►
From YouTube: Board of Equalization Hearing October 11, 2022
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
B
C
Okay,
very
good,
so
the
subject
not
I
didn't
actually
see
Rob
on
the
call.
I
think
this
one
is
with
Rob
I'm.
C
Hey
Rob,
sorry
I'm
on
the
board
side
here,
I
wouldn't
want
to
start
without
you
buddy.
So
this
one
is
Jefferson
Plaza
office
building,
it's
originally
a
1970
with
a
1996
renovation,
about
a
278
000
square
foot
office
building
in
Crystal
City,
the
original
assessment,
81.7
million.
There's
a
revision
to
70
recommendation
to
74.6.
We
appreciate
the
assessors.
You
know
work
at
you
know
reviewing
the
assessment
here.
However,
we
just
don't
think
it
went
far
enough.
C
The
big
you
know
issue
with
this
building
is
you
know
it's
gone
from
20
vacancy
last
year
to
48
vacancy
this
year.
They
had
a
large
GSA
tenant,
move
out
this
past
November.
That
occupied
you
know
about
three
or
four
floors.
You
know
almost
60
000
square
feet
so
that
and
a
few
other
tenants
also
left.
You
know
the
the
vacant
square
footage
went
from
about
54
000
square
feet
to
130
000
square
feet.
C
C
It
still
would
represent
the
highest
assessment
on
the
property
in
the
past
10
years,
and
the
property
is
the
most
vacant
that
it's
been
I
mean
when
you
look
at
those
years,
it
always
been.
You
know,
between
20
and
30
percent
vacant,
now
we're
talking
48
vacancy.
So
that's
really
the
big
issue
and
I'll
go
over
the
exact.
You
know
inputs
that
we
get
use
to
get
to
our
value.
C
And
because
there
is
such
a,
you
know
a
lot
like
revised
calculation
here
from
the
assessor.
You
know
we
wouldn't
even
really
be
talking
apples
to
apples
if
I
were
to
just
kind
of
go
right
off
of
this.
You
know
the
page
that
I
originally
submitted
so
I'm
gonna
take
the
opportunity
to
just
share
my
screen,
and
hopefully
everyone
in
the
boardroom
can
see
it,
but
this
is
the
Assessor's
original
assessment
here.
C
C
Surprisingly,
what
we
saw
from
the
original
assessment
to
the
revised
assessment
was
an
increase
to
the
rental
rate
for
vacant
office
space.
This
was
originally
a
non-issue
as
we
were
using
the
same
rate
as
the
assessor
37.75
37.75,
now
they're
using
39.50,
so
that
causes
a
pretty
big
uptick
to
the
Assessor's
PGI,
and
it's
part
of
the
reason
that
the
assessment
is
still
as
high
as
it
is.
C
When
we
look
at
the
market,
we're
seeing
you
know
an
indicated
rate
of
closer
to
you
know
38
39
per
square
foot.
We
do
have
some
support
for
that.
But
again
originally
it
wasn't
an
issue.
Now
it
is
an
issue.
What
the
assessor
agrees
that
the
rents
at
the
actual
building
are
closer
to
36.75.
So
it
is
a
bit
sort
of
mysterious
to
see
the
the
vacant
office
space.
C
You
know
tick
up
close
to
three
dollars
higher
than
what
is
what
they're
actually
getting
at
the
property
other
than
that
I
looks
like
we're
on
the
same
page
for
real
estate,
tax
reimbursement,
the
operating
expense,
reimbursement,
I.
Think
the
assessor
has
overstated
by
15
000,
not
a
big
big
deal,
but
it's
a
difference
where
you
now
we're
using
the
same
25
vacancy
the
assessor
was
using
20
before.
C
C
You
can
see
the
difference
in
noi
the
sensors
at
5.8,
which
is
what
they
were
at
before
again,
which
is
caused
by
that
increase
that
they
made
to
the
vacant
office
space
we're
at
5.6
here
on
the
noi.
