Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM112195 Jefferson County Board of Equalization TELEPHONE: 385.9100 COURTHOUSE P.O. BOX 1220 PORT TOWNSEND, WASHINGTON 98368 r--/~< ,.::;."S c. .~.. .. f"7( : .,::;J' ~ /&" ,<:":,;, '1 J . >, f..~A.." '.... . lL . ~...J.' 0,~>e' . .~' . r: '._'~~:>~ 1i.1'.~,".," .':-....,.,..kll.:~ c '~..I...... :f.:....;.L.~.........:.,. Vd ,!" ~. '.' 'd/X'.,). ~;." '~:' ,-h.. ..... ".:':'.ffi ii.~' -, ,,,,,It c" 'il ::' ~-' ,-'_' >;-:;"_~ <, 's'(,< ~",',"_',""".c....':. ..'....'..~._. >' . ,~: '.".' _. '. .",~qr, "".h,. i it/! "~'"" ;;. _' ,',.-" - .'c' ,J-, 'H~If:\i1~t(~~::~' 'I.m:.,;;, , ,.":'~ -, I'''''.''''<_'''u~. ~"'~" ,,",'Iu -",~~. . 'liI.i;.c~.'.:V ~~"'~L-,,","='!:~ JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF EQUALIZA nON MINUTES NOVEMBER 21, 1995 William S. Marlow Richard A. Broders James A. DeLeo 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 James A. DeLeo. HEARING WAIVERS Chairman Marlow read the following petition withdrawals and assessment corrections into the record: Darrell Fett Harrison Peter Hubbard Melvin Reck Family Trust George Herion " BOE 95-69-R BOE 95-88-R BOE 95-109-R BOE 95-1 18-LO BOE 95-119-LO BOE 95-130-LO BOE 95-155-LO BOE 95-156-LO BOE 95-157-R BOE 95-160-LO " Daniel Kimball Phillip Smith . Phillip Otness The Board concurred to accept them. n \,tI 100% Recycled Paper BOARD OF EQUALIZATION MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 21, 1995 Page 2 HEARINGS J. Paul & M.L. Heinzinger P.O. Box 213 Nordland, W A 98358 BOE: 95-80-LO 95-81-R PN: 953700437 021 294 038 Mr. Heinzinger was present. Robert Kingsley was present on behalf of the Assessor's office. Chairman Marlow explained the hearing process and swore them in. The appellant's property is located in Nordland on Marrowstone Island. Mr. Heinzinger began by giving the Board members additional information. Chairman Marlow stated that additional information must be provided prior to the hearing. Mr. Heinzinger stated he just recently received the information or he would have met the deadline. Chairman Marlow explained that the Board can only accept the information as long as there is no objection by the Assessor's representative. After reviewing the information Mr. Kingsley stated he objects to its submission on the grounds that he doesn't understand it. The information was not accepted. Mr. Heinzinger continued by stating that the property recorded under parcel number 953700437 is high bank which makes access to the beach very difficult. Additionally, there is no access to the beach on either side of the property because it is landlocked. As stated in the attachment to the petition, lack of access to the beach to collect clams and oysters, devalues the property and may adversely affect a potential sale. The owners of the property on both sides of Mr. Heinzinger's property, installed rock rip rap on their shorelines which has resulted in the erosion of his property. Also to be considered, is the swampy area on the property. He resides on the property recorded under parcel number 021294038 and is only requesting an adjustment to the improvement value. He feels the Assessor's office did not consider deferred maintenance during the assessment. The property is located on Point Wilson and is exposed to the elements of severe weather conditions such as high winds and rain. They are also having problems with their plumbing. He feels that valuing homes on the basis of replacement cost is a fair method, however, he feels consideration should be given for deferred maintenance. Mr. Heinzinger is requesting the Board reduce the current assessment of parcel number 953700 437 from $156,980 to $78,490 and the current assessment of parcel number 021 294038 from $416,600 ($240,620 for the land and $175,980 for the improvements) to $383,600 (240,620 for the land and $142,980 for the improvements). Mr. Kingsley commented on the testimony given by the appellant for parcel number 953 700437 and stated that the lack of beach access and the inability to collect clams and oysters is very common for waterfront parcels on Marrowstone Island. In fact many waterfront property owners on Marrowstone Island, and throughout the County, do not even own the beach or tidelands and have no rights to clams and oysters. Sale prices of waterfront parcels that do not have tideland rights are consistent with those that do. Tidelands are valued separately, so if they are not owned, they are not assessed. The information provided and the testimony given is conjecture and is not substantiated by market evidence. As for house located on parcel number 021 294038, the Assessor's office does take into account depreciation when they value the improvements. It is reflected as effective