►
From YouTube: Board of Equalization Hearing October 25, 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
This
is
the
Arlington
County
Board
of
Equalization
hearings.
We
have
two
cases
on
the
agenda.
The
first
case
is
rfbc
two:
three:
zero:
zero,
three
zero;
four,
a
at
911
South,
Buchanan
Street,
and
we
have
Mr
Blake
Warren
here
on
behalf
of
the
owner,
Mr
Warren.
You
can
start
with
your
eight
minutes
and
tell
us
about
this
property.
Sir.
B
Thank
you
Mary
before
I
begin.
This
is
a
this
is
a
case
and
I
think
Mary
only
you
are
familiar
with
this
one,
but
in
last
year's
appeal,
2021,
it
was
withdrawn.
B
It
was
withdrawn
with
the
understanding
and
the
insurance
from
the
board
that
the
recommended
value
increase
that
the
county
was
proposing
would
revert
back
to
the
initial
assessment.
If
we
withdrew
and
we
did
withdrew,
we
did
withdraw
that
appeal
only
to
find
out
later
that
the
change
was
made
and
the
county
or
the
the
owner
experienced
an
increase
in
tax
assessments.
We
had
emailed
you
when
we
learned
of
this
after
the
second
half
tax
bill
was
due.
B
That
was
after
the
2021
Board
hearing
Tech
concluded,
and
you
had
informed
us
to
get
together
with
Rick
and
Irving
who
no
longer
with
the
county
to
try
to
come
to
a
resolution.
I
can
say,
after
many
months
of
back
and
forth,
between
the
county
and
and
Irving
and
Rick
before
they
left
that
we
were
not
able
to
come
to
a
resolution.
B
B
That
was
something
that
we
categorically
categorically
denied
and
cannot
agree
with,
and
so
we
we
still
sit
here
with
an
appeal
that
we
withdrew
not
knowing
that
if
we
withdrew
that
the
value
would
go
and
revert
back
to
or
would
go
up
to,
the
County's
recommended
increase
letter
and
the
value
that
they
were
recommending
to
the
board,
and
so
we
never
got
a
chance
to
have
it.
B
Have
the
board
hear
that
that
case
and
render
a
decision
so
again
and
it
kind
of
put
into
the
2022,
because
the
county
was
asking
to
revert
it
back
to
2021
the
initial
assessment,
but
again
with
the
agreement
that
we
would
not
contend.
The
classification
issue
moving
forward.
So
I
think
it
is
still
relevant
to
this
year's
case,
and
we
would
ask
the
board
to
potentially
reopening
that
2021
case
to
here
before
I
start
the
2022
case.
B
Okay
and
with
that
understanding,
I'll
I'll
move
forward
with
the
2022
case
and
unfortunately,
we
did
not
get
a
resolution
to
the
2021
or
get
our
chance
to
be
heard.
So
I
think
the
owner
will
have
to
pursue
other
other
means
of
of
getting
consideration
for,
for
that
case,
with
regard
to
2022
I'll
start
on
page
79
of
196.
B
B
The
initial
assessment
for
2022
is
38
million,
265
200.
and
the
value
we're
recommending
from
the
board
today
or
or
requested
for
the
board
today
is
33
million
310
400..
B
This
is
an
older
property
located
in
South
Arlington,
originally
built
in
1962.
It's
178
total
total
units.
It's
a
low-rise
or
garden
multi-family
apartment,
complex
Class,
C
in
the
bar
Croft
sub
Market.
It's
comprised
of
six
individual
buildings
and
our
three
stories.
It's
it's
four
levels,
but
has
a
it's
it's
above
level
or
above
grade
three
stories,
and
then
the
fourth
or
basement
level
is
a
walkout
basement.
B
If
you
felt
direct
the
board's
attention
now
to
page
three,
which
is
our
summary
of
fact,
it's
located
on
page
three
of
the
of
the
County's
a
response
memo.
It's
the
the
income
expense
summary
sheet,
showing
the
last
four
years
of
reported
financials
at
the
location
in
columns
a
b
c
and
most
recently
in
2021
and
E.
The
County's
assessment
is
in
column
D.
