►
From YouTube: Board of Equalization Hearing September 8, 2021
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Good
morning
today
is
wednesday
september
8
2021.
This
is
the
arlington
county,
virginia
board
of
equalization
hearing.
We
have
four
cases
on
the
agenda.
The
first
case
is
economic
unit,
one
four
zero.
Two
four
two:
the
property
is
located
at
4301,
wilson
boulevard.
We
have
mr
jordan
harmon
here
to
speak
on
behalf
of
the
appellant.
Mr
harman,
you
can
start
with
your
eight
minutes
and
tell
us
about
this
property.
Sir.
B
Yes,
thank
you
good
morning,
madam
chairwoman
and
members
of
the
board.
Thank
you
for
your
time
and
consideration
of
this
case.
Today.
This
property
is
located
at
on
wilson
boulevard.
It's
right
at
glebe
road
right
at
that
intersection.
It
was
built
in
1994
and
was
assessed
with
an
effective
age
of
1996..
B
B
B
Additionally,
you'll
notice
that
the
operating
expense
rate
assumed
body
assessment.
We
do
not
believe
that
fully
captures
the
cost
associated
with
operating
this
property
and
the
public
amenities
of
the
courtyard
and
conference
center
to
start
with
the
office
rinse
in
place.
As
of
the
date
of
value,
we're
at
a
weighted
average
face
rent
of
41.92
per
square
foot
before
any
concessions
were
taken.
B
B
That
number
again
is
the
face
rent
of
41.92
of
leases
in
place
reduced
by
the
10
concession
rate.
The
vacant
office
space
is
also
supported
at
a
lower
rate
based
on
this
nami
lease.
It's
currently
assessed,
you'll
see
at
38.54
cents
per
square
foot
which
again
given
this
most
recent
lease,
which
was
at
a
net
effective
rent
of
35.25
per
square
foot,
is
above,
is
not
reflective
of
what
the
property
will
likely
command
on
new
leases.
B
The
latest
lease
was
also
for
a
significant
portion
of
the
property.
It
was
for
21
508
square
feet,
which
works
out
to
about
nine
percent
of
the
property's
total
nla.
Since
it
was
a
significant
lease,
it's
a
200
month
term.
We
believe
that
lee
should
be
given
considerable
weight
when
considering
the
vacant
office
space
rental
rate
now
for
the
retail
rental
rate,
there's
only
one
retail
tenant.
It's
the
grand
cru
restaurant
you'll,
see
on
the
county's
test
column
f
that
they
assessed
the
retail
income
at
38.54
per
square
foot.
B
Now
this
number
in
the
county's
packet
is
based
on
what
they
did
is
they
took
the
retail
income
reported
on
the
2020
ine
and
divided
that
into
divided
that
by
the
retail
square
footage.
Now
those
numbers
are
on
the
ine.
That's
that's
accurate.
You
can
turn
to
page
42
of
the
appeal
packet
and
that's
where
the
income
pages
for
2020
you'll
see
that
the
it
does
show
196
659
dollars
in
retail
income,
which,
when
divided
by
the
retail
square
footage,
gets
us
to
the
county's
38.54
rental
rate.
B
However,
this
isn't
the
complete
picture
of
the
retail
environment
at
this
property.
If
you
take
a
look
at
the
2020
ine
rent
roll
on
page
44
of
the
appeal
pack,
you'll
see
that
note
f
at
the
bottom
states
that
120
775
dollars
in
retail
rent
was
uncollected
due
to
the
tenant
being
impacted
by
the
covid
pandemic.
B
So
if
we
reduce
the
retail
income
reported,
if
we
reduce
that
number
by
the
uncollected
rent
reported,
we
get
to
seventy
five
thousand
eight
hundred.
Eighty
four
dollars
in
actual
retail
rent
collected,
which
is
fifteen
dollars,
eighty
four
cents
per
square
foot
rent
on
the
least
retail
space
on
our
pro
forma,
we're
only
asking
for
the
retail
base
rental
rate,
the
contracted
rate
of
17.73
per
square
foot,
and
this
figure
is
not
discounted
for
any
concessions.
B
Due
to
the
uncollectible
rental
retail
rent
in
2020,
we
respectfully
request
that
the
contract,
retail
rent
of
17.73
per
square
foot
be
used
to
value
the
least
retail
space
now.
Finally,
the
operating
expenses,
as
I
mentioned
at
the
beginning
of
this
case,
this
building
does
have
a
couple
of
unique
amenities,
namely
the
courtyard
and
the
10
000
square
foot
conference
center,
which
are
both
made
available
to
the
public
and,
in
the
case
of
the
conference
center
it's
available
after
hours
and
on
weekends.
B
The
courtyard
and
conference
facility,
again
both
open
to
the
public,
were
required
as
part
of
the
site
plan
review
process
with
the
county
during
the
development
of
this
property
and
as
as
you
can
well
imagine,
a
courtyard
open
to
the
public
increases
the
operating
expenses
at
the
property.
You
can
see
on
the
2020
ine.
On
page
43
of
the
appeal
pack
that
landscaping
at
this
property
was
20
cents
per
square
foot
in
2020,
whereas
nearby
properties
have
close
to
nothing
in
landscaping
expenses.
B
This
is
about
two
to
two
and
a
half
times
what
neighboring
properties
spent
in
security
expenses
in
2020.
B
So
due
to
the
courtyard
and
the
security
cost,
this
property
does
have
higher
operating
expenses
than
neighboring
properties,
actual
operating
expenses
for
2017
18
and
19
average
12.26
per
square
foot.
The
operating
expenses
did
dip
in
2020
to
11.86
per
square
foot.
This
was
largely
a
result
of
the
reduced
physical
occupancy
of
the
property.
Again.
This
was
due
to
covet
work
from
home
policies
that
reduced
physical
occupancy
significantly,
we
believe,
based
on
the
actual
operating
expense
history.
B
B
The
most
recent
lease
for
nine
percent
of
the
nla
supports
a
lower
rental
rate
for
the
vacant
office
space,
the
contract,
retail
rental
rate
and
actual
retail
income
received
in
2020
support,
a
lower
retail
rental
rate
and
the
expense
rate
needs
to
increase
to
truly
capture
the
operating
expenses.
Given
the
unique
aspects
of
this
property.
Thank
you.
A
C
Thank
you
board
good
morning,
jordan,
good
morning,
eileen,
this
property
is
a
leed
certified
property,
leed,
certified
silver
by
the
u.s
green
building
council.
C
It
has
a
retail
portion,
which
is
the
french
restaurant
grand
cru
for
this
property.
We
looked
at
the
income
and
expense
forms,
and
we
saw
that
the
average
for
this
property
was
about
41.10
for
the
office
space.
C
When
you
look
at
the
overall
gross
potential
for
this
property,
we're
only
about
98
000
more
than
what
they
actually
reported
in
2020
and
what
that
equates
to,
or
what
I
believe
to
be
true
is
there's
a
an
amount
of
about
11
224
square
feet
that
is
not
accounted
for
in
this
column
e.
If
you
will,
as
the
gross
potential
for
this
property,
I'm
just
going
back
just
a
little
bit.
C
I
just
wanted
to
touch
on
this
just
to
make
sure
you
the
board
understands
that
they've
leased
up
since
prior
years
and
year
to
date
actually
they're
about
9093
square
feet
vacant
as
of
today.
