Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM030515ok Dave Garing Henry Krist Mike Smith 1820 Jefferson Street P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 Dave Garing Henry Krist MINUTES March 5, 2015 Michael Smith Chairman Vice -Chairman Member Chairman Dave Garing called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m. in the presence of Vice -Chairman Henry Krist and Member Michael Smith. ASSESSMENT CORRECTION Vice -Chairman Krist moved to accept the following assessment correction. Member Smith seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. NAME APPEAL NO. Mark Schwartz & Cindy Bain BOE 14-16-R HEARINGS Janet Knudsen BOE: 14 -66 -LO 24450 Mt. Washington View Lane NW Poulsbo, WA 98370 PARCEL NO. 821 103 014 PN: 990 600 319 Janet Knudsen 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 value of a parcel located in the North Bay area of Port Ludlow. The property was assessed as of January 1, 2014 and is currently valued at $63,538. The appellant estimates the value to be $35,000. The appellant testified that she and her brother inherited the property from her parents in 2003. At that time the estate determined the property was worth approximately $30,000. Due to financial reasons she purchased her sibling's half of the parcel for $17,500. The appellant tried to donate the property to a charitable education trust last year. The charity required an independent appraisal. In order to receive the maximum taxable deduction, the independent appraiser valued the property at Phone (360)385-9100 Fax (360)385-9382 jeffbocc@co.jefferson.wa.us Board of Equalization Minutes — March 5, 2015 Page: 2 $35,000. Based on comparable property sales found in the Assessor's Office, she testified that if she placed the property on the market, she would only be able to sell the property for approximately $23,000. She received the Assessor's information packet and based on recent sales in the area, the value is still declining. Appraiser Hough provided the following documents for review: • Area map of the appellant's property; • Field sheet for appellant's property; Appellant's Comparable Property Sales 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 (Map, Field Sheet, and Excise Tax Affidavit); Raw Land Sales in North Bay January, 2013 through December, 2014; and • Raw Land Listings in North Bay as of January 15, 2015. Appraiser Hough stated that the Assessor's Office is working under Washington State law to correct the discrepancy between bare land values and improved values located in the North Bay area of Port Ludlow. The Assessor's Office will be conducting physical inspections in Port Ludlow in 2016. He provided a brief history of the values in the area. Discussion continued regarding the cost and availability of sewer system connections to Port Ludlow properties. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman Garing closed the hearing. The Board will make a determination at a later date. Jerry & Diana Coburn BOE: 14 -80 -LO PN: 990 603 204 385 Old Oak Bay Road Port Hadlock, WA 98339 Jerry Coburn 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 value of a parcel located in the North Bay area of Port Ludlow. The property was assessed as of January 1, 2014 and is currently valued at $97,175. The appellants estimate the value to be $67,575. The appellant testified that the adjacent property is currently listed for sale for $79,500. It has been on the market for over 10 months. He received his new valuation notice and it was more than the listing price of his neighbor's parcel. He referenced the Assessor's list of "Raw Land Sales in North Bay of Port Ludlow." Those properties sold for substantially less than their assessed value. He feels there is something wrong with the methodology used to value these properties. The view will be eventually diminished due to tree growth and restrictions placed on building height. Appraiser Hough provided the following documents for review: Area map of the appellants' property; Board of Equalization Minutes — March 5, 2015 Page: 3 • Field sheet for appellants' property; • Appellants' Comparable Property Sale A (Field Sheet and Sales Flyer); • Raw Land Sales in North Bay January, 2013 through December, 2014; and • Raw Land Listings in North Bay as of January 15, 2015. Appraiser Hough stated that the Assessor's methodology used to determine bare land values located in the North Bay area of Port Ludlow is incorrect. He feels the appellants' estimate of value is too high. He provided a brief history of the values in the area. Discussion continued regarding the quality of view and building site requirements. