Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM020909�1 • ok William S. Marlow Richard A. Broders Dave Garing Wiliam S. Marlow MINUTES February 9, 2009 1820 Jefferson Street P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 Richard A. Broders Dave Garing Chairman Vice - Chairman Member Chairman William S. Marlow called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m. in the presence of Vice - Chairman Richard A. Broders and Member Dave Garing. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Vice - Chairman Broders moved to approve the minutes of October 20, 27, and 29, 2008 and November 3, 5, 17, 18, and 19, 2008 as presented. Member Garing seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. ASSESSMENT CORRECTIONS and PETITION WITHDRAWAL Member Garing moved to accept the following assessment corrections and petition withdrawal. Vice - Chairman Broders seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. APPELLANT APPEAL NO. PARCEL NO. Lawrence & Cynthia Belisle BOE 08- 151 -LO 001 195 106 Robert & Angela Scott BOE 08 -172 -R 821 265 007 Gabriel Fletcher BOE 08 -173 -R 821 351 032 REQUEST TO WAIVE FILING DEADLINE The Board reviewed the following request to waive the filing deadline for appealing the Assessor's 2008 real property valuation determination: Property Owner: Michael Wells Parcel No.: 966100 004 Phone (360)385 -9100 Fax (360)385 -9382 jeffbocc@co.jefferson.wa.us Board of Equalization Minutes - February 9, 2009 Page: 2 Mr. Wells submitted evidence as outlined in RCW 84.40.038 and WAC 458 -14 -056 in support of his request to waive the appeal filing deadline. Upon review of the evidence, the Board determined that Mr. Wells has shown good cause to waive the filing deadline pursuant to RCW 84.40.038 (2)(e) and WAC458 -14 -056 (3)(e). Member Garing moved to waive the 2008 appeal filing deadline as requested by Michael Wells. Vice - Chairman Broders seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. The Clerk will write a letter to Mr. Wells notifying him of the Board's decision. HEARINGS Louis W. Munch & Jane Ann T. McNulty BOE: 08 -46 -R PN: 001 053 025 P.O. Box 2030 Port Townsend, WA 98368 Louis W. Munch was present. Appraiser Dennis Pownall represented the Assessor's office. Chairman Marlow explained the hearing process and swore in both parties. Under appeal is the land value only of improved property located at 2679 Hastings Avenue W., Port Townsend. Currently, the property is assessed at $269,120 ($136,160 for the land and $132,960 for the improvements). The appellant estimates the value is $192,960 ($60,000 for the land and $132,960 for the improvements). Mr. Munch stated that the value of the improvements is fair, however, he questions why the land value has increased so much. The one acre building site tripled in value and his acreage has nearly doubled in value. His acreage property is in the Open Space Timber program and is valued at a different rate. As long as it is in that program the value should not vary. Should he ever take the property out of the Open Space Timber program he understands he would pay a tax rate on a higher value, but, for now it should be valued for its current use to grow timber. In researching his case on the Internet he found information which states that pending property sales in Jefferson County were up in November 2008 by 53% from the previous year. It also states that the median selling price for properties is down 6% over that same time period. He realizes his property is assessed once every four years, but, his property was assessed during this same period of time and yet his land value almost tripled. He compared his property value to the values of neighboring properties and stated that they are not equitable. Mr. Pownall explained that the appellant's 8.86 acres which are in the Open Space Timber program have a taxable value of only $1,160, which equates to approximately $11.00 in taxes. He read from the appellant's petition form which states:... "Finally, after talking to 2 different Real Estate salesman, I get Board of Equalization Minutes - February 9, 2009 Page: 3 the distinct feeling there is a conspiracy to keep Real Estate values at a level that is artificially high. I feel the County and Real Estate sales people are feeding off each other at the expense of property owners ..." Mr. Pownall explained that the driving force with taxes is the County budget. That money is raised by taking the total assessed values of all taxable property in the County and multiplying that amount by the levy rate. He noted that if assessed values go up, the levy rate drops. If assessed values go down, the levy rate increases. The assessed value is only as important as the value of neighboring properties. A map was presented outlining various sales in the area that determine the current assessment. All the properties in the area were treated the same. There were some outstanding sales prices and the appellant is not the only one in the area to complain about land values. Based on sales the property is valued fairly and equitably. Mr. Munch added that he had initially wanted to build a four - bedroom house on his property but it would only perk for a two- bedroom house without