►
From YouTube: Board of Equalization Hearing May 23, 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
C
Thank
you
am
I
coming
through
clearly
thank
you.
Thank
you
all
for
taking
the
time
and
I'm
sure
you've
already
had
a
chance
to
review
the
things
that
that
I
submitted
and
Mr
Mills
submitted
so
I
think
just
that
it
seems
like
maybe
the
underlying
issue
that's
causing
the
disagreement
here
is
that
there
aren't
that
many
homes
in
our
neighborhood
that
are,
you
know
similarly
situated
so
we've
got
a
19.
You
know
small
1950
house
and
usually
when
they
sell
they
sell
and
they're
torn
down
to
build
some.
C
You
know
enormous
thing
that
sells,
for
you
know
1.6
million
dollars
or
whatever.
So
you
know,
and
then
that's
also
kind
of
obviously
the
case
with
newer
houses
that
resell
in
the
neighborhood.
So
I
think
the
issue
is
or
maybe
that
a
lot
of
the
times
when
you
have
those
sales
and
those
teardowns
those
sales
get
classified
as
sort
of
not
market
sales,
or
you
know,
there's
some
some.
C
They
get
coded
differently,
so
then
they're
excluded,
even
though
those
are
the
most
comparable
sales
into
what
I
think
is
likely
would
happen
with
our
house.
I
mean
it's
possible
that
some,
you
know
our
house
is
livable,
someone
could
buy
it
live
in
it,
but
there's
a
better
chance.
You
know
and
as
time
goes
on
a
better
and
better
chance
that
it
will
be
sold
simply
as
a
as
a
teardown
and
in
fact
the
you
know,
the
house
is
a
negative
to
a
developer
who
buys
it
because
they
have
to
spend
money
on.
C
You
know
asbestos
abatement
and
you
know
demolition.
So
really
the
the
the
value
of
the
house
is,
you
know,
I
know
it's
not
the
County's
not
saying
the
house
is
worth
a
whole
lot,
but
it's
really
more
of
a
negative
for
some
potential
buyers.
C
So
you
know
looking
at
at
the
sales
in
you
know,
in
the
very
recent
past
there's
not
you
know,
there
are
very
few
that
the
the
county
is
willing
to
consider
it
as
sort
of
valid
comparisons.
That
I
feel
are
also.
You
know
close
closely
comparable
I.
D
C
The
maybe
the
one
that
we
agree
on
is
RPC
one:
three:
zero:
three:
nine
zero
one,
nine
five,
six
one
nine
eight
Street
North,
which
is
a
larger
lot.
It's
a
couple.
A
couple
blocks
away
larger
lot,
that
sold
for
750
000,
you
know
and
and
the
county
has
it
coded
as
a
land
sale.
But
you
know
I
looked
up
the
pictures
on
Zillow
before
it
sold.
You
know
it
was.
It
was
an
old
house.
You
needed
updating,
but
it
wasn't
like
it
was.
C
You
know
a
hoarders
house
that
that
you
know
had
to
be
torn
down.
You
could
have
supported
a
family,
so
you
know,
presumably
the
people
competing
to
buy
that
house
included
both.
You
know
families
interested
in
moving
into
our
neighborhood,
as
well
as
the
developer,
who
ended
up
buying
it
and
or
whoever
ended
up
buying
it.
You
know
and
tearing
it
down
and
building
a
larger
house,
so
you
know
and
then
the
couple
of
other
examples
that
I
cited
at
the
county
disagreed
with
you
know,
including
where
there
were
these
teardowns.
C
E
C
C
So
the
idea
that
you
know
if
you
extrapolate
from
those
dates
to
the
end
of
2022,
the
idea
that
values
would
just
kind
of
keep
going
up
and
up
and
up
as
interest
rates
are
going
up
and
up
and
up
and
the
market
overall
has
cooled.
In
my
you
know,
non-expert
opinion,
I
I,
don't
think
it's
reasonable
or
fair
to
claim
that.
D
C
I,
don't
think
it's
you
know
reasonable
or
fair
to
just
assume
that
there
would
be
no
negative
impact
on
on
prices
from
say
March
of
last
year
to
the
end
of
the
year,
with
what
was
going
on
with
interest
rates
in
particular,
so
I
think
I.
Think
that's
that's
basically
my
case
and
as
far
as
you
know,
the
number
I
know
I.
You
may
recall
that
you
know
we
appealed
in
2020
and
the
board
voted
to
reduce
our
assessment
slightly
and
then
the
following
year.
C
I
appealed
our
assessment
again
and
it
was
a
narrow
vote
that
the
board
you
know,
voted
to
confirm
our
2021
assessment
last
year.
You
know
that's
about
750,
000
I
couldn't
you're
looking
around
the
neighborhood
and
what
things
were
selling
for
I.
Couldn't
really
disagree
with
that
one.
You
know
so
I
think
that
was
a
fair
assessment.
Last
year
and
I
don't
see
you
know
for
this
year
that
there's
justification
and
for
it
to
Rise
so
substantially
from
from
the
prior
year.
So
that's
that's
my
argument.
In
a
nutshell,.
B
Good
morning
today
we
have
the
property
at
5713,
6th,
Street
North,
so
one
story,
shingo
asbestos,
two
bedroom,
two
bathroom
finished
square,
footage
of
888
basement,
finished
square
foot
of
298
year,
built
in
1950,
defective
age,
1965
and
the
quality
is
the
average
Plus
in
neighborhood
50
40
44.,
as
the
appellant
already
stated.
