►
From YouTube: Board of Equalization Meeting | June 27, 2023
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
A
B
Beginning
on
page,
three
of
our
analysis
is
just
a
summary
of
the
economic
property.
Three
Parcels,
a
total
value
is
49
million,
thirty,
five
thousand
eight
hundred
dollars
or
132
dollars
per
per
unit.
This
is
apartment,
complex,
Washington
and
Lee.
Apartments
page
four
breaks
down
the
assessment
amongst
the
three
different
Parcels
again,
one
parcel
has
133
units,
the
other
partial
has
126
110
in
the
in
the
final
personal
total
369
units
situated
on
12.38
Acres.
B
B
Page
Six
breaks
down
each
parcel
by
unit
type
by
building
see
the
different
unit
types
one
bedroom
two
bedroom,
there's
a
couple
of
basement
apartments.
B
Which
is
also
the
the
column
called
p
l
pro
forma
of
utilizing
the
same
data
as
or
2022
total
revenue,
five
million
693
of
all
expenses,
total
to
2
million
Five
Thirteen,
two,
seventy
seven,
which
includes
an
amount
for
Capital
reserves
and
excludes
the
real
estate
tax,
noi
3
million
one.
Eighty
two:
ninety
one.
B
Page
9
just
shows
the
the
parcel
maps
from
from
the
assessor's
office
website.
Page
10
is
the
income
approach
you
can
see.
Total
revenue
collected
was
five
million
six.
Ninety
three,
the
actual
operating
expenses
which
again
includes
Capital
reserves,
39.9
percent
or
2
million
Five
Thirteen,
two,
seventy
seven
noi
3
million
one.
Eighty
two:
ninety
one
base
capitalization
rate
of
six
percent.
The
effective
tax
rate
editor
combines
with
the
base
cap
at
7.026
is
the
overall
capitalization
rate
indicated
value.
45
million
two
hundred
sixty
four
thousand
six
hundred
dollars.
B
Page
11,
it
just
breaks
down
the
revenue
by
parcel
to
the
rent
per
total
rent
collected
by
parcel
and
it
breaks
down
the
value.
It
comes
to
the
same
value.
It's
just
splitting
splitting
apart
the
income
approach
into
the
individual
Parcels.
That's
the
the
Genesis
of
our
value
indications
on
each
parcel.
B
B
Third
tier
investment
grade
properties
and
there's
many
investment
grades
below
third
tier.
This
is
that
are
that
are
not
investment
grade
level.
This
is
still
investment.
This
is
still
an
investment
grade
level
property.
The
cap
rate
there
shown
again
highlighted
at
the
bottom
7.4.
B
This
is
a
much
much
older
property.
It's
been
well
maintained,
but
it's
certainly
a
third
tier
investment
grade
property.
There's
no
questions
about
that.
B
Washington
DC,
page
68,
the
major
Metropolitan
they
do
have
some
some
first
tier
investment
grade
information
available,
and
it
just
shows
the
differential
between
the
east
region,
the
much
bigger
region
and
the
specific
market.
So
the
major
Metropolitan
Market
of
Washington
DC
estimate
for
first
tier
investment
grade
property
cap
rate
for
apartments
is
five
percent
versus
five
point:
five
percent
for
the
region,
so
a
50
basis,
point
differential
again,
third
tier
investment
grade
property.
B
Is
it
7.4
first-tier
investment
grade
property,
a
second
tier
investment
grade?
Four
Apartments
is
at
6.5
and
I
used
six,
so
I
adjusted
that
I
went
to
the
second
tier
to
be
conservative
and
adjusted
that
down
to
six
percent
from
six
and
a
half
be
consistent
with
the
major
Metropolitan
Market
page
69
is
a
band
of
investment.
Just
another
approach
using
a
mortgage
interest
rate
of
four
and
a
half
percent
equity
return
rate
of
20
I'm.
B
Sorry,
eight
percent
performance
period
of
20
years
with
a
mortgage
term
of
25
years
with
a
65
35
Equity
to
loan
ratio
indicated
cap
rate
0.5985,
which
coincides
with
the
cap
rate
from
the
survey.
B
And
then
I'll
just
go
back
to
page
10,
which
is
our
our
income
approach.
This
is
an
income
producing
property,
the
expense
ratio
that
we
used.
39.9
percent,
that's
consistent
with
the
expenses
it's
actually
lower
than
what
is
typical
for
property
of
this
age
and
of
this
type,
a
garden.
B
The
overall
expense
ratio
for
Garden
Apartments,
Region
3,
which
includes
DC
Maryland,
PA,
Virginia,
also
West,
Virginia
and
Delaware,
a
large
region,
but
that's
that's
they're
capturing
the
expenses
for
similar
properties.
To
this,
the
average
expense
ratio,
52.1
percent
so
significantly
below
the
the
industry
average.
But
it's
consistent
for
this
property
across
the
years.
When
you
look
at
its
performance.
B
Sure,
but
just
in
in
summary,
I
would
ask
the
board
to
reduce
the
value
to
45
million
264
600.
That
represents
a
significant
increase
over
last
year's
final
assessment,
which
was
approximately
42
million
dollars.
The
evidence
clearly
supports
A
A
reduced
assessment
and
not
the
the
assessment
at
49
million
dollars,
which,
if
you
look
at
the
history
of
this
property,
going
back
to
other
Decisions
by
this
board
and
by
the
assessor's
office.
The
level
of
Revenue
and
noi
has
has
really
not
changed
that
much
it's
gone
up.
B
C
Thank
you
board
members.
Just
to
give
you
a
brief
description
of
where
this
property
is
located.
It's
off
of
Arlington
Boulevard
directly
across
from
the
Fort
Myer
base.
The
nearest
metro
station
is
0.8
miles
to
the
north.
However,
there's
lots
of
bus
stops
and
everything,
and
the
reason
why
I
bring
that
up
is
just
to
let
you
know
let
you
know
we
used
a
non-metro
cap
rate
for
this
particular
property
type,
which
is
the
garden
effective
age
of
1955.
C
Noticing
we
did
not
include
a
test
column
for
this.
After
reviewing
our
January
1
assessment
and
reviewing
the
2022
INE
that
was
submitted,
we
believe
that
our
evaluation
is
well
supported.
Take
a
look
at
the
gross
potential
income
for
about
a
hundred
thousand
less
than
what
they're
reporting
also.
So
we
used
a
standard
vacancy
rate
of
seven
percent.