B
B
Most
recently,
we're
applying
the
garden
rides
Market
vacancy
rate
of
seven
percent,
the
actual
expenses
that
were
reported
at
the
subject-
property
in
2021
of
1492
000.,
which
was
approximately
41
and
then
capping
that
at
the
mid-rise
or
excuse
me,
the
garden
cap
rate
classification,
which,
for
this
property's
effective
age,
is
6.2
percent.
So
you
see
there's
a
50
basis.
Point
cap,
a
Delta
there
between
the
cap
rate
for
the
garden
as
well
between
in
the
mid
ride
that
the
county
is
currently
applying
once
capitalized.
B
That
value
is
33
million
310
400.
again.
This
is
a
case
that
in
Prior
years,
we've
brought
before
the
board,
and
the
board
has
agreed
with
that.
The
subject:
property
is
a
garden
classification.
It
should
be
valued
as
such
as
we
just
recently
discussed
in
2021.
B
The
the
initial
valuation
from
the
county
was
based
off
of
the
county,
applying
the
garden
cap
rate
in
their
in
their
income
model,
so
the
county
even
initially
valued
this
property
last
year
as
as
a
garden
apartment
as
well
again,
the
property
all
six
of
these
buildings
are
are
the
top.
B
Three
levels
are
above
grade
the
front
of
the
building
the
front
of
the
building
sit
on
a
slope
and
the
last
level
that
fourth
level
is
below
grade
similar
to
you
know
a
single
family,
residential
home,
my
home
here
I'm
in
the
basement,
I,
have
a
story,
residential
single-family
home
with
a
a
walk-out
basement.
It's
not
considered
a
three-story
building
the
way
the
county
is
valuing
this
property
right
now.
B
You
know
if
the
property
had
six
levels
that
were
were
below
grade
then
under
the
County's
justification
or
guidelines
seems
to
indicate
that
the
county
would
would
set
this
property
on
a
high-rise
classification
and
apply
the
high-rise,
Market
vacancy
and
the
cap
rates
to
it.
So
again,
if
you,
if
you
look
at
the
property
and
that's
we
have
a
picture
of
it
just
on
a
page
77
of
196.,
you
can
see
that
the
the
first
three
levels
again
are
above
grade
and
sloping
downwards.
B
Above
grade
floors
and
again,
the
there
are
no
elevators
in
this
property.
It's
a
it's
a
walk-in.
If
you
look
at
this,
it's
older
build
it's
it's
your
typical
Garden
style
apartment,
and
this
is
something
that
the
the.
C
B
Have
always
contended
Chris
in
his
response?
Memo
even
indicates
I
know
in
Prior
years
there's
been
a
disconnect
between
the
ownership
group
and
and
some
of
the
marketing
that
and
flyers
that
were
put
out,
but
this
property
is
marketed
as
a
garden
style
apartment.
It
is
a
garden
style
apartment
and
we
feel
that
those
Garden
style
parameters,
specifically
the
cap
rate,
should
be
applied
when,
when
buying
this
property.
D
Good
morning
board
members
good
morning,
Blake,
we
are
talking
about
Columbia
Park,
something
we've
visited
in
this
before
this
board
at
least
two
of
the
last
three
years.
D
We
want
to
make
sure
that
we
are
all
on
the
same
page
as
far
as
what
Mr
Warren
is
referring
to
last
year,
so
to
bring
us
back
to
the
same
page,
it
was
2020
that
we
noted
that
this
was
not
a
three-story
but
a
four-story
building.
We
corrected
that
in
that
Year's
review,
as
is
typical
with
some
economic
units.
This
is
more
than
one
Parcels.
There's
four
Parcels.
We
corrected
the
description
of
I,
think
two
out
of
the
four
Parcels
or
three
out
of
the
four.
D
Unfortunately,
one
still
showed
as
designation,
311
property
class
code
311,
which
was
indicative
of
a
garden
in
2021,
Irving,
barely
valued
the
property
for
January.
1St,
unfortunately
noted
just
the
one
PCC
at
311
and
valued
it
as
a
garden.
The
owner
submitted
a
review
of
assessment,
I
immediately
noted.
That
was
an
error.
