In Re: Maple Meadow Mining
Annotate this CaseJanuary 1994 Term
___________
No. 21900
___________
IN RE: THE PETITION OF MAPLE MEADOW MINING
COMPANY FOR RELIEF FROM REAL PROPERTY ASSESSMENT
FOR THE TAX YEAR 1992
___________________________________________________
Appeal from the Circuit Court of Raleigh County
Honorable John C. Ashworth, Judge
Civil Action No. 92-AD-361-A
AFFIRMED
___________________________________________________
Submitted: May 11, 1994
Filed: July 8, 1994
John A. Mairs
Jackson & Kelly
Charleston, West Virginia
Attorney for Maple Meadow Mining
Carl W. Roop
Canterbury, Poling & Roop
Beckley, West Virginia
Attorney for Raleigh County Commission
Darrell V. McGraw, Jr.
Attorney General
Barry L. Koerber
Assistant Attorney General
Charleston, West Virginia
Attorney for West Virginia Tax & Revenue
JUSTICE McHUGH delivered the Opinion of the Court.
Justice Neely dissents and reserves the right to file a dissenting opinion.
SYLLABUS BY THE COURT
1. "'It is a general rule that valuations for taxation
purposes fixed by an assessing officer are presumed to be correct.
The burden of showing an assessment to be erroneous is, of course,
upon the taxpayer, and proof of such fact must be clear.' Syl. pt.
7, In re Tax Assessments Against Pocahontas Land Co., 172 W. Va.
53, 303 S.E.2d 691 (1983)." Syl. pt. 1, Western Pocahontas
Properties, Ltd. v. County Commission of Wetzel County, 189 W. Va.
322, 431 S.E.2d 661 (1993).
2. W. Va. Code, 11-1C-7(d) [1990] authorizes the tax
commissioner to approve and a county assessor to adopt a valuation
plan which "would permit the placement of proportionately uniform
percentage changes in values on the books that estimate the
percentage difference between the current assessed value and sixty
percent of the fair market value for classes or identified sub-
classes of property and distribute the change between the two tax
years preceding the tax year beginning on [July 1, 1993]." This
method of valuation may be used in addition to or in lieu of
placing individual values on the books at sixty percent of value.
The goal of this provision is to ensure that all properties,
whether it be properties revaluated by the county assessor, the
board of public works or the state tax commissioner, reach the
standard assessment rate of sixty percent of the fair market value
by July 1, 1993, pursuant to W. Va. Code, 11-1C-1(d) [1990].
3. A taxpayer's right to equal and uniform taxation
under article X, section 1 of the West Virginia Constitution and
equal protection of the laws under amendment XIV, section 1 of the
United States Constitution is not violated when a certain class of
property of that taxpayer is assessed at a higher percentage than
certain other classes of property of other taxpayers within the
three-year period of achieving equality of assessed property
valuation pursuant to W. Va. Code, 11-1C-1, et seq. Accordingly,
article X, section 1 of the West Virginia Constitution and
amendment XIV, section 1 of the United States Constitution is
satisfied when general adjustments are utilized over a short period
of time to equalize the differences existing among taxpayers
regarding property valuation and assessments.
4. "'An assessment made by a board of review and
equalization and approved by the circuit court will not be reversed
when supported by substantial evidence unless plainly wrong.' Syl.
pt. 1, West Penn Power Co. v. Board of Review and Equalization, 112
W. Va. 442, 164 S.E. 862 (1932)." Syl. pt. 3, Western Pocahontas
Properties, Ltd. v. County Commission of Wetzel County, 189 W. Va.
322, 431 S.E.2d 661 (1993).
McHugh, Justice:
This case is before this Court upon appeal of the January
20, 1993, order of the Circuit Court of Raleigh County. In that
order, the circuit court affirmed the appellee's, the Raleigh
County Assessor's (hereinafter "county assessor") tax assessment of
the appellant's, Maple Meadow Mining Company (hereinafter "Maple
Meadow"), real property which consists of coal reserves in Raleigh
County. On appeal, Maple Meadow asks that this Court reverse the
order of the circuit court and order that this case be remanded to
the circuit court with instructions to reduce the assessment on
Maple Meadow's natural resources property.See footnote 1 For the reasons stated
below, the decision of the circuit court is affirmed.