Yes,
they're
experiencing
nine
point,
9.6
2.
C
But
when
you
look
at
the
egi,
it's
regi
is
not
that
much
higher
than
theirs.
It's.
C
Well,
we're
still
using
a
higher
ETI
than
theirs.
When
you
go
down
to
the
bottom
line
there,
you
take
a
look
at
the
operating
expenses.
What
we
used
for
the
January
1
assessment.
Those
expenses
are
substantially
higher
than
the
last
three
years-
I'm
sorry,
the
last
four
years,
so
that
puts
your
noi
much
lower
than
what
they're
reporting
45
out.
C
300
000.
I
also
want
to
bring
your
attention.
Yes,
the
appellant
mentions
that
this
property
is
will
take.
I
did
inspect
it
in
2021,
I,
actually
viewed
common
areas.
I
I
had
an
opportunity
to
go
in
and
inspect
us
a
couple
of
vacant
units.
You
know
a
sampling
of
units
and
they
were
well
maintained.
C
I
also
got
to
inspect
some
of
their
HVAC
systems.
You
know
things
like
that,
so
the
property
is
being
well
maintained,
but.
C
An
effective
age
of
1985,
which
is
the
original
you're
built,
but
to
further
note
that
this,
if
you
want
to
take
a
look
at
the
the
history
notice,
how
from
2019,
2000
2021
the
rent
started
or
the
rent
stayed
steady,
but
your
your
vacancy
went
up
and
that's
because
this
property
is
primarily
occupied
by
the
service
and
which
was
hit
very
hard
by
covid.
However,
they
are
recovering
if.
D
C
C
G
Only
one
thing
that
stands
out
to
me,
the
vacancy
concessions
rate
is
that
the
standard
of
the
guideline-
seven
percent-
yes,
sir,
and
and
but
through
history,
even
before
Kobe,
it's
much
higher
than
that.
But
you're
would
your
answer
be
well
I'm
bringing
it
to
the
guideline
because
they're
recovering,
because
covet's
dissipated,
because
people
go
back
to
work.
C
Right
and
also
keep
in
mind
we're
projecting
and
we
don't
have
the
two
to
when
we
value
this
property
for
January
1
and
that's
what.
G
A
C
C
On
and
ask
that
you
confirm
that
49
million
thirty
five
thousand.
B
Sure,
thank
you
again
to
the
board
for
having
this
hearing
and
just
again
to
repeat
the
assessment
from
last
year
was
about
seven
million
dollars
lower
all
these.
This
humongous
tax
increase
gets
passed
directly
on
to
the
tenants
which,
as
as
the
assessing
Department,
noted
our
comprised
primarily
of
people
in
the
service
department,
the
service
sector.
B
It's
it's,
it's
not
a
subsidized
property,
but
it's
certainly
lower
income
driven
and
the
income
approach
using
the
actual
income.
The
actual
expenses
using
a
reasonable
income
approach
comes
to
a
value
of
45
million.
264
600,
which
still
represents
a
sizable
increase
from
last
year
and
I
would
ask
the
board
to
reduce
the
value
to
to
an
increase
from
last
year
of
only
45
million
dollars,
264
000.
Thank
you.
G
Send
my
RC
Department
to
us
I
thought
that
Colin
D
was
really
a
good
column,
given
everything
they
do
at
the
time.
It's
with
one
exception
of
being
seeing
concessions.
They
have
a
long
history
and
they
don't
know
why
it
makes
no
sense
because
it
is
relatively
important,
is
in
no
shape
previous
location
and
I.
So
I
just
pulled
with
numbers
and
said
to
increase
and
I
think
this
is
a
modest
increase
to
the
to
the
2022
vacancy
concession.
G
G
G
Why
was
3
million
99
million.
A
F
A
Of
the
2022
first
year,
when
they
did
it,
so
you
know
actually
I
think
lmd
is
good.
I.
This
and
I
think
when
you
look
at
the
bottom
line,
you
know,
as
Miss
Ruskin
pointed
out.
You
know
they
use
such
a
high
operating
expense.
You
know,
and
when
you
look
at
the
noi
300
000
below
what
they
actually
did
so
just
think
from
a
standpoint
of
Equalization
to
lower
this
down
lower
than
what
they
did
in
2022.,
a
good
to
equalize
with
other
properties,
but
remember
what.
G
D
I
A
A
D
A
B
Thank
you
and
good
morning.
This
is
a
small
shopping
strip
with
three
tenants
owned
and
managed
by
combined
properties.
Mine
properties
owns
and
manages
shopping.
Centers,
like
this
property
and
larger
around
the
greater
Washington
DC
area
in
Virginia
and
in
in
Maryland
proposed
value
for
2023
is
11
million.
Seventy
thousand
three
hundred
dollars
our
indicated
value
is
nine
million.
Five
H5
is
a
summary
of
the
three
tenets,
their
their
rent.
You
can
see
Advance
Auto,
Parts,
CVS
and
Unleashed
by
Petco.
B
Their
rent
amounts
that
they
pay
thirty
seven
dollars,
forty
seven
dollars
and
forty
two
dollars
plus
they
have
reimbursement
for
the
cam
expenses
and
real
estate
tax,
and
that
is
some
further
summarized
on
Page
Six.
B
You
can
see
minimum
rent
has
been
pretty
consistent
over
the
years.
This
B
L
summary
goes
back
to
2017.
B
Effective
gross
income
is
at
its
highest
point
in
2022,
which
is
what
we've
utilized
a
million
Thirty
one
thousand
two
hundred
forty
nine
dollars
noi
towards
the
bottom.
That
has
not
changed.
We
all
know
what
inflation
has
done
with
all
sorts
of
costs,
not
only
energy
costs,
utility
costs,
Etc,
but
cost
of
employment,
so
noi
in
2017
was
784
000
in
2018
pre-covered,
802
528
dollars.
That
particular
year
is
interesting
because
look
at
2022
801,
216
noi.
B
So
it's
it's
unchanged
in
the
last
five
years,
despite
Revenue
increasing
incrementally
over
the
years
with
the
exception
of
of
2019
and
20.
B
B
Last
year
in
2000
I'm,
sorry
not
last
year
the
year
before
2022
year
in
21,
noi
was
804
760.
It
actually
dropped
from
21
to
22
from
804
to
801..
