Laserfiche WebLink
<br />JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF EQUALIZATION <br /> <br />A.C. Dalgleish <br />David G. Douglas <br />Archie Barber, Jr. <br /> <br />Chairman <br />Vice-Chairman <br />Member <br />Alternate <br /> <br />MINUTES <br /> <br />10 August 1987 <br /> <br />Chairman Dalgleish called the meeting to order at 9:15 AM. All Board members and <br />Clerk Lea were present. <br /> <br />BOE-87-062-LO - Parcel No. 965-700-014 - Judith Steen (agent) represented the <br />petitioner at the hearing, Bob Shold represented theA5s~s;oK';. office. The petitioner <br />stipulated that this parcel consisting of two adjacent lots in Kuhn's Ranch are <br />currently valued in excess of other lots in the area and should be inspected by the <br />Board. The Assessors office confirmed that the valuation on this parcel maybe <br />in excess of values on adjacent lots, and that the Board might want to inspect the <br />parcel prior to making a, judgement on a adjustment, <br /> <br />BOE-87-063-R - Parcel No. 931-200-201- Judith Steen (agent) represented the petitioner <br />at the hearin~, and Bob shold represented the Assesso~s office. The petition <br />stipulated (1) that this older victorian style house has a full bathroom upstairs <br />and a half bath downstairs, (2) presented comparable listings for the Boards <br />consideration, and (3) stipulated that best offers received were for $69,000. <br />The Assesso~s office reported that a recent inspection of the imProvements on <br />this parcel indicates that there might be an adjustment in the depreciation allow- <br />ance, but that land valuation appears consistant with valuations in the area, <br />, <br /> <br />BOE-87-064-R - Parcel No. 002-124-019 - Stacey Aickin was present at the hearing, <br />and Bob Shold represented the Assessors office. The petitioner stipulated that the <br />land purchase in 1982 for $30,000 required the assumption of contract obligations on <br />adjacent properties in order to attain title to this ten-acre parcel, and that true <br />value of the tenacres (per purchase) is $24,000. The petitioner also pointed out that <br />there is currently no water available on the parcel at this time. <br />The AsseSSOr reported (1) that two parcels in the Cape George area were purchased <br />in 1986 - 87 for $4,500 to $4,800 per acre, and that the improvements valuation on <br />this parcel are undergoing annual changes as the building is completed. <br /> <br />BOE-87-065-LO - Parcel No. 955-801-101 et al & ~55-802-011 et al-- <br />Petitioner Clevens was present at the hearing, and Bob$hold represented the <br />Assessor's offi ce, These two pa rce 1 s cons ist of 60 lots in the north half of the <br />Hamilton Addition across the street from the Phoenix Addition~which he purchased in <br />1972 as an investment (1) there is no consistent perk history, (2) many lots have no <br />current accessto water or streets, and (3) there ha4 been little or no sales since <br />1983 when some lots sold for $3,000. The petitioner was seeking a reduction in the <br />value of these lots from $2,900 to 1,250 per lot, <br />The Assessor confirmed that there had been no sales in the Hamilton Addition <br />since the last revaluation, and he presented current valuation and previous <br />valuations of nine parcels indicating an increase of approximately 14% at the last <br />revaluation. A~ issue appeared to be whether the Board and Assessors office should <br />not consider an adjustment in valuations in both Hamilton and Phoenix Additions after <br />reviewing the area and it sales history, <br /> <br />BOE-87-066-LO - Parcel No. 961-805-406 Petitioner Reuter was not able to attend the <br />heanng. llob shol d represented the Assessor's office. The petition stipulated that <br />this parcel consisting of eighteen lots (Purchased in 1963) in Block 54 of lrondale <br />No.2 were 100% over valued at $765 each and should be reduced to $330 per lot. <br />The Assessor (1) Produced comparable sales on two lots in Block 55 at $1250 each <br />in 1985, (2) noted that lots with access in the division were assessed at $1250 each, <br />and (3) that the current valuation of this parcel consisted of 4 lots at $1,250 each <br />and 14 lots at $800 each with a 15% di scount for an excess of lots. <br />