I
Prior to 1990, property in the State of West Virginia was
sometimes valued at less than the current market value or assessed
at a percentage lower than sixty percent of the market value. The
legislature saw the need to ensure equality among property
valuation and assessments. Thus, in 1990, the Fair and Equitable
Property Valuation Act (hereinafter "the Act") was enacted by the
legislature to require reappraisal of property in West Virginia for
tax purposes. See W. Va. Code, 11-1C-1, et seq. The findings of
the legislature setting forth the purpose of the Act are found in W. Va. Code, 11-1C-1(a) [1990], which states, in part: "The
Legislature hereby finds and declares that all property in this
state should be fairly and equitably valued wherever it is situated
so that all citizens will be treated fairly and no individual
species or class of property will be overvalued or undervalued[.]"
Under the Act, such equality in property valuation is to be
achieved by the end of a three-year cycle. W. Va. Code, 11-1C-1(d)
and 11-1C-7(d) [1990]. Specifically, at the end of the three-year
cycle, July 1, 1993, all property is to be annually assessed at
sixty percent of its then current fair market value. W. Va. Code,
11-1C-1(d) [1990].
The succeeding sections of this article set forth
policies and procedures to be followed by county and state
personnel in order to establish and maintain fair and equitable
property values. Pursuant to W. Va. Code, 11-1C-7 [1990], county
assessors are to employ the methodologies set forth in this Act and
the valuation system established by the tax commissioner in order
to adopt a county valuation plan and appraise all real and personal
property in their jurisdiction at fair market value. However,
property that is to be valued by either the tax commissioner under
W. Va. Code, 11-1C-10 [1990] or the board of public works under W.
Va. Code, 11-6-1, et seq. is excluded from this section. More
specifically, W. Va. Code, 11-1C-10 [1990], requires the tax
commissioner to value all natural resource property and industrial
property throughout the state, while W. Va. Code, 11-6-1 [1986] requires the board of public works to value properties such as
railroads, toll bridges, car line companies, pipeline companies,
express companies and telegraph and telephone companies.
Raleigh County's valuation plan provided that the county
assessor would reappraise a portion of the property located within
the county on a district by district basis. Furthermore, the plan
provided for all real property assessments within the county to be
phased in, starting at approximately thirty percent for the 1990-91
tax year, forty percent for the 1991-92 tax year and fifty percent
for the 1992-93 tax year in order to achieve a sixty percent
assessment rate by July 1, 1993.
In January, 1992, the county assessor, through
publication in the local newspaper, notified the citizens of
Raleigh County of the ensuing increase in the assessed valuation of
all real property in the county. Ultimately, the assessed
valuation of all real property was increased 24.61% for the 1992
tax year in order to achieve the forty percent assessment value for
the 1992 tax year; but, assessments for property falling within the
natural resources sub-class automatically received a sixty percent
assessment rate, because the assessor had the county's oil, gas and
other mineral properties placed at sixty percent from the outset of
the implementation of the Act.
Maple Meadow's natural resources property, as attested to
by Maple Meadow, was assessed at $763,350 for the 1991 tax year.
The assessment increased for the 1992 tax year to $7,112,647.20, sixty percent of $11,854,412, the reappraised value of the property
as determined by the tax commissioner. Maple Meadow challenged the
1992 assessment on the grounds that the county assessor violated W.
Va. Code, 11-1C-7(d) [1990]. Maple Meadow asserted that the
assessment was discriminatory, nonuniform and unconstitutional. On
February 24, 1992, a hearing was held before the Raleigh County
Commission, sitting as the Board of Review and Equalization
(hereinafter "the Board"). On February 27, 1992, the 1992
assessment of Maple Meadow's natural resources property was
affirmed by the Board. Maple Meadow appealed this decision to the
Circuit Court of Raleigh County on March 30, 1992; and, by order
dated January 30, 1993, the circuit court affirmed the 1992
assessment. It is from this order of the circuit court that Maple
Meadow appeals to this Court.