installing an expensive mound septic system. His neighbor's property perks for a three- bedroom house. In fairness, he feels his property should at least be reduced by the cost of engineering and installing a mound septic system. The Assessor's staff is not making equal comparisons based on what can be done with the land. Member Gating asked Mr. Pownall if the number of bedrooms is considered in the assessment process? Mr. Pownall explained that the Assessor's staff only has the ability to assess the improvements that are actually constructed on any given property. A two - bedroom house is valued as two- bedroom house. A four- bedroom house would be valued more because it has more square footage. They have no way of determining what type of septic system any select one acre piece of property will support. If a septic system is legal and functional that's all they can address, other than the size of the house on the property. They do not have the ability to ascertain the development capacity of any bare land parcel. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman Marlow closed the hearing. The Board will make a determination at a later date. Jim Maupin & Nora Petrich BOE: 08 -83 -R PN: 999 001 801 291 Cook Avenue 08 -84 -LO 999 001 701 Port Townsend, WA 98368 08 -85 -LO 999 001 702 Jim Maupin and Nora Petrich were not present. Appraiser Dennis Pownall represented the Assessor's office and was sworn in by Chairman Marlow. Under appeal are two bare land parcels and one improvement parcel located at 291 Cook Avenue, Port Townsend. Following is the current assessment and the appellant's estimate of value for the parcels under appeal: Parcel No. Current Assessed Value Appellant's Estimate of Value 999 001 801 $389,035 (land $148,950 /imps. $240,085) $275,000 (land $75,000 /imps. $200,000) 999 001 701 $12,500 (land only) $5,000 999 001 702 $7,800 (land only) $3,000 Board of Equalization Minutes - February 9, 2009 Page: 4 The appellants' reason for appealing the assessed value is written on their petition form as follows: "House sits on a wetland/seismic hazard zone." Mr. Pownall explained that the appellant's parcels are adjacent to each other. He looked up the seismic overlay zone in the County's records which show that the two bare land parcels and a portion of the parcel with the house are indeed located in that zone. This factor was not taken into consideration during the assessment process, because he has no way of knowing how the property value is impacted by seismic hazard. The bare land parcels are reduced in value by 75% as they are assumed to be unbuildable. Parcel no. 999 001 702 is reduced in value an additional 50% for wetlands. These parcels already have been significantly reduced in value and he doesn't know how he can adjust them any further. He presented sales of property in the area that have sold which support the base land rate. Chairman Marlow asked what is the difference between the two bare land parcels that would warrant only one of them receiving the additional 50% reduction for wetlands? After taking a closer look at the figures, Mr. Pownall replied that he must have made an error, because there is no reason why one parcel should be valued differently than the other. Parcel no. 999 001 701 should also be receiving the 50% reduction in value for wetlands. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman Marlow closed the hearing. The Board will make a determination at a later date. Monika Marriott BOE: 08 -97 -R PN: 963 302 001 P.O. Box 1425 Port Townsend, WA 98368 Monika Marriott was present. Appraiser Dennis Pownall represented the Assessor's office. Chairman Marlow explained the hearing process and swore in both parties. Under appeal is the land and improvement value of property located at 503 S. Discovery Road, Port Townsend. Currently, the property is assessed at $222,690 ($120,000 for the land and $102,690 for the improvements). The appellant estimates the value is $150,610 ($60,000 for the land and $90,610 for the improvements). Ms. Marriott stated that she has not made any changes to her property since the last revaluation and yet the assessment has significantly increased. She maintains her yard, but her manufactured home is depreciating. She noted that her two sheds are being valued at $1,000 each, yet, she only paid approximately $600 for both of them together. Her property is divided by Discovery Road. She is confused about how the land was assessed and why it also went up in value. Part of the land is landscaped, but, the majority of it only contains trees. She is raising two grandchildren and only works 25 hours per week. Her home is all she has and she doesn't want to lose it because the taxes are too high. Mr. Pownall stated that a portion of the appellant's property is used to provide access to a neighboring parcel. Consequently, the appellant is receiving a 50% reduction in value on that shared portion of property. There is a 2002 manufactured home on the property. He noted that mobile homes do increase Board of Equalization Minutes - February 9, 2009 Page: 5 in value because they are the most affordable housing. They don't increase in value as fast or as much as stick -built houses, but, they