In
fact,
in
fact,
I
brought
up
Virginia
code,
58.1-3379,
section
D,
which
gives
the
assessor
the
power
to
recommend
Boe
increase
the
subject's
real
property
assessment.
So
long
as
the
quote
requested
increases
based
on
mistakes
of
facts.
D
We
pointed
that
out
to
the
owner.
They
asked
for
withdrawal
Unfortunately.
They
asked
the
Board
of
Equalization
secretary
for
permission
to
withdraw
so
long
as
the
value
went
back
to
the
original
January
1
error
value.
They
didn't
contact
the
assessor.
They
didn't
contact
the
appraiser,
so
we
felt
that
was
an
error
judgment
on
their
call,
and
so,
as
was
stated,
they
did
reach
out
to
previous
director
Mr
Millman,
who
stated
that
that
case
that
they
should
have
contacted
either
myself
the
supervisor
or
the
assessor
for
the
county
to
ask
for
a
correction
of
value.
D
So
they
apparently
offered
a
contingency
that
would
set
something
effective
that
they
would.
What
honored
the
error
value
going
back
to
genuine
so
long
as
this
was
deemed
a
mid-rise
taking
this
argument
off
the
table
so
to
speak,
and
they
declined
to
do
that.
In
regards
to
this
year,
I
did
visit
the
property
again.
I
actually
tried
to
walk
the
each
unit,
because
I
found
that
useful
is
to
verify
how
many
units
are
on
each
floor.
D
That,
just
as
we
assume,
there's
four
units
on
each
of
the
first
three
floors
and
then
two
units
on
the
bottom
floor,
these
again
are
the
exact
same
size.
They
have
bonus
features
and
I
would
argue
in
a
sense
that
patios
as
opposed
to
balconies,
they
have
the
ability
to
have
a
fire
or
charcoal
grills
which
are
not
allowed
on
balconies.
They
have
the
ability
to
enter
and
exit
through
their
own
entrance.
They
don't
have
to
go
through
the
main
entrance.
They
have
Gardens,
they
have
a
bigger
area
to
to
use.
D
In
other
words,
a
patio
is
a
larger
area
than
a
standard
balcony,
same
exact,
full-size
windows
and
again,
a
full-size
patio
door
that
leads
to
the
outside.
If
we're
looking
at
again
as
far
as
an
income
approach
again,
looking
at
strictly
numbers,
we
essentially
throughout
the
metrics,
we
are
lower
by
almost
170
000
of
effective
gross,
we're
lower
on
an
operating
expense
by
almost
eight
thousand
dollars,
so
we've
essentially
nailed
that
and
we're
lower
on
the
netapper
income
by
over
a
hundred.
Fifty
thousand.
D
In
fact,
if
you
notice
we're
low
our
projection
for
generator,
one
is
lower
than
what's
been
achieved.
In
the
last
four
years,
income
has
gone
up
four
years
in
a
row.
Gross
potential
income
has
gone
up
four
years
in
a
row.
It's
highly
stabilized
less
than
two
percent
effective
vacancy
concession
each
year.
D
You
know
you'll
note
that
the
penalt
essentially
took
what
they
earned
for
gross
potential
and
then
applied
the
vacancy
and
Concession
guideline.
So
essentially
it's
just
a
number.
That's
that's,
not
necessarily
in
line
with
what
they've
achieved
the
last
40
years,
given
that
the
county
is
over
a
hundred,
fifty
thousand
dollars
below
what's
been
achieved
the
last
year
and
again,
lower
than
anything.
D
That's
been
achieved
last
four
years,
given
that
we
have
established
this
building
is
the
four
stories
40
feet
tall
again,
there's
at
least
two
buildings
I
believe
are
fully
four
stories
above
grade,
so
there
is
no
topography
issue
with
at
least
two
of
these
sitting
on
some
five
acres
again,
we
do
believe
we've
had
this
right.
The
last
three
years.
We
have
argued
that
again.
Costar
also
agrees.
This
is
a
four-story,
mid-rise
I.
Believe
we've
referenced
Fannie
Mae's
definitions
as
well.
D
We
believe
that
you
know
the
right
to
to
subjectivity
is
is
granted,
but
as
far
as
objectivity,
you
know
we
should
be
able
to
determine
if
something
is
four
stories
or
not,
we
believe
the
board
has
agreed
with
us
in
years
past.