II
The primary focus of this case is on the assessment rate
used for Maple Meadow's natural resources property. Our state's
Constitution proclaims that all property is to be assessed at sixty
percent. W. Va. Const. art. X, § 1b. The legislature, in an
attempt to equally value and assess all property, implemented the
Fair and Equitable Property Valuation Act. The legislature
recognized, within W. Va. Code, 11-1C-1 [1990], that the three-year
phase-in cycle is essential to achieve equality of assessed
valuation among the state's counties and the process to achieve this equality is not violative of W. Va. Const. art. X, § 1, which
calls for equal and uniform taxation throughout the state.See footnote 2
Because Maple Meadow is arguing that a statute within the
Act has been violated by the county assessor, an examination of the
relevant statutory provisions is warranted. We note that tax
statutes are often not models of clarity, and the tax statutes
within this Act appear to be no different.
The legislature's objectives and goals are set forth in
W. Va. Code, 11-1C-1(c) and (d) [1990]:
(c) The Legislature finds that requiring
the valuation of property to occur in three-
year cycles with an annual adjustment of
assessments as to those properties for which a
change in value is discovered shall not
violate the equal and uniform provision of
section one, article ten of the West Virginia
Constitution, the Legislature further finding
that such three-year cycle and annual
adjustment are an integral and indispensable part of a systematic review of all properties
in order to achieve equality of assessed
valuation within and among the counties of
this state. Notwithstanding such finding, the
Legislature intends to permit the assessors
and the board of public works to place
proportionately uniform percentage changes in
values on the books during the two tax years
preceding the tax year beginning on the first
day of July, one thousand nine hundred ninety-
three, in accordance with the provisions of
section seven [§ 11-1C-7] of this article.
(d) The Legislature deems that the goal
of this article is that by the end of the
three-year cycle contemplated by this article,
and thereafter from year to year, all property
shall be annually assessed at sixty percent of
its then current fair market value except for
the values derived for farms and managed
timberland properties, which are to be valued
as prescribed by this article one-c and
article four [§§ 11-1C-1 et seq. and 11-4-1 et
seq.] of this chapter.
The methodologies to be employed by county assessors to
achieve the very purpose of the Act is set forth in W. Va. Code,
11-1C-7 [1990]. Subsection (d) of this provision, the
controversial provision herein, states as follows:
Upon approval of the valuation plan, the
assessor shall immediately begin
implementation of the valuation process. Any
change in value discovered subsequent to the
certification of values by the assessor to the
county commission, acting as the board of
equalization and review, in any given year
shall be placed upon the property books for
the next certification of values: Provided,
That notwithstanding any other provision of
this code to the contrary, the property
valuation training and procedures commission
may authorize the tax commissioner to approve
a valuation plan and the board of public works
to submit such a plan which would permit the
placement of proportionately uniform percentage changes in values on the books that
estimate the percentage difference between the
current assessed value and sixty percent of
the fair market value for classes or
identified sub-classes of property and
distribute the change between the two tax
years preceding the tax year beginning on the
first day of July, one thousand nine hundred
ninety-three. This procedure may be used in
lieu of placing individual values on the books
at sixty percent of value as discovered, or
may be in addition to such valuation. If such
procedure is adopted by a county, then
property whose reevaluation is the
responsibility of the board of public works
and the state tax commissioner shall have its
values estimated and placed on the books in
like manner. Such estimates shall be based on
the best information obtained by the assessor,
the board of public works and the tax
commissioner, and the changes shall move those
values substantially towards sixty percent of
fair market value, such sixty percent to be
reached on or before the first day of July,
one thousand nine hundred ninety-three.