C
If
you
look
at
the
trailing
four
years,
it's
much
lower
been
much
lower
than
that
operate
is
really
an
issue
here
and
you
know
I
know
at
the
end
of
the
day,
you
know
the
guidelines
are
the
guidelines
and
that's
kind
of
how
how
it
operates,
but
I
would
hope
at
least
that
we
could
take
a
look
at
the
effective
age
of
this
property
or
the
assessor
could
explain
how
they
get
an
effect.
C
C
You
know
we're
using
the
1979,
which
is
a
7.793
cap
rate,
so
it
is
a
difference.
We
think
that,
supported
by
by
studies,
PWC
rerc
everything
we
looked
at
was
high
higher
than
six
percent
and
for
vacant
buildings,
it's
typically
higher.
C
Are
we
have
similar
below
the
line?
Deductions
as
the
assessor?
There
were
also
three
tenants
that
were
that
were
known
to
be
leaving
in
early
2022,
and
we
feel
at
least
have
cost,
for
those
tenants
should
be
taken
into
consideration
as
well
another
five
percent
of
the
building
and
that's
another
1.7
million
in
lease
up
cost.
These
are
the
tenants,
Sage
analysis,
rental,
beast
and
Microsoft.
C
They'll,
stop
sharing
now
and
just
to
go
quickly.
Go
through
the
rest
of
my
appeal
package
on
page
71
of
123
are
those
cap
rates
that
I
mentioned
and
the
you
know
the
the
correct
County
rate
from
for
the
17
1979
year
versus
1989.
C
C
Pages,
73
and
74
are
just
some
of
our
cap
rate
support,
as
previously
mentioned.
C
The
rest
of
the
report
is
really
just
the
income
and
expense
submission
and
rent
roll,
and
that's
that's
all
I
really
have.
Obviously
the
big
issue
here
is
the
year
over
year
increase
the
assessments
as
high
as
it's
ever
been.
We
think
there
are
a
few
things
that
could
be
changed
specifically
with
the
rents
and
the
cap
rate.
A
Okay,
thank
you,
perfect
timing.
Mr
Peralta
for
the
county.
D
Yes,
good
morning,
as
Mr
steinhauser
stated,
there's
not
much
difference
between
the
the
revision
and
the
appellons
pro
forma.
The
main
difference
is
the
the
vacant
square
footage
that
we
are
applying
the
market
rate
Market
rental
rate
too
we're
at
39.50
they're
at
37.75.
The
reason
for
that
is,
they
had
actually
three
leases.
Future
leases
on
page
83
of
123.
D
D
So
that's
why
we
used
a
higher
rate
because
we
have
extra
leases
to
to
the
pinpoint
and
we're
looking
at
the
property
here.
It
shows
on
the
pro
forma.
They
spent
4.4
million
on
Capital
spin
in
2021,
so
we
wouldn't
have
to
take
a
look
at
the
effective
age,
doing
inspection
and
see
what
the
changes
were
for
that
property.
D
D
The
appellant
is
using
a
one-year
lease
up
adjustment
of
1.7
million
and
then
that
Capital
spend
again
at
4.4
million.
That's
the
main
difference.
We
did
make
an
adjustment
based
on
the
excess
vacancy
originally
we're
at
54
000.
Now
we're
at
130
000,
just
like
the
appellant,
don't
have
anything
else.
I
do
actually
have
there's
about
almost
30
000
in
Spec
suites
available
for
this
property
and
it's
in
the
upper
tier
upper
floors.
D
So
we
would
we're
suggesting
a
higher
rents
due
to
the
fact
that
there
are
some
spec
Suites
as
well
that
Capital
spend
that
they
indicated
for
4.4
million
represents
about
six
percent
of
the
agents,
total
total
value
that
they
indicate
in
their
pro
forma.
That's.
A
A
Okay,
thank
you.
Questions
from
board
members.
B
B
D
January
2023
and
it's
till
28.,
when
did
it?
When
was
its
sign?
It
doesn't
sit
here.
It
just
has
it
has
it
on
the
2021
red
role,
so
it
had
a
design
prior
to
the
first
of
the
year.
B
D
Jones
and
I
am
General.
Dynamics
is
starting
their
lease
in
July,
but.
