►
From YouTube: Board of Equalization Meeting | June 28, 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).
B
A
Case
the
appellant
has
waived
the
hearing,
so
we're
gonna
as
a
courtesy
to
the
other
people
who
are
here
that
to
the
bottom
of
the
agenda.
So
we'll
start
with
the
second
case
on
the
agenda:
rpc-04008030
at
3901,
30th,
Street,
North
and
I
believe
I've
seen
Mr
yabar
and
Mr
Kim
I'm
gonna
turn
your
cameras
on.
C
Just
FYI,
it's
it's
audit,
Bernard
audit
and
so
I
can.
But
yes
so
the
property.
We
acquired
the
property
at
the
end
of
March,
and
we
would
have
preferred
to
resolve
this
informally.
But
we
just
didn't
get
a
chance
because
the
the
deadline
had
passed
by
then
so.
So
that's
why
we're
here
we,
it
was
originally
listed
for
a
million
point
fifteen,
and
on
that
that
was
on
January
12th
and
on
February
6.
C
The
asking
price
was
lowered
to
1.05
million
and
we
we
sent
the
offer
in
for
9.85
on
on
or
around
February
21st,
our
realtor
sent
it
in
and
at
the
time
it
was
our
understanding
that
there
were
multiple
offers
on
the
property
they
were
from
Builders
and
the
builders
were
offering
basically
the
land
value
by
high
800s.
C
The
the
descriptions
that
you've
seen
I
know
I,
know,
Jorge
referenced
the
MLS
description
and,
and
we
sent
in
the
description
on
the
from
the
appraiser
they
turned
out
not
to
be
entirely
accurate.
Once
once
we
had
moved
in,
we
discovered
that
there
were
some
pretty
serious
issues
with
the
house
that
needed
to
be
addressed.
C
The
the
the
chimney
was
at
risk
of
collapsing
and
it
was
venting
carbon
monoxide
into
the
basement,
so
we
had
to
spend
a
good
amount
of
money
getting
that
basically
repaired
and
replaced,
and
we
can
provide
those
documents
if
you
need
them
to
show
that
there
was
like
real
risk
here.
The
roof
was
leaking
and
in
bad
shape
had
to
be
replaced.
The
basement
was
the
basement.
Bathroom
had
had
degraded
pretty
seriously
and
it
was
basically
unusable
and
unsafe.
C
Major
electrical
repairs
were
needed
and
there
were
there
were
several
plumbing
plumbing
and
drainage
problems.
This
was
in
addition
to
the
sort
of
few
repairs
that
were
contemplated
by
the
MLS
listings,
such
as
like
hardwood
floor
resurfacing
and
and
painting
things
like
that.
These
were
all
issues
that
were
present
during
the
appraisal
period,
which
which
I
believe
was
August
of
21
to
August
of
22.
and
and
just
I.
Guess
it's
a
preliminary
matter.
C
It
appears
that
the
appraisal
period
was
was
sort
of
flexible
I.
I
know
the
county
referenced
a
comparable
sale
in
in
December
of
last
year
and
and
we're
talking
about
issues
that
we
discovered
after
the
after
the
appraisal
period,
but
that
it
definitely
existed
during
the
appraisal
period.
So
we're
we're
willing
to
be
flexible
on
that.
The
county
is
willing
to
be
flexible
so
that
that's
that's
fine
with
us.
C
The
the
seller
was
in
a
state.
The
seller
was
not
under
any
compulsion
to
sell
that.
We
were
aware
of
the
the
the
the
asking
price
was
lowered,
but
asking
prices
are
frequently
lowered
if
a
property
doesn't
sell
within
the
first
few
weeks.
I
don't
know
that
the
the
lowering
of
an
asking
price
would
indicate
compulsion
and-
and
we
were
under
no
compulsion
to
buy
there.
We
we
had
a,
we
were
living
out
in
Reston.
C
We
were
not
forced
to
buy
this
particular
house
or
any
house,
and
we
were
not
related
to
the
seller
in
any
way.
So
I
think
there.
The
the
the
the
the
fundamental
disagreement
here
is
that
we
have
an
actual
sale
that
it
occurred
outside
the
appraisal
period.
C
But,
as
I
mentioned
everyone's
willing
to
be
flexible
on
the
appraisal
period,
it
would
it
would
appear,
and-
and
it's
it's
it's
our
position-
it's
the
owner's
position
that
if
we
have
an
actual
sale,
the
the
actual
sale
is,
is
better
evidence
of
what
the
fair
market
value
of
the
price
of
what
the
fair
market
value
is
than
using
a
sort
of
comparable
sale
approach,
and-
and
we
a
few
points
to
back
that
up,
the
market
in
February
of
23
was
not
materially
different
than
the
market.
C
During
the
official
appraisal
period,
the
the
property
was
on
the
market
for
41
days
before
the
offer
was
accepted
in
in
February
of
2022
the
average
time
period
that
a
property
was
on
the
market
was
39
days.
We
don't
view
that
as
a
material
difference
and
and
we
compare
February
to
February
to
account
for
seasonality,
but
30
39
days
41
days,
that's
well
within
the
range
during
the
entirety
of
of
the
appraisal
period.
There
were,
there
were
223
new
listings
in
Arlington.
In
February
23,
there
were
288
February,
22.
C
I,
don't
know
that
that
would
be
meaningfully
different
and
the
median
sale
prices
in
in
zip
code
22207
were
actually
higher
in
in
February
2023
than
they
were
in
February
2022,
so
that
that
would
actually
seem
to
go
against
us.
The
owners,
if,
if
we're
trying
to
use
a
February,
23
sale,
that's
an
unfavorable
fact,
but
we're
willing
to
we're
willing
to
concede
that.
So
so
again,
we
think
that
the
actual
sale
is
the
most
useful
data
point
here.
C
As
far
as
if,
if
we
do
need
to
move
to
the
comparable
sales
approach,
we
still
think
that
our
comparable
sales
are
are
more
useful
than
the
County's
comparable
sales.
If,
if
you
look
at
the
examples
we
provided
on
our
petition,
30
31
military
route
that
was
sold
for
7.60
in
in
the
appraisal
in
the
official
appraisal
period
same
neighborhood
as
our
property,
newer
structure,
more
bedrooms
overall,
better
condition
slightly
smaller
lot.
C
We
think
this
is
a
useful,
comparable,
2389,
North
Quincy
sold
in
the
appraisal
window
for
8.85,
comparable
lot
size,
bigger
garage
and
a
two-car
garage
is
a
big
deal
in
Arlington.
We
only
have
one
car
garage
so
that
that
would
seem
to
command
a
premium
overall,
better
condition:
3101
military
route
sold
in
the
appraisal
window
for
860,
same
neighborhood,
more
bedrooms,
newer
structure,
slightly
smaller
lot
and
3406
military
sold
before
the
appraisal
window.
C
Admittedly,
it
appears
to
have
been
removed
from
MLS,
so
we
can't
look
into
it
very
well,
but
it
had
five
bedrooms
as
far
as
the
County's
comparables
go
and
and
I
think
we
have
one
minute
left
so
I'll
try
to
be
quick.
The
the
first
comparable
they
provide
is
3109
military
sold
for
a
million
and
five
better.
The
structure
is
in
better
condition,
has
a
new
roof
which
is
not
cheap,
as
we
found
out.
C
It
has
new
windows,
also
not
cheap
irrigation
system,
better
cared
for
our
property,
but
it's
it's
in
the
general
range
I
I
think
I.
Think.
If
appropriate
adjustments
are
made,
we
we
would
agree
that
that's
an
appropriate,
comparable,
3153
military,
the
the
County's
second
comparable.
It
was
sold
in
the
appraisal
window.
It
has
three
bedrooms
like
our
house,
it
was
sold
for
a
million
279..
It's
it's
not
exactly.