On appeal, Maple Meadow contends that the circuit court
erred in failing to order the assessment of Maple Meadow's natural
resources property for tax year 1992, "in like manner" as accorded
to other real property pursuant to W. Va. Code, 11-1C-7(d) [1990].
Maple Meadow, therefore, argues that such disparity in treatment is
violative of article X, section 1 of the West Virginia Constitution
and amendment XIV, section 1 of the United States Constitution.
We begin by setting forth the standard to be applied in
challenging assessments:
'It is a general rule that valuations for
taxation purposes fixed by an assessing
officer are presumed to be correct. The
burden of showing an assessment to be
erroneous is, of course, upon the taxpayer, and proof of such fact must be clear.' Syl.
pt. 7, In re Tax Assessments Against
Pocahontas Land Co., 172 W. Va. 53, 303 S.E.2d 691 (1983).
Syl. pt. 1, Western Pocahontas Properties, Ltd. v. County
Commission of Wetzel County, 189 W. Va. 322, 431 S.E.2d 661 (1993).
The burden clearly falls upon Maple Meadow to demonstrate through
clear and convincing evidence that the tax assessments were
erroneous.
In this case, Maple Meadow begins by contending that the
1992 assessment of its natural resources property is in violation
of W. Va. Code, 11-1C-7(d) [1990] and the Raleigh County valuation
plan. Maple Meadow asserts that this section gives the county
assessor the option of either placing changes in property value on
the property books at sixty percent of value or phasing in any
increases in value as discovered as a result of the reappraisal
during the three-year reappraisal period; further, if the county
assessor chooses the phase-in option, the county assessor must also
phase in any increases in the property that the tax commissioner is
responsible for appraising in "like manner." Maple Meadow argues,
that because the county assessor elected to use the phase-in option
on all other real property within the county, the county assessor
must also assess Maple Meadow's natural resources property in the
same manner. Thus, Maple Meadow asks that the county assessor be
required to follow the county's valuation plan in compliance with W. Va. Code, 11-1C-7(d) [1990] so that Maple Meadow is treated the
same as all other Raleigh County real property owners.See footnote 3
As the county assessor and the tax commissioner suggest,
Maple Meadow essentially is asking the county assessor to lower Maple Meadow's assessment rate to forty percent for the 1992 tax
year and then ultimately raise it to sixty percent by 1993. The
county assessor and the tax commissioner maintain that the language
within W. Va. Code, 11-1C-7(d) [1990], which focuses on the
procedural and methodical aspects of achieving the sixty percent
assessment goal, does not require the county assessor to lower the
assessments that were at sixty percent from the outset of the
implementation of the Act, but rather allows the county assessor to
choose an option to bring all other properties within the sixty
percent assessment rate and treat other classes of assessed
properties in like fashion. Thus, the county assessor and the tax
commissioner submit that other classes of real properties were not
at sixty percent and the county assessor had to raise the
percentages on these properties to the levels set forth in the plan
for each respective year; however, it was not necessary for the
county assessor to adjust the assessment percentage of sixty
percent on Maple Meadow's natural resources property in that Maple
Meadow's natural resources property, along with all other natural
resources property within the county, was from the outset of the
implementation of the Act at the statutory and constitutional goal
of sixty percent.
We agree with the county assessor's and the tax
commissioner's contentions regarding the county assessor's method
of determining the assessed valuation of the property within
Raleigh County. We believe that the methodologies and the resulting assessments employed by the county assessor were
appropriate and correct in light of the existing statutory and
constitutional provisions set forth herein.
W. Va. Code, 11-1C-7(d) [1990] authorizes the tax
commissioner to approve and a county assessor to adopt a valuation
plan which "would permit the placement of proportionately uniform
percentage changes in values on the books that estimate the
percentage difference between the current assessed value and sixty
percent of the fair market value for classes or identified sub-
classes of property and distribute the change between the two tax
years preceding the tax year beginning on [July 1, 1993]." This
method of valuation may be used in addition to or in lieu of
placing individual values on the books at sixty percent of value.