B
Page
seven
is
our
direct
income
capitalization
approach
again
utilizing
the
most
recent
year,
total
effective
gross
income,
one
million
Thirty
one
thousand
operating
expenses
without
the
property
tax,
230
000,
Capital
Reserves
at
two
and
a
half
percent
twenty
five
thousand
seven.
Eighty
one
noi
775
435
base
capitalization
rate
of
seven
percent
plus
effective
tax
rate.
1.15
total
indicated
value
via
direct
capitalization
of
nine
million
five
fourteen
five
hundred.
B
B
To
11
million
can
only
be
explained
by
the
assessor's
office,
obviously
changing
their
cap
rate,
either
that
or
using
different
expense
ratios
that
aren't
supported
by
the
actual
performance
of
the
property,
which
again
is
consistent
for
the
last
six
years.
You
can
see
it,
you
can
see
how
the
properties
performed
I
just
asked
the
board
following.
That
is
also
some
information,
including
the
P
L's.
The
rent
rolls
cap
rate
information.
B
Again,
seven
percent
is
on
the
low
low
side
for
retail
retail
is
not
the
darling
of
the
investment
Community
these
days
and
I
would
just
ask
the
board
to
reduce
the
value
to
nine
million
five.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you,
sir,
for
the
county.
I,
don't
know
if
we
have.
D
A
C
This
property,
it's
it's
got
three.
What
I
call
good
quality
tenants.
You
know
Auto
Parts,
CVS
and
Unleashed.
These
are
National
tenants,
a
couple
of
them
renewed
their
leases
last
year
and
one
of
them
the
rent,
remained
the
same,
but
the
other
one
it
had
increased.
C
When
you
take
a
look
at
it's
page,
page
three,
the
summary
page,
you
can
look
at
our
original
January
1
assessment.
The
the
rent
that
we're
using
as
compared
to
the
2022
is
just
a
little
bit
a
little
bit
less
I
take
bring
it
back
down
to
the
the
gross
potential.
Once
again,
that's.
C
What
they're
reporting
we
did
use
the
standard
stabilized
vacancy
rate
of
13
and
that's
applied
to
the
base
rent
does
not
get
applied
to
pass
through,
or
the
miscellaneous.
Okay.
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
note
that
bring
it
down
to
the
egi.
Our
egi
is
100,
roughly
a
hundred
thousand
less
than
what
they
are
reporting.
C
You
come
down
to
your
expenses.
Yes,
our
expenses
are
a
little
bit
less.
However,
we
did
talk
to
the
agent
and
that
it
did
talk
to
the
agent
about
the
expenses
and
wanted
to
know
why
for
2022
they
were
substantially
higher
than
what's
being
reported
by
the
three
years
prior
and
they
mentioned
that
they
were
resurfacing.
The
parking
lot,
which
we
consider
a
capital
expense,
not.
D
C
Expenses
are
showing
they're
showing
then
the
last
couple
of
years,
but
when
you
you
take
a
look
at
it,
you
go
down
to
the
inner
y.
Once
again,
our
noi
is
less
it's
roughly
60
000
less
than
what
the
reporting
for
the
2022
ine
and.
F
Can
I
just
add
something:
this
is
Deidre
Kelly
hi
can
I
get
everyone
to
just
turn
to
page
two
of
the
packet.
These
are
some
of
the
notes
that
the
appraiser
and
Neta
shuttles
shuttles
work
noted.
During
the
case
there
was
a
420
increase
in
maintenance
and
repair
which
we
felt
to
be.
You
know,
atypical.
F
There
was
an
actual
increase
to
the
base
rents,
3.5
percent,
compared
to
2021..
Again
we
did
use
a
stabilized
vacancy
for
this
property
at
13,
although
it
is
a
hundred
percent
occupied
and
the
sales
that
the
agent
used
were
outside
of
Arlington
I
do
recommend
when
the
board
makes
their
decision
they
actually
look
at
the
noi
for
not
2019,
2020
and
2021.
Our
NRI
for
2023
is
808
131.
F
D
Mr
loves
yeah
Lori
on
a
couple
two
quick
questions:
this
property
is
c
one
not
C2.
Does
that
enter
into
your
analysis
at
all.
G
That's
interesting
so
and
now
on
then
I'll
ask
you
a
poem
December.
This
is
total
operating
expenses.
This
is
column
f.
Your.
G
For
2023.,
why
is
given
that?
We
have
heard
testimony
that
column
e
2022,
your
the
total
operating
expenses
are
higher
than
usual
in
the
department
disputes
that
some
of
them
are
correctly
expense,
it's
so
much
higher
to
third
higher
than
that
for
2023.
What's
going
on.
B
B
D
C
Once
again,
I
just
want
to
bring
it
to
your
attention.
Column
D,
which
is
our
original
assessment.
January
1
assessment
we're
using
a
stabilized
vacancy
rate
of
13,
despite
the
fact
that
this
is
a
fully
occupied
property
and
when
you
take
a
look
at
our
noi
lower,
it's
lower
than
what's
being
reported
for
B
column
B,
which
is
2020.
C
on
C
2021,
but
more
specifically,
column
e,
which
is
the
operating
year.
2022.
look
at
the
inner
why
it's
substantially
less,
even
though
we
used
a
smaller
amount
of
expenses,
our
inner
life
is.
I
B
Sure
I'll
just
make
a
quick
comment
that
Ms
rosekin
indicated
she
considered
the
three
tenants
at
this
property
to
be
good
tenants,
National,
tenants
and
I.
Don't
disagree
with
that,
but
I'll
just
point
out:
here's
four
retailers
that
that
no
longer
exist
this
as
we
speak,
Bed,
Bath
and
Beyond
here,
one
David's,
Bridal,
Party
City
all
declared
bankruptcy
in
the
last
six
to
nine
months.
What
does
that
tell
you?
Retail
is
a
funny
game.
B
It's
it's
whack-a-mole
for
property
owners
that
own
shopping
centers
and
what
could
be
a
great
retailer
right
now
could
be
gone
next
year.
So
that's
just
a
quick
comment
about
that.
Again.
Regarding
noi,
this
property's
noi
is
is
lower
than
it
has
been
the
last
three
years.
Yes,
it
has
higher
expenses,
but
we
all
know
what
has
has
happened
with
inflation
over
the
past
two
years:
historically
high
levels
over
the
last
40
Years
of
EX,
of
inflation
up
to
eight
to
nine
percent.
B
So
yes,
that
impacts
older
properties
like
this
that
have
to
have
repairs
done
and
I
just
asked
the
board
to
reduce
the
value
to
9
million
five.