do increase in value. He presented evidence with the sale of parcel no. 001 174 020 with a 1987 mobile home located off of Nelson's Landing Road which sold in October 2007 for $220,000. That parcel was assessed as of January 1, 2008 for $215,000. Mr. Garing asked how the size of the parcel which sold compares with the size of the appellant's property? Mr. Pownall replied that the parcel which sold is 2.8 acres in size. Ms. Marriott replied that her property is made up of lots, but, is less than 2 acres in size. Mr. Pownall presented two additional comparable property sales in the area. Parcel no. 001 162 021 (he noted that he included the wrong data field shield for this parcel in the Board's packets) has only a garage constructed on it. It sold in April 2008 for $375,000. It was assessed at $368,000. Parcel no. 001 171 027 has a 1976 single -wide mobile home and it sold in June 2008 for $172,500. It was assessed at $172,000. Discussion ensued regarding the assessment methodology. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman Marlow closed the hearing. The Board will make a determination at a later date. Richard E. & Nadine Nordness Hild BOE: 08 -117 -R PN: 970 600 002 1571 Cape George Road 08- 118 -LO 001 074 012 Port Townsend, WA 98368 08 -119 -R 001 074 008 08 -120 -R 001 181 015 08- 121 -LO 001 181 006 Richard E. and Nadine Nordness Hild were not present. Appraiser Dennis Pownall represented the Assessor's office and was sworn in by Chairman Marlow. Under appeal are five parcels, three of which have improvements, located off of Cape George Road, Port Townsend. Following is the current assessment and the appellant's estimate of value for the parcels under appeal: Parcel No. Current Assessed Value Appellant's Estimate of Value 970 600 002 $184, 940 (land $158,400 /imps. $26,540) $73,155 (land $49,700 /imps. $23,455) 001 074 012 $142,500 (land only) $51,000 001 074 008 $245,625 (land $107,410 /imps. $138,215) $166,155 (land $50,965 /imps. $115,190) 001 181 015 $286,285 (land $160,300 /imps. $125,985) $165,090 (land $63,275 /imps. $101,815) 001 181 006 $100,890 (land only) $68,390 The appellants wrote the following statement on the petition form under item #4 (Specific reasons why you believe the Assessor's value does not reflect the true and fair market value.): "This cannot be determined without knowing how the Assessor arrived at the proposed 2009 value." Board of Equalization Minutes - February 9, 2009 Page: 6 Mr. Pownall presented materials in support of the valuation of these parcels. He stated that he spoke with Mr. Hild who told him that he does not have a complaint with the valuation of the property, rather he has a complaint with how his tax dollars are spent. Mr. Pownall stated that concludes his testimony. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman Marlow closed the hearing. The Board will make a determination at a later date. Janet Millar BOE: 08 -115 -R PN: 002 122 009 P.O. Box 415 Port Townsend, WA 98368 Janet Millar was not present. Appraiser Dennis Pownall represented the Assessor's office and was sworn in by Chairman Marlow. Under appeal is the value of land and improvements located off of Ravens Road, Port Townsend. Currently, the property is assessed at $361,965 ($321,750 for the land and $40,215 for the improvements). The appellant estimates the value is $200,200 ($190,000 for the land and $10,200 for the improvements). On the petition form the appellant wrote the following reason for appealing the valuation of the property: "Due to the poor condition of the structure and its lack of utilities and amenities, I believe fair market value would reflect this parcel as raw land. Its value is further offset by the considerable costs associated with installing those utilities at this particular site." Mr. Pownall presented a map outlining the appellant's property and five comparable property sales that support the current assessment. Of the five sales, only one (parcel no. 002 121 007) was bare land. It sold in June 2006 for $200,000 and is smaller in size than the appellant's property. There is cabin and a garage /shop constructed on the appellant's property. The only access to the cabin is by trail. There is no road or driveway to get to it. This property is not a full -time residence and the structures on it have not been well maintained. He noted that improvements are valued at a "cabin" rate. The garage /shop is only valued at $10,200. The land is valued at $3,000 per front foot and is receiving a 35% reduction in value for topography and access issues. There is also a $45.00 reduction in the improvement value for the type of woodstove that is installed in the cabin. The appellant did not submit any comparable property sales to support her estimate of value, because there aren't any. The appellant stated that the structure has no value and the property should be valued as bare land. If that is her feeling, she has the option to tear down the structure so it won't be assessed. As long as the structure is in place, it has to have some value. Hearing no farther testimony, Chairman Marlow closed the hearing. The Board will make a determination at a later date. Board of Equalization Minutes - February 9, 