The goal of this provision is to ensure that all properties,
whether it be properties revaluated by the county assessor, the
board of public works or the state tax commissioner, reach the
standard assessment rate of sixty percent of the fair market value
by July 1, 1993, pursuant to W. Va. Code, 11-1C-1(d) [1990].
As stated earlier in the text, the county assessor's plan
provided for all real property assessments to be phased in at forty
percent for 1992, and fifty percent for 1993, in order to reach
sixty percent by July 1, 1993. In 1992, the assessed valuation of
other classes of real property was increased by 24.61% for 1992, in
order to achieve the forty percent assessment value for the 1992 tax year. In other words, the county assessor was implementing
what W. Va. Code, 11-1C-7(d) [1990] refers to as "proportionately
uniform percentage changes in values" so as to eventually arrive at
the mandated sixty percent assessment rate by July 1, 1993.
The county assessor testified before the circuit court
that the county's oil, gas and other minerals were from the outset
assessed at the statutory and constitutional goal of sixty percent,
and so it was not necessary to adjust the assessment ratio on the
natural resources properties. W. Va. Code, 11-1C-10(d)(2) [1990]
specifically addresses natural resources property and states that
natural resources property shall be multiplied by sixty percent to
arrive at the assessed value of this species of property. See n.
2, supra.
W. Va. Code, 11-1C-7(d) and 11-1C-10(d)(2) [1990] are
conspicuously striving to achieve what our state's Constitution
mandates and that is for all real property to be assessed at a rate
of sixty percent. In order to achieve this goal, the county
assessor was required to raise the assessed value of those other
classes of real property not placed at sixty percent of the fair
market value from the outset of the implementation of the Act.
W. Va. Code, 11-1C-7(d) [1990].
This is not an arbitrarily unequal assessment or a
negation of the system pronounced in W. Va. Code, 11-1C-1(c)
[1990]. The nature of the Act is to achieve equality among
assessed valuation of all properties within the state. Unfortunately, in order for the state to realize this goal,
inequalities will continue to exist within the system until total
equality and uniformity can be attained. We, therefore, are of the
opinion that Maple Meadow has failed to demonstrate by clear and
convincing evidence that the tax assessment and the assessment
valuation process employed by the county assessor is erroneous and
in violation of W. Va. Code, 11-1C-7(d) [1990]. See In re Tax
Assessments Against Pocahontas Land Co., 172 W. Va. 53, 61, 303 S.E.2d 691, 699 (1983) ("It is obvious that where a taxpayer
protests his assessment before a board, he bears the burden of
demonstrating by clear and convincing evidence that his assessment
is erroneous."); accord syl. pt. 2, in part, Western Pocahontas
Properties, Ltd., supra ("The burden is on the taxpayer challenging
the assessment to demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that
the tax assessment is erroneous.")
III
This leads us to Maple Meadow's next point of contention
which is that such selective unequal assessment of property,
assessing natural resources property at sixty percent of fair
market value while other classes of property are assessed at forty
percent of fair market value, violates art. X, § 1 of the West
Virginia Constitution and amendment XIV, § 1 of the United States
Constitution. Article X, section 1 of the West Virginia
Constitution provides, in relevant part:
Subject to the exceptions in this section
contained, taxation shall be equal and uniform
throughout the State, and all property, both
real and personal, shall be taxed in
proportion to its value to be ascertained as
directed by law. No one species of property
from which a tax may be collected shall be
taxed higher than any other species of
property of equal value[.]
Amendment XIV, section 1 of the United States Constitution
provides, in pertinent part, that "[n]o State shall . . . deny to
any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the
laws."
Maple Meadow argues this Court's prior recognizance and
prohibition of taxing any one species of property higher than any
other species of property of equal value. In syllabus point 3 of
In Re Tax Assessments Against Pocahontas Land Corporation, 158
W. Va. 229, 210 S.E.2d 641 (1974), we held:
A systematic plan of assessing property
whereby some property owners' assessments were
increased 20% and other property owners in the
same class were intentionally omitted from
such increase is in violation of the equal and
uniform taxation provision of Article X,
Section 1 of the Constitution of West
Virginia.