Thank
you.
A
D
I'll
go
ahead
start
it
off
I!
Think
last
year,
one
of
our
members
that
this
shopping
center
is
coupon
flipping
and
you.
F
D
The
you
know,
we've
heard
criticism
of
the
department
that
sometimes
they're
picking
and.
D
What
to
apply
when
it
comes
to
the
actual
situation
needs
to
be
there.
You
know
a
typical
standard,
but
I
think
this.
That's
value
ended
up
being
lower
due
to
the
Department
given.
H
What's
the
expenses
back
in
line
with
where
they
had
been
I've,
not
seen
I
understand
the
argument,
but
I
don't
see
the
justification.
A
G
G
Knowing
what
I
know
about
commercial
real
estate,
I
agree
with
you
about
that
retail
is
getting
risky
and
riskier
riskier
property
owners
for
sure,
but
we're
not
about
in
intuition
and
probabilities
and
Trends,
but
rather
what
happened
so
could
easily
be
we're
looking
at
all
these
things,
four
years
from
now
at
50
of
what
they
are
now,
but
it's
not
now.
It's
then,
finally,
that
that
absolutely
impacts
the
Capri
as
well
as
the
revenue.
G
G
H
And
we're
not
analyzed
the
the
potential
CBS
disappearing.
Well,
we
can't
do
that.
Yeah
and
I
I
fully
understand
that
argument
that
it's
exactly
what
you're
saying
it's
not
there.
Now
it
wasn't
on
January
1st.
No,
it's
great
we're
analyzing.
These
numbers.
E
Wants
to
this
is
only
three
tenants
show
us
scbs,
that's
traded
in
Alexandria,
Arlington
Fairfax,
with
a
higher
cap
rate
than
a
7.3
I
mean
that
would
carry
a
lot
of
weight.
You
showed
me,
copper
balls
like
that,
but
I
just
I,
don't
see
them
in
my
day-to-day
job.
I.
E
D
E
A
K
I
I'm
here
for
Grant.
A
K
All
right,
thank
you
and
good
morning,
everybody
I'm
marvini
working
with
Ryan
as
representative
for
the
owner
of
this
property.
It
may
seem
a
little
bit
familiar
I
believe
we
presented
this
one
last
year
as
well.
K
This
is
a
retail
parcel
that
is
associated
with
the
Residence
Inn
Arlington
Capital
view
in
Crystal
City.
It
is
close
to
the
DC
airport
kind
of
wedged
in
between
Route
1
and
the
train
track
tracks.
K
K
On
page
two
I'm,
sorry
page,
two,
two,
we
have
a
summary
of
the
issue,
which
is
essentially
that
this
is
a
cold
dark
shell.
It
is
100
vacant
and
the
county
is
currently
making
no
adjustments
to
their
income
approach.
To
account
for
this,
the
current
assessment
is
2
million.
Ninety
four
thousand
eight
hundred
dollars
in
comparison
to
last
year's
value,
which
was
produced
by
the
Boe
of
one
million,
seven
hundred
and
thirteen
thousand
three
hundred
dollars.
K
Our
income
approach
is
on
page
three
and
we
make
two
major
adjustments
to
the
County's
model.
One.
We
increase
the
base
cap
rate
from
6.039
percent
to
seven
percent
based
on
PWC
surveys,
which
are
included
on
Page,
Six
and
part
of
the
reason
for
this
is
to
account
for
the
fact
that
you
know
there
is
more
risk
associated
with
this
property
than
there
is
with
you
know,
similar
fully
occupied
retail,
which
would
be
applied
the
same
rate
under
the
County
model.
K
So
we
thought
that
that
adjustment
would
be
Justified
and
then,
additionally,
we
have
calculated
lease
up
costs
of
six
hundred
thousand
dollars,
roughly
which
we
deduct
below
the
line
which
results
in
our
value
of
1.25
million,
roughly
or
238
per
square
foot.
The
County's
current
value
of
almost
2.1
million
for
comparison
is
400
per
square
foot,
which
definitely
seems
high
for
a
shell
space.
K
We've
included
the
calculations
for
our
lease
up
costs
on
page
four,
where
we,
you
know,
calculate
the
present
value
of
the
rent,
loss,
leasing,
commissions
and
TI
allowance,
which
would
obviously
be
significant.
Considering
it's
a
shell
space.
The
owner
has
not
had
any
leasing
activity
at
the
property
since
they
purchased
it
in
2021.
They
bought
this
hotel
along
with
this
retail
parcel
and
the
another
nearby
hotel
as
part
of
a
portfolio,
and
essentially
they
are
the
way
they're
looking
at
it
this
this,
this
property
is
not
feasible
to
be
leased.
K
At
this
moment,
it's
like
I,
mentioned
it's
in
an
odd
location.
There's
a
couple
Office
Buildings
across
the
street,
which
hypothetically
would
give
them
some
foot
traffic
but
I.
Think,
as
we
know,
with
everything
going
on
with
remote
work,
and
you
know
very
vastly
decrease
office
occupancies.
There
really
isn't
enough
activity
in
this
area
for
them
to
get
the
tenant
that
they
want
in
the
long
term.
So
their
turn.
Their
plan
is
to
wait
until
the
apartment
buildings
across
the
street
are
closer
to
being.
K
You
know,
completed
and
stabilized,
at
which
point
they'll
be
able
to
attract
a
tenant
that
is
actually
going
to.
You
know
be
a
better,
a
better
fit
for
the
space
and
something
that'll
stay
long
term
and
you
know
achieve
the
rents
that
they
are
looking
for,
because,
right
now
you
know,
as
it
sits
it's
the
location
doesn't
really
allow
for
them
to
get
the
rents
associated
with
the
costs
for
fitting
out
this
space
completely
for
a
new
tenant.
K
So
that's
pretty
much
the
extent
of
it.
We've
also
included
the
rerc
first
tier
investment
property
survey
on
page
seven
to
further
support
our
cap
rate.
The
average
for
that
is
7.6
percent,
we're
using
seven
so
I
think
that's
a
reasonable
thing
to
apply,
but
the
real
issue
here
again
is
the
lease
up
costs.
We
agree
with
the
County's.
K
You
know
stabilized
noi
assumption
the
issue
is
that
there's
just
no
adjustment
being
made
to
account
for
the
fact
that
it's
100
vacant-
and
there
is
no-
you
know
it's
a
cold
dark
shell,
that's
pretty
much
the
extent
of
it
I've
included
an
article
here
kind
of
discussing
these.
