HomeMy WebLinkAboutM091511•
Dave Garing
Henry Krist
Michael Smith
1820 Jefferson Street
P.O. Box 1220
Port Townsend, WA 98368
Dave Gering Henry Krist
MINUTES
September 15, 2011
Michael Smith
Chairman
Vice - Chairman
Member
Chairman Dave Garing called the meeting to order at 10:00 a.m. in the presence of Vice - Chairman
Henry Krist and Member Michael Smith.
ASSESSOR'S CERTIFICATE OF NEW CONSTRUCTION VALUE
The Board reviewed the Assessor's Certificate of New Construction Value. Vice - Chairman Krist moved
to accept the Assessor's Certificate of New Construction Value for 2011 in the amount of $31,726,180.
Member Smith seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote.
ASSESSMENT CORRECTIONS AND PETITION WITHDRAWALS
Member Smith moved to accept the following assessment corrections and petition withdrawals. Vice -
Chairman Krist seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote.
APPELLANT
Robert Carlson & Regina Andreasson
Michael & Anne McClure
Thomas & Nancy Conley
James & Marleen Yelaca
ff f,
I ,)
Duane Hogue
Thian & Julia Lim
APPEAL NO.
BOE 11 -05 -R
BOE 11 -07 -R
BOE 11 -08 -R
BOE 11 -19 -LO
BOE 11 -20 -LO
BOE 11 -21 -LO
BOE 11 -25 -R
BOE 11 -46 -R
PARCEL NO.
998 700 040
969 400 017
990 600 232
601 343 029
601 343 031
601 343 033
821 351 001
821 355 017
Phone (360)385 -9100 Fax (360)385 -9382 jeffbocc%eco.jefferson.wa.us
Board of Equalization Minutes - September 15, 2011 Page: 2
HEARINGS
G.P. Middleton, Trustee BOE: 11 -12 -R PN: 948 311403
Gregory 1329 Trust
P.O. Box 676
Port Townsend, WA 98368
G.P. Middleton was present. Appraiser Charley Hough represented the Assessor's Office. After
explaining the hearing process Chairman Garing swore in both parties. Under appeal is the
improvement value of property located at 1330 21' Street, Port Townsend.
Currently, the property is assessed at $192,400 ($117,400 for the land and $75,000 for the
improvements). The appellant estimates the value is $147,400 ($117,400 for the land and $30,000 for
the improvements).
The Appellant informed the Board that originally the property consisted of six parcels. Two parcels,
including the house have been sold and what remains is a rebuilt bam on four parcels. The barn looks
like a house on the outside, but it is just a shell on the inside. This was done for resale value. In 2009 he
tried to get power to the barn but was informed by the City of Port Townsend that he needed an address
before he was allowed to get electricity. In order to get an address he would have to apply for a change
of use permit for the building. He was told that before he can apply for a change of use permit he would
have to pay $40,000 late- comers fee. This fee is payable to Habitat For Humanity for installing the road.
He requested to make payments on the fee, but was denied. A stop work order will be posted if any
more work is done to the property. He feels he is being assessed a higher value for property he can't do
anything with.
Appraiser Hough informed the Board that he was not the site appraiser for this property, however he
visited the subject property to familiarize himself with the land and improvements. He provided the
Board and Appellant with current pictures of the barn structure. The 2007 appraisal sheet shows the
building had a $75,000 shell value on the structure and that value remains the same today. The land
value is the only change.
Had the Appellant been in the Country in 2005 when he received the change of value notice, he would
have appealed the $75,000 shell value. He stated he had to move the structure because it was in the right
of way. He estimates he has spent under $20,000 to build the structure.
Appraiser Hough discussed the late - comers fee. He talked with the City of Port Townsend and was told
that the Appellant would need to apply for a building permit, at which time an address would be issued,
and then utilities could be installed. The City did not mention late -comer fees, however Appraiser
Hough would not be surprised if a fee did exist for the installation of the road.
Appraiser Hough gave a history of the neighborhood and clarified the square footage of the structure.
Board of Equalization Minutes - September 15, 2011 Page: 3
In answer to a question of what stage /percent of completion are the improvements, Appraiser Hough
responded that he feels the current amount of 75% is too high and he estimates the structure to be 40 %-
45% complete. It was also determined that the subject property is being assessed as having utilities and
that is not the case. The $10,000 site improvement for utilities should be removed from the land value.
The hearing was temporarily adjourned in order for Appraiser Hough to calculate new values that
include a 40% completion value for the structure and a reduction of $10,000 for site improvements.
The hearing was reconvened with all parties present. After reviewing the new calculations provided by
the Assessor's representative, the Appellant stated he was agreeable to both the improvement and land
values. The Assessor's Representative recommended the Board reduce the improvement value to
$49,410 and the land value remain the same at $107,400 for a total value of $156,810.
Hearing no further testimony, Chairman Garing closed the hearing. The Board will make a
determination at a later date.
Ann Kittredge (Hearing Continued from 8/1/11) BOE: 11 -11 -R PN: 701 195 008
AMK Properties
P.O. Box 763
Quilcene, WA 98376
Ann Kittredge was not present. Appraiser John Pray represented the Assessor's office and was sworn in
by Chairman Gating. Under appeal is the land and improvement value of property located on Pratt Lane,
Quilcene.