We
do
recommend
that
the
board
confirm
the
value
of
38
million
265
200..
Thank
you.
C
D
D
Regulations
or
code,
that
is,
our
policy
Department
policy.
E
Be
next
I
I
forgot
to
look
at
all
when
I
went
by
the
other
day
for
the
appellant.
All
four
are
on
slopes
such
that
you
enter
in
on
the
second
floor,
but
you
can
go
down
to
the
first.
All
four
buildings
are
like
that.
Right.
B
A
F
F
B
F
B
F
And
only
has
two
units
but
does
have
two
units
at
the
ground,
walkout
level.
B
H
To
Mr
Cheeks
I
just
wanted
to
confirm
the
value
for
2021
the
total
for
the
economic
unit.
I
think
it's
my
addition
is
wrong,
or
the
number
in
the
first
page
of
the
package
so.
D
So
yeah
to
clarify
the
original
value
would
have
been
I
believe
it
was
34
6653.
But
again
that
was
based
on
it
being
a
garden.
So
my
correction
was
to
make
it
a
what
it
is,
which
is
a
mid-rise,
so
I
recommended
38
9651,
okay,.
H
H
E
Thanks
I
I
want
to
go
back
to
the
original
question,
I'm,
not
sure
I.
If
it's
the
same
as
what
barn
said
or
I
didn't
understand,
the
answer
and
that's
on
column
F
is
for
the
Department.
E
You
well
on
column,
D,
the
original
assessment.
You
gave
us
standard
guidelines,
eight
percent
vacancy
concessions,
but
when
you
Revisited
it
in
call
me
you
didn't,
it
was
more
like
what
their
usual
stabilized
small
vacancy
is.
Why
didn't
you
apply
the
the
guidelines
to
column
e
line.
D
We'll,
yes,
ma'am
again,
we
believe
we've
made
the
point
that
it's
a
four-story
through
site
visits,
two
twice
in
two
years
through
co-star.
Please
invite
you
to
look
at
the
pictures
showing
four
stories
above
grade,
but,
more
importantly,
again
as
far
as
the
economics,
it
solely
comes
down
to
that
operating
income
where
five
thousand
dollars
lower
than
what
they
achieved
in
2020
150
000
lower
than
what
they
achieved
in
2021.
D
This
property
is
game
value
from
GPI
perspective,
four
years
in
a
row,
effective
growth,
four
years
in
a
row,
it's
highly
stabilized
as
far
as
occupancy,
we
do
believe
the
county
should
be
confirmed
at
38
million
265
too.
Thank
you.
B
Have
one
real
quick
point
of
clarification,
then
I'm
going
to
let
Greg
reigns
with
ditmar
finish
up,
but
with
regard
to
the
County
family,
we
didn't
reach
out
to
them.
We
did
reach
out
to
them
as
soon
as
we
got
this
increased
letter
that
was
came
directly
from
the
county
and
did
not
have
any
of
the
county.
Excuse
me,
it
came
from
the
board
and
did
not
have
any
of
the
assessors
cc
to
it.
We
reached
out
to
Chris.
He
said
he
was
going
to
recommend
the
increased
value.
G
Okay,
yeah
I
won't
take
a
minute
I.
Just
this
one
to
me
is
like
a
common
sense
deal.
This
is
a
three
story:
building
it's
Garden
style.
It's
always
been
Garden
style.
We
marketed
as
Garden
style,
I
mean
I
know.
All
of
us
have
been
on
calls
where
our
marketing
has
been
referenced
for
Cherry,
Hill
or
Henderson
park,
or
thomasport
or
Thomas
place,
and
we
call
it
mid-rise,
but
in
fact,
and
then
we're
asking
for
guard.
This
is
a
garden
style
property.
It's
three
floors
of
a
walkout
basement.
G
It
always
has
been
that
we
marketed
the
property
for
sale.
It
will
be
sold
as
a
garden
style
Community.
It
is
the
quintessential
Garden
style
apartment
building.
That's
why
we
didn't
accept
the
offer.
We
had
denied
that
immediately
and
responded
immediately
and
I.
