11/14/1966 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Joe Kerley, Attorney and Mr. Mcaunkins, Vice -President of General Development. Corporation, protested the assessment of the land General Development owns in the E1/2 of Section 35, Township 33S,Range 39 E, and the WA of Section 36, Township 33S, Range 40E, Vicar Vero Highlands Sub) ' 0 contending that this property is being leased for cattle grazing and is over -assessed when compared to surrounding agricultural' land. They submitted a map showing the various assessments of General Development land and ad j oin3.rig jproperty. Mr. O'Neal, Attorney for Mr. Fletcher, .questioned and brought out facts. regarding the contract General Development uses to sell lots, whereby they retain possession of the property until final payment is made. It was bought out that some of the area under cattle grazing lease has been adjusted by, the Tax Assessor. After considerable ,.... discussion, Commissioner McCu}lers.moved that.the Assessor's recommendation be upheld by the Board,"because General Development is not in the cattle business to start with. If Mre Chesser owned the property under lease it would be different". The Motion was seconded by Commissioner Macdonald and unanimously carried. Mr. Kerley then protested the valuation of General Development property in Sebastian, .which is under cattle lease also, pointing out on a colored map,the valuations of their property and surrounding property. Mr. Fletcher stated that therehave been sales made from this area in question and because of the same identical type of lease, did not consider it a bona fide agricultureal pursuit by General Development Corporation. Mr. Mc- Junkins pointed out"that in March; 1966, this Board had agreed that the land which GDC owns and which was unplatted and under bona fide cattle lease would be certified to the Tax Assessor that it should be properly zoned as agriculture- and presumed that the fact of the agricultural use of this property is not. bo be challenged at this time The Board questioned. Mr. o Fletcher if the area determined in the Spring to beingeused as:_agricuiture, had he given tax relief to?r Mr. Fletcher responded'that"he could not rconcile all of them to be bona fide agricultural use- there were sales being made there and for that reason we did not feel that that could properly be considered only as pasture:' After considerable discussion, Commissioner Macdonald stated that it appeared to him that the Assessor's treatment of this question is fair and equitable and moved th the pp -666 600K 1U PACE 50 .1 h