age on the Assessor's worksheet. Mr. Kingsley was not aware of the other problems mentioned by the appellant, so he is unable to address them. After hearing the testimony of both parties the Board concurred to conduct an inspection of the property and make a determination at a later date. BOARD OF EQUALIZATION MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 21, 1995 Page 3 Moses & Yvonne Rogers P.O. Box 203 Nordland, W A 98358 BOE: 95-129-LO PN: 021212002 Mr. Rogers was present. Robert Kingsley was present on behalf of the Assessor's office. Chairman Marlow explained the hearing process and swore them in. The appellant is only contesting the land value of the property which is located on Marrowstone Island. Mr. Rogers presented photographs of his property and property down the street, and a newspaper which listed sales of properties on Marrowstone Island. He stated that Mr. Kingsley did a good job assessing the property on Marrowstone Island, however, he used the highest priced comparable bare land sales to value the property. He doesn't feel that bare land sales are comparable to his property which has improvements. Some of the sales occurred two years ago which is not reflective of today' s market. The market is flat and there are no buyers out there. One of the comparable sales used was the Nordland store. Mr. Rogers questions the similarity between the store and his residential property. Other comparable sales used were not even located on Marrowstone Island. He provided a listing of property sales on Marrowstone Island which shows that listing prices have come down considerably since nothing is selling. He believes his property value is not reflective of the market and is requesting the Board reduce the land value of the current assessment from $219,900 to $195,500 for a new total value of$369,265. Mr. Kingsley stated that he stands behind the comparable sales that were used in valuing this property. He asked Mr. Rogers to clarifY the information he submitted. Mr. Rogers stated that the information includes both sales and listings of property on Marrowstone Island. Mr. Kingsley stated that out of all the properties listed, only one is an actual sale. The rest are just listing prices. The assessed value of the property that sold, was approximately $30,000 less than the sale amount. The listing prices of the other properties are considerably higher than the Assessor's valuation, which may explain why they are not selling, After hearing the testimony of both parties the Board concurred to conduct an inspection of the property and make a determination at a later date. AMENDED DETERMINATION William & Shirley Rogers-Curd P.O. Box 67 Springdale, UT 84767 BOE: 95-79-LO PN: 990400510 Chairman Marlow explained that the Board determined to sustain the Assessor's valuation of this parcel during their meeting held on November 15, 1995. After reviewing the figures it was discovered that some information was omitted from the Board's consideration. During the hearing it was suggested by the Assessor's representative that the house be valued at a rate of good-minus. He recommended that the Board reduce the current assessed value of the improvements from $109,560 to $103,395 for a new total value of$134,395. The Board concurred to make the recommended adjustment. Member James DeLeo moved to amend the BOARD OF EQUALIZATION MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 21, 1995 Page 4 Board's previous determination and overrule the Assessor's valuation of parcel number 990 400 510 and reduce it from $140,560 ($31,000 for the land and $109,560 for the improvements) and reduce only the improvement value from $109,560 to $103,395 for a new total value of $134,395. Vice-Chairman Broders seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. (See also minutes of November 9 & 15, 1995) HEARINGS - CONTINUED Colleen McCahill 571 Griffiths Point Road Nordland, WA 98358 BOE: 95-92-LO PN: 021 324 014 Ms. McCahill was not present. Robert Kingsley represented the Assessor's office and was sworn in by Chairman Marlow. The appellant is only contesting the land value of the property located on Marrowstone Island. It states on the petition that "Tax at time of purchase was less than $400/yr. Your latest appraisal will raise it to approx. $2,000/yr. Using your math, market value should now exceed $400,000 - or rougWy triple actual m.v. This for property with a severely limited, tenuous, independent water supply, and no access to a reliable water source. Appraisal is obviously excessive and grossly unfair." An attachment to the petition states "Subject property was re-appraised when I completed the building ofa small home in late 1992. Now, LESS THAN TIIREE YEARS LATER, the land has again been re-appraised