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman Garing closed the hearing. The Board will make a determination at a later date. DETERMINATIONS Per WAC 458-14-095(4) post hearing deliberations of the Board of Equalization are not recorded. The Board began post hearing deliberations at 10:37 a.m. At the conclusion of the deliberations the Board resumed the regular meeting at 11:32 a.m. and the following actions were taken. Carl Martin BOE: 14-22-R PN: 955 900 031 1623 W. Admiralty Heights Lane, Apt. 104 Bremerton, WA 98312 The appellant's property is a single family residence located at 2003 Shasta Place in Port Townsend's Hamilton Heights neighborhood. The appellant asserts the true and fair market value offhe property to be $170,000 ($40,000 for the land and $130,000 for the improvements). The Assessor valued the property as of January 1, 2014 at $220,940 ($52,500 for the land and $168,440 for the improvements). The appellant bought the property in July, 2011 for $225,000. The appellant provided the Board with three sales of comparable properties that occurred in 2014 and one in early 2013 as evidence to support his contention of value. The Assessor's representative presented a tax parcel map of the immediate area, a copy of the appraisal worksheet, a sales affidavit indicating the appellant's property sold for $225,000 in 2011, and a list of 15 comparable property sales that occurred in Hamilton Heights, with corresponding sales affidavits and assessed valuation worksheets. He also provided a site map, appraisal worksheets and corresponding sales affidavits of the comparable property sales offered by the appellant. The Assessor's representative introduced affidavit evidence that the appellant incorrectly listed the price of his Comparable A at $196,624, it is not in the immediate neighborhood, and sold after the assessment date of January 1, 2014. He also noted the address for Comparable B was different from the parcel number, the sale price was listed incorrectly, and the sale occurred after the assessment date. The appellant reported the sale price of his Comparable C to be $172,542 while Board of Equalization Minutes — March 5, 2015 Page: 4 the sales affidavit did not list a sale price. The sale price listed by the appellant for his Comparable D was not specified in the Real Estate Tax affidavit and occurred in December of 2012. The Assessor's comparable property sales in Hamilton Heights neighborhood during 2013 closely corresponded to their respective assessed values suggesting the Assessor had accurately valued the neighborhood properties as well as the appellant's property. After reviewing all the information submitted, the Board concurred that the appellant did- not present clear, cogent, and convincing evidence necessary to overcome the presumptive correctness of the value established by the Assessor. Member Smith moved to sustain the Assessor's valuation of $220,940 ($52,500 for the land and $168,440 for the improvements). Vice -Chairman Krist seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. (See also minutes of February 27, 2015) Barbara Donovan & Louis Schwartz BOE: 14-85-R PN: 936 900 601 P.O. Box 493 Port Townsend, WA 98368 The appellants' property is a single family residence located at 5021 Jackman Street in Port Townsend. The appellants assert the true and fair market value of the property to be $227,893 ($107,000 for the land and $120,893 for the improvements). The Assessor valued the property as of January 1, 2014 at $250,682 ($117,700 for the land and $132,982 for the improvements). The appellants have owned the property since 1980. They testified that they live next door to a hoarder who has two rusting cars in his yard along with piles of rubbish. They provided photos of the neighbor's yard along with several comparable property sales. - The Assessor's representative presented a number of comparable property sales. He stated that he visited the property some time ago, and confirmed the condition of the neighbor's property. The Board finds that due to the condition of the adjacent property the appellants' land value be given a 20% reduction. The improvement value will remain unchanged. Vice -Chairman Krist moved to overrule the Assessor's valuation and reduce the value from $250,682 ($117,700 for the land and $132,982 for the improvements) to $229,342 ($96,360 for the land and $132,982 for the improvements). Member Smith seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. (See also minutes of February 27, 2015) Janice Svien BOE: 14-90-R PN: 990 400 247 P.O. Box 1223 Port Hadlock, WA 98339 The appellant's property is a single family residence located at 543 Montgomery Lane in Port Ludlow. The appellant asserts the true and fair market value of the property to be $205,481 Board of Equalization Minutes — March 5, 2015 Page: 5 ($75,000 for the land and $130,481 for the improvements). The Assessor valued the property as of January 1, 2014 at $236,303 ($86,250 for the land and $150,053 for the improvements). The Assessor's representative met with the appellant prior