2009 Page: 7 William Kenneweg & Ronni Ganapoler BOE: 08 -170 -R PN: 001053 014 P.O. Box 395 Port Townsend, WA 98368 William Kenneweg was present. Appraiser Dennis Pownall represented the Assessor's office. After explaining the hearing process, Chairman Marlow swore in both parties. Under appeal is the value of land and improvements located at 2673 Hastings Avenue W., Port Townsend. Currently, the property is assessed at 285,130 ($145,650 for the land and $139,480 for the improvements). The appellant estimates the value is $200,000 (a breakdown between land and improvements was not provided). Mr. Kenneweg stated that he is a Merchant Seaman and his career is either feast or famine. The last time he worked was March through September 2008. When he got home he found a whole new country due to the decline in the economy. Then he gets his property assessment from the Assessor's office which shows his land value increased 230% and the improvement value increased 121 %. This means his taxes for 2009 will increase 146 %. He added that he is getting ready to retire and live on a pension. Their home is a kit log house that they purchased from a manufacturer in Wisconsin and they know its replacement value. He acknowledged that based on sales of property in the area, the Assessor is "spot on" with the assessment of his property. Mr. Pownall was actually, rather kind with his assessment and he realizes, based on sales, that he did not over assess his property. Mr. Kenneweg stated that he just can't believe that the properties located across the street sold for as much as they did. He noted that the sales information was sent to him after he filed his appeal. They purchased their property as a home not as an investment. They plan to live there as long as they live. He would prefer assessments be made every year rather than every four years so the increases would be more gradual and easier for taxpayers to accept. Mr. Pownall stated that it sounds like the appellant is saying that the assessment is fair. Mr. Kenneweg replied that he was away at work when Mr. Pownall visited the property so he didn't have time to dress the place down. But, seriously, he believes the Real Estate market is based on speculation. He agrees the property is valued equitably based on those sales, but, those sales occurred during the Real Estate market bubble. He feels the assessment is too high. Mr. Pownall explained that the "boom" in the housing market became the market because it continued for certain period of time. He noted that he reduced the value of the appellant's property by 15% due to its odd shape. He presented the following four comparable property sales in support of the assessed value: Parcel No.: 001 053 002 (bare land) Location: No assigned address (Off of Hastings Avenue) Sale Date: August 2007 Sale Price: $164,000 Assessment: $159,000 Board of Equalization Minutes - February 9, 2009 Page: 8 Parcel No.: 001 053 021 (bare land) Location: No assigned address (Off of Hastings Avenue) Sale Date: May 2007 Sale Price: $185,000 Assessment: $184,550 Parcel No.: 001 051 007 (improved land) Location: 255 Jacob Miller Road Sale Date: April 2007 Sale Price: $226,000 Assessment: $219,150 Parcel No.: 001 052 011 (bare land) Location: No assigned address (Off of East Middlepoint Road) Sale Date: June 2008 Sale Price: $190,000 Assessment: $183,950 Using a projector and computer to access the County's records, Mr. Pownall presented aerial photographs of the appellant's property and comparable property sales. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman Marlow closed the hearing. The Board will make a determination at a later date. Michael H. & Letitia M. Thompson BOE: 08- 128 -LO PN: 974 600 002 75 Martingale Place Port Ludlow, WA 98365 Michael H. and Letitia M. Thompson were not present. Appraiser John Pray represented the Assessor's office and was sworn in by Chairman Marlow. Under appeal is the land value of property located off of Malamute Lane, Port Ludlow. Currently, the property is assessed at $212,250 (land only). The appellant estimates the value is $150,000. On the petition form the appellant wrote the following reason for appealing the valuation of the property: "Lots 7 and * in Mountain View Vista, which are larger than our lot 2, have been on the market for months for under $200,000 each and have had no offers to date. Since 2006, property values in Washington have declined 18.4 %. $141,500 x 50% = $212,250, does not reflect market value." Mr. Pray stated that appellants purchased this property in December 2005 for $150,000. He presented the following comparable property sales in support of the assessment: Board of Equalization Minutes - February 9, 2009 Page: 9 Comparable Property 91 - Double Sale (Sold twice during four -year revaluation period) Parcel No.: 974 600 005 (bare land) Location: No addressed assigned (Mountain View Vista - Lot 5, off of Malamute Lane) Sale Date: January 2006 Sale Price: $135,000 2nd Sale Date: December 2006 2" Sale Price: $200,000 Comparable Property #2 - Double Sale (Sold twice during four-year revaluation period) Parcel No.: 974 600 010 (bare land) Location: No addressed assigned (Mountain View Vista - Lot 10, off of Malamute Lane) Sale Date: January 2006 Sale Price: $89,000 2 "d Sale Date: December 2007 2 "d Sale Price: $210,000 Comparable Property #3 - Double Sale (Sold twice during four -year revaluation period) Parcel No.: 974 600 013 (bare land) Location: No addressed assigned (Mountain View Vista - Lot 13, off of Malamute Lane) Sale Date: November 2005 Sale Price: $135,000 2" Sale Date: November 2006 2 "d Sale Price: $297,500 Mr. Pray stated that these sales dispute the appellant's comments that property values in Washington have declined 18.4% since 2006, for this locality. Member Garing asked about the appellant's description of the property being half wetlands? Mr Pray replied that he does not believe wetlands affect the value of the property. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman Marlow closed the hearing. The Board will make a determination at a later date. Winston & Virginia LaJambe BOE: 08- 171 -LO PN: 991900 017 311 Sunshine Road Sequim, WA 98382 Winston and Virgina LaJambe were not present. Appraiser John Pray represented the Assessor's office and was sworn in by Chairman Marlow. Under appeal is the land value of property located off of Sunshine Drive (Gardiner), Sequim. Currently, the property is assessed at $51,125 (land only). The appellant estimates the value is $16,000. Board of Equalization Minutes - February 9, 2009 Page: 10 On the petition form the appellant wrote the following reason for appealing the valuation of the property: "The value was taxed at $15,825 12/12/2006. Why a great jump in value? There is no improvements. I have doubts it is buildable. Note: Drainage ditch through property, making marketable area a lot smaller than the 1.13 acre lot " The appellant's purchased this property in August 2008 for $6,000. The following information was also attached to the petition form: 1) a survey map of the appellant's property outlining the drainage ditch and the 50' set back from the ditch; 2) copies of Jefferson County's website page dated 10/29/08 and 12/02/06 showing valuation information; Excise Tax Sales Affidavit listing the sale on June 23, 2008 for $6,000; a copy of a parcel map from Jefferson County's website; and three comparable property sales with the following comment. "Here are three examples of properties in the direct neighborhood that have sold as vacant lots undeveloped in the near recent years. The sale price, I feel is a good indication of the value before development on the lot began. All these are larger lots, clear of any easements, unlike the lot in appeal. The lot 991 900 017 at the comer of Sunshine Road and Eagle Creek that I am appealing, has a drainage ditch running through it. This ditch has a stand off of 50 feet with another 50 feet of no build, making a total of 100 feet away from the centerline of the ditch. This effectively cuts the usable property down about to 70 -50% for any future development if ever used." Mr. Pray stated that the appellant's property consists 1.15 acres and is identified in the Assessor's records as lot 17 in Rondelay Meadows. He presented the following comparable property sales in support of the assessment: Comparabl Parcel No.: Location: Sale Date: Sale Price: Description: e Property #1 991 900 002 (Improved land; 491 Farnsworth Place March 2007 $210,000 .98 acres Comparable Property #2 Parcel No.: 002 283 028 (bare land) Location: No addressed assigned (Off of Sunshine Drive) Sale Date: November 2005 Sale Price: $105,000 Description: 5.10 acres Comparable Property 43 Parcel No.: 002 332 015 (bare land) Location: No addressed assigned (Off of Rajala Road) Sale Date: March 2008 Sale Price: $135,000 Description: 4.96 acres Comparabl Parcel No.: Location: Sale Date: Sale Price: Description: e Property #4 002 284 017 (bare land) 1740 Old Gardiner Road September 2008 $80,000 1.31 acres Board of Equalization Minutes - February 9, 2009 Page: 11 Mr. Pray explained that comparable property #4 occurred after the rolls had been closed and was included for informational purposes only. He noted that the appellants purchased the property in August 2008 for $6,000. This same lot sold in January 1979 for $7,950. In speaking with the appellant he attempted to inquire why the property sold for only $6,000. The reason given by Mr. LaJambe was that the property had been under a group ownership and it took him a lot of time to contact all of the owners. He was also told by Mr. LaJambe that the drainage ditch which runs through a portion of the property increases the development costs and thereby reduces its value. In light of this fact, Mr. Pray recommended that the Board may want to consider reducing the value by 25% for site quality. The appellant's estimate of value of $16,000 is too low. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman Marlow closed the hearing. The Board will make a determination at a later date. Vice - Chairman Broders moved to adjourn the meeting until 9:30 a.m. Tuesday, February 10, 2009. Member Gazing seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. ATTEST: Eric luudg n, "CIer12 of the B and 'J JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF EQUALIZATION William S. Marlow, Chairman Richard A. rB oPd"ers, jVic_e-_Ch`a_tr Dave Uazin , Meb r