C
So
that's
a
little
different
from
what
we
see
here
at
11,
000,
224
square
feet
vacant
when
looking
at
this
property
you'll
see
that
the
majority
of
the
building
is
owner,
occupied,
they're
assessing
well
they're,
allocating
a
rental
rate
that
we
believe
is
a
below
market,
but
we
did
account
for
that
exactly
as
they
reported
it
and
the
appellant
agrees
in
their
column
as
well.
C
Looking
at
the
overall
expenses
for
this
property,
we
do
see
that
the
owner
of
the
property
national
role,
electric
cooperative,
has
a
mission
to
keep
costs
down
and
they're
part
of
the
alliance
to
save
energy.
So
you
see
that
overall,
when
looking
at
this
property
that
it's
pretty
consistent,
we
believe
and
at
the
rate
that
the
county
is
assessing
this
property,
the
per
square
foot,
expense
rate.
We
believe
that
is
supported,
given
the
history
of
this
property
and
their
overall
mission
just
to
keep
costs
low.
C
Just
to
give
you
a
better
idea
when
reading
about
this
property
in
costar,
they
have
an
energy
efficient,
hvac
florida
floor
perimeter,
zone
fan
cooled
air
handler
systems,
they
have
efficient
energy
management,
operating
cost
control
assured
through
state-of-the-art
electric
and
mechanical
systems.
C
Thermal
storage
to
reduce
cooling
costs,
lighting
systems,
provide
energy
efficient
and
cost
savings.
So,
overall,
this
building
is
pretty
efficient,
and
so
we
believe
that
these
expenses
have
have
been
supported
and
overall,
it's
just
been
on
the
average.
About
two
thousand,
I
mean
two
million,
eight
hundred
thirty
nine
thousand
nine.
Eighty
six
over.
C
You
know
the
course
of
the
four
years,
and
we
looked
at
the
history,
I'm
just
touching
on
the
conferences
conference
center
that,
mr
that
jordan
pointed
out
this
conference
center
is
being
rented
out
or
has
the
ability
to
be
rented
out
at
350
dollars
per
hour.
C
That's
for
all
three
conference
rooms
within
that
10
000
square
feet
and
the
av
starts
at
a
minimum
of
300
dollars
per
day
and
I
believe
there's
a
mic
can
be
rented
out
for
fifteen
hundred
dollars
per
day.
So
any
expenses
that
incur
that
are
incurred
for
this
conference
center
would
be
somewhat
taken.
Care
of,
I
believe,
with
the
the
cost
that
they
charge
for
this
conference
center.
A
D
Metzken,
I
am
excuse
me,
I
have
a
question
for
each
party
on
the
two
apparent
points
of
contentional
retail
income
or
value
and
operating
expenses,
so
for
the
department
first
on
operating
expense
on
retail.
D
I'm
sorry,
I'm
not
clear
on
this,
and
I
ought
to
be-
and
I
want
to
be
in
because
we've
seen
a
lot
of
this
there's
a
lot
of
income
that
was
for
potential
income
that
was
forgiven
in
2020
due
to
covet
and
the
appellant
maintains
that
the
lion's
share
of
the
the
income
due
from
grand
cru
their
one
and
only
retailer
wasn't
collected.
It
won't
be
collected.
What's
the
policy
on
that
with
interrupted,
sometimes
you
know
partly
repaid,
sometimes
not
repaid
at
all,
sometimes
up
in
the
air.
What's
your
general
approach
well,.
C
We
look
for
for
this
particular
owner,
they
they're
reporting
actual
income.
So
when
we
look
at
the
actual
income
of
this
property,
it's
actually
higher
than
the
last
three
years
and
that
that's
with
kova-
that's,
I
believe-
and
I
don't
want
to
misspeak
for
the
owners,
but
I
believe
that
is
net
of
what
they
didn't
collect
as
they
noted
down
there.
C
Otherwise
they
wouldn't
report
it
as
actual
so,
given
that
figure,
that
figure
alone
equates
to
about
forty
one
dollars
a
square
foot
and
as
you
see
what
the
county's
test
column,
what
we're
you
know
assessing
if
you
will
or
per
square
foot
basis,
compared
to
the
the
appellant's
pro
forma.
It's
quite
a
big
difference,
and
so
that's
why
the
county
went
with.
You
know
the
the
test
column
for
a
recommendation.
E
I
I
can
just
clarify
that
mr
matskin,
if
you
look
at
the
rent,
roll
or
the
income
and
expense
survey
form
which
is
on
page
42,
the
retail
rent
is
reported
as
what
they
were
supposed
to
pay
the
196.
But
then,
if
you
look
at
the
less
actual
rent
loss,
which
is
on
page
I-10,
the
actual
rent
loss
is
135
000.
So
those
two
figures
need
to
be
netted
in
order
to
give
you
the
actual
income
for
the
further
rent
on
the
retail
space.
So,
mr.
D
B
D
C
Well,
prior
to
the
2020
rent,
roll
2019
had
grand
cru
at
41
dollars
a
square
foot.
Now,
if
you
remember
mr
jordan's
testimony,
he
said
they
may
not
collect
that
back,
so
it
wasn't
definitive,
meaning
that
they're
not
going
to
collect
it.
I
believe
that
means
or
implies
that
it's
deferred.
D
Yeah,
that's
the
heart
of
my
question:
how
do
you
project
in
the
future
whether
they're
going
to
write
them
a
check
this
year
or
next
year
or
never?
The
answer,
is
you
don't
know
you
just
assume
until
it's
written
out
formally?
This
is
a
question
that
sounds
like
a
statement
until
it's
really
horrible,
you
just
assume
the
landlord's
going
to
collect
it
is
that
right,
department.
C
Well,
I
mean,
if
that's
true:
if
we
look
at
the
actual
2020,
I
e
you'll
see
that
the
the
actual
income
is
what
is
reported
190,
that
that
figure
there
on
on
row
two
and
then
you
see
that
there's
another
line
on
them
on
row,
10,
where
it's
over
a
million
dollars
in
concessions,
so
is
that
you
know
included
in
that.
You
know
that's
a
question
that
you
might
want
to
think
about.
There.
E
We
can
answer
that
the
concessions
are
offset,
they
are
included
as
income
on
the
subtotal
of
actual
income
and
then
reduced,
just
like
the
other,
like
the
rent
loss
is
included
in
income
and
it
is
written
off
as
rent
loss,
not
a
concession.
E
So,
mr
matkin,
I
would
say
that
that
does
indicate
that
it
is
a
rent
loss
and
the
concessions.
The
million
251
are
included
in
the
9
million
279
214,
so
that
number
needs
to
be
reduced
by
both
the
rent
loss
and
the
concessions.
A
D
D
Well,
d,
actually
would
bring
it
up
a
couple
of
cents,
so
2017
through
2020
would
be
about
11.76
a
square
foot.
I
just
added
up
the
four
of
them
divided
by
four,
so
because
it
appears
that
the
department
is
going
along
with
it,
as
rob
peralta
said,
but
you've,
given
a
higher
number
than
simple
math,
dictates.
E
D
E
C
Yes,
thank
you.
You
know
just
overall
looking
at
this
property,
we're
only
a
hundred
thousand
dollars
or
ninety
eight
thousand
dollars
to
be
exact
over
what
they're
actually
reporting.
