Can a county board of supervisors stop a general reassessment from being finalized just because the board doesn't like the values the assessor came back with?

Plain-English summary

Dinwiddie County contracted with an outside professional firm in 2007 to conduct a general reassessment of all county real estate effective January 1, 2009. The Board of Supervisors awarded the contract by resolution in October 2007 and formally appointed the firm's project supervisor as the County's assessor in August 2008. On December 23, 2008, the assessor certified the land book and filed it with the circuit court clerk, completing the statutory process. The board did not like the results, generally believing the assessments came in too high. The county attorney asked the Attorney General whether the board could halt or undo the reassessment on the ground that it disagreed with the values.

Acting Attorney General William Mims concluded that the board had no such power. Virginia counties operate under the Dillon Rule. Boards of supervisors have only the powers expressly granted by the General Assembly or necessarily implied. Chapter 32 of Title 58.1 (§§ 58.1-3200 to 58.1-3389) comprehensively governs real estate assessment. Section 58.1-3300 requires the assessor, once the reassessment is complete, to make copies of the record, certify under oath that no real estate is omitted and there is no error on the face, file the original with the circuit court clerk, deliver copies to the commissioner of revenue and the local board of equalization, and forward recapitulation sheets to the Department of Taxation. None of the chapter authorizes the board to step in and stop the process because it disagrees with the values.

Prior AG opinions had reached the same structural answer: a board of supervisors cannot change the assessment of real property as ascertained by the assessor during a general reassessment, and has no authority to raise or lower the assessment ratio. Property owners who think their individual assessments are wrong have appeal rights through the board of equalization and the courts. Boards that think the overall valuation is wrong have policy options (changing the tax rate, adjusting the assessment ratio for the next reassessment, hiring a different assessor next cycle), but they cannot stop a completed reassessment from being finalized.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2009. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Background and statutory framework

Virginia localities reassess real estate periodically under Chapter 32 of Title 58.1. The default is general reassessment every four years (§ 58.1-3252), though many counties also conduct annual or biennial reassessments under §§ 58.1-3251 and 58.1-3253. Each locality may appoint either a board of assessors or a real estate appraiser to conduct the work (§ 58.1-3271; § 58.1-3253(A)).

Once appointed, the assessor's duties are largely independent of the board. The assessor ascertains and assesses the fair market value of all assessable real estate (§§ 58.1-3280 to 58.1-3295), must complete the general reassessment by December 31 of the reassessment year (§ 58.1-3257(A)), and then must follow the procedural steps in § 58.1-3300:

Such persons, or officers, designated as aforesaid shall then file the original of such reassessment in the office of the circuit court clerk of the city or county, who shall preserve the same in his office; and he or they shall deliver one copy of such reassessment to the commissioner of the revenue of the city or county and one copy to the local board of equalization of such city or county.

The board of equalization, established by other Chapter 32 provisions, is the body charged with hearing individual appeals from property owners who think their reassessments are too high or too low. The board of supervisors is not the appeals body and has no role in approving or rejecting the assessor's work.

The Dillon Rule frames the analysis. Counties have only those powers expressly delegated or necessarily implied. The General Assembly's comprehensive statutory scheme for assessment, with its specific roles for assessors, boards of equalization, commissioners of revenue, and the circuit court clerk, leaves no implied power for the board of supervisors to halt the process.

What the AG concluded

The General Assembly has not authorized boards of supervisors to stop a reassessment. Chapter 32 does not give boards a veto over the assessor's work. The statutory roles are distinct: assessor performs the valuation, board of equalization hears individual appeals, courts review board of equalization decisions, and the board of supervisors sets the tax rate based on the resulting values.

Prior AG opinions confirm this structural answer. A 1975 AG opinion concluded that a board of supervisors has no power to change the assessment of real property as ascertained by the assessor, and no authority to raise or lower the assessment ratio. A 1963 AG opinion reached the same answer. The consistency of the answer over decades reinforces it.

The Dillon Rule resolves any doubt against the locality. Even if some implied power could be argued, the rule of strict construction tips the answer in favor of the assessor's statutory role and against the board's claim of veto authority.

Boards have other remedies if they think values are too high. Setting the tax rate is the board's primary lever; if the assessed values come in higher than expected, the board can reduce the millage rate to keep the effective tax burden manageable. The board can also hire a different assessment firm next cycle, or work with the General Assembly on statutory reforms.

Common questions

What did Dinwiddie County actually do after the 2008 reassessment?
The opinion does not say. As a legal matter, the assessor had already filed the land book on December 23, 2008. The board's options were to set the 2009 tax rate at a level that reflected the new values (typically lower millage to offset higher values) or accept higher tax revenue.

What about property owners who think their assessments are wrong?
They appeal to the local board of equalization. If that fails, they can pursue judicial relief in circuit court under § 58.1-3984 (not directly cited in this opinion but the standard mechanism). The board of supervisors is not in the appeals chain.