Don't
think
and
I
think
you
gotta
watch
out.
The
adios
aren't
desirable
in
South
Arlington.
They
don't
get
more
space
outside.
We
don't
allow
them
to
plant
a
garden
and
we
don't
allow
charcoal
grills.
We
can't
just
say
things
that
that
that's
not
even
part
of
how
we
Market
that
building.
G
A
Okay,
thank
you
all
right,
I'll
start
here,
it's
just
Among
Us.
You
know
I,
don't
like
to
say
things
about
people
who
aren't
here,
but
I
mean
the
the
deal
from
last
year
that
they
didn't
reach
out
to
the
right
person.
I!
Think
that's
ridiculous!
A
You
know
if
they
reach
out
to
the
county,
the
counties,
the
county.
As
far
as
you
know,
we're
concerned
the
appellant's
concerned
and
I
think
that's
kind
of
a
a
lame
excuse
to
say
they
didn't
reach
out
to
the
same
person
but
or
to
the
right
person.
But
you
know
this.
This
does
give
me
angst,
because
you
know
this
is
I
know
we've
had
discussions
before
about
Garden
versus
mid-rise.
You
know
this
is
it
looks
like
a
garden
garden
style.
A
It's
got
the
three
floors
if
it's
got
the
units
on
the
back
side
that
are
walk
out,
that
you
can't
get
to
from
the
main
entrance.
You
know
and
the
counties
alluding
to
that.
Oh
well,
they're
they're
nicer
whether
they
can
have
the
gardens
or
not
or
whatnot
the
rents
would
be
applicable
to
that
and
you
would
have
a
higher
rent.
So
I,
you
know
I
look
at
these
numbers
and
I
think
this
is
really
just
to
cap
rate
and
determination
of
type
of
building.
A
You
know
I
mean
nobody
can
argue
with
the
noi.
That's
on
the
original
assessment.
You
know
and
I
mean
even
from
the
standpoint
I
think
what
the
appellant
has
come
up
with
is
a
little
bit
low,
but
you
know
they
need
to
make
a
point.
So
you
know
I,
don't
know
where
everybody
else
is,
but
I
tend
to
look
at
this
more
as
a
garden
than
a
mid-rise.
E
E
Are
you
but
I've
been
in
apartments
where
no
kidding
the
apartments
were
below
grade
and
maybe
the
there's
a
high
window
and
you
can
look
up
at
eight
feet
or
six
feet
and
see
the
lawn,
but
in
this
case
you
walk
out
and
I
know
it's
only
half
the
building,
you
walk
out,
but
you
walk
out
onto
a
lawn
and
so
to
me,
that's
the
decision-making
criteria,
whether
it's
Gardener
or
mid-rise.
A
F
F
E
F
E
F
F
If
you're
gonna
draw
a
line
somewhere
between
the
two
types
of
and
the
guidelines,
mid-rise
and
garden,
this
is
about
as
fine
line
as
you
can
get
yeah.
That's
why
I
was
curious
where
the
parking
is
I
mean
they
have
to
park
in
a
lot
and
walk
around
to
get
into
their
unit
or
I,
hear
what
Mary's
saying.
A
C
Was
on
the
board,
you
know
she
and
I
were
kind
of
I.
Guess
confused
is
the
right
word
or
surprised?
Maybe
you.
A
A
C
B
C
C
Board-
and
you
know
you're
you're-
harming
the
very
effort
you
claim
is
the
most
important
thing
that
you're
trying
to
accomplish
and
I
I
agree
with
you
Mary
100
percent,
and
the
only
thing
that
makes
me
hesitant
is
am
I
the
desire
and
I'm
not
sure
that
I
am
the
decider.
When
I
say
I
I
mean
us.
C
The
board
I
think
that
the
county
department
has
created
a
regulation,
and
they
say
four
stories
and
I
think
that
the
I
think
the
County
Board
would
be
very
sympathetic,
but
I
think
it's
incumbent
upon
the
owner
should
go
through
that
effort,
as
I've
suggested
to
them
before
and
and
quit
thrusting
us
into
this
confusing
situation.
That's.
C
A
Doesn't
set
the
policy
for
the
department
and
we
on
many
occasions,
look
at
the
policies
and
say
yes
or
no.