C
If
you
take
that
difference
in
you
know
simple
math,
divided
by
the
vacant
square
foot
of
this
property,
which
isn't
accounted
for
in
the
gross
potential
of
the
actual
income
reported
in
the
2020
ine
you'll,
see
that
it
only
equates
about
nine
dollars.
A
square
foot
for
the
remaining
11
000
square
feet,
space
also
included.
C
The
board
should
take
note
that
nami
did
lease
out
twenty
one
thousand
five
hundred
eight
square
feet
and
the
lease
commencement
day
is
2020,
so
you
don't
see
the
pass-throughs
or
the
extra
income
that's
attributable
to
this
particular
tenant
in
that
gross
potential,
as
well.
So
taking
those
factors
into
consideration,
we
believe
the
original
assessment
is
supported
when
looking
at
the
overall
expenses
for
this
property.
We
do
feel
that
the
1190
that
we
propose
or
1194
is
supported,
and
we
ask
the
board
to
take
that
in
consideration
with
this
lead
building.
A
Okay,
thank
you,
mr
harmon,
to
take
a
minute
to
wrap
up
sir.
B
B
Additionally,
if
you
look
at
the
noi
across
the
prior
years
for
this
property,
it
has
been
relatively
stabilized.
The
nami
lease
does
help
a
lot
and
they
took
occupancy.
The
least
commencement
date
was
february
1
of
2020,
so
they
did.
They
were
occupying
the
building
for
much
of
the
year,
so
you
know
it
the
additionally,
the
nami
lease
is
indicative
of
what
rents
this
property
can
potentially
get
the
retail
rent
it.
B
They
do
have
a
note
saying
that
they're
continuing
negotiations
with
the
client
on
covet
concessions,
so
as
of
the
date
of
value,
I
believe
that
the
tenant
and
landlord
are
still
talking
about
covet
concessions,
so
the
nominee
lease
supports
a
much
lower
rental
rate
and
vacant
space,
and
then
the
expenses
are
incorrectly
reported
on
the
county's
test.
Thank
you.
G
Yeah
I'll
go
ahead
and
and
and
throw
something
out
and
see
if
anyone
salutes
it.
You
know
I
listen
very
carefully
to
both
both
sides
and
on
the
expenses
I
kind
of
think
the
counties
where
it
ought
to
be,
and
you
know
on
one
hand
we're
looking
at.
G
A
A
Okay,
all
right
the
the
concern
I
had
when
I
looked
at
this
case.
I
look
at
it
and
I
I
saw
the
increase
of
sixteen
percent
in
the
covered
year.
It
just
seems
somewhat
unreasonable.
I
look
at
the
numbers
and
I
look
at
where
the
appellant
came
up
with.
In
I
mean
I
think,
the
appellant's
being
more
than
generous
when
you
look
at
what
the
actual
was
for
the
year
and
what
they're,
using
as
noi
in
column
g,
and
so
I
disagree
with
the
different
cap
rate.
A
But
if
you
cap
out
the
appellant's
number
in
g,
you
come
up
at
82,
705
5,
which
I
think
is
more
in
line
with
where
the
property
should
be.
I
think
the
increase
to
you
know
the
11.
Almost
12
million
dollar
increase
is
just
too
high
for
this
property
based
on
the
year
of
covid.
I
know
a
lot
of
people
that
work
in
that
building
and
they
were
not
in
that
building
right.
They
were
all
working
from
home.
You
know,
so
you
would
have
higher.
You
know,
expenses
and
whatnot
for
that.
A
G
Mary,
you
agree
on
the
expenses,
as
well
as
the
the
income.
A
Yeah
I
look
at
the
overall
the
whole
picture.
I
mean
because
if
anything
you
know,
I
think
it
nets
down
to
the
same,
a
proper
amount.
I
mean
when
you
get
it.
I
think
you
know
one's
high
one's
low,
so
yeah
in
column
g
are
the
expenses
slightly
high
sure,
but
I
also
think
that
you
know
based
on
the
operating
year.
The
effective
gross
income
is
high.
So
I
I
can
live
with
the
number.
That's
at
the
bottom.
A
When
you
look
at
historically
I
mean,
let's
just
take
the
operating
year
out
of
it
and
just
look
at
you
know:
eighteen
and
nineteen
five,
eight
five
six
to
be
at
five
seven
is
reasonable
and
pretty
stabilized
you
know
not
to
be
at
you
know,
six
million.
So
that's
that's
where
I
stand
so.
Mr
matskin.
A
F
D
In
the
middle,
I
decided
that
the
operating
expenses
were
legitimate,
especially
based
on
the
fact
that,
apparently,
the
trend
of
expenses
from
2017
and
2019
are
reported
in
the
ind
sheet,
a
little
bit
low.
So
the
inexorable
creep
of
expenses
getting
up
to
12.50,
given
that
2020
was
artificially
low,
makes
some
sense,
and
I
would
be
willing
to
accept
that
it
is
a
big
plaza.
There
is
a
lot
of
work
to
do
to
clean
it
up
and
make
it
appropriate,
even
if
it's
shared.
D
Nonetheless,
this
landlord
is
paying-
and
I
agree
completely
with
barnes-
on
the
the
retail
expenses,
maybe
in
2019
grand
cruz,
paying
a
lot
but
they're
not
now,
and
I
don't
want
to
get
into
whether
they're
going
to
pay
their
rent
abatement
or
all
that
the
lease
said
is
17
in
whatever
cents
and
that's
what
it
is
as
far
as
we're
concerned,
given
that
the
county
then
provides
some
five
percent
vacancy
rate
generically.
D
So
I
wanted
to
reduce,
in
my
mind
the
column
f
noi
by
the
hundred
thousand
dollars
that
that
that
barnes
mentioned
and
an
additional
the
operating
expenses
I
had
written
down.
I
don't
see
it,
but
it's
another
about
800
and
forty
thousand,
so
a
million
eight
hundred
forty
thousand
and
reduced
from
the
six
million
sixty
three
and
then
capital
comes
out
something
like
eighty
four
million
or
so
when
I
can
do
the
math.
If
people
agree,
that's
easy
enough
to
do.
D
Okay,
but
the
point
is
they
had
two
specific
data
points
to
get
me
there.
G
Ken
are
you,
okay,
with
mary's
proposed
reduction.
D
G
Yeah
I
kind
of
changed
myself.
I
kind
of
changed
my
thinking
based
on
you
know,
mary's
analysis,
so
I
I
would
kind
of
go
with
mary.
I
D
I
At
the
trend,
the
same
as
you
did
looking
at
2018
2019,
if
we
didn't
have
2020
being
a
year
that
we
had
with
differences,
you
know
going
up
and
down,
we
would
have
kept
looking
at
a
trend
going
up.
So
I
looked
at
it
at
the
rate
of
1250
and
that
comes
to
taking
out
the
storage
space,
because
I
know
the
appellant
included
the
whole
full
square
footage
taking
out
the
storage
comes
to
3
million
5
900..