His
concern
is
that
the
land
value
he
believes
is
too
high,
as
well
as
the
neighborhood
land
value.
B
His
comps
that
he
listed
are
mostly
off
market
sales
or
sales
that,
where
the
the
home
is
probably
inhabitable
and
will
be
torn
down
for
new
construction
and
if
the
board
would
look
at
the
comparable
properties
that
are
listed
in
the
comparable
sheet,
you
can
see
that
we
believe
the
assessment
is
fair
and
equitable,
as
well
as,
if
you
look
down
it's
on
page
five,
the
neighboring
lots
of
the
assessment
values
with
the
6
000
square
foot
lot
are
all
equalized,
so
the
county
recommends
a
confirmation
of
the
assessment
at
804
900.
A
C
Yeah
so
I'm
not
I'm,
not
claiming
that
that
they're
using
sales
that
are
outside
the
range
that
they're
allowed
to
use
I'm
just
saying
that,
because
the
most
recent
sales
they're
using
are
from
early
2022,
you
know
and
nothing
subsequent
to
that.
That's
you
know,
those
sales
wouldn't
wouldn't
take.
You
know,
wouldn't
show
the
impact
of
rising
interest
rates
and
the
market.
That's.
A
Not
relevant
to
the
assessment,
as
of
January
1st
of
this
year,
the
standpoint
of
Equalization,
they
have
to
pick
a
period
of
time
that
they're
pulling
sales
from
so
they're
pulling
those
sales
from
that
period
and
then
assessing
it.
Based
on
that
anything
after
that
period
would
be
subsequent
years.
C
Right
but
I'm
saying
the
the
end
of
the
period
you
know
had
there
had
there
been
sales,
you
know
in
say,
August
of
last
year,
that
would
have
been
in
that
period.
I
think
you
know
it's
just
rational
to
believe
that
those
would
have
shown
an
impact,
a
negative
impact
from
rising
interest
rates,
and
you
know
General
market
cooling
so
but
I'm
not
I'm,
not
disputing
that
the
county
is
using
something
outside
what
they're
allowed
to
just.
F
A
question
for
the
Department
are
actually
two
first,
one
did
I
understand
correctly,
that
probable
or
obvious
teardowns
are
not
considered,
are
considered
something
other
than
hands
off
arm
distance
sales
and
shouldn't
be
considered
as
legitimate
comparables.
B
F
So,
for
instance,
if
a
developer
goes
in
and
makes
it
or
anybody
knows
anything,
that's
of
course
not
arm's
life,
but
if
it
is
listed
and
a
developer
comes
in
in
the
house,
for
instance,
talking
about
the
on
page
two,
the
where
you
have
in
capitalize
inside
home
cannot
be
seen
at
this
moment.
It's
an
obvious
tear
down,
and
you
know
a
corporate
entity
bought
it
and
whatnot.
Would
you
use
that,
though,
as
given.
B
B
As
the
agent
put
you
know
that
property
is
going
to
be
torn
down,
so
we
consider
it
all
within
the
within
the
analysis.
You.
F
Do
okay,
so
my
second
question
is
this:
I
want
to
make
sure
this
is
right,
your
comparable
two
on
page
three-
and
this
again
is
probable
and
turned
out
to
be
tear
down
both
have
the
same
size.
Slots
I
mean
200
square
feet
and
they
are
both
assessed.
As
you
can
see
on
page
three,
that
I
looked
it
up
for
the
the
teardown
7
200
square
feet,
commands
of
land
price
of
749
500,
which.
F
F
The
appellants
much
smaller
a
lot.
F
B
I
guess
to
expound
some
more.
What
we
do
is
for
the
land.
We
have
an
average
square
footage
for
the
for
the
neighborhood
and
anything
below
the
average.
So
if
that
home
has
a
below
average
square
foot
lot
size,
we
give
a
a
increase
of
18.
We
use
a
factor
of
18,
so
increase
18
per
square
foot
on
that
land
assessment
and
anything
above
the
average
square
foot.
For
that
neighborhood
we
give
a
discounted
rate
of
18
per
square
foot.
B
C
All
right,
thank
you,
so
I
I
think
Mr
mask
is
hitting
on.
You
know
part
of
the
issue
here,
which
is
that
the
different
lot
sizes
you
know
in
the
context
of
something
that's
being
torn
down.
You
know
it's
not
just
a
simple
sort
of
you
know
ratio,
because
if
you
have
a
you
know
a
6,
000
square
foot
very
narrow,
so
40
foot
wide
150
foot
long
lot
like
ours
versus
a
wider
lot.
C
In
the
case
of
some
of
the
other,
the
other
properties
that
you
know
the
even
the
county
is
using.
You
can
build
them
and
the
purpose
is
a
tear
down.
You
can
build
a
much
larger,
much
more
attractive
house
on
that
kind
of
property.
So
it's
not
simply
saying
you
know
it's
10
percent
larger.
Therefore,
the
you
know
the
land
assessment
should
be
10
higher
you
as
a
developer.
The
premium
you
know
I
would
imagine
it
would
be
much
greater
with
you
know,
with
a
not
only
large
but
also
wider
a
lot.
C
So
you
know
I
know
this.
You
know
this
is
probably
far
beyond
what
the
board
would
ever.
You
know
plan
to
do
absent
that
you
know
major
issue,
but
I
think
it's
you
know
wouldn't
be
crazy,
wouldn't
be
crazy
to
say
that
the
entire
neighborhood,
maybe
over
in
the
land
assessments
may
be
higher
than
what
they
should
be.
A
D
E
E
And
start
I
do
think.