B
Again,
when
it
starts
it's
speculative,
it's
when
it
was,
you
know,
contracted
you
know,
for
instance
the
the
appellant
said.
Well,
we
we
know
that
we
have
a
big
tenant
meeting
in
early
2022.
They
announced,
but
it's
not
over
till
it's
over,
but
in
this
case
it
is
over.
They
are
signed,
leases
or
lease
extensions.
I.
B
A
Can
I
just
I
just
want
to
jump
in
here
on
that
same
point,
but
Mr
Paul
said:
did
you
say
it's
effective
January
2023.
A
D
Right
but
it
speaks
to
the
square
footage.
I
mean
the
the
rent
that
they're
going
the
dollars
per
square
foot.
C
If
I'm,
if
I
may
so
for
those
future
leases
that
you're
seeing
there
two
to
American
systems
and
one
to
General
Dynamics,
all
three
of
those
tenants
are
already
in
the
building.
None
of
that
is
fact-filling
any
of
the
vacant
space.
Those
are
just
renewals
or
options
that
were
exercised
by
the
tenant.
So
it's
not
a
new
lease.
It's
not
indicative
of
Market
rent
for
a
new
tenant
that
they're
bringing
in
they
have
these
options
within
their
existing
leases
and
they
were
they
were
exercised
and
for
General
Dynamics
they're.
B
Thank
you
for
the
appellant
different
related
question,
of
course,
in
Collins,
ABC
and
e
you
don't
have
any
vacant
office
numbers
in
there.
You
know
row
1A,
our
our
is
so
in
one
in
those
cases
they're
all
this
question,
they're
all
just
actual
income
from
offices
and
then
whatever's
vacant.
We
just
don't
know
about.
B
Right,
that's
cool!
That's
what
I'm
asking
okay!
So
it's
only
actionable!
We
don't
know
the
foregone
they.
What
what
the
county
calls
in
1A,
often
vacant
office
I'm,
not
accusing
you
of
asking.
If
I'm
reading
it
right.
B
C
B
C
G
D
E
So
you
think
it's
more
of
a
future
I
mean
it's.
It's
an
old
building.
D
If
you
have
spent
in
2021
we'd
be
curious
to
find
out
what
has
been
done
to
the
property
and
what
you
know
that
money
was
spent
on.
E
C
Yes,
yes,
that
is
that's
what
we're
arguing.
So
there
is
a
capital
schedule,
that's
included,
so
some
of
that
money
was
was
TI
money.
Some
of
that
was
spent
on
HVAC
refurbishment.
C
Some
of
that
was
spent
on
spec
Suites
on
11th
and
12th
floor.
So
they're,
really,
the
larger
spend
is
supposed
to
come
in
2022
2023,
where
they
budgeted
over
8
million
eight
and
a
half
million
in
spend
so
I
think
they
really
just
you
know,
maybe
just
started.
E
Suspect,
space,
HVAC
and
just
TI's
always
was
there.
E
D
Yes,
thank
you,
I'd
like
to
focus
on
my
page,
seven
of
123,
which
is
the
rent
roll
I
highlighted
the
the
new
tenants.
Are
the
renewal
tenants
that
Mr
steinhauser
had
pointed
out
in
the
rent
roll
itself,
they're
stating
40.31
cents
for
American
systems,
yet
they
released
at
42
a
square
foot
for
General
Dynamics.
D
They
didn't
include
any
rent
at
all,
as
Mr
steinhauser
noted
that
actually
in
the
food
and
again
they're
at
45
a
square
foot
for
that
space
of
about
I,
believe
it
was
43
000
square
feet
so
that
didn't
play
into
the
factor
of
the
the
average
of
the
leases
in
place.
D
We're
again
at
the
average
that
we
have
with
the
lower
rents
in
the
rent
row
at
38,
38
dollars
and
three
cents.
The
county
is
using
35.75
for
the
pieces
in
place.
Thank
you.
C
Sure,
yeah
and
if
I
think
I
heard
the
the
assessor
right,
he
just
said
we're
using
35.75
for
the
leases
in
place
which
does
tie
exactly
into
his
calculation.