I
So
that's
the
only
change
I
made
and
you
know
I
come
up
with
an
noi
of
5
million
919,
which
comes
to
85
million
787,
and
you
know
I'm
not
really
looking
at
how
much
she
was
valued
last
year,
because
you
know
we
always
see
that
there
are
differences
in
the
guidelines,
the
you
know,
cap
rates
and
it
doesn't
necessarily
reflect
a
trend
of
you
know
what
was
worth
last
year
what's
worth
this
year
and
yeah.
So
I'm
not
really
looking
at
that.
I
I'm
just
looking
at
what
the
actual
numbers
are
as
far
as
the
ones
that
should
be
used
so
that
that's
the
only
change
I
made.
J
You
know
I
I
felt-
was
high
by
the
county,
a
little
bit
of
the
expenses
in
mind
and
what
I
was
trying
to
look
at,
but
also
up
above
I'm,
I'm
mary,
I'm
not
as
comfortable
looking
at
just
accepting
the
appellant's
number,
although
I
do
see
how
they
got
there
and
I
do
think
it
balances
out.
I
I'm
closer
to
your
outcome,
but
I
do
see
the
logic
of
where
ken's
coming
from
and
I'm
trying
to
think
about
the
logic
of
what
we
justify
at
the
end
of
the
day.
J
I
would
okay,
it's
high.
I
don't
you
know.
J
D
A
J
D
H
A
D
Yeah,
that
makes
sense,
because
I
did
them
independently,
and
this
is
lower
remember.
I
said
it
should
be
about
84
million
intuitively
84
million
hundred
twenty
nine
thousand
and
twenty
eight
dollars.
That's
that's
by
maintaining
the
appellants
2021
expenses
and
and
also
their
projected
retail
for
grand
cru
at
17,
plus
a
square
foot
a
year.
A
A
and
it's
still
an
increase
from
75
million
813,
I
mean
it's
still
a
substantial
increase
over
last
year.
So
well.
D
D
Oh
and
I
just
just
deleted
my
number-
I
moved
that
we
assessed
this
property
at
84
million
mary
fill
in
the
blank.
I
just.
A
I'll
second,
it
so
motion
a
second
all
in
favor,
aye.
Okay,
thank
you,
mr
pen
around
here.
So
it's
unanimous,
the
assessments
reduced
to
84
million
129,
and
that
is
based
on
taking
100
000
off
of
the
did.
You
take
well,
I
guess
off
the
gross
potential
and
then
100
increase
in
expenses
by
158
000.
Yes,.
C
A
K
K
On
the
seventh
page
of
the
palance
analysis
is
a
summary
of
the
last
three
years
operating
results
for
2018,
19
and
20,
and
also
shows
a
column
for
p
l
pro
forma,
which
is
just
utilizing
the
2020
operating
results.
K
Since,
since
the
board
did
go
over
some
coveted
information,
I
will
note
that
this
property
did
have
some
covet
concessions
associated
with,
with
its
2020
operating
results.
They
had
62
454
dollars
in
code
concessions
that
they
weren't
able
to
collect.
K
As
best
I
can.
The
actual
revenue
that
was
collected
was
five
million.
Four
hundred
and
thirty
seven
thousand
dollars
the
actual
operating
expenses.
Exclusive
of
property
taxes
was
two
million
seven
eleven
nine
forty
two,
their
actual
noi,
was
two
million
seven
725
702
and
here's
the
primary
difference
between
the
appellants
analysis
and
the
county's
valuation.
K
The
base
capitalization
rate
used-
and
this
analysis
is
six
percent.
I'm
estimating
the
county
used,
5.3
or
somewhere
thereabouts.
K
When
you
take
out
the
the
tax
load,
the
county's
noi
is
2843,
so
it's
off
by
between
the
actual
and
the
county
is
using
about
about
120
000
indicated
value,
as
noted
on
the
bottom
of
page,
nine.
Thirty,
eight
million
seven.
Ninety
four,
what
I
will
add
is
just
splitting
the
difference
between
the
five
point.
K
Four
five
point:
three
somewhere
in
there
with
the
county
is
using
and
the
six
percent
would
be
a
5.7
base,
capitalization
rate
and
applying
that
to
the
actual
income
and
expense
comes
to
a
value
of
40
million
666
340.,
applying
that
same
cap
rate
to
the
county's
approach.
You
come
to
a
value
of
42
million
434
700,
and
I
would
contend
that
the
base,
capitalization
rate
being
used
by
the
county
at
between
5.3
and
5.4,
is
too
low
for
this
property.
K
This
is
a
lower
tier
apartment,
complex
and
that's
evident
by
the
the
rental
rates
that
are
asked
for
this
property
and
by
the
age
of
the
property
that
it's
a
there's,
nothing
wrong
with
this
property,
but
it
does
have
a
it
should
have
a
higher
cap
rate
than
the
cap
rates
that
are
associated
with
a
much
better
quality
and
and
revenue
earning
potential
page
8,
I'm
sorry,
page
10.
This
is
just
breaking
down
the
income
and
expenses
on
a
per
parcel
basis,
not
that's
necessary,
but
I've
done
it.
K
K
First
tier
investment
properties
on
page
83
show
a
going
in
cap
rate
of
six
percent,
and
this
is
just
for
the
entire
region
and
it's
lower,
obviously
for
dc
greater
dc
in
arlington
county
for
tier
two,
six
point:
five
for
tier
three,
which
is
what
this
property
is:
seven
percent.
K
Looking
at
page,
eighty
six
you'll
see
washington
dc
a
first
tier
investment
property
analysis
going
in
cap
rate.
They
show
east
being
six
and
a
property
specific
to
washington
dc
of
5.1,
so
about
90
basis
points
as
far
as
the
differential
between
the
region
and
specifically
this
market.
So
if
I
go
back
to
the
third
tier
at
seven,
I
subtracted
essentially
100
basis
points
to
get
down
to
my
base
capitalization
rate
of
six
percent.
K
Again,
the
county
is
at
approximately
five
point,
four
five
point
three
and-
and
I
would
suggest
that's
too
low
if
you
apply
a
more
reasonable
cap
rate
that
that's
associated
with
a
property
like
this,
you
will
come
to
a
an
indicated
value
range
of
40
million
666
to
42
434
and
that's
again
using
a
base
capitalization
rate
of
around
5.7,
and
I
just
asked
the
board
to
take
that
into
consideration,
and
that's
all
I
have
for
you
today.
Thank
you
for
listening
to
the
presentation.
L
Thank
you
board.
Thank
you
mitch.
So
have
you
noticed
that
there
is
no
test
column
here?
When
I
took
a
look
at
at
first,
I
was
going
to
do
a
test
column
because
of
the
concessions,
and
then
I
took
a
look
at
it,
and
I
said
you
know
what,
when
we
valued
this
property
for
january
1,
we
were
using
a
substantially
lower
number
for
revenue,
as
you
compare
it
to
both
to
the
2019
and
to
the
2020,
which
happens
to
show
just
a
couple
thousand
more
than
they
reported
in
2019.
L
So
when
you
look
down
at
our
gpi,
it's
substantially
lower
and
then
even
though
they
are
reporting
a
a
high
vacancy
rate
of
the
ten
percent
plus
versus
what
we're
using
at
six
percent,
our
egi
still
is
substantially
lower
than
what
they
reported
for
2021,
even
for
2019..