We
weren't
able
to
really
do
a
good
job
figuring
out
whether
this
was
comparable.
C
However,
it's
it's
right
on
the
golf
course
over
here
and
and
Golf
Course
views
tend
to
command
a
pretty
decent
premium,
so
we
would.
We
would
be
inclined
to
view
that
as
as
not
a
comparable
sale
because
of
that
Golf,
Course
View
and
then
34
3405
North
Perry,
that
was
that
was
sold
in
August
of
of
22
for
a
million
185.,
it's
in
the
same
neighborhood,
but
it's
it's
in
it.
The
neighborhood
changes
as
you
approach
that
house.
If
you
take
a
walk
around
our
neighborhood,
the
houses
around
our
property.
D
A
E
E
E
The
quality
is
very
good.
Minus
the
homeowner
purchased
the
house
in
March
2023
for
985
thousand
dollars.
This
sale
happened
after
the
assessment
date
of
January
1st,
and
this
cell
will
be
review
or
we
will
be
study
during
the
analysis,
for
2024
is
no
part
of
our
analysis
period.
E
The
homeowner
mentioned
that
he
needed
to
do
some
updated
renovations
to
the
house,
so
he
was
not
able
to
show
me
the
interior
of
the
property,
so
the
only
source
of
information
I
have
was
the
real
estate
listing
some
interior
photos
that
were
available
online
and
it
exterior
exterior
work
of
the
property.
I
I
wasn't
able
to
see
in
detail
the
house,
so
I
cannot
confirm
the
actual
conditions
for
the
house
right
now.
E
According
to
MLS,
the
house
was
sold,
as
is
condition
needed
some
repairs
or
some
updates,
but
also
during
my
research
I
found
that
there
was
an
addition
built
in
1997,
which
is
in
the
back
of
the
house,
which
includes
a
family
room
and
also
a
new
master
suite
with
a
full
bathroom
upstairs
that
was
built
in
1897,
also
in
2007-2008,
the
kitchen
and
bathrooms
were
renovated,
which
is
also
another.
You
can
see
that
on
the
MLS
listing
the
kitchen
is
not
the
original,
it
was
updated
or
renovated
in
2007.
E
also
the
bathrooms
for
the
estate
or
the
previous
owner.
It
was
a
living
trust
which
normally
these
sales,
we
take
a
careful
look.
Sometimes
there
might
be
motivations
to
reduce
the
sales
price
below
assessment
value
or
to
lower
the
cell,
the
the
listing
price
for
this
property.
So
sometimes
we
just
removed
these
sales
from
the
analysis.
So
again
we
have
to
take
a
closer
look
to
this
property
and
and
sales
in
the
neighborhood.
E
The
comparables
I
provide
are,
are
houses
within
the
neighborhood
that
I
consider
to
be
similar
in
size
or
livable
space,
and
also
comparable
and
quality
number
of
bedrooms
number
of
bathrooms
I
mean
it's
difficult
to
find
an
exact
property
that
matches
the
subject,
but
these
are
the
ones
that
are
available
to
me
on
during
the
analysis
period,
And
I
can
provide
to
the
homeowner
as
a
reference.
E
I
can
also
mention
that
the
neighborhood
assessment
increase
in
average
of
7.6
percent
for
the
neighborhood
and
this
property
assessment
increase
7.22
compared
to
last
year.
So
also
the
assessment
increase
from
previous
year
from
2022
is
within
the
range
of
the
neighborhood.
E
Another
reference
I
can
I
mean
another
reference.
I
can
do
to
the
compress
I
provide
again
I,
also
reviewed
the
appraisal
report
that
the
homeowner
provided
to
us
and
I
saw
that
the
sales
of
sales
comparable
approach.
E
E
This
specific
neighborhood
has
a
average
land
value
of
nine
hundred
and
twenty
thousand
dollars,
which
is
one
of
the
higher
land
values
in
in
the
area
again,
based
on
the
limited
information
available
to
me
and
the
the
basic
corrections
I
made
to
the
record
after
reviewing
and
re-costing
the
property
assessment,
my
final
result
is
to
recommend
to
confirm
the
assessment
that
one
million
165
000
for
2023..
F
Peter
bar
you
just
mentioned
that
there
was
a
mortgage
lender
appraisal
that
came
in
at
a
million
fifty
thousand
dollars.
But
on
page
was
it
two
yeah
two?
It
says
that
the
appellant
gave
you
a
mortgage
company,
appraiser
appraisal
of
the
sales
price
985
000.,
which
one
is
it.
B
F
F
Straight
the
other
here's
my
other
question
it
was
sold,
as
is
developers
mostly
were
interested
in
clearly
the
house
had
some
flaws
weaknesses,
the
and-
and
you
know
incites
some
more-
that
you
know
that
that
nobody
apparently
knew
about
much
at
the
time.
Two
guys
didn't
bring
invoices
from
the
repairs.
But
for
the
moment
saying,
yeah
there's
some
stuff
going
on
how.
F
With
an
excellent
minus
the
I'm,
sorry
very.
F
E
Where
the
quality
normally
is
set,
when
the
proper
the
house
is
built,
you
know,
based
on
you,
know
the
quality
of
the
construction,
the
size
of
the
house,
some
multiple
factors
in
order
to
make
an
adjustment
of
Correction
to
the
quality
of
the
house.
Based
on
the
on
the
you
know,
the
condition
of
the
property
I
have
to
see
the
house
I
have
to
see
the
property.
You
know
to
verify
the
real
conditions
for
the
houses.
This
is
structural
damage,
but
it's
something
that
just
for
example,
you
just
need
to
refinish
the
floors.
E
G
Yeah,
this
is
for
the
property
owner.
Tell
me
a
little
bit
about
the
seller,
who
was
it?
What
was
their
age,
etc,
etc?.
C
Sure
so
the
the
seller
was
in
a
state.
It
was
a
trust
we
we
never
had
any
that.
Obviously
one
cannot
have
a
direct
interaction
with
a
trust,
but
we
we
only
ever
dealt
with
the
with
the
selling
agent
and
only
ever
over
the
phone.
So
so
yeah.
It
was
just
a
just
a
piece
of
paper.
C
G
A
Have
a
question
for
the
Appellate
when
you
got
your
mortgage
loan
and
we're
going
through
this
process?
Did
you
do
a
home
inspection.
G
C
Not
exactly
the
the
the
the
home
is.
B
C
An
example:
the
the
home
inspection
would
note
something
like
there's
spalling
on
the
bricks
on
the
chimney
and
and
I
said
well.
What
does
that
mean?
And,
and
and
the
answer
would
be
well-
that
just
means
I
would
get
a
very
mechanical
answer
like
that.
Just
means
the
outer
surface
of
the
bricks
has
been
popped
off
over
the
years,
but
that
was
all
there.
C
C
The
roof
came
back
as
problematic,
but
not
necessarily
in
need
of
replacement.
Okay,
but
again,
okay,.
E
C
Sure
so
so
I
I
would
I
would
just
like
to
reiterate.
We
believed
that
985
is:
is
the
correct,
fair
market
value
that
that
value
accounted
for
potential
problems
in
the
future,
which
we
discovered
and
they
turned
out
to
exist?
So
so
we
believe
that
985
was
the
correct
value
and
we
hope
you
agree
with
us.
Thank
you.
Okay,.
H
A
I
A
G
B
G
J
Late
sales
and
yeah,
they
don't
really
justify
any
changes
and,
as
far
as
the
pictures
you
know,
my
opinion
is
mainly
before
that
hardwood
floors.
J
H
A
K
A
Okay,
thank
you.
Okay,
so
I
believe
Mr
Graham
came
on.
L
Yes,
I
joined
the
call,
I'm,
sorry
and
I
have
been
I,
have
spoken
to
Andrew
King
and
requested
that
I
review
some
information
that
he
sent
me
and.