and your notice reflects an increase of57.7% in land value. Taxation has now reached over 500% of the tax applicable to the property when I purchased it in 1980. Although substantial appreciation has admittedly occurred during that period, growth in market value in no way approaches a similar rate of appreciation. The patent unreasonableness of your latest finding should be apparent. This property is my sole asset. As a retiree, I receive a strictly limited income which fails to grow in proportion to your unfair and inequitable assessment. My personal inability to meet this galloping taxation rate will be of no interest to you; however, the fact that the tax structure is innately unfair and poorly apportioned SHOULD BE of paramount interest and concern. I earnestly request your unbiased review of this matter, and a substantial reduction in assessed land valuation." The appellant is requesting the Board reduce the land value of the current assessment from $110,000 to $85,000 for a new total value of$146,000. Mr. Kingsley stated that the 1991 comparable sale listed on the appellant's petition actually occurred in 1990. The correction was noted. He stated that the appellant's reasoning is not substantiated by any evidence. Comparable sales were presented and an explanation of how property in the area is valued was given. At the close of the hearing the Board concurred to conduct an inspection of the property and make a determination at a later date. Chairman Marlow did not attend the following hearings held in the afternoon, due to a previous commitment. BOARD OF EQUALIZA nON MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 21, 1995 Page 5 Gerald & Y oshiko Gilbertson P.O. Box 396 Port Hadlock, W A 98339 BOE: 95-137-LO 95-138-LO 95-139-LO PN: 961 807402 961 807 404 961 807 407 Mr. and Mrs. Gilbertson were present. Will Butterfield was present on behalf of the Assessor's office. Acting-Chairman Broders explained the hearing process and swore them in. The property under appeal is located in Port Hadlock. Mr. Gilbertson stated that he spoke with Mr. Butterfield about the assessment shortly after receiving the change of value notice. Mr. Butterfield was very helpful in providing and explaining the information that was used to value the property, however, he still doesn't understand how the property value has increased so much when there are such adverse conditions in the area. These adverse conditions include hippies, and trash on neighboring properties and in the streets. The area, commonly referred to as hippy haven, is under surveylance by the police because of the type of individuals in the area. Mr. Gilbertson feels that the property located across the street, which was used as a comparable sale by the Assessor's office, sold for more than it was worth. The other comparable properties used by the Assessor's office are not directly affected by these adverse conditions. Photographs of the area were presented for the Board to review. He is requesting the Board reduce the land value of parcel number 961 807402 from $20,000 to $15,000 for a new total value of$42,900; the land value of parcel number 961 807404 from $7,000 to $5,000; and the land value of parcel number 961 807407 from $6,300 to $5,900. Mr. Butterfield stated that sales and new construction in the area do not indicate that there is a loss in value due to the issues brought up by the appellant. The sales actually indicate a value greater than the current assessment of the appellant's property. Mr. Butterfield explained that the appellant owns 19 lots in that area. The four lots on which his house is located are valued at $3,000 each. Since the appellant owns more than 5 lots, a reduction of 10% was given for excess property. The four lots located directly behind his residence are valued at $2,000 each, less 60% (50% for the septic system and drain field, and 10% for excess property). Seven lots are valued at $1,000 each, less 10"10 for excess property, Three lots are valued at $2,000 each and one lot is valued at $1,000 with no reductions. The lots that face the poorly maintained neighboring properties are not valued as high due to the lack of access, and the possibility of water restrictions. Adjustments have been made for excess property, septic, and less than desirable characteristics. Additionally, the Assessor's office has been working with Mr, Gilbertson on enrolling in the senior citizen exemption program, which would affect the value of all but two of his lots. Mr. Butterfield reiterated that the sales evidence does not support the appellants claim. After hearing the testimony of both parties the Board concurred to conduct an inspection of the property and make a determination at a later date. Arlun Ames 14717 