07/01/2019 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

With regard .to ...the: Arden :.judgement, .the P,4: reques eci.; th4 the; S ecial (Vla istrate--:' attention.to`.Nos:'-24; 2$;''26, 29,.and30;• . : • * ' p g ,pay:specifit.�.:� • • • . They •.reaffirmedtheiri cornPliance.with:pSrofessionallY:.:.a.0,0, a. t; e;d• 'a•.psIial .se�.ndard, USPAP, :8t: •Critni a..and •exchange ofeidence peFoda tatutes 1301.1nd194 01;4): In the Facts-:..4:Compliance : • Section of.:Volume::i?-the PA describes Irl •detail.. how each of 8 criteria of.:F S. Section 193.011. i: s' considerd. • . • 1p. developing.t;he;comparabaes.presented :the:PA.uses..:theTPP;returns.and•.0 fed sal. r._ ... t .. $ . es of exact•;rriotlels;•>>� .. The PA stated thai County's Present Worth Tables always'trendllower than those recommended by the :Florida: D•epartnient of Revenue Their.market. tudies include:varioustypw of:assets, businesses. so d, supermarkets, square ..footage' and warehouse data', Photos were provided .with •some ;of alje, .. studies. • The warehouse study data relates to- A site'.Thspection was::. .: •performed in 2017 and included rn the PA's evidence The :PA:stated`that this is the.. first year. that •; . IiEnitations;wereplated on_ the;site:inspeetions..:, The: PA performed telephone,:interviews"with dealers; li ied:in the:,mod:el developed. by `' _The dealer. responses.. are•pr'esented in the; rebuttal' section, along with .comparable data from and PA: . .7fie• dealers were asked:about clew/used.pricing, shipping a:nd taxes Most of the dealers, operate in"the .new market.ar. d:do not supply,.the. niajor chains The:shipping .data frorr the model uses as the.' base, not County:. Th:s:data puts into;,question the pricing used in the model and applied by: the Petitioner/Agent to establish their requested. values.: None, df the•dealelrs/suppliers :were from the focal:. market.: :A:sphotos..were,:preserited,.the PA could not confirm that Site m$p.ection was..performed; by MIMS asstated m tXie Cerfifieatrort., ' .. The :PA.read.•a:iclosing statement. •:The:•.PA believes t at they:ha'e:compll'ed with: DOf7; •,County :•and • professional appraisal': practices,`,procedures and Standards. °Therefore, fife evidence. presented.:,.: •shows•thatthe• presumption: of correctness fias been rrraintained: loci°that.the; PA's,evldence' :roves. b .a: : preponderance of the ,evidence that their jusk;value methodology complies with:: F:S: �9 :01 i F.$. 194.301. The PA's evidence:was accepted and;wrll be considered ;`• • ; •. . •Petitioner/Agent:....:..: • Petitioner/Agent,did ndt,attend but.:requested that•evidence presented be.consideretf:• Their. evidonce .• :- includes a Letter stating:;thet.,they will not attend,: an•Affidavit for Protest Hearing, spreadsheet with Appraisal Value .and Taxpayer's • Opinion,, various. rriodels,"from l valuation tables using models, • DOR Answer nef,. DORZ TPP. GuidelinesIndex to Le al<Authorities,.:Deposition. by :Stephen Barreca (1/1/2001);;•disG'marked'."Appraisals baa.ekup"•and value. cajculation,pages-by Site Code and asset .• specific.. •••.: The Special: Magistrate.''r'ead idto the record.the yaides indicated; iri th'e;Petitioner/Agent's request Petition.No: -.� �•