A
Hold
on
hold
on,
we
haven't
started.
We
just
just
want
to
make
sure
you're
here
hold
on
a
second.
Do
you
have
a
camera,
sir,
to
turn
on.
L
A
Thank
you,
okay.
There
we
go
all
right
just
so
that
the
record
reflects
that.
A
L
M
Mr
Grohl
stated
that
he
hadn't
received
any
of
the
the
package
from
from
the
county.
So
I
forwarded
the
email
to
him
with
the
Dropbox
link.
It's
not
new
information,
it's
it's
just.
What
was
there.
A
G
N
A
I
It
is
it
Ryan
LLC,
then
I
would
am
I
saying
it
right.
Then
it
would
include
all
the
members
that
work
for
Ryan
LLC.
B
B
N
N
The
the
old
owner
actually
tried
to
get
enough
density
for
a
multi
multi-family
site,
but
unfortunately
failed,
which
inevitably
led
to
his
sale
of
the
property.
Last
January
in
January
of
2022
for
3.5
million
dollars
in
a
bankruptcy.
N
The
property
is
actually
it's
aging,
it's
in
pretty
bad
shape
and
it's
surrounded
by
other
multi-family
properties
and
obviously
would
you
know,
create
a
lot
more
income
if
it
was
converted
to
a
multi-family
site-
and
you
know,
given
it
an
inevitable
disadvantage
in
the
marketplace,
and
I
saw
a
five
percent
increase
in
the
assessment
from
tax
year
2022,
despite
no
improvement
in
actual
property
performance,
and
if
I
could
just
direct
you
to
page
three
for
the
for
the
income
approach.
N
So
when
the
income
approach,
we
match
the
the
Assessor's
retail
income
of
278
000,
the
property
is
actually
producing
three
dollars
per
square
foot
per
the
base
per
the
or
the
lease
agreement
that's
included
later
on
in
the
packet.
N
We
believe
that
Staples
is
basically
there
just
paying
the
absolute
bare
minimum
just
to
keep
the
lights
on.
So
the
property
is
essentially,
you
know
not
getting
any
kind
of
income,
so
we
felt
that
that
market
rent
was
applicable.
Here.
N
That's
that's
on
a
month-to-month
lease
as
well,
which
is
you
know
that
could
vacate
the
premises
at
any
moment
any
given
time
again
the
pass-through
income
of
56
000.
We
also
use
that
as
well
despite
there's,
no,
despite
the
fact
that
there
is
no
pass
through
income,
not
from
percentage
rent,
not
from
parking
not
from
any
any
other
any
other
source,
but
whenever
we
arrive
at
the
same
PGI
and
use
the
same
vacancy
and
collection
loss
ratio
as
the
as
the
county
for
the
Opex.
N
We
also
use
the
same
figure
but
wanted
to
point
out
that
the
43
026
dollar
figure
only
represents
thirteen
point.
Nine
percent
of
the
egi
and
per
Arlington
County
guidelines
I
believe
that
figure
is
supposed
to
be
a
17
expense
ratio.
Nevertheless,
we
arrived
at
the
same
noi
and
overall
cap
rate
and
use
the
same
overall
cap
rate,
but
what
we
feel
like
we
had
the
biggest
difference
is
that
there
is
a
need
here
for
a
discount
for
lease
up.
N
The
new
owner
is
essentially,
you
know
it's
essentially
buying
a
100
vacant
building,
given
that
Staples
is
due
to
leave
at
any
at
any.
Given
time
we
have
some
articles
in
the
back
of
kind
of
you
know,
kind
of
pointing
out
how
poor
performance
has
been
for
Staples
and
again
this
this
property
surrounded
by
all
multi-family
buildings.
So
you
know
likely
you
know.
N
They're
gonna
have
to
make
some
significant
changes
in
order
to
get
this
profit,
this
property
to
be
asked,
profitable
and
competitive
as
possible,
and
so
we
include
on
page
four,
our
discount
for
lease
up
where
we
use
what
we
use
figures
that
are
all
cited
in
the
in
the
back
half
of
the
packet.
N
As
far
as
the
annual
market
rate
same
from
the
assessor,
the
market,
Senate
Improvement
allowance,
again
of
from
reputable
Solutions,
where
we
have
what
we
that
we
included
in
the
packet
to
arrive
at
a
discount
rate
of
479
926,
which
we
subtracted
from
from
the
indicated
value
to
arrive
at
our
Target
values,
which
is
again,
we
feel,
is
reasonable.
N
Given
the
the
status
of
the
property
and
I
believe
that
should
be
everything
again,
the
month-to-month
lease
of
three
dollars
per
square
foot
they're
due
to
vacate
at
any
you
know
at
any
moment
there,
so
we
thought
that
that's
that
discount,
really
suppose
was
definitely
a
was
definitely
needed.
There.
I
Good
morning
am
I
okay
good
morning
board.
You
are
familiar
with
this
case.
You've
heard
this
in
the
last
several
years,
the
the
at
one
time
this
tenant
had
a
rent
that
was
substantially
higher
actually
much
higher
than
what
we
used
for
the
January
1
assessment.
B
I
I
want
to
point
out
that
the
rent
that
we
did
use
is
reasonable.
It's
a
little
on
the
low
side.
I
do
after
reviewing
our
analysis
period
where
I
reviewed
income
expense
statements
that
were
submitted,
and
these
are
tenants
that
are
relatively
close
to
this
subject.
I
They're
in
this
same
market
area,
down,
Wilson,
Boulevard
or
off
a
block
or
two
and
those
rents
range
from
39,
a
square
foot
to
fifty
eight
dollars,
a
square
foot
and
yes,
those
are
some
of
those
stores
might
be
in
a
little
bit
better
condition,
but
the
subject
is
not
in
poor
condition:
it's
just
kind
of
average.
Yes,
they
probably
need
to
do
a
little
bit
of
Maintenance.
Keep
in
mind.
This
building
was
remodeled.
It
was
renovated
in
2007.
So
it's
not
falling
down
around
your
ears.
I
Okay,
you
don't
have
to
worry
about
walking
in
the
door
and
you
should
have
a
hard
hat
on
this
property
did
sell
for
3.5
million.
It
was
a
foreclosure
back
in
January
2022
to
also
add
to
the
rents.
Annetta
did
a
search
in
co-star
and
found
that
co-star
would
estimate
the
rents
for
a
property
like
this
at
32
to
39
a
square
foot
there's
still
more
than
what
we
used
for
the
January
one
assessment.
I
Additionally,
let's
see
guidelines
were
used
for
this
property.
Let
me
switch
back
to
my
page,
looking
at
my
summary
that
annetta's
summary
sheet,
the
number
some
of
the
numbers
that
she
has
on
here
are
incorrect
for
the
January
1
assessment.
When
you're
looking
at
the
vacancy
rate,
she
has
seven
percent,
it's
actually
nine
percent
that
was
used.
When
you
also
look
at
the
expenses
and
she's
got
13.9
percent.
It
was
actually
17
that
was
used.
Those
are
guidelines,
keep
in
mind.
We
do
not
apply
vacancy
or
expenses
to
pass
through.
I
I
The
dollar
figure
is
correct
and
also
to
add,
we
do
not
use
Lisa.
It's
used
for
new
construction,
keep
in
mind
that
this
property,
the
owner,
the
prior
owner-
let's
put
it
that
way,
the
prior
owner
intent
was
to
redevelop
this
as
apartments
or
whatever.
So
they
gave
a
really
good
deal
to
Staples
staples
is
not
going
out
of
business.
You
know,
there's
always
been
this
rumors
that
Staples
is
going
bankrupt,
they're
not
going
bankrupt,
they're
a
good
tenant
they've
got
an
extremely
and
I
cannot
stress
enough.