We
agree
with
it
or
don't
agree
with
it
on
a
certain
property,
so
I
mean
I.
Think
it's
very
clear
about
the
four
stories,
but
in
this
instance
this
is
a
three-story
with
a
walk
out
on
the
bottom.
You
know
on
the
back
side,
so
it's
really
interpretation
of
it
and
I
think
it
is
within
the
purview
of
the
board.
You
know
to
make
a
decision
on
it.
You.
A
C
Do
yeah
yeah
the
the
County
Board
could
I
mean
they
have
the
ordinance
power
and
I
really
wish?
They
would
clarify
this
so.
A
F
C
A
Okay,
so
here's
what
I'm
gonna
do
where's
the
baby
right?
Well,
because
it's
it's
depending
on
the
vote.
If
the
votes
aren't
there,
then
it's
going
to
revert
to
the
county
anyway.
But
what
I
would
like
to
propose
is
to
take
the
noi
of
the
assessment
of
the
2.1
and
use
the
garden
style
cap
rate
and
that
caps
out
at
35
million
179
300.,
so
I.
A
And
we'll
see
if
it
works
to
reduce
the
assessment
to
35
million
179
300.
do
I
have
a
second
okay.
I,
have
a
motion,
a
second
by
Mr
Larson,
all
in
favor
I.
Oh,
look
at
that
split.
The
base
done.
Okay,
it's
unanimous!
The
assessment
is
reduced
to
35
million
179
300.
A
A
I
I
The
issues
on
appeal
are
the
potential
rental
income
and
the
operating
expenses.
The
Drea
summary
is
on
page
three
of
the
appeal
here.
You
can
see
that
the
2021
actual
noi
at
this
property
was
only
389
600
and
that
the
revised
assessment
imputes
noi
at
427
882
dollars
the
property
in
2021,
saw
potential
rental.
Income
decreased
by
nine
percent
operating
expenses
increased
by
16
percent
and
noi
decrease
by
14
over
the
prior
year.
I
I
Here
we
see
income
decrease
for
both
2020
and
2021,
but
vacancy
and
collection
loss
remains
stable
from
2020
to
2021..
This
means
that
the
owner
has
only
decreased
rents
in
order
to
stabilize
occupancy
total
vacancy
and
collection
loss
in
2020
and
2021
was
only
four
percent,
even
with
vacancy
and
collection
loss
at
only
four
percent.
The
resulting
gross
effective
income
is
thirty
thousand
dollars
lower
than
what
the
assessment
imputes
next
the
operating
expenses
in
2021
or
126
thousand
dollars.
I
This
is
higher
than
the
2020
operating
expenses,
but
it
is
in
line
with
what
the
property
incurred
in
2019
looking
across
the
prior
three
years
operating
history.
We
see
here
that
we
have
seen
what
we've
seen
at
multi-family
properties
throughout
the
county,
the
owner
cut
expenses
in
2020
due
to
the
uncertainty
caused
by
the
pandemic.
I
So
we
have
two
years
out
of
the
past
three,
with
operating
expenses
of
one
hundred
twenty
two
thousand
dollars
or
greater,
yet
the
assessment
imputes
operating
expenses
at
only
one
hundred
seventeen
thousand
dollars.
This
is
lower
than
the
two-year
average
of
that
2019
and
2021
operating
expenses,
which
is
one
hundred
twenty
four
thousand
dollars
as
such.
2021
operating
expenses
are
reflective
of
what
this
property
requires
at
stabilized
occupancy.
As
of
the
data
value.
I
I
D
That's
essentially,
we've
said
this
is
associated
with
the
meyerton,
which
is
nearby
courthouse.
Co-Star
seems
to
agree
as
far
as
essentially
calling
it
108
units
looks
like
this
was
essentially
an
add-on,
maybe
three
years
ago,
four
years
ago,
when
it
was
purchased,
but
as
you
can
see
in
some
of
the
pictures,
they
actually
refer
those
who
are
renting
these
to
go
to
the
meyerton
leasing
office.
D
So
as
far
as
looking
at
this
from
an
income
approach
again,
the
board
is
very
familiar
with
how
we
look
at
these
literally
one
year
does
not
assessment
make.