You
know
the
challenges
of
retail,
but
ultimately
we
do
believe
that
this
space
will
eventually
be
leased,
and
you
know
the
tenant
will
hopefully
stare
stick
around
once
it
is
leased.
K
So
that's
not
really
a
you
know,
issue
of
contention
in
terms
of
the
retail
Market,
so
yeah.
We
just
asked
that
the
the
board
reduce
the
value
to
1
1
million
245
600
in
consideration
of
the
fact
that
it's
a
cold
dark,
100
vacant
retail
shell
with
no
leasing
prospects,
and
they
will
have
to
incur
significant
lease
up
costs
to
get
the
space
occupied
and
generating
income
which
it
has
not.
At
this
point,
and
that's
all
thank
you.
D
C
C
I
actually
have
been
to
this
property
a
few
years
ago.
I
actually
inspected
the
interior,
and
it.
C
At
that
annetta,
the
appraiser
for
this
appeal
this
year
she
went
out
and
inspected.
She
was
not
able
to
get
inside
and
she
met
with
macroth
a
representative
for
the
appellant
and
but
she
was
not
able
to
get
inside,
but
she
can
see
through
the
window
that,
yes,
it
is
vacant,
so
basically
we're
looking
at
our
rent.
The
rent
that
we
used
is
on
the
low
end.
Okay,
we
took
a
look
at
this.
We
go
okay,
it's
bacon,
it's
been
bacon.
C
They're
gonna
have
to,
but
we
would
look
through
our
income
expense
statements
that
have
been
submitted
to
us.
The
county
which
we
have
privy
to.
We
felt
that
the
38
square
foot
is
reasonable.
She
missed
shellesworth,
also
looked.
A
C
Co-Star
and
the
rents
range
between
37
and
45
dollars,
a
square
foot
and
forty
five
dollars
would
be
a
space
on
the
same
Elizabeth.
The
high
end
keep
in
mind
we're
also
using
a
stabilized
vacancy
rate,
nine
percent
and
we
also
applied
17
for
expenses
which
the
owner
has
no
expenses,
with
the
exception
of
the
real
estate
taxes,
which
is
so
for
this
property,
we've
built
a
our
January
1
assessment
at
2
million.
Ninety
four
thousand
eight
hundred
is
reasonable.
C
Also
keep
in
mind
this
property
sold
in
July
of
2021
for
2
billion
357
000.,
that's
about
roughly
250
000
250
000
more
than
the
assessed
value
and
that
the
the
the
buyer
purchased
the
property.
D
E
F
E
K
My
assumption
is
that
there's
some
parking
associated
with
the
hotel-
and
maybe
there
eventually
could
be
some
validation
process
with
that.
There
also
is
a
parking
parking
lot
across
the
street,
but
I
don't
believe
that
that's
public
I
think
that
that's
you
know
for
another
property,
and
so
it
would
pretty
much
as
far
as
I
know
be
limited
to
the
small
amount
of
street
parking
outside.
D
K
K
Mean
sure
so
the
base
cap
rate
I
use
is
a
seven
base,
just
7.0
loaded
loaded
with
the
tax
rate,
of
course,
so
the
overall
rate
is
8.151
percent.
K
That
gives
us
a
stabilized
value
of
one
million,
eight
hundred
and
forty
seven
thousand
eight
hundred
and
forty
nine
dollars,
and
then
we
calculated
lease
up
costs
of
602
215
dollars,
and
that
also
includes
the
stabilized
vacancy.
So
we
don't.
We
calculate
the
lease
up
costs
for
the
difference
of
that,
so
it
opposed
to
the
full
5200
square
feet.
K
We
take
out
that
nine
percent-
that's
given
by
the
county
for
stabilized
vacancy,
and
we
only
calculate
the
lease
up
costs
for
for
4763
square
feet,
because
we
do
acknowledge
that
the
county
did
give
that
vacancy
and
collection
loss,
deduction
which
is
part
of
the
guidelines
not
mistaken,
and
then
our
total
value
comes
out
to
one
million
245
600
or
238
dollars
per
square
foot.
Okay,
all
right!
Thank
you.
A
Okay,
just
to
follow
up
on
that
Mr
Ruskin.
Do
you
know
why
the
county
didn't?
Do
it
below
the
line
adjustment.
C
Or
on
General
commercial,
a
lot
of
those
below
the
line,
adjustments
developed
on
the
large
Office
Buildings,
okay
and
a
lot
of
times
you
wore
tenants,
are
going
to
be
paying
for.
F
C
D
C
H
F
At
least
not
on
co-star
I
haven't,
we
have
not
seen
an
advertisement
for
this
property,
and
so
the
rent
that
we
used
was
based
on
what
we
felt
was
a
nominal
rent
in
comparison
to
the
market
in
that
area.
K
So
the
right
now
I
think
I
I
kind
of
discussed
this.
Previously,
the
owner
does
not
see
this
as
as
feasible.
It
could
be
leased
right
now
at
a
market
rate
due
to
the
location
and
the
lack
of
foot
traffic
in
the
area.
There
are
Apartments
being
developed
across
the
street
and
their
intention
is
to
lease
it
up
as
soon
as
those
are
completed
within
the
next
year
or
so.
K
C
And
we
believe
that
our
the
rent
that
we
used
is
reasonable
for
this
shell
condition.
They're
co-star
is
showing
that
the
rent
should
be
somewhere
around
37
to
45
45,
even
more
towards
the
spent
space
side
of
it
and
once
again,
annetta
did
meet
someone
out
there
and
she
asked
if
they
were
actively
listing
this
property
and
they
said
they
would
get
back
to
her
and
they
never.
C
Also,
keep
in
mind
that
we're
applying
nine
percent
stabilized
vacancy
at
rate
and
we're
also
applying
17
in
excuse,
which
the
owner
is
not
incurring
in
the
expenses
on
this,
because
there's
no
tenant
I
think
only
expenses,
they're
occurring
it's
real
estate
taxes
and
that's
built
into.
C
We
believe
that
our
cap
rate
is
also
supported.
That
also
includes
it
did
a
bit
rate
of
0.043.
C
K
Sure
so
I
would
just
say
you
know.
I
would
agree
that
the
current
rents
being
applied
are
reasonable
code.
You
know
it's
even
above
the
bottom
range
of
what
co-star
is
saying.