L
But
when
you
take
a
look
at
the
bottom
line,
look
at
the
noi
we're
still
less
than
what
they
reported
for
2020,
despite
their
their
concessions,
their
their
high
vacancy
rate,
the
appellant
when
you
look
at
his
expenses,
keep
in
mind
that
he's
reporting
or
that
he's
using,
not
reporting,
but
what
he's
using?
That
includes
replacement
reserves,
so
we
do
not
use
replacement
reserves.
L
I
am
fin.
I
also
wanted
to
note
that
we
use
the
highest
cap
rate
in
our
guidelines
at
6.4
percent.
It's
the
non-metro
and
it's
the
highest
due
to
the
the
age
of
the
property.
I
did
go
out
and
inspected
several
buildings
and
I
even
went
down
into
take
a
look
at
their
boiler
rooms
and
they
were
just
spotless.
They
did
an
excellent
job
of
maintaining
this
site.
L
Even
the
the
vacant
units
that
I
got
to
inspect,
they
do
an
excellent
job
of
maintaining
it,
so
I
think
they're
looking
at
their
2020
ine,
and
I
believe
that
our
original
assessment
is
very
reasonable
in
comparison
to
that,
I
am
finished.
Thank
you
very
much.
A
Okay,
thank
you.
Both
questions
from
the
board
members.
D
L
Okay,
so
keep
in
mind
I
I
was
not
the
appraiser
for
this
property.
I
did
not
value
it
for
january
1,
but
I'm
assuming
that
we
were
looking
forward
and
thinking
about
covid.
L
So
I'm
believing
or
I'm
assuming,
I
make
an
assumption
that
that
lower
revenue
rate
is
based
due
to
coping.
They
were
okay,
fair
enough.
F
Ken
also
to
speak
on
that
point,
this
property
has
a
history
of
reporting,
a
game
to
least
lost
to
lease
line
which
is
not
reflective
of
vacancy.
So
whenever
we
see
properties
report
this
gain
to
lease
loss
to
lease,
we
look
at
the
resulting
number,
so
they'll
show
potential
gross
income.
Then
they'll
show
gain
to
least
lost
the
lease
and
then
they'll
show
another
potential
gross
income
number.
So
essentially
they
have
like
two
gross
income
numbers.
F
We
pay
attention
to
the
second
one,
because
again
they
lost
the
lease
is
not
reflective
of
vacancy
is
not
reflective
of
rent
loss
and
is
not
reflective
of
concessions
because
they
report
that
further
down
the
line.
This
is
some
number
that
this
rent
number
is
something
that
they
believe
they
should
get.
But
then
the
market
has
a
different
value
for
their
units,
and
so
they
deduct
further
from
their
potential
gross
income.
F
If
you
look
at
just
right,
quick,
if
you
look
at
their
page
59
of
the
packet
and
they
show
the
2018
19
and
2020
information,
you'll
see
under
revenue,
it
says
revenue,
growth,
rent
revenue,
pgr
and
then
there's
this
less
gain
loss
to
old
lease
number
that
they
deduct
and
then
they
have
total
rent
revenue
collected,
but
they
further
deduct
loss
to
vacancy
loss
because
of
collection
and
loss
to
concession.
So
this
is
what
I'm
referring
to
that
less
gain
lost
to
old
least
number.
D
My
second
question
before
I
ask
it:
that's
why
the
on
line
well
total
vacancy
and
concessions
is
so
relatively
high,
because
they're
actually
putting
it
up
up
top
and
taking
it
off
all
right,
then
I
don't
need
to
ask
my
second.
L
You
once
again,
I'm
just
asking
you
to
take
a
look
down
the
line
at
when
we
valued
this.
We
were
looking
at
2019.
L
Our
noi
is
still
lower
than
what
they're
reporting
and
that's,
despite
using
a
smaller,
a
less
number
for
operating
expenses
than
what
they
reported,
and
I
just
asked
that
the
board.
K
Yes,
thank
you.
What
I
would
like
to
also
note
is,
first
of
all,
I
disagree
with
the
the
county's
position
of
not
recognizing
capital
reserves
because
they
absolutely
exist.
We
all
know
roofs
go
bad
parking.
Lots
have
to
be
replaced.
Boilers
have
to
be
attended
to
and
replaced
at
some
point
during
their
lifespan,
so
not
recognizing.
That
is
in
direct
conflict
with
appraisal
institute.
Niao
assessing
principles
is
first
how
what
what
you
have
to
do
in
an
income
approach.
K
That
aside,
what
I
would
note
is
the
actual
expenses
noted
on
our
page,
seven
of
two
million
seven
eleven
nine
forty
two
when
you
deduct
out
the
capital
reserves
that
were
used
here
of
217
000,
our
actual
expenses
are
2
million
494
436
that
are
summarized
from
the
actual
p
l's,
and
the
county
used
2
million
316
813,
which
is
about
180
000
less
than
the
actual
aside
from
that
again,
which
I
would
suggest
should
should
lower
the
the
noi
that's
being
used
by
the
county,
the
cap
rate-
and
I
I
understand
lori's
indication
that
they're
using
the
max
cap
rate
for
this
category
of
6.4.
K
A
J
Yeah,
I
I
was
looking
at
the
income
and
the
tpi
and
egi
and
the
county
and
answering
that
how
that
how
they
really
came
to
those
numbers
and
balanced
out
that
cleared
it
up.
For
me,
I
looked
at
expenses
a
little
bit
and
in
a
bit
of
a
trend,
but
I
don't
given
what
we've
just
gone
over
or
heard.
I
don't
think
it's
that
far
off,
I
ran
numbers,
but
I
I'm
comfortable
with
the
county.
G
You
know
martha
moore
and
I
used
to
talk
about
this
a
lot
and
it
seems
like
you
know,
the
applicants
are
in
here,
you
know,
knock
it
down,
knock
it
down,
knock
it
down,
and
then
they
sell
it,
for
you
know
a
lot
more
than
than
it's
assessed
at,
and
I
think
I
think,
on
the
cap
rate,
there
are
some
things
about
arlington
that
are
not
measurable,
and
you
know
good
schools,
good
location,
good
transportation,
and
so
that's
why
I
really
have
not
questioned
the
county's
cap
rate
and
we've
had
lots
of
arguments
that
the
cap
rate
is
is
just
simply
too
high,
and
yet,
when
properties
sell,
it
seems
to
verify
that
maybe
the
cap
rates
are
accurate
or
maybe
even
they
even
need
to
be
a
little
higher.
G
And
so
it
just
seems
like
there's
some
intangibles
that
exist
here
in
this
county.
That,
in
my
mind,
justify
a
higher
cap
rate,
perhaps
than
simple
math
would
yield,
and
with
that
I'll
be
quiet.
I
I
agree
with
you
mary,
I
think
from
all
the
cases
that
we've
seen
this
year,
I
think,
looking
at
all
the
numbers
and
everything
that
we've
seen
that
are
showing
in
this
case.
I
think
this
is
the
easiest
case
to
actually
confirm
all
the
numbers
are
much
lower
than
what's
been
for
the
past
years
and
the
current
ones.
So
I'm
okay
with
the
county.
A
J
K
A
H
All
right,
thank
you
good
morning,
everyone,
it's
always
nice,
to
be
able
to
watch
without
a
for
a
couple
cases
to
ground
myself
a
little
bit
before
joining
the
I'm
not
going
to
talk
about
cap
rate,
even
though
we
we
have
a
little
bit
of
a
cap
rate
discussion
here,
because
I
just
saw
how
that
went.
