Appellant seeks 15% ‘intangible’ deduction for two RV‑park parcels; assessor says RV parks lack hotel‑style goodwill
June 22, 2026 | Oklahoma County, Oklahoma
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
A buyer’s representative asked the Oklahoma County Board of Equalization on June 22 to reduce the assessor’s apportioned value for two account numbers treated as one economic RV‑park unit, saying that a portion of the sale price should be allocated to intangibles or goodwill and therefore not fully attributable to assessed real property.
“Typically RV parks and mobile home parks…they usually attribute anywhere from 15% to 25% to intangibles and goodwill,” the appellant’s representative said, requesting the board apply an 85% allocation of the assessor’s value (a 15% reduction) across the two accounts. The parcels had been sold together for roughly $7.4 million, the parties said.
Assessor staff pushed back, telling the board that RV parks are transient, lack franchise‑style brand intangibles and are valued chiefly on land, improvements and income streams. The assessor pointed to sale documents, a pro forma and a rent roll that supported an overall sale figure around $7.4 million and said the office’s income and sales approaches supported the assessor’s parcel apportionments.
The assessor explained why one of the nearby properties the appellant cited was excluded as a comp — it was materially smaller, of lower quality, lacked lake frontage and had no pool or hot tub, which would require large adjustments. For the two accounts the assessor read apportionments totaling the sale: roughly $4,498,114 for the larger parcel and $2,904,704 for the smaller, with the assessor’s total value near the combined sale price.
Board members asked clarifying questions about how the assessor apportioned value, whether the two account numbers reflected a single economic unit, and how the sale price was allocated. The appellant said the acquisition closing had not allocated any amount to intangibles or goodwill, and the representative asked the board to consider industry practice that sometimes recognizes such allocations.
The board did not decide on June 22 and scheduled its final determination for Friday; parties were told they would receive written notice by mail.
“Typically RV parks and mobile home parks…they usually attribute anywhere from 15% to 25% to intangibles and goodwill,” the appellant’s representative said, requesting the board apply an 85% allocation of the assessor’s value (a 15% reduction) across the two accounts. The parcels had been sold together for roughly $7.4 million, the parties said.
Assessor staff pushed back, telling the board that RV parks are transient, lack franchise‑style brand intangibles and are valued chiefly on land, improvements and income streams. The assessor pointed to sale documents, a pro forma and a rent roll that supported an overall sale figure around $7.4 million and said the office’s income and sales approaches supported the assessor’s parcel apportionments.
The assessor explained why one of the nearby properties the appellant cited was excluded as a comp — it was materially smaller, of lower quality, lacked lake frontage and had no pool or hot tub, which would require large adjustments. For the two accounts the assessor read apportionments totaling the sale: roughly $4,498,114 for the larger parcel and $2,904,704 for the smaller, with the assessor’s total value near the combined sale price.
Board members asked clarifying questions about how the assessor apportioned value, whether the two account numbers reflected a single economic unit, and how the sale price was allocated. The appellant said the acquisition closing had not allocated any amount to intangibles or goodwill, and the representative asked the board to consider industry practice that sometimes recognizes such allocations.
The board did not decide on June 22 and scheduled its final determination for Friday; parties were told they would receive written notice by mail.
View the Full Meeting & All Its Details
This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.
✓
Watch full, unedited meeting videos
✓
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
✓
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
✓
Permanent access to expanding government content
30-day money-back guarantee