Maple Meadow further argues the case of Allegheny
Pittsburgh Coal Company v. County Commission of Webster County, 488 U.S. 336, 109 S. Ct. 633, 102 L. Ed. 2d 688 (1989) in which the
United States Supreme Court reversed this Court's decision in In re
1975 Tax Assessments against Oneida Coal Co., 178 W. Va. 485, 360 S.E.2d 560 (1987).
Oneida involved four coal companies which contested the
procedure used by the Webster County Assessor to determine property
valuation for tax purposes. In Oneida, the assessment rate for
property within Webster County was fixed at fifty percent as
determined by the county assessor. The county assessor, however,
fixed the appraised value at the consideration at which the
property was sold. This approach resulted in dramatic differences
in the valuation of each of the four coal companies' properties.
This Court held the actions of the county assessor did not
constitute "intentional and systematic" discrimination. Id. at
489, 360 S.E.2d at 564. We implied that the coal companies'
assessments need not be reduced but rather, "'they should seek to
have the assessments of other taxpayers raised to market value.'"
Id. at 490, 360 S.E.2d at 565, quoting Killen v. Logan County
Commission, 170 W. Va. 602, 622, 295 S.E.2d 689, 709 (1982)
(citation omitted).
The United States Supreme Court reversed this Court's
decision and found that the coal companies', and petitioners'
therein, assessments were determined to be in excess of other
property owners similarly situated and the petitioners were
entitled to have their assessments lowered accordingly. The United
States Supreme Court, in arriving at its conclusion, held that a
system of taxation which intentionally and systematically results
in gross disparities in the assessed value of the taxpayer's
property in comparison to the assessed value of other comparable property denied the petitioners equal protection of the laws as
guaranteed by the Constitution. The court went on to state,
however, that "the present action is not an example of transitional
delay in adjustment of assessed value resulting in inequalities in
assessments of comparable property." Allegheny Pittsburgh Coal
Company, 488 U.S. at 344, 109 S. Ct. at 638, 102 L. Ed. 2d at 697.
The court recognized that:
The use of a general adjustment as a
transitional substitute for an individual
reappraisal violates no constitutional
command. As long as general adjustments are
accurate enough over a short period of time to
equalize the differences in proportion between
the assessments of a class of property
holders, the Equal Protection Clause is
satisfied.
Id. at 343, 109 S. Ct. at 638, 102 L. Ed. 2d at 697.
Similarly, this Court recognized a similar standard in an
earlier decision: "[I]t is true that unintentional, sporadic
deviations from an established system are not a sufficient basis
for reversal of an assessment[.]" In re U.S. Steel Corp., 165
W. Va. 373, 378, 268 S.E.2d 128, 132 (1980) (citation omitted).
The tax commissioner and county assessor contend, and we
agree, that the assessment valuation process in Raleigh County does
not impinge upon Maple Meadow's right to equal and uniform taxation
under the laws of this state. The general adjustments and any
transitional inequalities that may result will only last three years. The Act will rectify inequity and the duration of any
disparity is short. The corollary to all of this is equality.See footnote 4
Therefore, we are of the opinion that a taxpayer's right
to equal and uniform taxation under article X, section 1 of the
West Virginia Constitution and equal protection of the laws under
amendment XIV, section 1 of the United States Constitution is not
violated when a certain class of property of that taxpayer is
assessed at a higher percentage than certain other classes of
property of other taxpayers within the three-year period of
achieving equality of assessed property valuation pursuant to W.
Va. Code, 11-1C-1, et seq. Accordingly, article X, section 1 of
the West Virginia Constitution and amendment XIV, section 1 of the
United States Constitution is satisfied when general adjustments
are utilized over a short period of time to equalize the
differences existing among taxpayers regarding property valuation
and assessments.
