Murphy – Joe and Cherokee County Commissioner Jan Griggs lost their appeal of a $488 property tax bill they claim they were charged because they were vindictively targeted by the county tax assessor.
The Cherokee County Board of Equalization & Review met Thursday at the courthouse and, by a 3-0 vote (with two members absent), ordered that the couple pay the recently discovered back taxes.
It was the second meeting of the board at a cost to taxpayers of at least $1,010, as board members are paid $130 per meeting. Following the previous meeting on July 26, the board recessed for research, then determined that the Griggses had missed the deadline to appeal and rejected it.
The tax bill didn’t arrive in time for the Griggses to meet the appeals deadline, so they went to the county Board of Commissioners, which approved a special order for the appeals board to reconvene to hear the Griggses’ appeal and for county attorney Darryl Brown to advise the appeals board.
The board reconvened Thursday and, following a hearing of just over an hour, rejected the appeal. The arguments were similar to what the Griggses made in July.
Jan Griggs said she was singled out by tax assessor Teresa Ricks over a previous dispute between the two that led to Ricks filing charges of harassment against Griggs and the Griggses talking to a lawyer about filing a defamation lawsuit against Ricks.
Ricks’ accusations were dismissed for lack of evidence and the Griggses have not yet filed a lawsuit against Ricks, although Jan Griggs said her lawyer advised her not to contact Ricks.
The appeal arose after staff from the Cherokee County tax assessor’s office examined the Griggses property and discovered they had under-reported agriculture acreage, which is taxed at a value of $3,500 per acre, and over-reported forestry acreage, which is taxed at a value of $330 per acre.
The result was a bill for the discovery of underpaid property taxes of $488.
Griggs said she found a notice on her door on March 15 informing her that a tax appraiser had been by to look at their 86.9-acre spread in western Cherokee County. Although their property was not due for another revaluation until 2026, his findings had several contradictions from a revaluation of the property done in January 2020.
The appraiser was routinely rechecking properties in the area. Whether that area was targeted by Ricks because of the Griggses property was not determined. Ricks said the appraiser, under his own initiative, checked the Griggs’ property and found a small parcel that escaped recent scrutiny by tax assessor staff.
He found a barn that touched the parcel that had not been reported. The barn was mostly located on an adjacent Griggs-owned parcel where it was noted and taxed, but while checking into the details, the assessor started looking deeper into the Griggs properties.
He found what he called a campsite but that the Griggses say stores a mobile home and is not a campsite; a finished garage the Griggses said is unfinished; and heart pine floors that the Griggses say is actually old oak.
He also measured timberland and cleared pastureland, and found a discrepancy with the records. That discrepancy led to the $488 bill for discovered property.
Ricks said the Griggses’ forest land has not been part of an active forest management plan since 2016. The Griggses were notified of the status several times with no response.
Ricks said the re-examination of the Griggses property showed $12,000 in property value that had been under-taxed.
Joe Griggs said his property includes forested land, which has been reported and managed under a forestry management plan and taxed at the lower rate, and pasture land, on which he raises cattle and grows their feed. Although previous forestry management plans have expired, they are applying for a new plan.
Joe Griggs said weather and insect infestations brought down a number of trees in the forested portion of the property. He didn’t keep track of how much of that land became pasture.
That came to about 3 acres of newly cleared pasture not picked up during previous revaluation periods,. The couple argue that they shouldn’t be held accountable for two previous appraisers’ mistakes.
Jan Griggs also argued that the difference in value is 1.75 percent of their total land value, far below the 10 percent threshold the Internal Revenue Service identifies as a “substantial change” necessary to trigger a response.
State guidelines are vague on the matter, although Ricks consulted the UNC School of Government, which advised that the discrepancy should be classified as discovery and subject to back taxes.
The couple warned that 811 other parcel owners could face the same situation. The appeals board listened to the arguments during a hearing that lasted just over an hour.
“I see what you are saying, and I understand,” acting chair Teresa Oblenes told the couple.
The board huddled, discussed the issue in hushed voices and then Oblenes spoke for the board.
“In all reality, our opinion is that it is a discovery,” she said, making the newly defined property eligible for back taxes over the previous five years.
She added that the board disagreed that the Griggs property was targeted by Ricks.
Jan Griggs said she and her husband plan to appeal.
“I won’t be targeted,” she said.