07/21/2021 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Appraiser, Wesley Davis for all use codes on the DR -493 Adjustment made to recorded selling prices of Fair Market Value in arriving at Assessed Value. Sec 193.011(8) and 192.001(18) Florida Statutes Rule 12D-8.002(4), F.A.C. the subject Just Value is indicated at $2,933,231. The. Just Value for the subject property is supported at $2,933,231 based on Florida Statute 193:011 Factors to consider in deriving just valuation, including: (1), present cash value of the property, exclusive of reasonable fees and cost of purchase; (7) Income from property; and (8) net proceeds of the sale of the property after deduction of ail usual and reasonable fees and cost of sale. Magistrate Conclusion: in conclusion the PET preponderance of the evidence supports a reduction in Just Value for the combined properties to $2,933,231. After both parties were given the opportunity to be herd and all evidence is taken into consideration, the Special Magistrate finds that the Property Appraiser's Just Valuation methodology, although complying with. Section 193;011 F.S. is overcome by the Petitioner. The. Petitioner's evidence provided a preponderance of evidence that the Property Appraiser's valuation does not represent Just Value. There is competent and substantial evidence in the record to establish a revised value. Therefore the petition is GRANTED. Conclusion of Law: The. Property Appraiser did establish a presumption of correctness, which has been overcome by a preponderance of evidence provided by the Petitioner. The Income Approach provided by the Property Appraiser is not compelling .because of a lack of market support for ADR, expenses, or Cap Rate. The Market. Sales do not represent adequate market indicators for the subject. The Cost Approach is not supported by market Information to establish appropriate rates of depreciation. Additionally, there is no reconciliation for the final value assessed to the subject and no adjustments indicated for cost of sale. The Petitioner information is more compelling for the Income Approach, with adequate market support for ADR, RevPar, occupancy rates, expense ratios, and OAR rates. In the .petition process the burden of proof is on the Petitioner. In this case the Petitioner has overcome the presumption of correctness. The preponderance of evidence indicates that the subject is over assessed and that there is sufficient, relevant, credible evidence on the record to determine,a property assessment. Based on F.S. 193.011 the Petition is GRANTED, with primary conditions based on Sections 1;, 7, and 8. -64-