Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutM080598 1820 Jefferson Street PO Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 James A. DeLeo, District 1 William S. Marlow, District 2 Richard A. Broders, District 3 JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF EQUALIZATION MINUTES AUGUST 5, 1998 Richard A. Broders William S. Marlow James A. DeLeo Chairman Vice-Chairman Member Chairman Richard A. Broders called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m. in the presence of Vice-Chairman William S. Marlow and Member James A. DeLeo. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES Vice-Chairman Marlow moved to approve the minutes of July 15, 1998 as presented. Member DeLeo seconded the motion which carried by a unanimous vote. HEARING WAIVERS/ASSESSMENT CORRECTIONS The Board concurred to accept the following assessment corrections. APPELLANT Henry & Mary Richbourg Ron Byers/Glenn Wood Brian & Kathy Richie APPEAL NO. BOE 98-05-R BOE 98-09-LO BOE 98-1O-R PARCEL NO. 990500061 601 232001 938 400 804 HEARINGS Gayle Mathieson 2316 Captain Cook Drive Anchorage, AK 99517 BOE: 98-38-LO PN: 001082004 Ms. Mathieson was not present. Appraiser Dennis Pownall represented the Assessor's office and was sworn in by Chairman Broders. The property under appeal consists of approximately five (5) acres and is located at the end of Hidden Trails Road in Port Townsend. In a letter to the Board Ms. Mathieson explained that her reason Phone (360)385-9100 / 1-800-831-2678 Fax (360)385-9382 jeffbocC@cojefferson.wa.us BOARD OF EQUALIZATION MEETING MINUTES - AUGUST S, 1998 Page 2 for appealing the assessed valuation is based on 1) a letter from a Realtor stating a more realistic market value, and 2) the unimproved, narrow dead end road leading to the property. A copy of the Realtor's letter and a photograph of the road was submitted with her appeal. The Realtor's letter notes other factors which reduce the value of the property such as the marginal cabin and junk cars located on the property across the street from the appellant's property and the fact that there is evidence that someone has been "squatting" (living) on the appellant's property in a very primitive lean-to. Ms. Mathieson does not believe that she could sell her unimproved property for the current assessed value of$30,085. She feels fair market value is somewhere between $19,000 and $24,000. Mr. Pownall stated that for a period of time the appellant's property was marketed for more than the assessed value. However, now it is being suggested by the Realtor that it be marketed for less. The revaluation was done in 1996 based on sales of comparable property in the immediate area. The comparable properties all sold for less than their assessed valuations. He made an adjustment to the valuation of -20% for topography and access. The concerns brought up in the appellant's appeal may be legitimate, but how much they affect the property value is unknown. After reviewing all the information submitted and hearing the testimony of Mr. Pownall, the Board concurred to conduct an inspection ofthe property and make a determination at a later date. Robert & Marian Thoms Thoms Family Trust 8819 Colima Road Whittier, CA 90605 BOE: 98-22-LO 98-23-LO PN: 101341013 101341014 Mr. & Mrs. Thoms were not present. Appraiser Peter Schuck represented the Assessor's office and was sworn in by Chairman Broders. The two lots under appeal are located off of Jackman Street in Port Townsend. The appellants' petitions state that Coldwell Banker Realty has been unable to sell these lots so they are reducing their asking prices from $62,000 to $59,500 for parcel number 101 341 013 and $72,500 to $69,500 for parcel number 101 341 014. The appellants did note in their appeal, however, that they would accept an offer of $50,000 and $60,000 for the parcels. Also submitted was a letter from a Realtor with Coldwell Banker requesting a reduction in value on behalf of the appellants due to current market conditions. The Thoms' feel the current assessed value of $72,000 for each parcel should be reduced to reflect the amount they would actually accept. Mr. Schuck stated that there were numerous sales which occurred in the area ofthe appellant's property prior to revaluation. Based on the sales presented he believes the valuation is fair as of the appraisal date of January 1, 1997. After reviewing all the information submitted and hearing the testimony of Mr. Schuck, the Board concurred to conduct an inspection of the property and make a determination at a later date. BOARD OF EQUALIZATION MEETING MINUTES - AUGUST 5, 1998 Page 3 Conifer 508 - Marine Plaza Apartments BOE: 98-08-C Allan Hanson P.O. Box 11246 Tacoma, W A 