We
do
acknowledge
the
vacancy
and
collection
ratio
being
applied
of
nine
percent
and
we
do
not
calculate
the
lease
up
cost
for
that
space.
K
As
a
result,
I
also
believe
that
the
expense
ratio
and
vacancy
in
collections
loss
ratio
being
applied
were
part
of
the
commercial
guidebook,
and
you
know
that,
ultimately,
when
you're
looking
at
this
property
and
leasing
it
up,
there
will
be
expenses
and
what
we're
looking
at
is
the
stabilize
operating
expenses,
not
the
current
operating
expenses
because
we're
you
know,
projecting
forward
to
get
the
stabilized
value
and
then
taking
the
present
value
of
the
lease
up
costs
to
get
the
you
know
the
value,
as
is
as
the
data
valuation
I,
would
also
like
to
mention
that
the
sale
that
was
mentioned
was
part
of
a
portfolio,
and
the
allocation
for
this
parcel
that
was
used
was
exactly
the
assessment
at
this
time.
K
So
it
has
no
indication
on
you
know
the
fair
market
value
of
the
property,
and
then,
additionally,
you
know
we
did
reach
out
to
the
owner
and
speak
with
them
about
the
leasing
situation.
However,
we
had
already
received
a
a
letter
from
the
county
sustaining
the
assessment
to
the
Boe.
So
you
know
we
didn't
see
it
necessary
to
you
know
get
back,
because
the
value
was
already
sustained
by
the
department
and
then
additionally,
I
would
just
like
to
point
out.
I.
Don't
think
that
my
colleague,
okay.
D
Yeah:
here's
the
problem
with
that
Greg,
the
602
figure
that
he
has
below
the
line
is
126
dollars
per
square
foot
of
leased
area,
which
I
think
is
high,
slow,
yeah.
G
G
D
D
E
D
E
D
A
Where
everybody
is
you.
A
Last
year,
so
I
don't
think
I
think
it
is
a
unique
property,
but
I
also
seem
to
think.
Like
we've
got
an
owner
who's
not
trying
to
rent
it
at
all,
they
can
rent
it
for
something.
You
know
they're
just
choosing
to
sit
back
and
wait
for.
A
G
Correct
and
these
guys
at
least
have
some
allegedly
some
plan
to
me.
The
602
is
perfectly
that's.
What
I
came
up
with
originally
and
I
said.
Well,
wait
a
minute,
we're
probably
going
to
be
in
this
exact
same
position.
Next
year,
it's
going
to
be
another
602
next
year
and
another
we
get
lots
of
arguments.
I
want
a
three-year
lease
up
rate.
That's
kind
of
what
this
could
be,
so
I
went
towards
the
rent
rate.
C
G
Or
whatever,
but
those
are
asking
devices-
and
this
is
the
place-
that's
been
called
our
child.
You
know,
since
I
was
in
conference
and
and
38
seems
just
way
too
high
as
a
presumption
by
the
county
and
I'm
very
modest
and
just
ran
it
at
35,
I.
G
D
H
You're
coming
from
the
county
did
go
at
pretty
much
the
low
end
of
the
range
and,
yes,
it
could
go
lower.
Yes,
either
way,
no
matter
what
it's
still
gonna
have
to
build
out,
it's
going
to
come
off
off.
There
I
think
that's
the
most
legitimately,
even
if
they
put
it
on
the
market
right
now,
today,
at
the
37
or
whatever
you're
still
going
to
have
a
build
out
yeah.
If
someone
walks
in
there,
no
one
so
there's
there's
you're
still,
you
can't
help
it
so.
G
H
K
G
Of
times
more
people
who
have
mortgages
are
not
allowed
to
put
it
up
to
rent
at
some
lower
than
some
Ventures
right.
Well,
I
think
all
of
it
30
Senator
right.
A
D
I
The
only
issue
that
we
that
I
have
with
this
is
that
you
know
they're,
really
not
a
marketing
the
property,
and
we
haven't
really
seen
this
type
of
properties
with
below
the
line
deduction.
No,
it
is
a
different
type
of
Graphics.
E
I
D
F
D
E
I
A
F
F
A
K
L
Thank
you
so
much
good
morning,
everyone
we
are
talking
about
the
Hyatt
Regency
Crystal
City,
located
at
2799,
Richmond
Highway
built
in
1981,
686,
keys
or
rooms.
L
L
This
property
again
is
is
not
immune.
Of
course.
It's
it's
struggled.
Mightily
there's
been,
you
know
a
lot
of
issues
affecting
the
industry
in
general,
but
you
know
things
have
improved
year
over
year,
but
it's
still
below
the
pre-pandemic
performance
back
in
2019..
L
You
know
this
property
also
struggles
from
issues
affecting
the
the
whole
Arlington
and
DC
Metro
region,
and
one
of
the
problems
that
it's
having
is
that
tourism,
and
you
know,
business
travel
is
actually
down
and
in
Washington
the
I'm
just
going
to
bring
a
statistic
in
there
was
the
the
a
year
ago,
51
events
in
booked
at
the
Washington
Convention
Center,
so
for
this
year,
there's
only
37
events
and
that's
down
from
56
events
back
in
2019.
L
So
you
can
see
the
business
travel
and
the
tourism
conventions
that
hasn't
really
returned
and
that's
having
an
effect
on
the
amount
of
Revenue
that
hotels
can
generate.
L
Another
issue
is
the
fact
that
the
the
slow
I
guess,
the
indefinite
suspension
of
the
Amazon
headquarters
that
was
expected
to
bring
a
big
Revenue
boost,
a
big
boost
to
the
hotel
business
in
general,
but
that
being
on
hold
right
now
that
hasn't
materialized,
and
so
that
you
know
that
whole
Amazon
second
phase
and
all
of
that
is
is
has
been
on
hold
and
that's
that's
causing
quite
an
issue
for
these
local
folks.
L
So,
anyway,
to
Value
this
property,
we
looked
at
the
actual
performance
year,
end
2022
when
we
compared
it
to
the
the
Departments
values,
and
you
can
see
that
the
revenue
is
very
close.
In
fact,
you
know
I
think
the
actual
operating
income
for
year
and
22
is
slightly
above
the
Department's
Department's
model.
But
the
problem
here
is
the
expenses.
Now
the
expenses
here
at
this
property
have
hovered
around
29
million
to
3
million
29
to
30
million,
while
this
property
is
fully
operational.
