Opinion ID: 2518099
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: The State Board's duty to equalize property valuations is a quasi-judicial function

Text: The Nevada Constitution mandates that [t]he [L]egislature shall provide by law for a uniform and equal rate of assessment and taxation, and shall prescribe such regulations as shall secure a just valuation for taxation of all property, real, personal and possessory. Nev. Const. art. 10, § 1(1). The State Board is governed by NRS Chapter 361, which obligates the State Board to equalize property valuations throughout the state: [T]he [State Board] shall: (a) Equalize property valuations in the State. (b) Review the tax rolls of the various counties as corrected by the county boards of equalization thereof and raise or lower, equalizing and establishing the taxable value of the property. NRS 361.395(1). We previously determined that, under the statutes, the State Board has two separate functions: equalizing property valuations throughout the state and hearing appeals from the county boards. State, Bd. of Equalization v. Barta, 124 Nev. 58, ___, 188 P.3d 1092, 1102 (2008). The State Board's predominant concern, however, should be the guarantee of a uniform and equal rate of taxation. Id. Although the statutes clearly provide that the State Board has a duty to equalize property valuations throughout the state, there appears to be a lack of certainty in the procedures for the equalization process that has resulted in an ambiguity as to whether the process is an administrative or a quasi-judicial function. NRS 361.395(1) obligates the State Board to equalize property valuations, and NRS 361.395(2) and 361.405(1) require notice be given to property owners when equalization results in a proposed or actual increase to a property's valuation. However, NRS Chapter 361 lacks clarity as to the processes and procedures that the State Board undertakes in determining to equalize property valuations, equalization methods, and the relevant sequence of events. When the Legislature has addressed a particular matter with imperfect clarity, this court will consider the statutory scheme as a whole and any underlying policy in order to interpret the law. See In re Orpheus Trust, 124 Nev. 170, 174-75, 179 P.3d 562, 565 (2008). The Taxpayers argue that the duty to equalize property valuations is an administrative function that does not incorporate the traditional attributes of a judicial proceeding and, therefore, absolute immunity should not apply. We disagree and conclude that the State Board's equalization process is a quasi-judicial function. Considering the factors in the functional approach, the members of the State Board perform quasi-judicial functions because the equalization process requires the members to perform functions (fact-finding and making legal conclusions) similar to judicial officers, the process is adversarial, it applies procedural safeguards similar to a court, errors can be corrected on appeal, and the statutory scheme retains State Board members' independence from political influences.