98411 PN: 989710201 Mr. Hanson was present. Appraiser Robert Shold represented the Assessor's office. After explaining the hearing process, Chairman Broders swore them in. The property under appeal consists of a two-story, wood frame apartment building with a daylight basement on approximately 1.11 acres located at 619 Clay Street in Port Townsend. Mr. Hanson explained that he is the President of Conifer Development which is a general partner with Conifer 508, the owner of Marine Plaza Apartments. Conifer 508 acquired the apartments on May 23,1997. Mr. Hanson stated that his company managed the apartments for a couple of years prior to the acquisition and he became familiar with the property as a result. He reviewed the purchase negotiations and explained that H,UD. controls the property. When he applied for a loan to purchase the property an appraisal was done to establish its value in order to arrange for financing, A copy of the appraisal was submitted with the petition and indicates two (2) separate values based on two (2) separate methods of calculation. The first is based on an "As Is" method, or as it currently exists under the subsidy program, with an estimated value of $672,000. The second indicates a value of $854,000 based on a method using conventional rents without any subsidy or government controL This appraisal was used as the basis for his purchase. Due to some needed repairs the actual purchase price was $644,000. Based on his purchase price he feels the current assessment is extremely excessive and not reflective of the market. He is asking that the Board reduce the current assessment from $1,303,855 ($257,400 for the land and $1,046,455 for the improvements) to $672,000 ($340,000 for the land and $332,000 for the improvements). Mr. Shold eXplained how the property was valued. He stated that after the Assessor's office had already sent out the revaluation notices for 1997, the State Board of Tax Appeals came down with a ruling on subsidized housing as a result of the number of appeals they had received with regard to the issue. The State Board's ruling on the appeals was to reduce the total assessed value by 25% which was taken off the value of the improvements so as to keep land values fair and equitable. Mr. Shold stated that under normal circumstances the Assessor's office would recommend that this case be handled in the same manner which would result in a new valuation of$977,000. However, this amount is still significantly higher than the appellant's purchase price. Mr. Shold added that there have not been any sales of comparable properties. Smaller apartment units have sold, but this transaction is way out ofline as far as price per unit. He is not certain ifH.U.D. 's involvement affects the value. Mr. Hanson explained that the property is under a section 8 contract with the government and will continue to be under contract until the year 2001. When the contract expires he will have the option to get out of the government program and convert the building into a conventional apartment project. He believes the value of the property would increase if it were taken out of the government program. At the close of the hearing the Board concurred to conduct an inspection of the property and make a determination at a later date. BOARD OF EQUALIZATION MEETING MINUTES - AUGUST 5, 1998 Page 4 Bernard & Mary Pranger 6225 Ranger Clovis, CA 93611 BOE: 98-02-R PN: 993800 013 Mr. and Mrs. Pranger were not present. Representing the Assessor's office was Appraiser Peter Schuck who was previously sworn in by Chairman Broders. The property under appeal consists of a lot which contains a residence located at 2380 Sea View Drive in Port Townsend. On the petition the appellants state their reason for appealing is, "The letter from Mr. Schuck noted the home @ 2250 Sea View sold. Did he see the improvements made to sell that home? Others may have made improvements. We have not! Why is our value raised with no improvements? I understand the land may have appreciated - not the building." The appellants are requesting the current assessed value be reduced from $307,985 ($106,000 for the land and $201,985 for the improvements) to $278,000 ($106,000 for the land and $172,000 for the improvements). Mr. Schuck stated that the appellants are only contesting the value of the improvements. Mainly the percentage of increase. He presented and reviewed the sales of comparable property which were used in assessing the property, He also explained how the house was valued. There have been even more sales which have occurred in the area since the time of revaluation which further support that the property value is fair and equitable. At the close of the hearing the