IV
We are of the opinion that no statutory or constitutional
violation exists as contended by Maple Meadow. The record in this
case clearly supports the circuit court's ruling regarding the Raleigh County Assessor's method of and conclusions in arriving at
the assessments for the real property of the taxpayers of Raleigh
County. We have previously held that:
'An assessment made by a board of review
and equalization and approved by the circuit
court will not be reversed when supported by
substantial evidence unless plainly wrong.'
Syl. pt. 1, West Penn Power Co. v. Board of
Review and Equalization, 112 W. Va. 442, 164 S.E. 862 (1932).
Syl. pt. 3, Western Pocahontas Properties, Ltd. v. County
Commission of Wetzel County, 189 W. Va. 322, 431 S.E.2d 661 (1993).
Upon review of the record, we conclude that the ruling of the
circuit court should be affirmed.
Affirmed.
Footnote: 1W. Va. Code, 11-1C-10(a)(2) [1990] defines "natural
resources property" as "coal, oil, natural gas [etc.]." W. Va.
Code, 11-1C-10 was amended in 1994; however, the amendments do
not affect the case before us.
Footnote: 2As we previously mentioned above, prior to the
enactment of this article, some property within the state was
appraised at less than the current market value and was assessed
at a percentage lower than sixty percent. Thus, the enactment of
this article can adversely affect taxpayers in one of two ways.
Property value will most likely increase if it was previously
valued at less than the current market value; or, the assessed
value of their property may increase since not all property was
assessed at the requisite sixty percent.
In the case before us, we note that Maple Meadow does
not challenge the method employed by the tax commissioner in
determining the now current market value of their property. See
Western Pocahontas Properties, Ltd. v. County Commission of
Wetzel County, 189 W. Va. 322, 431 S.E.2d 661 (1993) (Valuation
of coal reserves based upon legislative regulation is presumed
correct.)
Footnote: 3Because Maple Meadow's coal land is considered
"natural resources property" within the Act, the tax commissioner
is required to follow W. Va. Code, 11-1C-10 [1990] in valuing
Maple Meadow's property for tax purposes. The valuation formula
and process for natural resources property is set forth in
subsection (d)(2) of this statute which provides, in part:
Formulas for natural resources valuation may
contain differing variables based upon known
geological or other common factors. The tax
commissioner shall forward each natural
resources property appraisal to the county
assessor of the county in which that property
is located and the assessor shall multiply
each such appraisal by sixty percent and
include the resulting assessed value in the
land book or the personal property book, as
appropriate, for each tax year.
W. Va. Code, 11-1C-10(d)(2) [1990]. The tax commissioner, during
the 1992 tax year, appraised Maple Meadow's natural resources
property at $11,854,412. The assessed value of Maple Meadow's
natural resources property, for 1992, was $7,112,647.20, sixty
percent of $11,854,412, the reappraised market value.
We reiterate that Maple Meadow is not challenging the tax commissioner's valuation of Maple Meadow's natural resources property, but rather Maple Meadow is contesting the assessment rate applied to the property. However, the majority of the increase in the assessed value is primarily due to the valuation of Maple Meadow's natural resources property and not in the assessment level of Maple Meadow's property. Pursuant to W. Va. Code, 11-1C-10(d)(2) [1990], the county assessor multiplies the tax commissioner's property appraisal by the assessment rate to arrive at the assessed value. When the sixty percent figure is multiplied by a larger valuation figure, obviously the assessed valuation figure will be larger. Thus, the assessed value of Maple Meadow's property increased due to the increase in the reappraised value of Maple Meadow's natural resources property. Footnote: 4We reiterate the legislature's anticipation of possible inequalities that could arise as found in W. Va. Code, 11-1C-1(c) [1990], which specifically states, in relevant part: "The Legislature finds that requiring the valuation of property to occur in three-year cycles with an annual adjustment of assessments as to those properties for which a change in value is discovered shall not violate the equal and uniform provision of section one, article ten of the West Virginia Constitution[.]"
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.