So
we
did
I'll
briefly
mention
it,
but
know
that
it's
not
going
to
be
used.
H
We
did
take
a
bit
of
a
cap
rate
adjustment
in
our
test
column,
but
I
understand,
after
having
other
cases
and
witnessing
what
I
just
witnessed,
that's
not
going
to
apply
so.
The
big
issue
here
is
the
expenses.
So
this
property
is
very,
very
unique
as
compared
to
anything
else
that
I
bring
in
front
of
you,
it's
corporate
housing
and,
as
you
can
imagine,
who
was
hit
hard
by
covid,
well
obviously
hotels
and
were
hit
by
hovid.
It's
our
belief.
H
The
retail
was,
although
the
county
is
still
using
a
four
percent
retail
vacancy,
but
not
much
has
been
hit
harder
than
cover
than
corporate
housing.
This
property
is
under
was
under
a
mass
release.
Agreement-
and
I
say,
was
because
that's
changed
in
2021,
but
after
the
value
date
that
equity
leases,
the
property
to
oakwood
and
then
the
expenses
are
are
applied.
So
what
the
county
has
done
here
correctly
for
90
of
it
they've
correctly
used
a
market
rent,
which
we
don't
really
have
an
issue
with.
H
They
then
correctly
apply
to
vacancy,
which
you'll
see
there
five
percent,
which
is
the
same
we've
done
in
our
test
column,
so
you'll
notice
for
egi
we're
about
forty
thousand
dollars
less
than
they
are.
But
when
you're
talking
about
three
point,
seven
million
dollars,
40
40
000-
is
pretty
close,
but
then
we
get
to
operating
expenses.
H
The
county
did
not
use
that
number
of
74,
essentially
74
000
per
unit,
which
is
where
our
optics
is
in
our
pro
forma.
They
use
4
600
per
unit
4640..
We
have
no
idea
where
that
number
came
from
you'll
see
the
the
average
there
are
quite
low
and
again
it's
a
it's,
a
very
unique
leasing
structure.
H
So
in
that
situation,
what
we've
done
and
what
the
county
has
has
historically
done
is
take
the
property
up
to
market,
as
if
we
had
brought
if
we
brought
a
property
with
a
four
million
dollar
operating
expense,
you
would
stabilize
that
to
market
if
we
bring
in
a
property
with
a
three
thousand
dollar
operating
a
thirty,
a
three
hundred
thousand
dollar
operating
expense.
H
You
would
take
that
up
to
market,
for
we
don't
know
why
we
haven't
been
able
to
get
an
explanation
of
why
they
just
used
751
when
the
market
operating
expenses
for
this
property
for
the
guidelines
would
be
one
million
one
hundred
ninety
four
thousand
eight
hundred
and
eighty
nine
going
further
down
the
cap
rate
again,
not
gonna,
really
get
into
that
after
what
I
just
witnessed.
So
the
the
final
conclusion
of
this
case
is
a
value
of
use,
ucr
437,
but
again,
that's
including
the
cap
rate.
H
The
issue
here
again
is
that
this
is
corporate
housing
and
when
this
property
lori
inspected
this
property
a
couple
weeks
ago,
there
were
six
tenants
in
the
building
there's
162
units.
H
H
Oakwood
is
out
there
they're
terminating
this,
and
the
property
is
going
to
have
to
go
through
a
total
repositioning
to
take
it
from
a
1986
corporate
housing
project
to
a
market,
because
there's
just
no
market
for
corporate
housing.
The
thought
on
corporate
housing
and
the
theory
behind
it
is
basically
in
a
way
like
an
extended
state
hotel
that
a
company
rents,
20
units
and
then
when
they
need
employees
in
the
dc
area.
H
They,
instead
of
putting
them
up
in
a
hotel
for
for
a
month,
they
might
put
them
in
one
of
these
units
for
a
month.
It's
a
good
business
model
when
business
travels
booming,
which
is
why
you
have
a
place
like
this.
That's
located
in
close
proximity
to
reagan
airport,
but
when
business
travel
comes
to
a
complete
halt,
there's
nobody
there
to
travel.
H
So,
although
you
still
have
the
properties
leased
to
these
companies
for
the
year,
who
are
taking
in
saying
ibm,
for
example,
will
have
a
floor
and
a
building,
although
they
have
at
least
to
them,
there's
nobody
coming
in
and
out
of
the
building.
So
the
company
until
the
lease
is
over
leases,
the
space
has
it
at
their
disposal,
but
since
nobody's
getting
on
and
off
planes
and
traveling
for
business
nobody's
using
these
properties.
H
Obviously,
with
the
the
emergence
of
zoom-
and
I
mean
as
we're
meeting
right
now,
you
see
there's
quite
a
difference
in
how
business
travel
is
going
forward,
but
because
of
that,
oakwood
is
going
to
shed
the
oakwood
title,
go
eventually
eventually
as
an
after
evaluation
date,
but
now
to
a
to
a
market
rate
apartment
after
changes.
But
for
this
year
you'll
see
that
you
had
a
building
that
was
essentially
leased
with
nobody
in
it
and
that's
what
you're
seeing
from
the
income
statement.
So
what
needs
to
be
done
there
is?
H
You
need
to
stabilize
the
county
correctly
stabilize
the
income
correctly
stabilized
the
vacancy,
but
then,
for
some
reason
took
the
expenses
said:
you
know
what
they
can
do
it,
but
they
can
operate
this
property
at
half
of
the
expenses
of
what
a
true
market
expenses
are
and
again
we
always
talk
about
guidelines
for
vacancy.
We
talk
about
guidelines
or
cap
rate.
We
just
heard
about
how
how
the
guidelines
or
cap
rates
are
done,
but
the
guideline
for
vacancy
for
expenses
is
7
375
and
86
cents.
H
When
you
multiply
that
by
162
units,
it's
1
million
194
889,
which
is
the
same
number
you'll,
see
in
column
f,
so
using
751,
which
is
just
46.40
per
unit.
It
seems
like
it's
a
bit
off,
so
I
asked
that
since
we're
taking
the
apartment
income
to
market
the
vacancy
to
market
the
cap
rate
to
market,
we
should
also
take
the
the
expenses
to
market
which
the
county
has
already
done.
That
exercise
for
us
and
indicated
that
that
number
should
be
1
million.
194
889.
H
This
property
did
see
a
next
increase
in
the
assessment,
not
this
past
year,
but
from
from
prior
years.
So
we're
seeing
a
growth
in
the
assessment
year
over
year,
but
we're
not
seeing
any
justification
to
why
that
would
occur.
H
The
property
was
assessed
at
54
7
this
year
last
year
was
54.2
and
then
the
before
that
it
was
50
and
before
that
was
47.,
we've
seen
a
3
million
dollar
increase
a
three
million
dollar
increase
of
four
million
dollar
increase,
and
now
a
five
hundred
thousand
dollar
increase
for
a
building
that
is
completely
almost
completely
empty.
H
But
again
you
have
tennis
paying
but
nobody's
in
there
and
that's
a
short-term
thing,
because
as
soon
as
it's
time
to
renew
the
lease
it's
not
being
renewed,
which
we
already
learned
is
in
fact
the
case,
not
speculation,
so
open
any
questions.