The
lot
is
overvalued.
F
I
think
the
concept
of
buildability
makes
a
lot
of
sense,
I'm,
not
sure
that
I
recall
and
my
recall
it's
not,
but
in
my
judgment
but
I,
don't
know
that
we've
ever
gotten
other
than
purely
not
buildable,
big
slope
stream.
That,
of
course,
you
make
adjustments
for,
but
just
curb
appeal,
I,
don't
think.
F
It
up
and
we
don't
bring
it
up.
I'm
sympathetic
item
I-
think
that's
it.
This
is
I'm
surprised
that
tear
Downs
in
this
neighborhood
are
going
through
such
handsome
sales
values,
but
they
are,
they
are
what
they
are
and
we
look
at
the
appellants
Improvement
pretty
much
as
low
as
it
gets
in
Arlington
County
Indiana,
that's
yeah
and
we've
seen
unhabitable
higher
than
this.
So
as
sympathetic
as
I
am
I
I.
A
G
A
D
I
I
J
D
D
C
A
A
J
A
A
K
Sounds
good!
Thank
you.
Everyone
for
your
time,
I
really
appreciate
it.
I
think
I'll
go
into
the
two
areas
of
contention
with
the
property
value
assessment.
Our
first
contention
is
that
the
property
was
not
appraised
in
a
matter
Equitable
with
similar
properties.
During
the
analysis
period.
You
know
our
town
home
is
1584
square
foot
above
grade
with
an
additional
792
square
foot
and
a
lower
level
for
a
total
of
2
376
square
footage
with
no
garage,
and
what
I
noticed
is
that
this
is
this
town.
K
Home
is
identical
to
all
12
units
in
the
Tuckahoe
planned
Urban
Development,
which
are
mostly
assessed
at
around
820k
to
850k
I,
believe
I
attached
some
comparable
assessments
of
a
similar
and
unit
properties.
I
also
note
that
the
Sycamore
Heights
development
we
sure
are
streets
with
to
more
heights,
were
all
built
around
the
same
time
1976..
These
are
they're
on
Tuckahoe
streets,
22nd,
Street,
North
and
North
Somerset,
and
they
also
contain
many
three
level
Town
Homes
similar
to
ours.
K
So
I
want
to
specifically
note
one
of
those
Townhomes
6514
22nd
Street
north,
so
that
one
had
a
sales
price
around
the
same
time
as
when
I
purchased
on
this
property
last
year
on
April
19
2022
it
sold
for
935
000
and,
to
be
honest,
when
I
was
making
my
offer.
I
actually
used
this
home
as
kind
of
The
Benchmark,
to
determine
what
ice
the
offer
for
this
house,
but
I
noticed
that
its
assessment
was
only
879,
300.
K
K
And
if
you
look
at
the
other
town
homes
in
Sycamore,
Heights
you'll
also
see
that
the
typical
range
is
into
820
to
850k,
with
the
max
that
I
found.
I
didn't
look
at
all
of
them
to
be
honest,
but
then
backs
that
I
found
and
that
I
focused
on
is
the
6514
22nd
Street.
K
North
I
also
want
to
point
out
that
my
town
home
was
assessed
in
the
similar
range
to
all
these
Town
Homes
as
of
last
year
at
820k,
which
didn't
differ
from
the
typical
ranges
of
the
town
homes
in
these
communities
and
I.
Understand
that
the
assessments
also
deter
are
depend
on
the
effective
age
of
the
property
and
how
much
the
property
is
renovated,
despite
having
disabled
features
in
terms
of
bathrooms,
bedrooms
Square
footage,
but
you
know,
I
pointed
out
6514
a
22nd
Street
North
was
more
recently
renovated.
K
D
K
Most
of
the
renovations
were
was
done
during
the
previous
sale
in
2017
and
the
previous
owner
didn't
maintain
many
areas
of
the
home.
I
have
an
email
from
the
sellers
stating
I'm.
Sorry
I,
don't
have
complete
knowledge
of
the
house,
as
we
did
not
spend
much
time
there
when
we
moved
in
I
added
all
the
window
treatments,
the
dining
area,
Chandelier,
the
new
large
kitchen
window,
as
well
as
tearing
down
the
walls
which
separated
the
living
room
from
a
hallway.
K
D
K
Add
18
years
to
the
effective
age
of
the
home,
now
I'm,
not
the
expert
at
how
effective
age
is
calculated,
but
I'll
leave
that
piece
of
evidence
and
let
you
decide
if
18
years
is
an
appropriate
adjustment,
and
so
that
concludes
the
part
where
we're
looking
at
how
it's
relative
to
the
other
homes,
but
I
also
disagree
with
one
of
the
sales
comparables
used
by
the
department.
K
So
I
agree
with
two
of
the
ones
they
sent:
2229
North
Tuckahoe
with
a
sales
price
of
810
000
on
July
19th
and
6514
22nd
Street
North,
with
the
sales
price
of
nine
hundred
thirty
five
thousand
I
believe
these
are
both
good
comparables
I
disagree
with
the
use
of
six
five
one:
four
one
Washington
Boulevard,
which
sold
for
1.145
million
on
March
31st.
K
So
this
one
is
2640
square
feet.
All
Above
grade
has
a
parking
garage
for
for
two
group
cars
and
was
built
much
more
recently.
High
ceilings,
a
quick
look
at
all
the
town
homes
in
this
community
will
show
that
they're
at
a
different
class
above
the
ones
in
Tuckahoe
Parks
party,
in
Sycamore,
Heights
development,
with
high
ceilings
and
overall
modern,
build
I'd
love
to
live
there,
but
unfortunately,
that
wasn't
in
my
price
range,
but
I
did
suggest
the
third
comparable.