On
page
seven,
however,
when
you
look
at
the
assessment
he's
actually
using
36.75
for
the
occupied
office
space,
so
I
think
at
the
very
least
you
know,
we
should
be
changing
that
to
35.75
for
the
occupied
space.
C
I.
Think
39.50
is
too
aggressive
for
the
vacant
office
again
keeping
in
mind.
There's
a
six
percent
concession,
Factor
I
think
the
original
the
original
that
was
used
by
the
assessor
was
37.75
and
that
would
tie
into
like
a
40
Market
rent.
C
The
last
piece
again
is
the
cap
rate.
I.
Think
this.
This
one
has
a
older
age
to
1989.
It's
a
1970
build
with
a
96
renovation
I'm
facing
a
bunch
of
capital.
Thank
you.
E
My
babies,
a
couple
points,
I
guess
but
I
think
he's
gangs
you're
going
up
20,
some
thousand
one
building
with
this
much
vacancy.
That's
not!
It
doesn't
have
a
great,
releasing
record
an
older
building
at
that,
even
if
it
did
have
some
effective
age.
B
I
said:
okay,
well,
there's
something
that
we've
missed
here
and
I
of
course
thought
it
was
the
they
can
office,
a
red
per
square
foot,
but
I
thought
the
Department's
saying
well,
we've
got
signed
extensions
and
it
doesn't
matter
that
they're
new
leases,
they've
signed
extensions
year
in
advance
for
more
than
what
the
department
is
allocating,
is
the
value
they
can
office
and
these
companies
could
have
moved
across
the
street.
You
know
a
year
from
now
and
paid
less
but
they're
staying
here.
B
So
surprisingly,
to
me,
the
value
really
is
in
that
39
range,
even
while
the
vacancy
is
increasing
in
the
building
I
I,
so
I
kept
looking
for
as
Mark
did.
Where
can
I
objectively?
Do
we
do
thing
else,
such
as
the
valuation
should
be
done?
The
only
thing
that
I
got
to
was
that
50
cents,
a
square
foot,
difference
between
column,
A
and
A
Row
a
in
column,
f.
B
E
Thing
I'd
say
about
the
releasing
of
the
existing
space
you're
not
doing
tenant
improvements.
The
tenants
aren't
running
into
the
expense
of
moving
down
the
street.
That
kind
of
makes
more
sense,
you're
thinking,
if
that
space
works
for
them.
B
A
F
G
H
The
only
problem
that
I
had
doing
that
was
I.
Look
at
both
the
same
was
the
expenses
I
think
the
talent
is
usually
a
higher
number,
so
the
only
thing
I
did
is
pretty
much
use
the
same
column
as
they've
done,
except
with
expenses
or
the
department
has
eight
dollars.
Instead
of
none.
B
A
D
Yeah
I
was
at
72
million.
F
A
No
I
think
so
too:
okay,
Mr,
panaranda
I,
believe
you've
got
some
boats
here.
H
A
Okay,
we
have
a
motion
and
I'll
second,
that
all
in
favor
hi,
okay,
it's
unanimous
so
I-
have
to
zero
the
assessments
reduced
to
71
million
nine.
Seventy
two
four
hundred
based
on
column
G,
using
the
County's
expenses
and
below
the
line,
deductions
and
cap
rate.
A
You,
okay,
the
next,
which
we'll
go
quickly,
I
believe
Mr,
Warren
I
saw
him
here.
Mr
Warren
has
asked
to
withdraw
all
of
his
cases.
Three
of
them
are
with
Mr
chicas
I,
assume
Mr
chicas.
You
have
no
no
problem
with
the
withdrawal.
A
Okay,
all
right
since
they're
all
with
the
same
I'm,
going
to
make
a
motion
to
accept
the
withdrawal
of
the
next
three
cases,
which
are
one
eight:
zero,
zero,
seven,
zero.
Three
one:
two:
eight:
zero:
zero:
four:
zero,
zero
three
and
two
eight
zero
zero
four
zero
six
six
do
I
have
a
second
to
accept
the
withdrawal.