I
An
extremely
good
deal
for
rent
on
this
property.
Staples
is
just
moving
more
towards
e-commerce.
They've
talked
about
closing
stores,
but
they're
still
in
this
property,
they've
got
an
excellent
deal.
Why
would
you
leave
if
you're
paying
the
rent
that
they're
paying
so
that's
it?
For
now,
I
am
open
for
questions.
Thank
you.
N
I
think,
in
order
to
put
someone
else
in
there
easily,
obviously
we
there
will
be
need.
There
will
be
some
costs
attributed
to
that.
So
that's
why
we
feel
that
that
discount
for
lease
up
is
necessary,
just
because
they
will
have
to
adapt
that
space.
They
would
have
to
take
some
time
to.
N
Out
I
believe
so
I
believe
they
should
be.
I
mean
I,
think
that
the
new
owner
in
all
in
all
honesty,
is
probably
gonna.
Gonna
go
ahead
and
choose
to
take
that
route
just
because
they
know
that
they're
going
to
be
able
to
get
much
higher
rents
on
page
eight
actually
is
where
that
lease
is
available.
N
If
you
want
to
take
a
quick
look,
but
again
as
a
new
owner
coming
in
I,
believe
that
they'll
they'll
obviously
take
you
know,
they'll
take
the
steps
necessary
to
get
this
property
to
bring
them
as
much
income
as
possible,
and
obviously
Staples
is
not.
Is
not
the
the
tenant
in
in
place
to
be
able
to
do
that.
B
I
I'm
sorry,
but
I
did
not
hear
you
very
well
I'm,
valuing
this
we're
not
valuing
it
based
on
the
the
tenant,
the
name
tenant,
Staples,
we're
valuing
this
properties.
You
know
if
there
was
a
reasonable
tenant.
You
know
just
standard
tenant
to
occupy
the
space
in
the
in
its
current
condition
and
as
I
stated,
you
know
from
our
analysis,
we
show
rents
that
are
higher.
F
Besides
that,
maybe
I
said
for
sale,
I'm
sorry
listed
for
lease
I
may
have
misspoken
I'm,
asking
I'm
asking
the
Appellate.
N
Okay,
okay,
as
far
as
we
know,
it
is
not
listed
for
at
least
just
yet
I
believe
again,
they
just
bought
it
in
January
of
last
year,
so
maybe
they're
still
trying
to
figure
out
what
would
be
the
most.
You
know
effective
approach
here
in
in
the
future,
how
they
want
to
proceed
with
the
property
again,
it's
surrounded
by
multi-family
buildings
and
obviously
would
require
some
Renovations,
so
they're,
probably
taking
some
steps
to
get
it
to
get
everything
ready.
I
Thank
you
once
again,
the
the
rent
that
we
use
for
this
property
is
very
reasonable
for
current
condition
and
and
state
with
the
current
tenant.
That's
in
place,
as
I
mentioned
before.
In
our
analysis,
with
similar
properties
that
are
fairly
close
to
the
subject.
I've
got
rents
that
range
from
39
to
58
dollars
a
square
foot
also
co-star
States,
for
something
of
this
condition:
32
to
39
dollars
a
square
foot
and
the
building
is
not
collapsing.
I
It
is
not
in
a
collapse
in
state
as
just
an
average
condition.
It
probably
needs
a
little
bit
of
spit
and
polish
make
it
look
nice.
You
know
before
you
put
a
new
tenant
in
there
and
once
again
we
did
use
guidelines.
Please
keep
in
mind
that
the
numbers
that
are
showing
on
the
summary
page
are
incorrect,
but
the
dollar
figures
I'm,
sorry
the
rates,
the
seven
percent,
the
13.9
are
incorrect,
but
the
dollar
figures
are
correct.
Thank
you.
N
Yep
again
just
wanted
to
point
out
the
sale
of
just
one
over
one
year
ago
for
3.5
million,
with
no
changes
or
improvements
to
the
property
wanted
to
point
out
again
also
that
that
operating
expense
figure
of
43
000
26
dollars
still
only
represents
15
of
that
retail
income
of
278
000,
not
the
17
per
the
guidelines.
And
again
we
had
absolutely
no
issue
with
the
market.
N
Rent
just
felt
that
there
were
some
leads
up
costs
that
were
inevitable
in
order
to
get
the
property
prepared,
and
you
know,
fix
it
up
for
a
new
tenant
to
get
a
new
tenant
in
there
in
the
near
future
and
again
no
pass
through
income
in
a
three
dollar
per
square
foot
month
to
month,
income.
G
It's
residential
prior
owner
rejected
a
rejected,
a
offered
purchased
by
Arlington
Housing
Court
and
went
in
for
a
planned
Amendment
and
resuming
to
mixed
use,
which
was
inconsistent
with
the
glove,
so
it
got
denied
the
county,
wants,
affordable,
housing
or
pure
residential
along
this
stretch,
the
property
you're
all
probably
familiar,
but
maybe
you've
even
been
in
there
property
is
not
really
conducive
to
a
commercial
use
and
I
guess
is
eventually
you'll
see
a
total
residential
build
here.
G
I,
don't
know
how
long
that'll
take
so
on
one
hand,
I
don't
think
the
building
needs
a
whole
lot
of
fixing
up
to
be
leased
to
somebody
else,
but.
G
I,
don't
know
if
somebody
else
is
going
to
go
in
there,
because
it's
not
very
visible,
it's
not
really
in
a
retail
good
retail
location.
So
I
just
I,
wanted
to
share
that
background
with
everybody.
I
think
the
assessed
values
probably
a
little
bit
high
enough
grossly
high,
but
a
little
bit
High
and
so
I'll
just
see
what
others
think.
F
You
know
about
what
orange
just
said,
but
there
are
uses
for
it
wouldn't
be
a
shoe
store,
but
it
certainly
could
be
a
fitness
oriented
type
Studio,
it's
a
block
from
9
000
square
feet,
I
mean
you
know,
I'm
talking,
martial
arts
kind
of
thing,
yeah
and.
B
H
No
or
I
disagree
a
little
bit
because
the
fact
you've
got
all
this
residential
around
there
there's
commercial
operations
that
would
love
to
have
that
much
residential
around
oh
yeah,
yeah,
so
I
think
there
there
could
be
a
tentative
and
the
fact
that
they
said
this
is
probably
the
action
plan.
The
appellant
said.
This
is
probably
the
actual
plan
they're
going
to
pursue.
A
K
A
H
A
H
J
Yeah
I
mean
we've
been
hearing
about
this
building
for
so
many
years
and
every
year
it's
like,
oh,
they
might
leave
they're
going
this
year
and
you
know
it's
still
being
occupied.
It's
they're
still
paying,
rent
and
and
I
did
check
the
percentages
and
the
numbers,
and
they
are
correct.
Hello,
Mr
Gomez
was
saying
that
it's
still
a
15
on
these
places.
But
when
you
look
at
the
income
you
take
the
vacancy
out
and
then
compute
the
percentage
of
the
expenses
correct.
It
is
17
yeah
correct.
So
all
the
numbers
are
correct.
F
F
H
H
G
F
F
G
K
B
A
I
A
P
Okay,
very
briefly,
it
we
won't
take
eight
minutes.
This
is
the
Days
Inn
on
Arlington
Boulevard
and
Pershing
Drive,
just
west
of
Fort
Myer.
It's
page
40
of
the
Boe
memo.
I
assume
it
would
be
page.
Three
of
our
presentation
shows
in
direct
capitalization
analysis,
our
income
work
up
as
compared
to
the
counties
and
really
the
main
issue
is
the
counties
valuing
the
hotel
as
though
it
were
fully
recovered
from
the
pandemic.
You
can
see
there
imputing
and
noi
of
almost
six
hundred
thousand
dollars.