K
Two
two
two
two
two
one:
seven
North
Somerset
Street
in
Sycamore
Heights,
this
sold
for
850
000
on
August,
17th,
I,
apologize,
I,
think
I
wrote
the
wrong
date
in
my
appeal
and
but
I
think
this
list.
Town
home,
is
a
much
closer
assessment
to
the
ones
that
I
to
the
other
two
and
you
know
from
listening
in
I,
can
tell
that
the
board
cares.
A
lot
about
Equalization
I.
Think
the
strongest
piece
of
evidence
that
I'm
presenting
is
the
is
the
6514
22nd
Street
north.
K
You
know
it's
sold
for
the
exact
same
sales
price
and
for
the
large
difference,
then
the
assessed
value
I
think
that's
the
one
that
I'm
having
trouble
taking
issue
that
I'm
still
having
issues
with
and
based
off
of
my
assessment.
I
think
it
should
be
slightly
lower
than
that
that
assessment
I
would
be
fine,
I
think
a
fair
assessment
would
be
870
000.
L
Please
good
morning
board,
so
this
property
is
a
three-story
Bridge
veneer,
siding
town
home.
It
has
four
bedrooms:
three
full
baths:
one
and
one
and
a
half
bath
the
year
belt
is
1980
and
effective
ages.
2008.
the
quality
is
very
good,
plus
and
finished.
Square
footage
is
227
and
776..
L
This
is
an
end
unit,
so
that
pellant,
as
you
already
expressed,
feels
their
assessment
values
above
the
current
market
value
and
they
stated
that
comparable
sales
or
similar
size
and
build
have
build,
have
sold
significantly
less
than
the
latter
half
of
2022
and
early
2023.
L
The
appellant
provided
three
sales
comps
for
Town
Home
properties
and
they
Json
development
built
at
the
same
time
and
of
similar
size
and
amenities.
They
also
provided
four
other
end
unit
properties
and
their
tax
assessment.
However,
as
part
of
the
department
review,
we
used
three
of
the
sales
comps
that
pellen
provided
RPC
11005105,
which
was
sold
in
January
of
2023.
This
was
outside
our
analysis
period
and
the
record
has
since
been
updated
to
reflect
the
current
state
of
the
house,
and
the
effective
age
has
also
been
changed
to
1996..
This
is
outside
is.
L
This
is
also
outside
of
the
appellants
neighborhood
50
1811
RPC
11005066
was
sold
in
August
of
2022
for
850
000
and
is
being
assessed
at
828.
This
was
an
open
market
cell
sale
and
the
finished
square
footage
is
2442..
This
is
a
center
unit
and
it's
also
a
neighborhood
50
18
11,
with
an
effective
age
of
99
96..
L
L
This
sale
was
used
in
the
Department's
review,
as
he
stated
finished
square
footage,
for
this
is
six
1628,
and
this
is
also
a
center
unit.
It
is
also
a
neighborhood
50
1886
and
the
effective
ages.
1998..
L
The
difference
in
value
between
the
subject
property
and
the
comps
provided
is
due
to
the
fact
that
the
subject
property
has
a
much
recent
effective
age
compared
to
the
rest.
The
parents,
neighborhood
50
18,
changed
on
average
by
2.1
percent
due
to
sales
that
occurred
within
the
analysis
period
and
unfortunately,
for
this
neighborhood
there
was
only
one
sale,
which
is
the
sale,
which
is
the
subject
property
in
question.
So
the
properties
quality
is
a
very
good
plus,
which
is
in
line
with
the
neighborhood.
L
This
neighborhood
only
has
12
Town
Homes
and
there
will
and
the
department
uses
sales
inspections
to
update
records
with
work
that
has
been
done
on
properties
and
the
time
between
when
it
was
last
inspected,
but
in
the
absence
of
sales
and
in
an
abton
and
an
attempt
to
make
sure
we
have
updated
information
in
our
records,
I'll
be
going
over
by
door
to
verify
any
interior
updates
to
that.
Just
so
that
adjustments
can
be
made
to
the
effective
ages
of
the
other
properties.
L
Additionally,
end
units
usually
have
highs
their
ability
as
compared
to
Center
units,
which
is
why
that
balanced
property
was
sold
at
a
higher
price,
and
so
is
its
assessment.
The
interior
and
extreme
of
the
subject.
Property
was
inspected
and
photographs
were
taken
and
the
workers
have
been
updated
since,
in
conclusion,
Arlington
County
assesses
property
is
100
prayer
market
value,
this
property
sold
for
935
000.
It
is
being
assessed
at
99
400.,
an
amount
we
believe
is
fair
and
Equitable.
L
H
D
H
Square
feet
and
the
comp
that
he
feels
is
most
comparable
was
only
1637.
but
as
I'm
looking
at
this
I'm
wondering
if
the
bit
finished
basement
has
been
added
into
that
upper
number,
because
that's
about
what
the
differences
are,
so
that
puts
them
all
back
at
equal.
Is
that
correct?
It's
not
a
finished
feed.
The
Finish
facing
space,
one
is,
has
been
added
into
the
total
finish
basement
or
total
finish
house.
H
L
K
Yeah
I,
don't
know
exactly
what
it
is,
but
I
did
notice,
6514
22nd
Street
when
I
looked
it
up
on
Redfin
said
that
it
was
818
square
foot,
Fergie,
finished
basement,
so
I'm
not
sure.