We
do
only
have
partial
gear
for
18,
but
we
do
a
full
year
is
19
and
20,
and
looking
at
this,
as
a
correctly
surmised
by
the
appellants,
we
did
see
a
drop
in
Gross
potential
in
2021
we
did
see
a
corresponding
drop
in
the
effective
roofs,
but
that
was
actually
after
two
years
of
growth
in
18
and
20..
D
So
again,
when
we're
looking
at
this
when
you're
looking
this
as
a
stabilized
property,
instead
of
four
years,
we
essentially
have
three
years
to
look
upon.
You
know
there
was
make
mention
of
our
projection.
For
operating
expenses
is
a
little
bit
lower
than
the
average
for
19
and
20.,
but
so
is
our
effective
gross.
So
again,
as
we've
seen,
the
board
do
if
there
are
corrections
to
be
made
potentially
to
the
operating
expense.
D
We
ask
you
to
obviously
keep
in
mind
and
our
effective
Bruce
projection
is
also
low,
especially
compared
to
what
it's
achieved
in
the
last
three
years.
As
far
as
the
net
operating
income
again,
that
falls
in
line
with
Once
adjustments
are
made
to
the
gross
potential
affect
our
growths
and
operating
expenses.
Again,
I
point
out
that
they're
very
much
in
line
with
what's
been
achieved,
historically
again,
barely
above
what
was
achieved
in
2019.
D
Again,
this
is
a
well-stabilized
property,
as
we've
seen
it's
gone
down,
essentially
around
four
percent
over
the
last
two
years
actually
mirrors
itself
the
last
two
years
at
4.04
well
below
the
stabilized
seven
percent
offered
by
the
county.
Again,
the
board
has
seen
this
where
we
have
to
make
over
projections
on
Gross
potential
to
get
to
a
established
and
stabilized
effective
gross
based
on
our
essentially
low
projection
for
Effective
growth
as
a
stabilized
manner.
We
do
believe
that
our
revision
of
six
seven
million
1314
should
be
confirmed.
D
A
I
This
is
incorrect
that
uniform,
opera,
The,
Uniform,
vacancy
and
collection
rate
applies
to
properties
across
the
county.
We've
seen
time
and
again
when
a
property
reports
higher
vacancy
and
collection
than
that
uniform
rate,
a
lot
allows
we
don't
reduce
rents,
we
propose
that,
but
it
hasn't
happened.
The
property
suffers
to
its
detriment.
Here
we
have
the
opposite
case.
The
property
should
benefit
from
this
uniform
vacancy
and
collection
and
not
have
rental
rental
rates
increase
to
compensate
for
it.
Thank
you.
Okay,.
C
Yes,
art,
it
seemed
to
me
that
the
question
in
this
is
expenses.
C
You
know
these
were
higher
expenses
than
normal,
so
I
looked
at
the
detail
of
the
income
and
expense
information
and
as
I
looked
as
I
examined
all
these
figures
you
know,
Electric's
gone
up,
payroll's
gone
up,
gas
has
gone
up,
you
know
it
seems
like
Electric's
gone
up,
and
so
I
was
looking.
You
know,
how
can
we
cut,
let's
just
say,
I
own
this
place?
Where
can
I
cut
expenses
and.
I
C
Know
the
management
fees
very
reasonable.
That's
not
what's
the
word
I'm
looking
for
that's
small
higher
than
what
it
should
be,
and
it
just
looks
to
me
like
those
expenses.
Are
you
can't
lower
them,
so
my
thinking
was
perhaps
we
should
look
at
slightly
lowering
this
based
on
the
expenses?
That's
my
thinking.
F
F
But
if
I,
if
I
take
the
I,
looked
at
the
three
year
average
and
then
I
decided
to
take
a
look
at
it
with
taking
the
County's
test,
but
taking
it
to
a
24
expenses
from
the
you
know,
because
I
do
think
that
they
reduced
expenses
to
because
of
cobit
anyway.
That
brought
the
bot
the
noi
up
to
414
5
256.,
I
didn't
run.
I
didn't
have
a
chance
just
about
the
camera,
because
I
just
thought
of
this,
but
that
I
think
is
somewhere
in
between.