I
know
this
is
a
bit
of
a
unique
one,
but
that's
all
I
have.
L
You
board,
thank
you,
jeremy,
okay,
so
the
lease
that's
in
place
is
for
a
corporate.
It's
a
single
entity,
that's
leasing,
this
property
and
obviously
they're
out
to
make
money
so
they're
gonna
they're
gonna
charge
higher
rents
than
what
we
used
in
our
original
assessment.
L
You
know,
because
they're
out
to
make
some
additional
money.
So
when
you
look
at
the
expenses,
you're
mixing,
you're,
you're,
mixing,
apples
and
oranges
when
you
want
to
use
their
market
expenses
shown
in
the
you
know
in
the
guidelines,
if
nobody's
reporting-
and
you
don't
use
the
market
rate
for
revenue
for
this
property.
Okay.
So
when
we
applied
the
expense
right,
the
expenses,
as
you
can
see
under
column
d,
look
at
the
trend
for
2017,
18
and
19,
which
19
was
a
lot
less
and
then
take
a
look
at
2020.
L
The
the
expenses
are
even
lower,
but
we
use
something
that's
more
than
that's
much
much
higher,
almost
double
what
they
reported
for.
2020..
Take
a
look
at
the
noi,
my
goodness,
that's
substantially
less.
Our
noi
is
600
000
less
than
what
they're
reporting
okay.
So
when
you
cap
that
out
with
the
5.49
percent,
we
think
our
value
is
very
reasonable.
L
But
once
again,
their
their
argument
for
expenses
that
they
should
be
using
market
expenses
doesn't
apply
to
this,
because
this
is
a
single
entity.
That's
renting
out
this
building
from
the
owner
and
then
they're
going
out
and
renting
it.
You
know
the
individual
or
whole
floors
whatever,
which
obviously
is
going
to
rent
for
more
than
what
they're
reporting.
L
So
if,
if
you
want
to
use
higher
expenses,
then
you
need
to
calculating
a
much
higher
revenue
rate
irving.
Is
there
anything
you'd
like
to
add
for
this.
F
Yeah,
I
just
want
to
reiterate
what
you
said
and
what
the
agent
said
this
building
is
leased
out
to
oakwood
by
equity,
residential.
The
rent
revenue
we
use
is
based
off
that
lease.
We
apply
our
rate
to
the
apartment
units
to
get
to
that
revenue
amount,
but
in
the
past,
when
we've
used
actual
market
rents,
we've
had
discussions
with
this
agent
about
these
leases.
F
That's
in
place,
because
this
is
not
the
only
building
that
oakwood
leases
in
the
county,
there's
one
in
roswell
as
well,
and
I
think
there
might
be
one
in
boston
if
I'm
not
mistaken,
so
these
buildings
are
valued
based
off
of
the
least
that's
in
place.
We
also
know
based
off
this
lease
that
oakwood
pays
expenses
as
well,
so
the
expenses
that
are
reported
are
what
is
attributed
to
the
owner
of
the
building
and
what
they
incur
based
off
of
this
lease.
F
So
as
glory
points
out,
the
expenses
we
use
actually
are
higher
than
what
they
reported
for
the
past
two
years.
We
believe
it's
in
line
with
with
2017-18
and
honestly
I
mean
just
look
at
the
inner
widest
property.
F
I
mean
it
increased
by
a
hundred
thousand
from
1718
and
increased
by
another,
what
390
000
from
18
to
19
and
from
19
to
20
and
increased
by
another
hundred
some
thousand
dollars
we're
at
three
million
we're
six
hundred
thousand
away
from
this.
The
valuation
is
appropriate
because
of
the
master
lease
that's
in
place,
we're
not
assessing
this
property
based
off.
What
oakwood
is
charging
because
again,
oakwood
is
the
tenant,
we're
that
is
property
based
off
of
what
the
owners
are
charging
oakwood
to
lease
the
entire
building.
L
I
I
did
want
to
add.
I
know
that
the
agent
is
arguing
that
they're
not
going
to
renew
their
lease
their
lease
expires
february.
2023.,
we're
still
speculating
here,
anything
can
happen
between
then
I
mean
look
at
caddy
corner
when
I
was
standing
in
one
of
the
units
I
pointed
out
to
the
agent
and
the
other
person,
the
representative,
I
think
of
the
oakwood
I
said:
doesn't
that
happen
to
be
amazon
going
in
right
there
about
a
block
away
and
they
both
agreed?
L
G
F
So
if
you're
not
going
to
report,
if
you're
going
to
report
all
the
expenses
at
the
property,
you
will
also
report
the
pass-throughs
of
the
property
and
so
they're,
not
reporting
pass-throughs,
and
therefore
you
would
offset
the
expenses
at
properties
the
same
as
with
utilities.
There's
some
property
under
the
report.
G
G
F
F
So
I
don't
think
we're
I
think,
we're
talking
about
the
same
thing,
but
I
mean,
of
course,
we're
going
to
disagree,
because
if
the
utilities
are
500,
000
dollars
and
oakwood
pays
300
000
and
the
owner
pays
200
000
the
owner
reports,
200
000
to
us
and
they're
not
reporting
that
pass
through.
If
you're
going
to
report
the
500
000
you
reported
300
000
is
pass-through
income
to
offset
what
oakwood
pays.
F
G
F
A
Okay,
mr
matzke.
D
Good
question
for
the
appellant
twice:
I
need
help
twice.
She
brought
up
and
defended
the
operating
expenses,
that's
shown
in
column,
f
and
there
and
and
decried
the
expenses
in
column
d
that
the
county
uses.
I
I
don't
why
not,
of
course,
in
column
e
expenses
are
very
low.
Very
few
people
were
there
flushing
toilets
using
elevators
that
all
make
sense,
but
based
on
the
history
of
2017-18-19,
how
do
you
go
from?
You
know:
4
000,
plus
a
unit
to
7,
000
plus
a
unit.
H
Yeah,
absolutely
so,
in
a
situation
where
you're
missing
information
like
vacancy
cap
rates
expenses,
either
high
or
low,
we
often
look
for
what
is
the
market
same
with
income?
If,
if
the
income
report,
if
if
the
property
is
100
empty
and
you
had
zero
income,
we
don't
value
the
property
at
zero,
we
go
and
say:
okay,
what
is
the
true
income
for
the
property?
And
we
look
at
the
market
and
arlington
does
a
very
good
job
of
providing
what
the
market
is.
So
they
say:
okay,
a
two
bedroom
apartment
in
arlington.
H
This
part
of
arlington
is
two
thousand
dollars
a
month,
so
we're
gonna
apply
that
to
all
the
two
bedrooms
and
we're
going
to
we're
using
the
term
stabilize
the
property
so
we're
going
to
because
we
don't
have
any
income
we're
going
to
stabilize
the
income
to
market.
In
this
situation
we
essentially
don't
have
expenses,
the
utilities
are
zero.
We
all
know
that
if
we
were
to
run
a
property
with
a
four
million
dollar
income
in
there
would
have
to
be
some
type
of
utilities,
because
the
expenses
are
only
seven
percent.