P
Even
in
2019,
the
noi
was
only
just
above
500
000
516
versus
598.
What
we've
tried
to
do
is
stabilize
and
with
the
other,
under
understanding
that
it's
we're
not
fully
recovered
from
the
pandemic.
We
use
the
county
County's
parameters
on
the
revenue
side,
stabilize
expenses
at
a
70
ratio,
which
is
roughly
where
it's
been
in
the
2019
was
the
last
stabilized
year.
It
was
69
I
used
70,
then
imputed,
a
four
percent
reserve
and
at
100
basis
points
to
the
County's
base
rate
of
8.22
percent.
P
To
come
up
with
our
value
of
4
million
215
then
deducted
the
the
modest
35
000
in
ffne.
Also
included
in
the
package
I've
got
a
tax
map
with
the
cap
rate.
The
PWC
4-pack
study
is
in.
There
then
also
studies
from
the
the
housing
Lodging
Association
talking
about
after
recovery
for
hospitality,
but
that's
really
all
I
have.
O
Board
members,
so
we
will
focus
primarily,
as
we
normally
do
on
our
summary
sheets,
remind
the
board
again
of
all
the
positive
economic
indicators
for
tourism
again
indicating
that,
for
the
most
part,
tourism
is
back
in
a
big
way
for
the
hospitality
within
the
county.
Again
for
the
year
ending
2022
Hotel
occupancy
at
56
Revenue
per
available
room
of
111,
it's
an
average
daily
room
rate
of
35
percent.
Obviously
that
encompasses
all
40
properties.
We
don't
get
individual
line
items
from
these
properties,
but
then
we.
B
Q
O
B
O
O
And,
of
course,
we
still
value
the
property
via
income
approach,
but
noting
that
we
cannot
have
value
that's
less
than
the
land
we
here
at
again,
the
Minimus
value
this
year,
given
the
metrics
that
we
did
see,
we
anticipated
an
increase
in
net
operating
income.
Again,
as
noted
by
Mr
Aarons,
we
were.
B
O
Aggressive,
but
that
being
said,
the
assessment
actually
increased
by
Thirty
one
thousand
dollars
point
five
percent
that
there's
just
not
much
more
modest.
We
could
do
as
far
as
representing
an
increase
to
the
property,
which
I
think
we
all
agree
occurred
again.
We
saw
an
increase
to
net
operating
income
of
134
percent
a
year
over
year.
O
You
know
putting
it
bluntly
that
the
hands
are
tied
in
the
sense
of
we
reflect
that
our
original
genuine
assessment
was
a
bit
aggressive.
We
did
test
that
information.
Obviously
again,
looking
at
that,
we
were
low
on
operating
expenses.
We.
B
O
In
fact
believe
that
after
72
percent
growth
of
total
revenue
that
are
26,
indication
was
probably
a
bit
low,
so
we
did
extrapolate
that
a
bit
up
to
39
growth,
but
of
course,
that
led
to
a
indication
of
value
higher
than
the
January
one.
Therefore,
we
do
request
that
the
genuine
one
value
of
6
million,
four
hundred
thirty
two
thousand
three
hundred.
B
O
Confirmed
I
guess:
Mr
Aaron's
noted
it's
very
well
situated
it's
across
Fort
Myers
base,
it's
approximately
two
miles
or
so
from
DC's
border
right
here
on
Route
50..
You
know
again,
given
what
we
know
of
the
property
and
its
future
potential.
While
we
don't
value,
Heist
and
best
use,
you
know
we
would
hope
that
you'll
look
to
that
and
at
least
enforce
the
current
land
value
and
again,
a
very
modest
half
percent
increase
to
a
6
million
432.
G
Ian
Mr
cheek,
is
you
didn't
give
them
a
reserve?
Is
that
right.
O
That
is
correct.
Normally,
what
happens?
Is
we
value
based
on
the
previous
history?
As
you
can
see,
2019,
2021
and
22
they
do
not
have
any
patterns
are
in
place,
not.
F
O
F
O
Based
on
an
income
approach,
so
essentially
we're
going
to
look
at
the
property
itself.
In
this
case,
128
Keys
128
rooms,
we
figure
out
an
average
daily
rate,
subsequent
rent
Park.
We
play
that
to
get
Revenue,
we
project
operating
expenses
cap
that
gives
us
the
value.
Once
we
have
the
value
what
land
is
allocated
goes
to
land
anything
left
would
be
allocated
towards.
F
So
then
my
question
becomes
in
your
test,
knowing
more
after
you
instructed
column
D,
you
found
that
predictably
they're
total
revenue
went
up,
and
originally
you
had
just
Divine
through
just
get
estimations
that
it
went
was
going
to
go
up
2023
by
about
26
percent,
which
you
found.
But
then
you
increase
that
in
the
test,
the
36
percent,
when
the
income
was
much
less
when
that
was
tortured,
I'm,
so
sorry,
I,
don't
know,
I
can
make
it
easier
in
column,
F,
total
revenue.
O
From
that
we
can
extrapolate
out
what
their
room
revenue
is
going
to
be
for
the
year
from
that
we
project
forward
into
2023..
We
knew
based
off
of
2022's
rebound
that
2023
would
be
even
more
robust,
would
be
better,
and
then
once
we
received
the
2022
INE
sometime
in
April.
B
O
B
O
Available
room
up,
you
know,
even
with
this
adjustment,
we
did
note
that
we're
half
of
one
percent
above
last
year's
assessment,
which
again
was
the
Minimus
value.
We
do
believe
that
the
Improvement
the
property
should
be
reflected
in
the
fact
that
probably
did
in
fact
go
up
at
least
31
000..
That
being
said,
we
wouldn't
ask
the
board
to
confirm
the
property
at
6
million
432
300..
Thank
you.
P
Just
just
very
briefly
again,
it's
been
a
while,
since
I've
encountered
the
year
so
issue
so
I
apologize.
If
if
things
have
changed,
but
any
sort
of
projection
for
2023
I
mean
isn't
that
the
sort
of
you
know,
speculation
that
is
prohibited
by
the
the
Fruit
Growers
decision
and
again,
if
that's,
if
that's,
changed,
I
apologize,
but
that
I
mean
years
years
ago
when
I
was
fairly
active
in
in
Virginia.
That
was
always
always
an
issue.
Otherwise
I've
got
nothing
else
to
to
add.
F
Obligated
to
look
trends
forward,
just
plunk.
Oh,
this
is
what
the
the
results
were
for
2022
in
this
case,
and
so
that's
what
we
just
do
it,
but
30
cents
37,
six
percent
increase
over
the
results
of
2022..
That's
that's
an
aggressive
objection,
balance
of
course
right.
We
try
not
to
object
and
guess,
what's
going
to
happen
future
starting
January
2nd.
F
H
F
A
Last
year
almost
at
600
000
I
mean
they
haven't
hit
it
for
many
years
now
and
granted.
They
didn't
have
the
operating
income
in
column
E
when
they
did
column,
D,
30,
289
000.,
so
to
be
using
almost
six
hundred
thousand
I.
You
know,
I,
don't
think
it's
back.
I
mean
I.
Think
the
appellants
pro
form
at
432
is
certainly
aggressive.
A
G
B
K
G
G
A
G
G
K
H
F
A
K
F
A
A
D
Yes,
good
morning,
everyone,
my
name,
is
Dede
George
I
represent
Wesley
housing,
which
is
the
owner
of
the
Cadence.
The
Cadence,
which
is
the
property
in
question,
is
a
100
percent
low
and
moderate
income
property
that
was
newly
developed
it
delivered
this
year
and
so
100
of
the
units
there
are
dedicated
to
persons
residing
in
Arlington,
better
of
low
and
moderate
income.
D
Our
our
perspective
is
really
based
on
the
Arlington
code
that
requires
an
income
approach
for
the
properties,
current
use
and
restriction
because
of
the
affordable
housing
Covenant
that
comes
with
the
property.