F
E
C
H
Yeah
I
mean
that
was
one
of
the
things
that
I
also
looked
up
but
I.
Think
to
me
the
vacancy
that
they're
getting
used
is
more
than
customers,
because
I
think
it's
more
than
the
amount
of
money
that
you
could
as
an
additional
experience.
F
H
C
E
E
So
I
kept
looking
at
the
income,
would
would
it
rebound
up
in
2022
to
about
the
2020
quote
normal
level
where
people
were
locked
in
place
because
people
were
afraid
to
move
or
and
who
knows,
and
those
two
numbers
are
are
very
much
they're
the
same
so
I
I
come
up
with
Landing
right
on
top
and
approving
of
calmap
because
of
those
two
reasons,
yeah.
C
Debating
Jose
a
little
bit,
they
they
increase
per
unit
per
month
is
going
to
have
to
be
124
124
dollars
per
unit
per
month.
So
I
used
up
the
excess
vacancy
for
that,
and
so
then
that's
why
I
say
to
me:
the
only
issue
is
expenses
and
I
think
they
should
go
up.
You
follow
them
again.
That's
where
I
see
the
vacancy.
E
C
E
Yeah
well
sure
vacancies
higher
than
realistic
and
sometimes
appellants
landowners
profit
from
that,
and
sometimes
they
don't
that's
just
the
way
it
goes
in
this
case
they
are
profiting
from
it.
But
but
the
pound's
point
is,
but
you
don't
other
stuff
in
order
to
offset
the
fact
that
this
year
the
guidelines
in
their
favor
and
I
agree
with
that
yeah,
it's
absolutely
correct.
So
so
I
looked
at
it
and
again
I
you
know:
could
we
save
five
or
nine
thousand
dollars
off
the
income?
I
guess
but
I'm
not
sure,
based
on
what
okay
well.
F
And
I
I,
maybe
24,
is
too
high,
but
I'm.
Looking
at
the
egi
and
your
thirty
thousand
dollars
difference
between
21
and
the
County's
revision,
they're
thirty
thousand
dollars
higher
yeah
mine
adjustment
expenses
was
about
fifteen
thousand.
It
split
that
number.
E
E
H
E
H
I'm:
okay,
with
the
original
I
mean
with
the
revised
assessment.
The
way
it
is
but
yeah
I
can
I
can
do
that.
Okay,.
A
Copy
it
all
right,
then
I
will
make
a
motion
to
reduce
the
assessment
to
six
million
three
forty
seven
four
hundred,
and
that
is
by
increasing
the
expenses
on
the
revised
column
to
23
and
then
capping
it
out
at
six
and
taken
off
the
rehab
exemption.
A
A
A
Thursday
and
I
just
have
to
check
with
with
Greg,
because
I
understand
on
Thursday
Mr
panerandi.
You
will
not
be
able
to
be
here:
hi
Greg,
just
logged
on.
B
B
Thursday
is
a
huge
problem:
I've
got
a
in-person
Foundation
board
meeting.
A
Well,
we
can't
move
them
over,
but
we
don't
have
a
quorum,
but
here
I
mean
I
can
do
this.
If
you.
A
A
B
A
Derek,
so
if
you
wouldn't
mind
just
let
Mr
Peralta
just
be
one
less
person
in
there
and
and
you
know,
you
can
obviously
be
remote
as
well.
At
least
we'd
have
the
Quorum,
but
you
know
so
close
to
the
end
I.
You
know.
B
A
Right
so
we're
going
to
say
no
Jose
and
no
Greg
on
Thursday,
and
so
it
will
be
Barnes
can
myself
and
Mark
will
be
the
four
Quorum
and
we'll
just
you,
don't
have
to
be
masked.
I'll
be
messed
tomorrow
is
in
person.
Tomorrow
is
in
person.
A
Okay,
cool
all
right
and
then
I
believe
we
may
have
I,
don't
know
if
Derek,
oh
well,
let's
conclude
and
then
we'll
go
off
on
this,
so
we
will
stand
adjourned
here
at
9
50
re-adjourn.
Tomorrow
morning,
Wednesday
10
26
at
9
A.M.