H
I
brought
a
property
like
that
to
you
the
hotels
for
example,
say:
look,
this
property
is
only
has
a
20
occupancy,
we're
not
going
to
value
it
at
a
20
occupancy,
we're
going
to
stabilize
it
up
and
we're
doing
the
exact
same
thing
here.
It's
just
a
different
column
than
the
normal
and
we're
stabilizing
up
the
expenses,
and
that's.
L
Okay,
so
the
big
argument
here
is:
why
are
we
not
using
a
much
higher
rate
of
expenses?
Well,
once
again,
this
is
what
the
owner
is
reporting
now
oakwood.
L
The
owner
is
not
reporting
the
additional
income
that
oakwood
makes
beyond.
If
you
take
a
look
column
e,
what
oakwood
is
reporting
for
their
revenue?
Okay,
that's
not
what
they're
collecting
by
each
tenant!
That's
what
the
owner
is.
I'm
sorry,
that's
what
the
owner
is
reporting
in
the
lease.
Okay
with
this
one,
individual
and
oakwood,
is
then
in
turn,
renting
it
to
other
individual
tenants
and
obviously
they're
going
to
rent
it
at
a
higher
rate,
you're
going
to
have
a
higher
collection
rate
for
revenue.
L
So,
if
you're
going
to
do,
if
you're
going
to
use
higher
expenses,
then
you
need
to
use
a
higher
revenue
rate.
Okay.
This
assessment
is
based
on
the
one
lease
the
corporate
lease
and
the
expenses
that
the
owner
is
incurring
and
once
again,
the
expenses
that
we
used
in
column
d
is
substantially
higher
than
what
they
reported
in
2019
2020,
and
if
you
want
to
jump
back
to
2018,
it's
n17,
it's
the
expenses
that
we're
using
are
in
line,
and
this
is
based
on
it.
L
L
I
I
have
no
other
information
for
you.
Thank
you.
F
I
think
other
things
that
would
be
considered
if,
if
this
was
a
typical
leasing
building,
would
be
parking
income,
other
income
and
miscellaneous
income
that
comes
with
the
other
properties
in
this
area.
For
things
such
as
amendment
fees,
application
fees,
again,
there's
parking
revenue,
that's
not
being
shown
and
those
things
are
being
covered
by
oakwood
because
that's
what
they
received.
So
that's
why
you
don't
see
things
such
as
certain
repairs
in
the
building?
H
Yes,
you'll
notice
that
what
they're
saying
is
we're
not
we're
using
the
actual
lease,
but
you
see
column
e.
The
the
collected
is
three
million
nine
thirteen
and
they're
using
forty
five
thousand
dollars
higher
than
that.
So
that
number
isn't
any
kind
of
actual.
They
do
have
the
lease
in
hand.
They
happen
to
be
using
a
number,
that's
high
at
the
highest,
the
last
four
years.
What
oakwood
does
is
they
furnish
these
departments
and
then
rent
them
for
a
premium?
H
I
think
it's
pretty
clear
what's
happening
is
the
expenses
are
too
low,
they're
not
reported
fully,
and
we
need
to
stabilize
them
and
no
property
owner
is
going
to
come
in
and
say
you
know
what
I'm
going
to
operate,
this
property
of
7
operating
expense
and
not
have
any
utilities
so
from
the
questioning.
It
appears
that
it
definitely
makes
sense
to
some,
but
what
it
what
it
comes
down
to
is.
The
county
has
stabilized
the
gpi
they've
stabilized
the
vacancy
they've
stabilized
the
cap
rate,
and
then
they
are
then
using
an
operating
expense.
H
That
is
not
stabilized
in
any
way
and
is
basically
based
off
actual
it's
an
absolute
mix
and
match,
and
if
they
determine
that
it
was
best
to
value
this
on
a
master
lease
like
a
hotel,
then
they
should
use
the
hotel
cap
rates.
But
I
don't
think
anybody
is
in
position
to
do
that.
So
I
think,
because
they've
gone
four
out
of
the
five
on
on
the
stabilizations,
they
should
continue
it
all
the
way
and
include
the
operating
specimen.
Thank
you.
D
D
They
have
real
expenses
and
they're
being
paid
out
and
and
wisely
the
appellant
has
chosen
not
to
pursue
the
cap
rate
issue,
so
I
don't
see
what's
left
now,
having
said
that,
if
this
were
not
a
master
lease
and
why
not,
I
always
have
anxious
going
with
the
appellant's
point
of
view,
his
argument
that
we
have
a
gross
potential
income,
but
then
these
are
the
actual
expenses.
D
G
Yeah
I
hear
what
what
ken's
saying,
but
I
don't
agree-
I
mean
you've
got
almost
it's
almost
like
a
ground
lease,
and
so
the
landlord
collects
a
certain
amount
of
money
and
they
don't
worry
about
expenses.
You
know,
maybe
they
have
an
account,
they
pay
an
accountant
or
something
of
that
nature.
I
haven't
looked
at
the
lease
and
I
don't
quite
understand
it,
but
you
can't,
I
don't
think
you
could
go
out
and
sell
this
product
and
say
well.
G
This
is
a
great
deal
for
you
because
our
expenses
are
19,
19,
11
7
it
just
it's
just
an
inaccurate
picture
and
it's
inaccurate
due
to
the
setup
between
these
two,
these
two
business
entities-
and
so
I
think
what
ought
to
be
done-
is
to
take
the
the
assessment
income
and
then
take
the
applicant's
suggested
expenses
and
then
apply
the
county
cap
rate.
G
I
Yeah,
I
think
you're
right
barns
that
you
probably
won't
get
much
support.
I'm
I
I'm
I'm
with
ken.
I
think
you
know
we
have
to
consider.
This
is
a
special
case.
It's
not
like
a
typical,
you
know:
apartment
building.
We
have
to
really
consider
what
the
owner
is
getting
on.
What
the
owner
is
reporting.
You
know
we
can't
really
worry
about
what
the
tenants
expenses
are.
I
You
know
we
would
have
to
consider.
Like
mr
asking
said,
we
would
have
to
consider
the
actual
income
that
they're
getting.
You
know
that,
but
the
tenant
is
getting
us
an
income,
so
I
agree
with
canada.
You
know,
I
think
the
county
is
correct
in
this.
In
this
case,.
G
Yeah,
you
know
it
it
in
a
perfect
world.
I
think
what
you
would
have
had
was.
The
entire
analysis
would
have
been
done,
based
on
the
tenants
figures
rather
than
the
landlords.
J
G
Yeah,
I
think
my
last
comment,
I
think,
in
absence
of
that
information,
I'm
I'm
gonna
go
ahead
and
vote
in
favor
of
the
county,
but
I
do
think
it's
not
being
done
right.
D
We're
we're
assessing
the
value
of
real
property
and
the
owner
owns
it.
The
tenant
doesn't
own
it.
The
corporations
who,
rent
by
the
month
don't
own
it
we're
just
looking
at
the
owner.
How
much
are
they
taking
in?
How
much
are
they
paying
out
period?
That's
our
mission
and
that's
the
county's
mission
wilson.
I
A
H
A
A
H
D
A
That
completes
the
agenda
any
other
business
from
either
board
members
or
the
county.
Mr
matzke.
A
Enough
said,
any
other
business,
no
okay,
we
stand
adjourned
at
10,
28,
we'll
readjourn
next
tuesday
september
14th
at
9
am
thank
you.