Laserfiche WebLink
Three (3) sales froni CoStar, with sales summary sheet. -and otte sale from the <br />public record were presented. The sales ranged from $101 SF to $155 SF. No <br />discussion or conclusion was provided. <br />Rebuttal Testimony: <br />The PA testified, that of the :comparable sales used by: the petitioner were <br />substantially larger and not considered comparable to the subject property, The <br />petitioner had no rebuttal. <br />Special magistrate's analysis and finding of facts: <br />The presumption. of correctness for the assessment was not established because the <br />property appraiser did not provide by the: preponderance of the evidence that :the <br />property appraiser's just value assessment was:arrived at by complying with . <br />r <br />section 193.011 of the Florida Statutes and *professionally accepted appraisal :' :: <br />practices. The PA did not make a:cost ofsal deduction from the preliminary value <br />estimate of $242,055. <br />:The admitted evidence was determined to be sufficiently=relevant'and credible to <br />meet the.standard of proof (Rule 12D-9.027(6); F.A.C.):eased on the evidence . <br />presented by the PA the record contains competent substantial evidence that <br />cumulatively meets the criteria of section 193.011 F.S. as necessary. to determine <br />just value. Therefore; the special magistrate has established a.revised preliminary <br />value for the subject property as follows. <br />The PA primarily relied on the income approach to' value the subject property. The <br />income approach provided a preliminary value of $242;055.. There was. no cost of <br />sale deduction made in the valuation. Deducting: a. 15% Cos, as shown on the DR <br />493 for Indian River County, would result in a just value 'of $205,747. <br />Although the petitioner presented evidence that the subject :property may =be over <br />assessed, the petitioner did not present competent substantial evidence into the <br />record to support: a lowerJust'value: The petitioner didnot present actual income <br />and expenses for the subjectproperty to: justify the: income approach: input; The <br />petitioner's rental comparables were not considered similar to the subject and, as.a' <br />result, did not provide a credible valuation by the income approach. <br />Conclusions of law for petition 2023-043 <br />3 <br />2023-043-39Page 4 of 5 <br />