In Arcadian Fertilizer v. Sarpy Cty. Bd. of Equal., 7 Neb. App. 499, 583 N.W.2d 353 (1998) the Court noted that Neb. Rev. Stat. § 77-1511 (Reissue 1996) stands for the general proposition that TERC has no authority to consider questions not raised before a county board of equalization.
The issue in Arcadian Fertilizer was whether a question as presented to the board of equalization and a question as presented to TERC were sufficiently related in content and context to be deemed the same question at both levels.
The board of equalization in Arcadian Fertilizer argued that Form 422 should be examined to determine if the issue had been raised before the board of equalization.
Arcadian Fertilizer, L.P. (Arcadian), argued that its statement of reasons for appeal should not be limited to the statement set out in Form 422 but must be evaluated in the context of the proceedings before a referee and the board of equalization where, Arcadian asserted, the underlying reasons were clearly explained and set out in detail.
Arcadian argued that TERC erred in refusing to permit Arcadian to supplement the record with a transcript of the proceedings before the referee. TERC had held that the refereed proceedings were irrelevant in determining what issues had been presented to the board of equalization.
The Court held on appeal that proceedings before the referee were part of the board of equalization process and were clearly relevant to the proceedings before TERC, especially where the scope of issues previously raised before the board of equalization was an issue.
ecause it would be impossible to determine jurisdiction without reviewing the transcript of the refereed proceedings, it was error for TERC to deny Arcadian's motion to admit the transcript of the refereed proceedings. The matter was remanded to TERC for reconsideration of the jurisdictional issue.