Board concurred to conduct an inspection of the property and make a determination at a later date. James D. Morrison 203 Ludlow Bay Road Port Ludlow, WA 98365 BOE: 98-12-R PN: 968 700 107 Mr. and Mrs. Morrison were present. Appraiser Dennis Pownall represented the Assessor's office. Chairman Broders explained the hearing process and swore them in. The property under appeal consists of approximately 3.17 acres with a residence located at 203 Ludlow Bay Road in Port Ludlow. Mr. Morrison stated that their property has decreased in value as a result of water run-off from County roads and Pope Resources extensive development including the construction of additional houses and the Port Ludlow golf course. The appellants paid for making improvements to the existing culverts and still are unable to control the excess water and silt which accumulates on their property. Pope Resources made an offer that they would provide the Morrison's with two (2) sewer hook-ups for their property, if they would take care of the silt problem, The Morrison's agreed, however, due to County regulations they are now unable to build on their property. Years ago they had planned to eventually build on and sell portions of their property which already have water, power, and sewer connections. Now they are unable to do that and before long will be unable to afford their taxes. They have been paying taxes for years on a property valuation that no longer exists. Everything they have done is now useless. They feel the current assessed valuation for the land is too high, however they did not provide an estimate of value. Mr. Pownall stated that there is a gully between the appellant's property and the adjacent property. When he valued the appellant's property he was unaware of the problems stated and no adjustment was made to the value for them. The adjacent property was given an adjustment of -1 0% due to the gully and drainage problems and it is the position of the Assessor's office that the appellant's property should receive the same adjustment. This adjustment would reduce the total valuation by approximately $40,000. BOARD OF EQUALIZATION MEETING MINUTES - AUGUST 5, 1998 Page 5 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. Gary & Mary Ann Bloomgren 4903 20'h Avenue NW Gig Harbor, W A 98335 BOE: 98-41-R PN: 961600202 Mr. and Mrs. Bloomgren were present. Jeff Chapman attended on behalf of Jack Westerman representing the Assessor's office. Chairman Broders explained the hearing process and swore them in. The property under appeal is a condominium located at 81-B North Chandler Court in Port Ludlow. Mr. Bloomgren stated that they purchased the property on January 5, 1998 for $128,003. Also submitted with the petition are sales of comparable property and an appraisal that was done at the time of the purchase which substantiates the purchase price. It is understood that the property was assessed as of January 1, 1995 based on sales of similar property which occurred around that time. The appellants feel that the current assessment of$139,100 ($32,000 for the land and $107,100 for the improvements) should be reduced to the purchase price which is reflective of the fair market value. Mr. Chapman stated that the Assessor's office does not contest that the sale price reflects market value as of January 1, 1998, However, property in Jefferson County is revalued once every four (4) years. Not annually. The area where the appellant's property is located was valued in 1995 and will not be revalued until 1999. In a four (4) year revaluation cycle property values remain the same for four years. If the appellants paid more than the assessed value for the property it still could not be changed. It does not matter whether someone paid more or less out of cycle, the Assessor's office is unable to reassess property values until the fourth year. Any recent changes in the market will be reflected in the 1999 revaluations. As long as Jack Westerman valued all the condominiums fairly and equitably in 1995, the value of the appellant's property should not change until it is reassessed next year. Mr. Chapman did add, however, that in looking back at all the sales it appears as though there has not been a downward trend in the market but rather the sale which the values were based on in 1995 was over inflated. He feels the property may have only been worth $128,000 in 1995 regardless of the prior sale. While the current assessment is reasonable and can be justified, the possibility exists that the property may have been overvalued. 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. !b~~~ JEFFERSON COUNTY ~I~ON Richard A. Broders, Chairman t-. ~ S. Marlow, Vice-Chairman Oarnes A.15edi: ~ber