to the scheduled hearing and determined that the kitchen floor had water damage and needed to be replaced. He recommended the following value: $212,496 ($75,038 for the land and $137,458 for the improvements). The appellant, while unavailable to testify at the hearing, submitted a letter stating that she accepted and agreed to the recommendation by the Assessor's representative. Member Smith moved to overrule the Assessor's valuation and reduce the value from $236,303 ($86,250 for the land and $150,053 for the improvements) to $212,496 ($75,038 for the land and $137,458 for the improvements). Vice -Chairman Krist seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. (See also minutes of February 27, 2015) HEARINGS Continued Karl & Marilyn Boettcher BOE: 14-79-R PN: 001 175 006 P.O. Box 95 Port Townsend, WA 98368 Karl and Marilyn Boettcher were present. Appraiser Charley Hough represented the Assessor's Office. After explaining the hearing process, Chairman Garing swore in both parties. Under appeal is the value of property located at 184 Cougar Ridge Road, Port Townsend. The appellants assert the true and fair market value of the property to be $493,314 ($83,314 for the land and $410,000 for the improvements) without the 110% market adjustment used by the Assessor, and $542,645 ($91,645 for the land and $451,000 for the improvements) with the 110% market adjustment. The Assessor valued the property as of January 1, 2014 at $599,535 ($126,331 for the land and $473,204 for the improvements). The appellants provided a cardboard diagram showing the topography of their property. They stated that their property consists of 5.13 acres. Their home is located on approximately two acres of relatively flat land. The remaining acreage slopes downward and is unusable. They stated they are not appealing the improvement value, only the land value. A sewer line has been installed through the middle of the sloping portion of the land. In February, the appellants met with the Assessor's representative and they agreed on a recommendation to reduce the improvement value from $473,204 to $468,033. They also said there is an arithmetic error and the current improved value established by the Assessor should be $473,202. They feel the land value is warranted a reduction for topography. They don't understand why they are paying taxes on a "private" road when someone who lives on a "public" road is not taxed. The appellants stated they would agree to the following land values: • $1,368 for the 30' wide driveway (.342 acres) • $70,000 for the flat land area with the improvements (1 acre) • $6,118 for the flat landscaped area (.874 acres) 0 $5,828 for the slope/forest/green belt area (2.9 acres) Board of Equalization Minutes — March 5, 2015 Page: 6 Additionally, the appellants questioned why they are arbitrarily paying an additional 10% multiplier. After further review, they feel the total value should be $558,000. Appraiser Hough responded to the appellants' statements as follows: • "Flat" land value used by the appellants - Assessor's Office does not establish a "flat" land value. • Private Driveway — The appellants are not being taxed for their driveway. • 10% market adjustment — Placed on the land value as part of the 2014 statistical update due to comparable property sales. Appraiser Hough projected a picture of an aerial map, taken in 2013, showing the elevation of the appellants' property. The garage is located at 307 feet above sea level and at the lowest slope of the property the elevation is 271 feet above sea level (36 foot slope for the 5.13 acre parcel). He provided a breakdown of the appellants' land value as follows: • $87,500 - 1 acre homesite; _ • $10,000 -utilities (power, water, septic); • 10% statistical update used in the neighborhood; • $4,620 per acre - Residual 4.13 acres (includes a 50% reduction for topography and septic use only; and 10% market modifier). The appellants purchased their property in May, 2004 for $440,000 and have since constructed a large garage/shop. Appraiser Hough provided the statistical update of properties that sold including properties located in the appellants' neighborhood 45340. The appellants said they talked with 3 or 4 realtors who informed them that their value is high. Referencing the statistical update, the appellants stated that in neighborhood #5340 there were 9 sales. They questioned how many properties were listed but did not sell and how can the Assessor justify a 10% market adjustment? Discussion continued regarding the reduction given for residual acreage. Chairman Garing asked Appraiser Hough if he feels the land is valued correctly? Appraiser Hough responded that the land value is correct. The slope of the appellants' property is approximately 36 feet over a 5.13 acre parcel. He stated the model submitted by the appellant is not a true representation