58th Avenue S. Tukwila, WA 98168 BOE: 95-112-LO PN: 976200608 Mr. Ames was present. Robert Kingsley was present on behalf of the Assessor's office. Acting- Chairman Broders explained the hearing process and swore them in. The appellant's property is located on Marrowstone Island. Mr. Ames stated he purchased this property for $45,000 with the intent of retiring on it someday. There is a well on the property and a shed he built which cost BOARD OF EQUALIZATION MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 21, 1995 Page 6 $600. He doesn't agree with the method of valuation used by the Assessor's office and feels the rate of increase is ridiculous. Mr. Ames is requesting the Board reduce the current assessment from $140,000 to $80,000. Mr. Kingsley presented comparable sales and explained that the Assessor's responsibility is to value property at 100% of fair market value. The use of comparable property sales is one of the methods used. Marrowstone Island is one of the most desirable places to live in Jefferson County. Based on comparable sales the valuation is accurate. Since the appellant's property would require a mound septic system, a reduction for the approximate cost of a mound system ($10,000) was given. After hearing the testimony of both parties the Board concurred to conduct an inspection of the property and make a determination at a later date. E. Patricia Carp 7513 Flagler Road Nordland, WA 98358 BOE: 95-95-LO PN: 021332014 Ms. Carp and Mr. Bart Glen were present. Robert Kingsley was present on behalf of the Assessor's office. Acting-Chairman Broders explained the hearing process and swore them in. The appellant's property is located on Marrowstone Island. Mr. Glen stated that the appeal is based on two points. The first being that the number of feet of waterfront was not correctly measured and subsequently the valuation was reduced by the Assessor's office. When the correction was made the Assessor's office added a value of$31,500 which was not included in the original assessment. Secondly, they feel the land value is higher than the sales of similar property on Marrowstone Island. They attached to the petition a list of nine sales of property similar to theirs and used those to calculate the requested adjustment. They are requesting the Board reduce only the land value from $274,904 to $224,198 for a new total value of$419,608. Mr. Kingsley stated that waterfront property is valued per front foot, based on bank height, not on an acreage basis. The comparable sales chart presented by the appellant does not seem to take that into account since it only lists the amount of acreage. The valuation is supported by sales of comparable property with the similar number of front feet of waterfront and similar bank height. Mr. Glen stated that assessments need to be fair. If the method doesn't result in a fair assessment, than maybe the method needs to be changed. Ms. Carp asked Mr. Kingsley what the additional assessment was for? Mr. Kingsley answered that the appellant's property has two houses on it. One is a mobile home and the other is a stick built house. The $35,000 was added to reflect the value of the additional home site. The $35,000 was reduced by 10% for economic obsolescence, for a total additional value of $31,500. Ms. Carp stated that the mobile home was on the property when she purchased it. The property cannot be subdivided so there is no possibility of it becoming a separate sellable homesite. She contests the additional assessment since it can never be sold and nothing can be done with it. Mr. Glen stated that the assessment already reflects value of approximately $14,000 for the mobile home. He questioned why they are being assessed an additional $31,500 for the mobile. Mr. Kingsley explained that they are not being assessed twice for the mobile home. The $14,000 BOARD OF EQUALIZATION MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 21,1995 Page 7 reflects the value of the mobile home. The $31,500 is the assessed value for the second home site on the property. Mr. Glen reiterated that the additional $31,500 assessment was not included in the assessment until the assessment was modified. After hearing the testimony of both parties the Board concurred to conduct an inspection of the property and make a determination at a later date. Vernon, Gwendolyn, & Timothy Jones BOE: 95-98-LO 1433 14th Street Port Townsend, W A 98368 PN: 021212 010 Mr. Jones was present. Robert Kingsley was present on behalf of the Assessor's office. Acting- Chairman Broders explained the hearing process and swore them in. The appellant's property is located on Marrowstone Island. Mr. Jones stated that his property is very narrow. It was purchased for recreation purposes such as