The
property
itself
is
97
units.
There
are
four
Studios
42
one
bedrooms,
48
two
bedrooms
and
three
three
bedrooms
of
those
property:
please
there
is
a
spread,
albeit
low
and
moderate
income
between
30
percent
of
Ami,
and
we
do
have
a
few
at
40.
D
We
have
a
few
at
50,
60
and
70
of
Ami
is
the
max
that
we
can
go
to
when
we
apply
the
County's
cap
rate
that
was
provided
in
the
assessment
versus
the
proforma,
which
was
year
end
2022,
that
actual
income
is
about
13
million
dollars.
It's
thirteen,
eight
six,
four
one.
Eight
six,
which
is
three
million
dollars
less
than
the
current
assessed
value
at
a
million
Seventeen,
five
hundred,
and
so
our
perspective,
and
our
plea
is
to
keep
it
using.
D
The
County's
current
cap
rate
and
the
performer
went,
which
we
are
not
receiving
yet
are
actual
income
is
less
than
that
for
the
property
to
to
follow
code
and
to
keep
the
property
at
its
assessed
value
based
on
its
income,
the
income
that
the
property
brings
in
and-
and
that
would
be.
That
would
be
our
RS.
A
D
I
Thank
you
ma'am.
So,
as
this
is
mentioned,
this
is
a
newly
constructed
building.
Their
Lisa
began,
December
2022,
so
obviously
column
e
is
only
showing
one
month's
rent
vacancy
and
expenses.
That's
why
you're
seeing
the
vacancy
rate
looking
exceptionally
high
as
they're
just
beginning
to
lease
up
there?
I
So
where
do
I
start
I,
you
know
where
do
I
start?
How
do
I
develop
a
rental
rate
for
this?
I
Well
I
analyzed
the
rent
roll
that
was
supplied
to
us
and
based
and
the
rents
are
kind
of
all
over
the
place
right
now,
if
you
look
at
the
apartment,
revised
worksheet,
which
is
page
five,
they're
kind
of
still
a
bit
all
over
the
place
as
they're
trying
to
lease
up
and
so
I
I
use
my
best
analysis
and
that's
how
I
came
up
with
the
annual
rent
that
you
see
under
column,
f
and
3100
is
just
other
miscellaneous,
probably
laundry,
some
other
little
fees,
things
like
that.
I
We
use
the
standard
three
percent
for
our
guidelines
and
also
for
the
expenses.
When
you
look
at
our
guidelines
for
calf
mid
rise,
the
per
unit
rate
is
6960
per
unit
because
they
really
haven't
established.
I
We
have
nothing
to
reference,
so
we
use
the
guidelines
for
that
and
because
this
is
a
new
building,
we
used
a
one-year
lease
up
discount
below
the
line
and
that's
how
we
came
up
with
the
value
of
17
million,
one
hundred
and
thirty,
four
thousand
five
hundred,
which
is
a
a
reduction
from
the
January
1
assessment.
I'm
open
for
questions.
Thank
you.
A
D
We
only
had
a
few
units,
at
least
that
we
had
just
started
leasing
up.
It
was
somewhere
around
15
if
I'm.
Looking
back
at
my
notes,
correct.
K
D
We
we
end
up
with
significant
losses.
Our
our
property
is
very
challenged
with
trying
to
collect
rent
trying
to
lease
up
right
now
we
have
been
able
to
lease
up,
but
even
with
our
lease
up,
our
income
is
very
far
below
projections
and
we
are
committed
to
still
providing
affordable
housing,
and
so
we
sort
of
roll
with
the
challenges
of
lease
up
and
turnover
and
and
trying
to
meet
our
performers
closely
as
possible.
But
it
is
significantly
below
what
has
been
stated,
not.
K
O
K
K
You
all
are
probably
a
lot
slower
to
evict
than,
and
you
know
the
market
rate
apartment
okay,
you're
gone,
and
we
should
probably
appreciate
that
and.
D
Our
tenants
know
that,
and
so
we
are
carrying
over
a
lot
of
losses
exactly
to
that
point,
because
we
do
not
evict
with
our
mission
to
support
and
provide
quality,
affordable
homes.
It
is
a
current.
It
is
a
significant
struggle
for
us
in
Arlington
and
across
the
portfolio
just
to
be
clear.
We
would
actually.
O
There
are
quite
literally
waiting
lists,
and
then
concessions
tend
not
to
be
offered
as
much
because
of
that
feature.
If
you
have
someone
who's
waiting
to
come
in,
you
don't
necessarily
have
to
incentivize
them.
We
do
agree
with
rent
losses,
more
common
on
our
competitive
portals
than
our
Market.
Okay,.
G
That,
based
on
the
the
rent.
A
G
That
are
in
the
Covenant.
I
P
O
G
In
the
beginning
of
the
report
Lori,
it
says
efficiency,
704
unit
news
listing
all
these
units
and
what
they
could
rent
for.
So
the
way
you
did
it
I
think
is
you
said:
okay,
100
occupied
every
unit
we
calculate
the
rent
is
going
to
be
whatever.
B
G
Therefore
it's
civilian
Aid,
and
so
then,
then
we
start
subtracting
from
that.
We
can't
use
actual
figures
because
it's
not
leased
up,
and
so
we
don't.
We
don't
know
what
that's
going
to
be.
I
So
so,
once
again,
I
was
looking
at
the
rent
roll
and
it's
still
not
fully
rented
so
you're
not
going
to
have
your
your
truest
accuracy,
your
best
accurate
number
for
the
rent
on
that
property
until
they
get
it
completely
filled
up.
Okay,
like
I
said
she's
mentioned
it
was
roughly
15
percent
occupied
and,
as
those
units
start
filling
in
you're,
going
to
get
more
consistency
in
rents.
I
A
To
follow
up
on
that
point,
you're
looking
at
hold
on
a
second
you're
looking
at
the
rents
that
are
coming
in
and
just
by
agreement,
you
both
said
it
was
just
starting
to
be
released
up
in
December
I.
Think
all
your
points
are
valid
for
2024,
but
this
had
15
of
income
coming
in
and
then
we're
kind
of
assessing
this
as
if
it
was
fully
rented
and
then
oh
by
the
way,
we'll
take
off
two
million
dollars
for.
G
A
I
Well,
you
know
this
is
not
atypical.
This
is
what
we
do
for
other
similar
property
types
that
are
committed,
affordable,
whether
you
don't
have
well.
We
do
have
a
bunch
that
some
that
are
coming
online,
that
are
new
construction.
This
is
what
we
do.
We
have
to
annualize
it
it's
an
annual
rent.
What
will
the
rent
be
as
of
January
1
we're
not
doing
this
on
month?
We
don't
value
it
based
on
one
month,
we're
valuing
it
based
on
an
entire
year,
and
if
Chris
would
like
to
supplement
that
comment,
he's
welcome.
It's.
O
F
O
Do
is
100
residential
and
then
we
take
off
for
issues
at
the
property.
So
in
this
case
it
is
very
typical
that
we
will
gross
up
what
the
potential
is.
You
could
see
that
Miss
Ruskin
did
change
that,
based
on
what
they're
actually
receiving
based
on
rents
in
place,
so
rather
than
grow
those
we're
actually
using
what's
in
place.
Three
percent
was
applied
as
this
guideline
and
it
has
that
below
the
line
adjustment
is
applied
only
for
those
first
year
initial
lease
UPS-
you
haven't
seen
this
before.
H
D
I
wish
we
could
get
to
those
rents,
we
are
see.
We
have
had
to
give
away
tremendous
concessions
to
actually
get
people
in
in
the
door
to
Lisa.
We
we
have
projections
for
all
of
our
new
properties.