Can the board of supervisors fire the assessor?
The opinion does not address mid-reassessment dismissal. Generally, contract terms govern the firm's removal. Even if the board could fire the assessor, doing so after the land book has been certified and filed would not undo the reassessment.

What if the assessor made widespread errors?
Errors are correctable through the board-of-equalization appeal process. The opinion does not say the board of supervisors cannot raise concerns or ask for review of specific assessments; it says the board cannot prevent the statutorily required filing under § 58.1-3300.

Does this apply to cities and towns too?
Cities follow a similar reassessment regime under Chapter 32. The opinion is framed in terms of "a county board of supervisors" but the underlying analysis would apply equally to city councils that contract with outside assessors.

Can a board of supervisors set the tax rate at zero to neutralize a high reassessment?
Theoretically, yes. Boards have authority to set tax rates under separate provisions. But setting the rate at zero would eliminate property tax revenue entirely, which is rarely feasible. The realistic option is to set the rate to produce revenue roughly equivalent to the prior year, accounting for the higher assessed values.

Citations

• Va. Code Ann. §§ 58.1-3200 to 58.1-3389 (real estate assessment chapter)
• Va. Code Ann. §§ 58.1-3252, 58.1-3253, 58.1-3271 (appointment of assessor)
• Va. Code Ann. § 58.1-3300 (filing of reassessment)
• Nat'l Realty Corp. v. Va. Beach, 209 Va. 172 (1968)
• Bd. of Supvrs. v. Horne, 216 Va. 113 (1975)
• Bd. of Supvrs. v. Countryside Invest. Co., 258 Va. 497 (1999)

Source

• Landing page: https://www.oag.state.va.us/annual-reports-opinions/official-opinions
• Original PDF: https://www.oag.state.va.us/files/Opinions/2009/09-008-Blair.pdf

Original opinion text

COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
Office of the Attorney General
William C. Mims

900 East Main Street
Richmond, Virginia 23219
804-786-2071
FAX 804-786-1991
Virginia Relay Services
800-828-1120
7-1-1

Attorney General

March 19, 2009

Mr. John C. Blair, II, Esq.
Dinwiddie County Attorney
P.O. Drawer 70
Dinwiddie, Virginia 23841

Dear Mr. Blair:

I am responding to your request for an official advisory opinion in accordance with § 2.2-505 of the Code of Virginia.

Issue Presented

You ask whether a county board of supervisors may prevent an assessor for a general reassessment from complying with § 58.1-3300, which governs reassessment records, on the sole basis that the board of supervisors disagrees with the results of such general reassessment.

Response

It is my opinion that a county board of supervisors may not prevent a statutorily appointed professional assessor for a general reassessment from complying with § 58.1-3300 on the sole basis that the board disagrees with the results of such reassessment.

Background

You state that the Dinwiddie County (the "County") performed a general reassessment of real estate during the 2004 calendar year, which became effective January 1, 2005. Further, you advise that the County issued a request for proposal ("RFP") for a general reassessment of all County real estate to be conducted during fall of 2007 and calendar year 2008, with the effective date to be January 1, 2009 (the "2008 Reassessment"). You relate that the RFP contained the following language:

In accordance with § 58.1-3252 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, the County requires that all real estate undergo an independent, general and uniform reassessment every four years. Such reassessment shall include all taxable and tax-exempt properties with the improvements and buildings thereon, if any, and shall be based upon Fair Market Value. All manufactured housing/mobile homes must be appraised in the same manner as real estate. The reassessment of all properties shall begin in the Fall of 2007 and be completed by the end of December, 2008 to become effective January 1, 2009.

You note the County reviewed the RFP submissions, interviewed the candidates, and by resolution dated October 1, 2007, the Dinwiddie County Board of Supervisors awarded the contract to perform the 2008 Reassessment. The contract, by reference, incorporated the provisions of the RFP. By resolution dated August 19, 2008, the Board appointed the project supervisor of the firm that received the contract as the County's assessor for the 2008 Reassessment. On December 23, 2008, that assessor certified the land book and filed it with the clerk of the circuit court. You relate that the Board does not agree with the result, generally believing that the assessments are too high. Therefore, you ask whether the Board may prevent the assessor from complying with § 58.1-3300.