of the topography. Chairman Garing asked the appellants what each level of the model represented? The appellants replied that each level represents a 2 foot decline in elevation and the length and width are not to scale. They submitted the model to show that the property is not flat. He reiterated that due to the slope, the residual acreage is unusable. Appraiser Hough discussed the square footage of the appellants' improvements as follows: Residence: Detached Garage: First Floor — 1,635 Square Feet First Floor — 4,109 Square Feet Second Floor — 1,797 Square Feet Second Floor — 4,109 Square Feet Attached Garage — 660 Square Feet Board of Equalization Minutes — March 5, 2015 Page: 7 He does not feel that the appellants' property is incorrectly valued. The appellants disagreed with Appraiser Hough's statement and request the land value be reduced. Prior to the hearing, the appellants and Appraiser Hough met and agreed on a lower improvement value which was included in the Board's packet as a recommendation to reduce the improvement value from $473,204 to $468,033. The appellants reiterated that they are required to give the homeowners association a 30 foot easement. Their driveway is included in their total acreage which means they are paying taxes on property used by everyone. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman Garing closed the hearing. The Board will make a determination at a later date. Sidney & Karla Stecker BOE: 14 -46 -LO PN: 989 600 010 3645 Cassie Drive SW Tumwater, WA 98512 Sidney Stecker 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 value of a parcel located off of Prospect Avenue, Port Townsend. The property was assessed as of January 1, 2014 and is currently valued at $273,000. The appellants estimate the value to be $70,000. The appellant stated that he appealed his value to the Board of Equalization in 2012 and the Board overruled the Assessor's value and reduced it to $127,000. He was surprised when he received a change of value notice in November increasing the value to $273,000. He contacted the Assessor's Office and was informed that they have implemented a new computer system that didn't transfer the appellants' property value correctly. The appellant said he has not seen much of a change in the Real Estate market to warrant an increase in value. He would like the value to be reduced to the 2012 value set by the Board of Equalization of $127,000 or reduced even further to reflect the 2012 purchase price of $70,000. Appraiser Hough apologized to the appellant for the glitch in the new computer system. He discussed the lawsuit between the appellants and the owner of the neighboring property. The appellants did not lose any property with the lawsuit decision. The land value was given a base rate of $160,000. Appraiser Hough recommended a 30% reduction of the base rate ($160,000) for a total value of $112,000. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman Garing closed the hearing. The Board will make a determination at a later date. Board of Equalization Minutes — March 5, 2015 Page: 8 Max Watson BOE: 14-99-R PN: 801 034 016 _ P.O. Box 171 801036 401 McCloud, CA 96057 Max Watson was not present. Appraiser Charley Hough represented the Assessor's Office and was sworn in by Chairman Garing. Under appeal is the land and improvement value of a parcel located at 4675 Center Road, Chimacum. The property was assessed as of January 1, 2014 and is currently valued at $111,761 ($73,821 for the land and $37,940 for the improvements). The appellant estimates the value to be $75,000 ($65,000 for the land and $10,000 for the improvements). On the petition form the appellant wrote the following reason for appealing the valuation of his parcel: "I bought this place so my brother would have a place to live. He died about a year ago. His daughter now lives there. The Assessor is raising the value because someone else sold their property for more than assessed value not fair. Go and look at property. " Appraiser Hough stated that the appellant's property consists of two parcels with a manufactured home situated on the property. There is no indication that the manufactured home is in poor condition to warrant a value of $10,000 as requested by the appellant. Discussion continued regarding the difference between a mobile home and a manufactured home. He feels the appellant's property is valued correctly. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman Garing closed the hearing. The Board will make a determination at a later date. ADJOURNMENT Vice -Chairman Krist moved to adjourn the meeting at 3:15 p.m. Member Smith seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. ATTEST: 01�ieR. Locke, Clerk of the Board JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF EQUALIZATION Dave G ing, h an Henry Krist, Vice -Cha' an aichael Smith, Member