<< Back 12/18/02 Property tax snafu unresolved By Scott McLeod A vexing property tax mistake that refuses to be resolved and could involve thousands of taxpayers has left Haywood County officials frustrated and many citizens angry. “I’m mad as hell,” said Eugene Morris. “I’m a good American, and I pay my taxes.” Morris’ frustration was felt around the room Monday (Dec. 16) as commissioners, county officials, the county attorney, a North Carolina Department of Revenue official and about 35 citizens discussed what has become a troubling situation. For now, taxpayers will have to wait on a ruling from the state Attorney General’s office. If that ruling agrees with what state revenue officials have argued, no resolution will occur until the county board of equalization and reviews reconvenes sometime in 2003. When property tax notices were sent out this year after the revaluation, many residents who live in the four municipalities in Haywood County — Waynesville, Canton, Clyde and Maggie Valley — were charged for having wells and septic tanks, which added $3,500 to their property values. Most of those residents, though, use municipal water and sewer. Other town residents were not charged the $3,500. The error stems from a mistake in the Schedule of Values which is used by appraisers. In that document, municipal lots were not increased in value for having access to water and sewer. In other words, the value of an acre in Waynesville with water and sewer was given the same base value as an acre in Fines Creek without water and sewer. Why the $3,500 for septic and well was added to some properties and not others is still not known. The county will not be sure how many properties were valued incorrectly until it gets a list of water and sewer users from the municipalities and checks that against its property tax records. About 18,000 residents live in the four municipalities. The problem is complicated by the fact that state Department of Revenue officials are arguing that it would be illegal for the county to change the values, refund the money or provide taxpayers a credit. None of that can be done until the board of Equalization and Review reconvenes in 2003. “Essentially, you are faced with what the state’s other 99 counties are faced with — how to deal with what may be unfair tax listings when the board of E and R has adjourned,” said Stan Duncan, a state Department of Revenue official. Most taxpayers will pay around $40 dollars extra due to the error. Duncan told commissioners that they could be personally liable if they release tax money illegally. County attorney Chip Killian said he has researched the statutes and reluctantly agreed with Duncan that the county can’t simply return the overpayments. “I tried to argue that this was a clerical error, but that was wishful thinking. I went into this trying to find a way to easily correct the situation, but I don’t think we can legally do that,” said Killian. One of the problems is that if the county re-opens its schedule of values, it will have to — by state statute — use current market values. That could cause some people’s taxes to go up by more than $40. Commissioner Mark Swanger said it was bothersome that some taxpayers noticed the problem, appealed the mistake and got it corrected, while others did not. He said the fact that county officials did not notice the enormity of the error during that appeals process should absolve taxpayers from having to carry the burden of proof. “In the real world, it’s not uncommon for taxpayers not to know about this error. (County attorney Chip Killian) did not know about it, (County Manager) Jack Horton did not notice it,” said Swanger. “If we can find a legal way to get your money back, you can be assured that we will. We certainly want to do that,” said Commission Chairman Bill Noland.