A hearing was held on August 1, 2011 in which the Board determined that the Assessor's representative
was not allowed access to the subject property to determine fair market value. The Chairman continued
the hearing until a site inspection could be performed.
Clerk of the Board Leslie Locke informed the Board that a letter was sent to the Appellant notifying her
of today's hearing date and giving her the option to attend, but it was not necessary.
Appraiser Pray stated he revisited the subject property and determined a new fair market value. Both
parties submitted written confirmation that they agree to and are recommending a new improvement
value of $36,155. The land value would remain the same at $77,600 for a new total valuation of
$113,755.
Hearing no further testimony, Chairman Gating closed the hearing. The Board will make a
determination at a later date.
Board of Equalization Minutes - September 15, 2011 Page: 4
Daniel & Audrey Lafforgue BOE: 11 -24 -R PN: 964 601 601
P.O. Box 692
Brinnon, WA 98320
Audrey Lafforgue was present. Appraiser Charley Hough represented the Assessor's Office. After
explaining the hearing process Chairman Garing swore in both parties. Under appeal is the land and
improvement value of property located at 304698 US Highway 101, Brinnon.
Currently, the property is assessed at $304,355 ($103,750 for the land and $200,605 for the
improvements). The Appellants estimate the value is $211,290 ($52,500 for the land and $158,790 for
the improvements).
The Appellant stated they purchased the subject property five years ago for $305,000. At that time the
assessed value was $314,410. The property was reassessed in 2010 for the current value of $304,355.
She said that adjacent properties that had sold during the same timeframe as their property, were
assessed 7 % -9% lower than what they were actually purchased for. She questioned why their value was
so much higher when their home is 5 years older and no improvements have been made before or after
the purchase date? Their land value is assessed at $4,000 more an acre than other land in the area.
Currently their home would not sell for the assessed value. They purchased at the peak of the market
and buyers are just not willing to pay that in today's market.
Appraiser Hough informed the Board that the assessment date for the subject property is January 1, 2010
and provided:
Exhibit 1: Map of the area including the subject property;
Exhibit 2: Field sheet of the subject property;
Exhibit 3: Real Estate Excise Tax Affidavit showing the purchase price of $305,000 at which time
the assessed value was $314,410;
Exhibit 4: Photo of the back of the home;
Exhibit 5: Printout of all the sales in the Brinnon area from July 1, 2009 through July 1, 2010 (20
improved sales). The medium average was 90.5% which is almost 10% below market
value. There were only 9 land sales during that 12 month period with the medium of
87.5 %;
Exhibit 6: Printout of sales that occurred in the Brinnon area after July 1, 2010 (7 months after the
assessment date). During that time there were only 6 improved sales with the medium of
95.1%. Not one transaction sold for more than 100% of fair market value. There were
only 7 land sales with a medium average of 93 %. Two properties sold for their assessed
value.
Hearing no objections from the Appellant, Appraiser Hough submitted additional information. He
discussed a map showing the subject property and the Appellant's comparable properties. Also provided
was a field sheet for both the Appellant's comparable properties. In March, 2010 comparable property #1
was listed for sale for $349,900 and has since been removed from the market. He acknowledged that
Board of Equalization Minutes - September 15, 2011 Page: 5
property can be listed for any amount. He also provided a breakdown of all three properties showing the
similarities and the differences. If comparing all three properties from the 2006 value to the 2010 value,
the subject property was lowered more than the comparable properties provided by the Appellants. He
provided the 2006 field sheets for all three properties showing the assessed values at that time.
As far as the land goes, Appraiser Hough stated that the two comparable properties have a land base rate
of $50,000 and the subject property's land base is $75,000. The difference is the Appellants have a really
nice view of the water compared to an average view for the other parcels. He questioned whether an
appraisal had been performed for the sale of the subject property?
The Appellant replied that the only appraisal that was done had an assessed value of $315,000.
In answer to a question from Member Krist, Appraiser Hough said the difference in size between the
comparable and subject properties are 1.21 acres for one parcel and less than an acre for the other. The
subject property is 1.6 acres.
The Appellant asked if an easement to the property and a shared water system decreases the value of the
property?
Appraiser Hough replied that he is aware of some court proceedings dealing with the subject property- and
asked if there was a judgement involving those proceedings?
The Appellant stated that a judgement was granted in their favor. However, they continue to have issues
with the property owners blocking access to their home. The judgement that was granted cannot be
enforced by law enforcement only through the court system. She described incidences where sharp
objects had been placed on the easement causing damage to their vehicle and/or not allowing them access
to their property. They have access to their property by two roads, however both are easements.
Appraiser Hough informed the Appellant and the Board that normally a reduction in value is not given for
easements because by law access cannot be blocked.
The Appellant feels that they could not sell their property at the current assessed value.
Appraiser Hough explained the four year cycle used by Jefferson County. The Brinnon area never really
increased in value which means the values didn't decrease much either.
Hearing no further testimony, Chairman Gazing closed the hearing. The Board will make a determination
at a later date.
Board of Equalization Minutes - September 15, 2011 Page: 6
Vice - Chairman Krist moved to adjourn the meeting until the next scheduled meeting. Member Smith
seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote.
A �/er
cke, Boazd
JEFFERSON COUNTY
BOARD OF EQUALIZATION
G_
Dave DaveGarin fg, hai an
Henry "st,e -C irman
Michael Smith, Member