L
So
if
you
go
back
to
2019,
the
the
expenses
here
are
29
Million
968.
last
year
was
29
million
894..
So
you
can
see
that
when
the
hotel
is
operating,
the
cost
to
operate
this
hotel
is
about
29
million.
L
I
also
want
to
point
out
it
I,
don't
think
it
made
it
into
our
packet,
but
I
want
to
read
a
few
expenses
from
the
prior
years,
and
this
goes
back
several
years
before
the
pandemic,
so
in
2016
the
expenses
again
30
million
30.1
million
2017
29.9
million
2018
29.5
okay
2019
the
year
before
the
pandemic,
okay,
we're
at
30
0.8,
and
so
you
can
see
that
that
history
is
about
the
same
and
so
last
year,
which
we
had.
You
know
a
full
year
of
operations.
L
It
wasn't
severely
restricted
and
things
of
that
nature
due
to
covid
the
operating
expenses
were
29,
894,
266
or
265.
Excuse
me,
so
that
is
right
along
as
it's
always
been
every
single
year,
it's
operated
with
a
normal
operations,
and
so
we
put
that
into
our
model.
So
we
have
our
income,
which
has
been
above.
We
have
our
normal
operating
expenses
this
year
being
none
different.
L
We
put
that
into
our
model
and
we
kept
all
the
other
things,
such
as
the
other
percentages
and
the
value
for
the
personal
property,
the
same
as
the
department
when
we
removed
that
our
indicated
value
was
87,
587
715,
and
so
that
is
our
request.
We're
using
the
actual
performance
above
the
the
department,
the
actual
expenses
which
is
in
line
with
every
historical
year
that
the
property's
been
in
operation
and
this
year
is
no
different
in
that
regard.
L
L
I
mean
business
travel,
folks,
aren't
in
their
office,
and
that
may
come
back
eventually,
but
for
this
property
it
hasn't
come
back
completely
and
it's
unknown
if
that's
going
to
occur,
and
so
what
what
I'm
saying
here
is
that,
when
you're
looking
at
the
value,
it's
the
present
worth
of
the
future
benefits
derived
from
ownership
and
so
we're
just
not
100
sure
what
that
future
holds
for
us.
So
it's
it.
L
Performance
has
trended
up,
but
not
to
the
extent
that
we've
reached
the
performance
at
2019
and
not
quite
to
the
level
that
the
Department's
using.
So
thank
you
very
much.
J
Ma'am
good
morning
board
members
good
morning,
Mr
Aiden,
so
we're
going
to
focus
on
our
summary
sheets
and
I
am
going
to
ask
the
board
to
refocus
on
our
original
assessment
column
d.
We
would
like
the
board
to
consider
not
in
fact
going
with
the
revision
that
we've
originally
put
out
there
as
of
May
31st
and
I'll,
give
you
some
quick
reasoning
as
to
why
this
was
one
of
the
first
hotels
we
looked
at
in
for
review
purposes
for
the
Board
of
Equalization
hearings.
J
J
As
you
know,
we
received
the
2022
INE,
typically
sometime
in
April
or
so
of
the
following
year
after
the
projections
are
made
as
a
typical
I
started
to
make
adjustments
to
what
would
be
more
realistic
as
projection
for
the
general
one
year
based
upon
the
new
information
once
we
started
to
receive
more
of
these
appeals,
we
started
to
pick
up
on
the
tick
that
not
only
were
these
properties
outpacing,
the
average
growth
for
all
of
the
hotels
in
the
industry.
Excuse
me
in
Arlington.
J
They
were
doing
it
at
a
pace
of
you
know
triple
digit,
if
not
quadruple,
digit
growth.
That
made
us
look
back
on
the
revision
that
we
had
offered,
and
it
seemed
that
it
was
somewhat
strange
that,
after
a
year
of
eleven
hundred
percent
growth,
when
we
originally
projected
41
growth,
we
then
revised
it
down
to
35
percent
growth,
so
we're
going
to
focus
on
the
column
D
and
give
you
reasons
why
we
believe
it's
supported,
based
mostly
on
the
metrics
at
the
property
itself.
J
We
would
start
with
the
idea
that
I
believed
Mr
Rayden
misspoke
regarding
airline
travel
by
our
metrics,
that
received
pardon
the
Arlington
Economic
Development
National
Airport
travel
is
up
16
in
2022.,
we're
talking
over
470
000
additional
passages
that
came
through
that
airport.
Now,
obviously,
unless
they're
all
staying
on
a
friend's
couch,
they
needed
some
place
to
stay.
What
we
saw
as
far
as
tourism
economic
indicator,
metrics
Hotel
occupancy
in
the
county,
was
up.
J
56
percent
average
daily
room
rate
was
up,
35
percent
Revenue
per
available
room
was
up
111
percent,
then
we
looked
at
the
subject:
property
itself
and
the
property
bested
all
of
those
metrics
in
2022
alone,
2022's
occupancy
increased
77
percent.
They
are
now
within
1.3
percent
of
2019's
metric,
which
again
was
an
industry
leading
standard.
J
To
give
us
a
background
of
2019,
the
Smith
travel
research
Str
is
tends
to
be
the
industry
leader
as
far
as
these
metrics
that
we
use
for
hospitality.
The
primary
metrics
that
we
use
are
again
occupancy
average
daily
rate
and
revenue
per
available
room.
When
we
looked
at
those,
we
noted
that
again
we
are
within
1.3.
F
J
J
So
again
we
looked
at
the
individual
metrics
achieved
in
2022.
occupancy
again
Up
77
percent
average
daily
rate
up
37
percent
Revenue
per
available
room
up,
143
percent
room,
Revenue
up
143
food
and
beverage
up
285
percent
total
revenue
up
170
percent.
So
even
when
equating
for
the
operating
expenses
which
do
rise
and
fall
in
accordance
with
Revenue
at
three
percent.
Excuse
me:
101
growth.
The
noi
still
grew
by
1105
percent,
again
vastly
outpacing
the
County's
original
projection
of
41
percent.
J
Looking
again
at
just
the
idea
of
the
appellants
pro
forma
we're
seeing
that
they
essentially
matched
up
the
year
2020
with
what
they
project
will
be
made
in
2023,
so
essentially
no
growth
whatsoever,
and
in
fact,
when
you
follow
the
mass
and
look
at
the
opinions
overall
opinion
of
value,
it's
an
18
drop
year
over
year.
After
again,
growth
of
1
105
noi
growth.