Applicable Law and Discussion

The power of a local governing body, unlike that of the General Assembly, "must be exercised pursuant to an express grant"[1] because the powers of a county "are limited to those conferred expressly or by necessary implication."[2] "If the power cannot be found, the inquiry is at an end."[3] The Dillon Rule requires a narrow interpretation of all powers conferred on local governments since they are delegated powers.[4] Therefore, any doubt as to the existence of power must be resolved against the locality.[5]

Chapter 32 of Title 58.1, §§ 58.1-3200 through 58.1-3389, comprehensively governs the assessment and reassessment of real estate for local taxation. Under Chapter 32, a local governing body has the option to provide for the assessment and reassessment of real estate by appointing a real estate assessor or a board of assessors.[6] The assessor ascertains and assesses the fair market value of all assessable lands and lots.[7] The assessor is required to complete the general reassessment no later than December 31 of the year of the reassessment.[8] Section 58.1-3300 requires that:

As soon as the persons, or officers, designated under the provisions of Article 6 (§ 58.1-3270 et seq.) herein have completed the reassessment, they shall make two copies of such record, in the form in which the land books are made out, and shall certify on oath that no assessable real estate is omitted and that there is no error on the face of such record. Such persons, or officers, designated as aforesaid shall then file the original of such reassessment in the office of the circuit court clerk of the city or county, who shall preserve the same in his office; and he or they shall deliver one copy of such reassessment to the commissioner of the revenue of the city or county and one copy to the local board of equalization of such city or county. For cities having an additional court for the recordation of deeds, one extra copy of such reassessment, embracing real estate the conveyance of which is required to be recorded in the clerk's office of such additional court, shall be made and filed in such circuit court clerk's office.

Such persons or officers shall at the same time forward to the Department of Taxation a copy of the recapitulation sheets of such reassessment.

In lieu of complying with the foregoing provisions of this section, the person or persons appointed by the governing body to perform the annual or biennial reassessment of real estate set forth in §§ 58.1-3251 and 58.1-3253 shall sign the land book attesting to the valuations contained therein resulting from such assessment.

The General Assembly has not authorized a county to appoint an assessor to begin to undertake the general reassessment process and then prevent such assessor from complying with the requirements of § 58.1-3300 because the county's board of supervisors disagrees with the reassessment results. Prior opinions of the Attorney General similarly conclude that a board of supervisors has no power to change the assessment of real property as ascertained by the assessor during a general reassessment and has no authority to raise or lower the ratio of assessment of real property.[9]

The application of the Dillon Rule in the Commonwealth requires a narrow interpretation of all powers conferred on local governments because any such powers are delegated powers.[10] Therefore, I must conclude that a county board of supervisors is without statutory authority to prevent the completion of an initiated general reassessment based on such board's disagreement with the assessment results.

Conclusion

Accordingly, it is my opinion that a county board of supervisors may not prevent a statutorily appointed professional assessor for a general reassessment from complying with § 58.1-3300 on the sole basis that the board disagrees with the results of such reassessment.

Thank you for letting me be of service to you.

Sincerely,

William C. Mims
1:213; 1:941/09-008

1. Nat'l Realty Corp. v. Va. Beach, 209 Va. 172, 175, 163 S.E.2d 154, 156 (1968).
2. Bd. of Supvrs. v. Horne, 216 Va. 113, 117, 215 S.E.2d 453, 455 (1975) (noting corollary to Dillon Rule).
3. Commonwealth v. County Bd., 217 Va. 558, 575, 232 S.E.2d 30, 41 (1977).
4. See Bd. of Supvrs. v. Countryside Invest. Co., 258 Va. 497, 504-05, 522 S.E.2d 610, 613-14 (1999) (holding that county board of supervisors does not have unfettered authority to decide what matters to include in subdivision ordinance; must include requirements mandated by Land Subdivision and Development Act and may include optional provisions contained in act); Op. Va. Att'y Gen: 2002 at 77, 78; 1974-1975 at 403, 405.
5. 2A EUGENE MCQUILLEN, THE LAW OF MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS § 10.19, at 369 (3d ed. 1996); see also Op. Va. Att'y Gen.: 2002 at 83, 84; 2000 at 75, 76.
6. See VA. CODE ANN. § 58.1-3253(A) (Supp. 2008) (discussing role of full-time real estate appraiser or assessor relating to biennial reassessment); § 58.1-3271 (Supp. 2008) (authorizing appointment of board of real estate assessors or real estate appraiser to conduct annual or biennial assessment); 1984-1985 Op. Va. Att'y Gen. 304, 304 (interpreting § 58-778.1, predecessor to § 58.1-3253, and concluding that governing body may establish real estate assessment department to conduct biennial assessment); id. at 305, 306 n.1, (interpreting § 58-778.1 and concluding that governing body may employ full-time appraiser or assessor to conduct biennial assessment).
7. See generally §§ 58.1-3280 to 58.1-3295 (2004 & Supp. 2008).
8. See § 58.1-3257(A) (Supp. 2008).
9. Op. Va. Att'y Gen.: 1975-1976 at 374, 375; 1973-1974 at 395, 396; 1963-1964 at 17, 17; see also 1975-1976 Op. Va. Att'y Gen. 375, 377-78 (concluding that commissioner of revenue cannot change value of real estate ascertained at general reassessment; locality may not increase tax rate applicable to public service corporation property absent enabling legislation).
10. See supra note 4 and accompanying text.