If
there's
a
discrepancy
with
the
records
I
do
want
to
point
out.
For
these
three
level,
town
homes
or
lower
levels
are
very
similar.
They
have
one
side
that
faces
that
faces
goes
out
to
a
patio
or
a
deck
area.
That
is
level
with
the
ground.
K
The
other
side
is
where
it's
a
little
different
mine
is
like
halfway
below
grade.
Some
of
them
is
completely
below
grade,
but
I
think
for
the
purposes
the
square
footages
should
be
very
similar.
Okay,
that
was
verifying.
J
H
F
Have
one
perhaps
two
questions
for
the
Department
did
I
hear
that
for
this
year
the
affected
age
has
I
I.
F
A
L
Yes,
normally,
when
we're
picking
up
sales,
we
look
at
the
changes
that
have
been
made
to
properties
and
then
we
we
changed
the
effective
age
depending
on
what
updates
have
been
made
to
the
property.
So
we
have
a
guideline
that
the
county
uses
to
add
the
effective
ages.
F
L
Yes,
so
we
added
18
years
to
the
effective
age
to
bring
it
to
2018.
L
L
Yes,
the
updates
that
were
made
and
I
think.
Prior
to
this
there
was
a
sale,
but
a
lot.
A
lot
of
the
changes
hadn't
been
picked
up,
so
our
debt
was
added
to
the
property
and
the
kitchen
was
remodeled.
L
L
So
normally
we
update
our
records
when
sales
data
when
sales
come
on
the
market.
That's
when
we
recognize
the
changes
and
we
change
our
effective
ages
using
what
we
see
and
the
inspections
that
we
do
in
the
field.
F
J
A
L
Yes,
so,
although
there
was
only
one
sale
in
the
neighborhood,
which
is
a
subject
property
which
is
being
assessed
at
15
000
below
the
sale
price,
we
believe
this
solidifies
the
approach
the
department
uses
to
develop
to
derive
assessed
values.
L
So
it
is
for
this
reason
that
we're
asking
the
the
board
to
confirm
the
2023
assessment
to
919
400..
Thank
you.
Thank.
K
I'm
sure
I
just
wanted
to
answer
that
question
that
was
brought
up
because
I
think
that
was
a
great
Point.
If
you
look
at
page
8
on
the
boa
memo,
it
does
show
that
the
department
applied
to
a
25-year
update
to
the
effective
age
when
it
was
last
sewed
on
October
20
2017.
K
I
mentioned
in
my
remarks.
Some
of
the
updates
that
seller
has
made
they
updated
the
window,
treatments,
the
dining
area
Chandelier
and
they
didn't
up
renovate
the
whole
kitchen
they,
but
they
changed
out
one
of
the
bay
windows
to
this
larger
kitchen
window
and,
like
I,
said
I
really
like
these
improvements,
I
Just
Disagree
that
it
adds
an
effective
18
years
to
the
property,
so
yeah
I,
just
I,
wanted
to
thoroughly
answer
your
question
on
that.
K
F
F
E
I,
you
know
I
initially
thought
that
the
department
had
it
right.
That's
for
the
life
of
me,
I
can't
figure
out
why
65-14
is
so
much
less
than
subject
yeah
I'm
trying
to
come
up
with
a
reason.
Why
why
it's
worth
that
much
less,
it's
40
grand
less
than
I,
just
can't
figure
out
why
yeah
I
went
actually
pulled
up
on
the
phone.
E
You
know
the
picture
of
it
and
6514
is
an
interior
again,
but
it
has
a
slightly
bigger
yard.
I
mean
it
has
a
very
hard.
Yet
it
doesn't
because
it's
cornered
a
lot
is
that
worth
40
Grand
in
the
townhouse,
so
I
don't
know,
I,
look
for
guidance
from
others.
I
Yeah
these
movements
were
made,
but
the
effective
page
increase
I
think
it's
just
way
different
than
anything
else
and
I'm
sure
the
other
function
were
also
renovated.
I
looked
at
all
the
13
homes
that
are
there.
I
I
That
the
opponent
had
last
year
this
year
it
was
almost
increased
to
a53,
853,
14
and
number
one.
That
is
because
it
says
five
thousand
dollars
more
of
an
application.
8500,
so
I
think
it
is
I.
Don't
really
see
that
you
know
just
because
this
whole
song,
Totally
renovated
or
in
very
good
condition,
that
all
of
a
sudden
will
be
the
highest
assist.
H
I
F
F
Comparable
cities
were
given
the
circumstances
and
I
agree.
It
ought
to
go
down.
I,
don't
I,
don't
agree
with
you
down
that
much,
for
instance,
to
the
level
of
Improvement,
because
it's
an
end
unit
and
we
know
sometimes
Donald
communities
and
units
matter
sales
price,
and
sometimes
they
don't,
and
we
don't
have
enough
data
to
know
one
way
or
the
other
we
didn't
just
assume
is.
E
F
Sometimes
it's
the
side
and
it's
not
depends
on
the
street.
It's
just
anyway.
I
I
would
like
to
go
down
too
and
I
was
just
thinking
just
split
the
difference
between
the
Improvement
I
didn't
do
the
arithmetic,
instead
of
going
all
the
way
down
competitions,
pretty.
D
F
I
A
A
E
F
D
F
E
F
55,
of
what
the
building
five
percent
of
the
409
400.
just
something
down
lower,
but
not
equal
to.
A
D
A
All
right,
the
next
property
that
we're
going
to
look
at
is
rpc23013012
4500
South
4th
Street.