J
Again,
our
original
Sesame
called
for
an
increase
of
a
fairly
modest
18
percent,
given
all
the
metrics
that
were
in
place,
we
have
to
complicate
things
a
little
bit
more
because,
as
the
board
also
knows,
our
bid
rate
complicates
things
a
little
bit
with
our
system
being
Antiquated
and
not
allowing
for
the
1000th
place
to
be
registered.
The
original
assessment
actually
rounded
that
cap
rate
to
8.54
percent.
J
We
would
in
fact
call
for
the
full
8.543
percent
to
be
applied,
which
would
bring
that
total
value
to
132
million
five
twenty
three
four
four
six.
We
then
deduct
the
personal
property
of
six
million
four
hundred
seventy
two
thousand
zero,
eight
six
that
gives
a
value
of
1260514.
J
That
is
what
we
would
ask
the
Board
of
Equalization
to
Value
the
property
at
as
of
January
1,
again,
based
on
the
metrics
in
place.
I'll
just
point
out
too,
you
have
the
same
sheet,
so
you're.
Looking
at
the
same
information
again
our
projection
for
growth
of
noi
in
2022.
Excuse
me:
2023
was
41.
The
property
itself
grew
39
in
2022.,
so
excuse
me
2021,
so
one
year
removed
from
covid
and
they
had
already
grown
almost
as
much
of
the
projection
that
we've
made
in
2023..
J
We
do
believe
that
that
God
covet
has
passed
us.
We
do
believe
that
the
business
travel
is
in
fact
up.
We
do
believe
that
all
airliners
travel
is
up.
We
believe
that
the
the
all
of
the
hotels
that
we've
seen
in
the
county
again
are
reaping
the
benefit
of
this
again.
I
would
also
remind
the
board
that
we
have
four
or
five
fewer
hotels
than
we
had
in
2019,
so
all
of
them
now
have
a
bigger
market
share
and
it
seems
like
they're
all
taking
their
piece.
J
We
do
believe
that
again,
a
value
of
126
million
51
400
should
be
applied.
Thank
you.
A
G
L
Thinking
well,
I'll
tell
you
it's
a
little
bit
well,
you
know
Chris
presented
this.
This
Boe
revision
document
to
us
earlier
in
the
month.
I
will
say
that
it's
new
information,
as
of
yesterday
at
3
30,
that
Chris
says
that
he
didn't
feel
like
they
wanted
to
support
that
number
anymore.
That
to
me
was
a
little
different.
I
haven't
experienced
that
yet
from
them
the
county
deciding
that
they
wanted
to
move
away
from
their.
You
know,
offered
revision.
L
G
L
Number,
yes
exactly:
we
we
didn't
accept
that
lower
number,
because
you
know
the
performance
it
still
was
below
what
was
being
indicated
and
the
in
the
revision.
So
we
still
felt
as
though
you
know
I
didn't
want
to
capitulate.
You
know
these
numbers
and
and
agree
that
they
were
okay
with
those
values.
I
mean
that
again,
the
expenses
were
extremely
high
in
those
issues,
so
we
decided
that
we
would
come
present
our
case
here
to
the
board.
Thank.
J
J
Lawson,
this
is
unique
proposition.
What
we
essentially
noted
was
this
was
essentially
offered
initially
offered
May
31st.
We
talked
as
a
team
deidro
Derek
myself
decided
that,
based
on
the
new
reviews,
I've
seen
that
I
could
no
longer
support
that
we
did
verbally
suggest
to
Mr
Raiden
that
since
we've
already
offered
it,
he
should
still
be
allowed
to
to
take
that
revision,
but
to
the
board.
We
would
recommend
the
original.
J
Ma'am
again
apologize
put
the
board
in
a
unique
position,
but
we
do
believe
that
we'd
rather
have
this
awkwardness,
rather
than
offer
a
value
that
we
believe
is
unsupportable
again.
Given
that
we've
seen
all
the
metrics
in
the
county
for
the
the
hospitality
wide
are
all
up
some
as
much
as
triple
digits.
Given
that
the
subject
property
itself
has
bested
all
those
county-wide
metrics
and,
in
fact,
has
increased
its
noi
growth
by
over
1100.
J
L
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
So
the
you
know
the
subject:
property
received
17.5
increase
year
over
year,
the
the
department
reports,
their
hotels
in
general,
only
receive
7.5
percent
increase.
Our
numbers
don't
support.
The
current
value.
Expenses
are
not
being
adequately
considered.
L
The
uncertainty
of
the
you
know,
coveted
situation
and
whether
or
not
they're
going
to
fully
recover
to
pre-2019.
It's
not
you
know
is
not
known,
and
so
we're
looking
at
these
actual
numbers
we're
looking
at
the
actual
performance,
and
you
can
see
that
our
expenses
have
been
in
line.
Our
revenue
is
slightly
above
what
the
department
has
said.
Numbers
have
increased.
Everybody
knows
this
place
was
essentially
vacant.
They
were
essentially
closed
for
a
couple
years.
L
So,
of
course
the
numbers
are
going
to
go
way
up
year
over
year,
but
that's
not
just
because
numbers
in
the
county
and
numbers
everywhere
have
gone
up
substantially.
That
doesn't
mean
the
actual
performance
doesn't
need
to
be
considered.
Yes,
in
theory,
numbers
have
gone
up,
it's
gonna
happen
when
the
place
is
relatively
closed
and
that's
that's
a
given,
but
we're
looking
at
the
Real
Performance.
We
have
the
numbers
here,
no
reason
to
speculate.
L
We
have
we
have
the
performance.
So
let's
not,
let's
look
at
what
the
actual
performance.
So
thank
you
so
much
I
appreciate
your
time.
Thank.
H
H
H
D
Yeah
here
let
me
share
what's
troubling
me
and
see
if
anyone
agrees
on
the
revision,
the
income
was
was
higher
than
actual
so
dropping
back
to
the
Call
of
Duty
assessment
must
probably
be
is
the
26
million
expense
number
when
the
actual
is
29,
and
then
the
revisions
30.
and
to
me
I,
think
I.
Think
if
you're
gonna
make
these
assumptions
I
think
you've
got
to
assume
the
expensive,
so
I
think
I
think
that
126
is
high.
I
I
think
it
I,
don't
think
it
should
go
down
tremendous
amount,
but.
G
E
A
A
G
Third,
one:
you
don't
want
to
use
exactly
what
the
the
penis
Colony
F.