Board of Equalization Meeting   6/9/2025

My name is Bob Beard representing Samuel Miller, Will Howard, Jack Jewett's District, David Mitchell,

David Norford, Brad Manning, Frank Friedman, Ryle.

Understand from staff's orientation that the property owner has called in this morning and advised his attention to withdraw the application.

Okay.

In that case, I would use a official recess so that we can move on to whatever it is that we want to do for the next two hours.

In a request that we just return

Thank you.

Have a good day.

Go ahead.

I thought I would get back.

Do you need this to finish?

And for the program.

I'd like to address the income approach of the applicant first.

Oh, sorry, $11,107,300.

No.

The request for increase is unexpected.

And as my rebuttal, I would like to request a withdrawal of this bill.

Okay.

It was the taxpayer who wanted to do something with the dust increase in 2014.

What were the mistakes in fact?

There was also more office than there had been.

And we didn't receive the lease documentation until the appeal was requested.

We would be withdrawing this appeal if we were to reschedule.

I'm not aware that there was so much going on.

Thank you for your presentation.

Sure, I'll be, you know, it's less for us to open up today.

each color, and the first process starts.

Okay.

OK.

That's the only place here.

What we're talking about now is what is the fair market value of these properties?

Because my tax is based on 15% of the fair market value.

Okay?

Yeah.

Okay.

So in the meantime, the assessment has been dropped twice since I originally talked to the Assessor's Office about it.

Most recently, that was in just a week or two ago.

Does anybody have any questions so far?

So, to me, there is no

You can't buy a right-of-way from RWSA because of the easement that's been put in place.

Walkthrough.

And the terms of that restrictive easement are in your packet.

Because if it was a conservation easement, it would run back and fall apart.

The parcels were previously RS2 and RS3, and now they have changed to RS1.

That's also the adjustments that we're using have changed.

Or they were different.

No, you were not aware, as far as I can tell, you were not aware that there was any restriction, restricted easements.

So you had an adjustment not for access but for

changing that up to RS1 and RS2 would have raised the value by 28% I think I'm counting.

That's pretty much ours.

You know what I mean?

So there are no set guidelines for implementing RS2.

Why not put the discounts on RS3 if it was already RS3?

There are reasons why we could use those in those cases.

We could do that.

And this is not just the nine, but the ones that came before that sent a lot of these pieces in the past.

2024.

You're arguing that the RS3 categorization was more appropriate?

Yes.

The other parcels have different adjustments applied.

Well, you can see the values on there and get a, I don't have a card for each of those other parcels, but you can see the values and see that they're not too much different.

And then they're trying to get it into the line again.

Well, I don't think

and a change that increases the value of the property by 28% is warranted.

The only difference is that I came in through a BOE hearing.

Nothing else has changed with that property.

No, what changes is that you went into a process with the treasurer's office whereby they gave it a certain review.

They just looked at the same things you guys did.

Did you request an in-person view of the property?

No.

Why did you want them to come and look at the property?

and there's no apparent difference.

It's as likely that it should be RL3 as RL2.

and this is a property that's in the same area as IRWSA, it's leased.

And it is RS, RS3, it's one of these, RS1.

The property is very similar except that they're outlawed.

Mr. Miller, what do you use the property?

I allow certain people to vote there, but there are people that vote illegally, including one person that hunts drunk, and I need to legally be able to throw them off the property.

So how do those people use access to property?

They just walk through.

They trespassing on the properties to get there.

That's why they said that.

Take it.

Frank?

Yes.

Do it in the clinical state if you're preventing the following activities.

It says improvements for site access, which would allow for improvement provided it's in service of activities which would be necessary for renovation for reservation heritage.

Right, but who's going to buy a property that they can't have?

And which part do you think is supporting those?

The destruction of the structures on fills, this is something to be able to do to grow.

So that means, no matter what happened before, the following activities, not restricted, regardless of the general prohibition, these specific things are related.

Okay, so you say that as permitting a road that they built through there.

The site access would be just foot access or question access.

It's quite one of the questions is who will divide if you couldn't do it or not.

It doesn't mean they're going to have exactly the same change.

Any of them are partiles once again.

And that's what I'm going to do today.

I'm going to go on both in time.

The other bit is, with Glusting, was basically a farther reduction based on referring some of the changes, but not others.

Yeah, I just want to make sure I understand that.

And now it's been reduced to $287,000?

So I didn't.

That's when the market value of these potatoes, they were being assessed in.

I'd like to point out something.

I'd like to clarify a section that you've seen in the previous conservation visit.

There are other taxes.

So, you know, these properties like Mr. Miller's, they tie your rent based on the assessment values.

I don't believe that ever been considered before I brought it to Peter's and John's attention early in the year.

But you're not saying they didn't consider it yet?

So they gave me the one hand, but they were taken away with the other hand.

That's the point of this.

It's in keeping with the spirit of the law anyway.

It's not actually a consolation issue.

It really depends to a large extent what, I mean, I know I was only supposed to... Is there anything else we need to discuss about engagement?

It's just

He was not aware that I was only leasing part of one of these parcels.

How much aspect of that restriction, it's just a very difficult thing.

Not a knowledgeable buyer.

You can put it on the market.

Yeah, there is a dated access and it would be difficult to get.

So that's

and the base raid is a big disagreement that you know I mean maybe the day will come when you're doing everything that way when you're starting with RS-1 and there is no RS-2 and RS-3 but I don't see that happening in the near future in the meantime I'm getting burned.

A lot of people, Christine.

Please tell yourself about the other two parcels.

Are there any arguments that you would like to make that are specific to the other two parcels?

So the first one I'm going to give you is the one on the left.

This is why it says 26.

Yeah, on this map it is 26, yes.

One last point here is just giving you visualizations depending on what you decide about R as one, R as two, R as three

So this gives you the numbers depending on what you decide about this.

and you say recent adjustments, this is what you mean?

and we'll be talking about what sort of reduction we've talked about in access.

So saying that, you know, being treated wrongly because of

There's a lot of them out there that are RS2, RS3, there were combinations of either of those.

Okay, any further questions?

No, they're not making a mistake.

The small number 26 on the map.

Yes, yeah.

You applied that restriction across the entire two points.

Yeah.

Big parts of you broke it all.

broken out in a small part section.

there's only one point on the item

So to use that same residual value for otherwise equivalent pieces of property doesn't make sense to me.

Well, I'm saying RS-1 doesn't necessarily mean it's residual to the house.

That's not a part of the idea.

Two completely different situations.

I didn't realize what the conservation is on the land use.

Way more than that, maybe 80%.

Our teachers lost.

I went on that app where I did my stuff.

It was like, you know, historic preservation on this shit.

You can't with some reason, but it can't be too small.

I mean, these are some of the big arguments that I was listening to, but curious to hear what others meant.

I've done a good job of taking all this information into account and adjusting it and I don't know that there's been any reason to assume that what they have come up with, finally, you could not promote.

Second?

Yeah, to approve the assessment.

The motion passes unanimously.

They updated my phone and turning down the volume no longer turns down the volume.

First you write?

The first year.

Okay.

All in favor?

Aye.

Okay.