camping. They built a small cabin on the property and keep their travel trailer on it. A big storm in 1978 took out several trees along the beach as well as much of the 50' bank. The damage to the bank resulted in the loss of their trail to the beach and now they have no access to it. When the neighbors built stairs down to the beach they caused a lot of erosion of the appellant's property. Additionally, the appellants do not have water or a septic system and they do not know if they can ever get those utilities. Without these utilities they believe the property could not be sold for the assessed amount. The appellants are requesting the Board reduce the current assessment from $96,060 to $60,060, Mr. Kingsley stated that the appellant is not being assessed for the beach and he assumes the appellant does not own the beach. Mr. Jones stated that they thought they owned it, and regardless if they do or not, they still consider it as part of the use of the their property, Mr. Kingsley stated that the actual owner may not agree. He suggested Mr. Jones find out ifhe owns it or not so he can be assessed for it or know if he is trespassing. Comparable sales in the area were presented to the Board for review. Mr. Kingsley stated that the appellant is not being assessed for having a well, septic or power. No reduction in value can be made unless the appellant provides documented evidence stating that the property will not support a septic system. If the property will only support a mound system, the value will be reduced by the cost of a mound system ($10,000). After hearing the testimony of both parties the Board concurred to conduct an inspection of the property and make a determination at a later date. Susan May, Peter Braicks, & Herbert Braicks 2194 N. Cove Drive Oak Harbor, W A 98277 BOE: 95-101-R PN: 021 321 039 Peter Braicks and Herbert Braicks were present. Robert Kingsley was present on behalf of the Assessor's office. Acting-Chairman Broders explained the hearing process and swore them in. The property under appeal is located on Marrowstone Island. Herbert Braicks stated that this property was deeded to himself, his brother and his sister, who each own 1/3 interest. With this last assessment there was a 45% increase in valuation which they feel is excessive. Their salaries BOARD OF EQUALIZATION MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 21, 1995 Page 8 have not gone up that much to allow them to pay for the taxes. While they realize sales of comparable properties are used to assess property, they feel that there are some exceptions with regard to their property. In September of this year a final decision was made regarding Indian rights to shellfish on private property. They believe that this somehow affects the value of their property since they no longer have clear title with this ruling. The Attorney General has even stated that some form of tax relief should be provided for affected citizens. They believe the State has given away valuable rights in private property ownership. The comparable sales used by the Assessor's office occurred prior to the ruling on the shellfish issue, so they may not actually reflect current market values. The appellant's are requesting the Board reduce the current assessment from $177,135 ($110,200 for the land and $66,935 for the improvements) to $122,700 ($63,575 for the land and $59,125 for the improvements). Mr. Kingsley stated that the assessments are based on market value, not the ability to pay. He explained that the appraisal date was January 1, 1995, which was prior to the ruling on the shellfish issue. Therefore, the issue was not taken into consideration during the valuation. Sales of comparable property were presented which support the current assessment. Mr. Kingsley agrees that there may be an impact as a result of the shellfish ruling, however, the Assessor's office is unable to make an adjustment in value until there are sales which clearly indicate that the ruling has devalued tideland property. The market must reflect the impact in order for it to be accounted for in assessments. Herbert Braicks stated their property is unique to any other property on Marrowstone Island. It is adjacent to property owned by a neighboring commercial shellfish grower, who through a verbal agreement, is seeding and harvesting their property as well. For these reasons they would like special notice to be given to this particular issue. After hearing the testimony of both parties the Board concurred to conduct an inspection of the property and make a determination at a later date. Meeting adjourned. Attest: r'/L.C';'( '-f) . ?(; / lz..dtj/LeJ( Erin K. Lundgren, CI~Jtc;fthe B6"ard JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF EQUALIZATION Jr'