We
are
not
coming
close
to
those
projections
and
the
actual
rents
that
we
are
receiving
and
even
at
the
Ami
levels,
we
have
had
to
accept
lowered
rents
to
actually
lease
up
the
property
to
meet
our
our
tax
credit
sort
of
lease
up
deadline.
I
I
I
would
assume
I
would
say
yes,
I
mean
we're,
comparing
it
to
other
committed,
affordable
units
when
we're
developing
those
guidelines.
They're
all
based
off
of
strictly
committed,
affordable
income
and
expense
statements
did
I
answer
your
question.
F
I
thought
I
heard
two
different
answers
to
this:
rent
roll
on
pages
two
and
three,
mostly
three
of
83.-
did
the
appellant,
create
this
rent
role
and
give
it
to
the
department.
This
is
for
Miss
George.
D
The
the
rent
roll
is
a
projected
rent
roll
for
the
property
as
we
roll
through.
We
see
that
the
income
that
we
projected
is
not
close
and
we
can't
just
serve
to
emphasize
so
if
you're
looking
at
our
goal,
which
is
our
rental,
that
income
number
is,
is
a
bit
higher,
but
we,
if
you
look
at
our
actual
income
and
based
on
the
performer,
we
are
not.
We
are
not
close
to
that.
F
Ms
roskin
I
want
to
know
you,
you
didn't
use
these
numbers
either.
Did
you
Desiree.
I
So
this
rent
role
was
supplied
by
the
owner.
Okay,
I'm
gonna
stress
it
again.
You've
got
a
column
for
Market
rent.
We
did
not
use
that.
We
went
with
the
rent
that
they
supplied.
That
they're
receiving
and
I
did
confirm.
Are
these
rents
that
you're
receiving
for
these
units-
and
these
are
Ami
rates
that
are
they
are
receiving?
Those
are
the
numbers
that
I
used
when
I
developed
the
annual
rent
are.
I
Q
I
Sure,
once
again,
this
is
a
new
building,
so
we
applied
a
load
line
adjustment
for
one
year's
rent.
I
My
my
annual
rent
that
I
used
was
developed
from
a
rent
roll
that
was
supplied
by
the
owner
and
I
used
rents
that
they
are
actually
getting
for
this
property.
When
I
tried
to
determine
what
is
the
average
rent
for
an
efficiency,
30
percent
Ami,
that's
what
I
used
what
they
are
receiving
once
again,
we
used
guidelines
vacancy
of
three
percent
and
the
guidelines
for
expenses,
because
those
really
have
not
been
established.
I
Yet
we
don't
know
what
their
their
history
will
be
and
I
want
to
say
that
the
guidelines
are
developed
from
other
committed,
affordable
buildings.
They're,
not
you
don't
use
Market.
I
D
Sure,
if
I
need
to
add
in
anything
else,
I
would
stress
that
our
rent
rolls
are
a
goal
and
with
significant
collection
laws,
vacancy
laws,
the
property
is
underperforming,
and
if
we
looked
at
our
actual
income,
not
the
projections
based
on
the
rental,
you
would
see
a
recalculate
a
about
a
three
million
dollar
reduction
to
the
value.
D
We
we
recognize
that
our
rent
will
depicts
rents
and
provides
goals
that
are
higher
than
realized
and
I
think
we
are
in
the
same
boat
as
anyone
else,
especially
with
a
new
property
that
is
is
committed
to
providing
Quality
Homes.
Our
goal
is
to
House
people
first
and
unfortunately,
our
rentals,
our
actual
income,
depicts
the
reality
of
of
the
property's
performance.
A
I
agree
with
everything
that
the
county
is
saying:
projections
but
property.
Just
came
online.
Remember
this
time.
Next
year
I
had
no
problem,
they
had
15.
That
means
rented
approximately
somehow
over
the
month
of
December,
so
first
some
could
have
been
December
29th.
You
know,
you'll
know
that
I
just
think
it's
like
we're
a
year
ahead
of
ourselves.
A
A
F
G
There's
a
speaking
to
the
window,
yeah
there's
a
gap
in
the
state
code
and
I
participated
in
a
lunch
meeting
with
your
boss
and
the
leaders,
the
then
leaders
at
ahc
and
from
the
time
it
gets
approved
to
the
time
it's
up
and
running.
There's
this
Gap
that
that
we
think
the
affordable
projects
are
being
over
assessed.
G
I
think
we
should
go
with
what
it
was
last
year.
Then.
B
G
Year
we
could
look
at
the
assume,
is
fully
geared
up
right.
A
A
G
On
evidence,
but
it
just
seems
like
that
can't
be
accurate
because
it
takes
so
long.
You've
got
to
find
a
eligible
tenant.
You
got
to
get
rid
of
the
only
one
and
you
know,
I'm
haven't,
set
and
I
tell
Mr
Court
over
there
I've
seen
situations
where
it's
been
months
and.
G
J
M
G
The
thing
is
you
can
you,
you
could
do
the
math
and
do
all
this
calculation
all
right.
How
many
units
are
there
at
that?
Are
a
efficiency
30.
You
know.
How
many
are
we
going
to
rent?
You
can
do
all
that
math,
so
you
can
get
the
income,
but
there's
no
way
you
get
to
expenses,
and
so
I
don't
think.
Based
on
this
Limited
information.
F
At
all
sensible,
sensitive
to
Vision
the
limitations
that
they
have
be
saying
all
kinds
of
stuff,
but
I'm
having
a
tough
times
evaluating
for
2023
the
same
as
2022,
which
was
a
building
under
construction
that
that
can't
be
right.
This
isn't
yeah!
You
know
what
I'm
saying
it
was
six
million
plus
in
2022,
because
it
was
a
building
that,
by
definition,
would
not
generate
Revenue
work
very
little.
That.
Q
F
G
H
H
K
So
in
preview,
11.8
million
is
what
I
ended
up
with
the
the
way
I
got.
There
was
instead
of
the
three
percent
vacancying
and
rent
losses,
I
used
20
percent
and
and
kept
everything
in
the
counties,
revision
column,
the
same.
H
K
K
H
K
K
But
it's
between
the
sixth
and
the
and
the
issue
with
the
six
honestly
I
can
go
with
it,
but
I
see
what
Ken
saying
that's
6.7
might
have
been
based
on
a
partial
construction
AIA.
Where
are
we
on
the
Billings
and
what's
been
spent
so
determine
that
so
I'm
not
sure
if
this
here,
because
it
could
have
been
at
80
percent
construction,
cost.
B
F
Problem
is
that
you
know
the
Department's
done
very
well
that
surely
they
extrapolate
they
didn't
take
the
advertisement.
They
went
to
the
slim,
but
existing
actual
bless
their
hearts.
I
sorry
I
had
a
different
point,
but
so
David
Greg
said.
Oh,
it
seems
to
me
that
the
department
can
own.
This
three
percent
rate
intuitively
seems
low
to
me.
Probably
everybody
in
the
room
I'm,
not
speaking
for
the
department,
but
that's
what
they
get
from
Apple
in
in
their
corporate
colleagues
and
I.
H
H
A
B
G
K
K
So
I've
still
got
the
below
the
line.
Deductions.
K
All
I've
got
is
I'm,
saying
20
historically
from
what
this
woman
is
telling
us
is
40,
but
I'm,
saying:
let's
give
them
a
20
allowance
for
writing
off
bad
debt,
which
is
what
they
end
up
having
to
do.
It
hits
their
bottom
line.
They
don't
see
that
20
and
I'd
say
next
year.
It'll,
if
you
know
I'm
trusting
what
she's
telling
me
but
it'll
be
that
that's
going
to
translate
to
noi.
Ultimately,
that's
that's
the
20
percent.
Oh
so.
K
Was
the
case
during
covet,
there
would
have
been
so
many
people
put
out
on
the
streets
through
eviction
to
use
that
waiting
list
and
bring
in
new
people.