It
was
Carol.
You
can
start
with
your
eight
minutes
and
tell
us
about
this
property.
M
Thank
you
very
much
ma'am.
Thank
you.
All
Mr,
Jacobs
and
I
purchased
this
house
in
October
of
2022.
the
house
had
been
vacant.
The
previous
owner
had
passed
away
in
November
of
2021,
as
we
mentioned
in
our
filing.
The
house
was
not
in
a
livable
condition
in
October
of
2022.
When
we
purchased
it,
the
house
was
full
of
mold.
M
The
utilities
were
not
working
and
the
prior
owner,
his
executor,
had
to
replace
the
HVAC
and
when
we
purchased
the
house
a
part
of
our
mode
as
part
of
our
making
it
livable
was
to
not
just
completely
do
a
mold
remediation
throughout
the
house,
which
required
a
gut
demolition
of
the
basement,
but
we
also
had
to
replace
the
water
as
well.
The
heating
water
heater,
as
well
as
a
lot
of
the.
M
And
electrical
the
electrical
was
completely
un
hazardous,
so
so
we
purchased
the
house
for
689
000
583
dollars,
which
was
the
price
that
included
the
cost
that
the
executor
had
paid
for
replacing
the
HVAC
unit.
M
So
we
were
a
little
bit
surprised
at
the
assessment,
because
the
time
frame
was
immediately.
I
I
recognized
that
the
assessment
is
looking
at
a
time
frame
of
July
2021
to
June
30th
of
2022,
but
part
of
that
time
period.
That
was
under
the
assessment
this
particular
house
was
unlivables,
so
the
the
value
of
the
property
as
a
whole
reflected
is
reflected
in
the
purchase
price
that
we
paid
for
it
four
months
after
or
three
months
after
the
the
assessed
period.
The
last
of
the
assessed
period.
M
I'd
also
note
that
the
house
is
a
two-bedroom
one-bath
above
square
feet.
Excuse
me
above
ground
main
floor.
It
is
an
unfinished
basement
without
any
additional
bathroom.
The
comparables
that
are
listed
in
the
assessment
are
all
different.
They
have
either
three
or
four
bedrooms,
and
each
of
them
is
in
livable
condition,
so
I,
don't
believe
any
of
the
comparables
are
comparable
to
the
house
during
that
time
frame.
Keeping
in
mind
that
it
was
a
vacant
property,
nobody
was
living
in
it
and
as
soon
as
it
was
sold,
we
couldn't
live
in
it.
M
We
had
to
wait
at
least
two
months
after
our
closing
before
we
were
able
to
complete
just
making
it
to
a
livable
status.
So
I
would
respectfully
request
that
the
board
reassess
the
r
assessment.
G
Please
good
morning
board
this
property
had
an
interior
and
exterior
inspection
on
March
3rd
of
2023
with
Tressa
Vitus.
The
property
is
a
one-story,
brick
veneer
home
with
two
bedrooms
and
one
full
bathroom.
The
basement
is
unfinished
the
year
built
is
1952
an
effective
ages,
1970
with
the
quality
of
average
plus
and
the
finished
square
footage
being
1514
accounting
for
the
corrections.
So
we
did
correct
the
property
based
on
the
visit,
because
we
did
have
incorrect
information
going
out
there.
G
Originally
the
sale
occurred
on
October
20th
of
2022
for
689
583,
and
it
was
an
estate
sale.
The
appellons
neighborhood
increased
on
average
4.5
percent
due
to
sales
that
occurred
within
the
analysis
period
and
within
the
neighborhood,
the
subject.
The
subjects
change
was
right.
In
line
seeing
a
4.4
increase
in
total
assessment
value
from
2022
to
2023.,
the
property
was
inspected
and
changes
were
made
to
the
bedroom,
count,
bathroom
count
and
number
of
fireplaces.
G
Although
the
changes
to
the
interior
details
of
this
home
are
usually
factors
that
would
reduce
the
Improvement
value,
many
exterior
features
like
the
Improvement
itself
and
decking
in
the
rear
of
the
home
were
not
reflected
on
the
property
record
card.
After
completely
updating
the
property
record
card,
the
net
change
was
a
slight
increase
to
the
rebuild
cost
of
the
home.
Following
the
inspection,
the
property
record
was
updated
to
reflect.
What
is
there
and
the
interior
details
of
the
home
and
sales
columns
were
sales
comps
to
confirm.
G
Subject
are
referenced
on
page
four
of
the
package,
and
these
are
all
sales
that
occurred
during
the
analysis
period.
As
a
result
of
the
review
and
the
inspection,
the
property
record
is
now
correct
and
reflects
the
subject's
single
bathroom
in
two
bedrooms.
In
fact,
if
you
look
at
the
building
value
row
of
the
comp
sheet,
you'll
notice,
the
subject's
Improvement
value
is
in
line
and
equalized
with
other
dwellings
in
the
neighborhood.
G
F
G
Yes,
So,
based
on
when
we
went
out
there
for
the
review,
we
had
made
changes
to
the
number
of
bedrooms,
the
bathroom
count
and
the
number
of
fireplaces
that
were
low,
that
were
located
inside
the
home
and
it
actually
did
cause
a
decrease
in
value,
but
due
to
the
fact
that
the
Improvement
had
not
been
sketched
and
the
and
the
decking
of
the
home
hadn't,
it
actually
kind
of
counteracted
the
value.
Unfortunately,
so
there
was
we
did
correct
it,
which
would
have
caused
a
decrease
in
value.