It
would
have
been
a
humanitarian
disaster.
So
all
these
organizations
end
up
not
kicking
people
out,
which
I
think
is
the
right
thing
to
do,
but
they're
taking
losses
on
their
books
or
what
are
you
willing
to
do.
G
The
thing
with
low
models
you
always
go
with
the
real
numbers,
not
guidelines,
and
so
once
this
thing's
up
and
running
and
and
cranking
along
and
you
look
at
your
actual
expenses,
you
look
at
your
actual
vacancy.
They
can't
use
guidelines
and
so
we're
in
this
year
position
where
we
we
can
go
with
the
income,
but
we
can't
go
at
the
expenses
and
vacancies
and
so
we're
halfway
there
and.
K
You
did
yeah
okay,
so
I
took
a
20
off
for
the
vacancy
and
our
cost
combined.
Okay,
so
then
my
noi
becomes
or
the
effective
gross
income
becomes
a
million
480
458
noi
805,
338,
8053
338
and
then
the
indicated
value
would
be
13
649.80.
G
K
A
I
A
Okay,
going
back
to
we'll
bring
up
Mr,
King,
Mr
Groff.
L
Hello,
sorry
again
and
thank
you
for
delaying
this
to
me
in
the
video
the
the
session
I'll
be
quick,
I'm
still
I'm.
A
L
L
Thank
you
and
again
I'm
still
new
to
the
procedure
here.
Are
you
looking
at
the
board
package
that
I
just
received
and
reviewing
so
my
presentation
starts
on
page
61.?
Is
that
what
you're?
Looking
at
yeah?
Yes,
okay,
so
page
61,
is
the
list
of
comparables
that
we
provided
for
this
property,
the
subject
property,
there's
four
equity
and
two
Stills
properties?
L
If
you
go
to
the
two
pages
forward
on
page
64,
we
show
the
proximity
of
those
comparables
to
the
subject:
property
they're,
all
within
walking
distance
very
close,
and
the
subsequent
pages
on
65
60
is
the
subject
property
actually,
but
66
67
are
the
some
just
some
pictures
from
the
internet
of
the
the
comparable
properties.
L
So
that's
just
background
information,
but
going
going
to
the
actual
data
on
back
to
page
61.,
we're
just
showing
that
the
subject
property
is
valued
more
than
the
comparables,
both
equity
and
sales,
both
on
an
absolute
basis
on
the
per
square
footage
basis
I,
while
you've
been
dealing
with
these
other
issues,
I
looked
up
some
of
the
the
bedrooms
and
bathrooms
as
well.
Unfortunately,
the
county
data
that
we
have
does
not
have
the
the
quality
index
on
it
either.
L
So
I
had
to
review
that
information
that
was
provided
by
Mr
King,
the
the
property
I
guess:
you've
changed
the
effective
age
of
the
property
from
1980
to
1985
I'm,
not
quite
sure
what
the
the
justification
of
that
was
for,
but
the
property
was
sold
back
in
91,
so
that
was,
and
according
to
the
owner,
based
on
the
information
they
filled
out
in
our
questionnaire.
There's
been
no
real
sub
large
additions
or
any
major
work
done
to
the
property
since
they
acquired
it.
L
So
the
property
has
just
been
increasing
in
value
along
with
the
the
rest
of
the
the
market,
but
I
don't
understand
why
it
would
be
valued
more
than
other
properties
that
have
had
clear
upgrades
to
those
properties
in,
in
particular,
the
the
properties
that
have
sold
on
most
recently
the
sales
that
the
county
has
provided.
All
three
of
those
properties
are
actually
further
away
from
the
subject
properties
than
the
comparables
that
I
provided.
One
has
a
pool.
L
All
their
effective
ages
are
much
older,
sorry
much
newer
and
they
have
more
bedrooms
or
bathrooms,
or
both
so
I,
don't
know
how
those
are
comparable
to
the
the
subject
property.
So,
even
though
the
assessors
confirmed
the
the
assessed
value,
we
are
asking
for
a
reduction
based
on
on
on
these
comparables.
M
Good
morning
board
Andrew
King
here
this
is
this:
property
is
a
one
and
three
quarter
story:
single
family,
home,
four
bedrooms,
two
and
a
half
bathrooms
an
unfinished
basement.
As
far
as
we
know
with
a
garage
the
year
built
was
1923,
the
effective
age
was
1980
and
the
quality
was
at
very
good.
Minus
no
inspection
was
performed.
We
tried
to
set
up
a
an
inspection
with
the
agent
here,
but
it
didn't
work
out,
so
we
were
just
flowing
forward
with
some
of
the
plans
that
we
had
on
file.
M
You
can
see
on
the
second
page
of
the
property
worksheet
that
in
2007
there
was
a
385
thousand
dollar
addition
that
was
done
on
the
property,
so
there
was
Major
work
that
has
been
done
since
the
property
was
bought
in
1991,
so
any
all
the
stuff.
Beyond
the
original
footprint
there
is
going
to
be
from
that
2007
edition,
so
we
did
make
minor
changes.
You
know
reviewing
the
the
plans
that
we
had
on
file.
M
Just
some
small
square
footage
changes.
The
effective
age
I
did
take
from
19
1985..
It
probably
still
is
a
little
bit
low.
You
know
if
I
went
inside
this
house,
it
probably
is
a
bit
higher
than
that
due
to
that
2007
renovation.
That
was
done
to
the
property,
but
regardless
you
know
a
lot
of
the.
M
Sometimes
the
properties
surrounding
the
house
are
going
to
be
older,
that
we
haven't
gone
out
and
updated
recently,
so
we'll
try
and
get
out
and
do
those
properties
that
the
agent
brought
up,
but
we're
mainly
going
to
be
focusing
on
sales
sales
comparison.
M
So
if
you
look
at
the
comp
sheet,
I
think
you
know
we're
pretty
strong
in
terms
of
those
older
properties
that
have
had
additions.
I
think
the
three
comps
are
pretty
similar
in
square
footage
above
ground,
similar
bedroom
bath
or
brown,
similar
style
garages
and
those
sorts
of
things.
You
can
see
that
they
are
in
that
1.1
1.2,
1.3
million
dollar
range.
M
So
without
an
interior
inspection,
the
county
recommends
a
confirmation
of
the
assessment
at
one
million
153
300.
Thank
you.
L
A
M
Sure
so
we
did
try
and
take
another
look
at
that
large
2007
edition
that
was
done
to
the
property,
so
that
did
make
some
minor
changes
to
the
record
as
we
you
know,
get
get.
You
know
better
reflection
of
our
our
work.
M
There
was
some
minor
changes
to
the
property
that
did
change
the
value
but
I
think
looking
at
the
sales
in
the
neighborhood
for
these
older
properties,
with
additions
with
master
suites
with
garages.
I
think
the
the
counties
original
2023
assessment
is
in
line
with
the
neighborhood.
Thank
you.
L
Yes,
I
just
stand
by
the
contention
that
the
the
sales
comparables
that
are
provided
by
the
county
aren't
true
one-to-one
comparisons
with
the
subject:
property
they're
slightly
further
away.
One
has
a
pool.
If
you
look
at
the
pictures
online,
all
these
properties
sold-
and
you
know
the
recently
and
the
kitchens
have
been
upgraded
and
they're
just
not
alike,
for
like
comparison.
F
Just
quickly,
looking
at
the
appellant's
case,
we
don't
know
much
about
his
equity
comparables.
F
F
That
he
brings
are
not
they're.
All
the
same
kind
of
building
elements
tend
to
be
at
a
disadvantage.
They
don't
know
how
to
assess
the
quality
and
condition
of
a
you
know
a
residence
but
going
on
dollars
per
square
foot.
Just
isn't
it
doesn't
get
us
there
at
all.