G
Correct
because
it
actually
caused
a
slight
increase
in
value.
So
when
we,
when
there
is
an
increase,
we
don't
in,
we
don't
change
the
value,
we
keep
it
whatever.
It
was
for
January
1st
all
right,
so
there's
been
you're
going
with
what.
E
Questions
yeah,
quick
question,
I
guess
for
the
owner
was:
is
this
property
listed.
M
It
was
not
listed,
but
we
were
not
the
only
purchase
offer
that
the
executor
considered
their
head.
The
executor
had
been
negotiating
with
other
folks
and
in
fact
we
were
competing
with
a
developer,
who
also
wanted
to
purchase
the
property.
But
the
developer
was
unwilling
to
pay
for
the
the
out-of-pocket
expense
that
the
executor
had
to
pay
for
the
HVAC
unit
that
he
had
to
put
in
and-
and
that
was-
and
we
were
willing
to
pay
for
that.
M
That
was
one
of
the
reasons
why
we
paid
more
that
the
original
sales
price
was
going
to
be
675,
but
we
agreed
to
wrap
in
the
amount
of
debt
and
pay
off
the
HVAC
that
the
executor
had
put
in,
because
you
know
that
was
our
one
agreement.
But
so
we
were
not
the
only
ones
they
were
I
know.
M
The
executor
had
a
number
of
other
offers
that
he
was
communicate
meeting
with
at
the
time,
but
he
was
also
trying
to
sell
another
property
in
the
neighborhood
which
was
not
being
sold,
and
he
would.
He
was
recognizing
that
it
was
going
to
be
a
little
bit
more
difficult,
at
least
during
the
time
frame,
keeping
in
mind
with
the
increases
in
interest
rates
and
the
decreasing
in
values
and
the
condition
of
the
house.
He
was
having
difficulty
let.
E
M
G
Okay,
thank
you.
The
subject
still
assess
value.
863
900
again
is
equalized
with
comparable
properties
and
is
a
fair
opinion
of
market
value,
given
the
other
open
market
sales
that
occurred
within
the
analysis,
so
the
department
recommends
that
the
subject's
value
of
863-900
be
confirmed
as
fair
and
Equitable.
Thank
you.
M
You
we
would
respectfully
request
that
you
reconsider
and
bring
the
assessment
more
in
line
with
what
the
actual
market
value
is
of
the
property.
I
recognize
that
this
was
a
sale
through
an
Executor,
but
the
executor
had
been
at
the
time
trying
to
sell
another
property
in
the
neighborhood
and
wasn't
able
at
740
000
to
sell
that
property.
M
So
there
was
a
reason
that
we
were
able
to
obtain
this
house
for
the
price
the
the
executor
was
trying
to
get
the
best
price
he
could,
but
the
house
was
unlivable
and
I
would
request
that
that
be
taken
into
account.
As
for
the
additional
deck
I'd
note
that
it
is
rotting
and
we're
going
to
have
to
replace
that
had
we
had
the
money,
this
would
have
been
a
tear
down
house
and
I.
Think
this
is
along
the
lines
of
some
of
the
other
arguments.
M
A
F
Follow-Up
was
that
we
have
the
appellants
searching
that
it
wasn't
livable
and
there
was
lots
of
upgrades
but
basic
infrastructural
upgrades
that
needed
to
occur
now.
The
department
couldn't
know
that
one
way
or
the
other
was
enlisted.
Nobody
knows
if
that
were
the
case,
then
of
course
the
improvement's
worth
less
than
what
we
have
here
on
the
assessment.
I
don't
want
to
get
into
what
the
department
found
in
March
of
2023
we'll
work
that
out
next
year,
it's
a
great
year.
F
So
my
the
assertions
are
correct:
I
I'm
asking
do
we
go
with
that?
Clearly,
the
improvement's
worth
less
than
the
123.
kept
as
a
benchmark.
Looking
it's
got
to
be
close
to
the
first
developments.
The
first
appellants
Improvement
not
terribly
far
away
same
part
of
the
county,
comparable
kind
of
improvement.
You.
F
Be
worth
so
much
more
60
more
than
that
one.
So
I
was
in
my
mind.
If
we
take
the
tones
assertions,
that's
correct,
then
we've
got
to
get
it
down
to
that
other
level.
Somewhere
I
mean
that's
my
Benchmark,
you
might
solve
it
instead
of
just
going
that's
the
number
I
come
with,
which
is
about
47
000
left,
but
do
we
take
the
most
key
that
we
take.
H
H
D
H
E
F
F
A
I
I
I
J
F
But
you
know
media
maximum
25
reduction.
F
I
How
much
did
you
get
Jose
20
of
the
vegetable
and
Improvement
would
be
99
20.
I
I
H
H
G
Okay,
good
morning
again
board
this
property
was
inspected
interior
and
exterior
on
4
20
23
with
tressivitis.
The
property
is
a
one
and
three
quarter
story:
cement,
fiber,
siding
single
family
home
with
four
bedrooms,
two
full
baths
and
finished
basement
the
year
built
is
1947
and
effective
ages.
1997.
the
quality
is
good
and
the
finished
square
footage
is
1
680.,
the
lands
square
footage
is
6809
in
the
review
application.
The
appellant
feels
the
value
is
unfair
due
to
values
listed
on
redfinzillow,
realtor.com
and
other
websites
in
the
Board
of
Equalization
application.
G
The
appellant
stated
that
the
updates
done
to
the
home
and
the
values
value
spent
does
not
equate
to
the
market
value
comp
submitted
by
the
supply.
The
by
the
appellant
were
reviewed
in
the
following
were
were
noted:
five
zero
one:
four:
twenty
Third
Street
South,
this
property's
land
is
6825,
which
is
slightly
larger
than
the
subject
and
has
a
higher
assessed
land
value
of
554
900
and
the
Improvement
has
a
lesser
quality
than
the
subject.
Therefore,
having
a
lesser
assessed
value,
there
is
no
recent
sale
price
and
the
assessed
value
is
746.
G
300.5054
22nd
Street
South,
this
property's
land
is
6912.
Which
is
higher
than
the
subject
and
has
a
higher
assess
land
value
of
555
900..
The
Improvement
has
a
lesser
quality
than
the
subject.
Therefore,
having
a
lesser
assessed
value-
and
there
is
no
recent
sale
price,
the
assessed
value
is
709.
200.,
5048,
22nd,
Street
South,
this
property's
land
is
6502.
Which
is
less
than
the
subject
and
has
a
lower
assessed
land
value
of
551
000..
The
Improvement
again
has
a
lesser
quality
than
the
subject.
G
Therefore,
having
a
lesser
assessed
value,
there
is
no
no
recent
sale
price
and
the
assessed
value
is
six
hundred
and
ninety
thousand
two
hundred
2125
Columbus
Street
South.
This
property's
land
is
6.
000
Which
is
less
than
the
subject
as
well
and
has
a
lower
assessed
land
value
of
545
000..
The
Improvement
does
have
a
lesser
quality
than
the
subject.
Therefore,
having
a
lesser
assessed
value
again,
there
is
no
recent
sale
price
and
the
assessed
value
is
704.
G
800.,
5024,
22nd,
Street
South,
the
property's
land
is
800
8332,
which
is
significantly
larger
than
the
subject
and
has
a
higher
access
land
value
of
573..
The
Improvement
does
have
a
lesser
quality
than
the
subject.
Therefore,
having
a
lesser
assessed
value,
there
is
no
recent
sale
price
and
the
assessment
value
is
six
hundred
and
seventy
eight
thousand
two
hundred
after
reviewing
the
appellons
land
and
those
of
other
homes
in
this
neighborhood,
with
around
6
800
square
foot
Lots,
the
subject's
land
is
equalized.
G
The
appellons
neighborhood
510.85
increased
on
average
2.3
percent
due
to
sales
that
occurred
within
the
analysis
period
and
within
the
neighborhood.
The
properties
grade
of
good
minus
appears
in
line
when
comparing
to
similar
graded
properties
of
average
Plus,
the
property's
record
was
confirmed
as
being
correct
and
land
values
were
reviewed
as
a
result
of
the
review.
The
inspection
and
information
submitted
by
in
it
is
the
Department's
opinion
that
the
assess
the
assessment
is
fair
and
Equitable,
and
we
recommend
that
the
board
confirmed
the
current
assessment
of
846
800..
Thank
you.
G
G
G
F
D
A
N
Good
morning
board,
this
is
located
at
2904
13
000
unit
404
at
the
commons
of
Arlington.
This
is
a
two
bed.
N
On
June
5th
2019
305
000,
we
were
able
to
analyze
the
MLS,
which
indicated
have
been
done
to
this
unit.
The
kitchen
has
been
updated
with
granite,
countertops,
stainless
steel
appliances,
new
flooring
throughout
and
updated
bathroom,
given
that
the
building
was
built
in
1988
the
unit,
the
Appellate
believes
their
property
is
assessed
when.
N
Mr
pisner
claims
his
unit
is
only
one
bedroom
and
it's
not
two
bedroom
additional
room.
This
room,
the
building,
is
a
total
of
103
4
units
in
which
there
were
four
open
market
sales.
In
the
2020
analysis,
three
hops
we've
got
unit
5201
that
sold
September
8th
of
2021
for
329
900
as
an
assessment,
sale
ratio
of
0.9
5.
N
Your
two
zero
one
sold
on
923
of
or
280
000
and
has
an
assessment
to
sale
ratio
point
a
little
bit
about
this
unit
as
well.
It's
a
one
bedroom,
one
bathroom,
so
it's
slightly
smaller
with
705
square
feet
and
the
kitchen's
been
updated
with
new
floors.
Cabinets
have
been
updated
to
countertops
and
the
appliances
as
well.
N
D
N
.,
an
assessment
comp
was
provided
to
share
uniform
assessments.
N
The
subject
with
809
this
has
a
similar
size
room
at
the
Talent
is
questioning.
E
N
Ratio
in
2022
was
1.00
5
for
the
2023
analysis.
It.
G
N
0.972
and
therefore
the
subject
had
a
slight
decrease,
there's
there's
there
seems
to
be.
D
N
A
F
Mr
Zimmer
is
this
correct
on
page
one
that
the
Appellate
once
is
assessment.
N
To
go
up
yeah,
so
I
believe
he
believes
that
it's
too
high
anything
does
think
that
no
I
believe
what
he
accidentally
did
was.
F
F
F
D
A
C
F
F
A
E
A
O
Just
to
reiterate
that
we're
looking
to
schedule
the
commercial
property
briefing
on
June
6th,
we
have
cases
of
the
cases
scheduled
for
the
seventh,
but
none
on
the
sixth
we're
leaving
that
day
open
to
you
know,
provide
you
information
on
the
commercial
valuations
that
we
did
this
year,
so
I'm
planning
on
doing
the
commercial
briefing
that
day.
If
that
works,
for
you
guys
schedule
and.