My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02/25/2008
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2000's
>
2008
>
02/25/2008
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/19/2015 11:32:44 AM
Creation date
8/19/2015 11:32:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Value Adjustment Board
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
02/25/2008
Meeting Body
Value Adjustment Board
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES <br /> ON MOTION by Vice Chairman Wheeler, SECONDED by Board <br /> Member Brombach, the Board approved the Organizational Meeting <br /> Minutes of July 10, 2007, as written. <br /> 5. PROPERTY APPRAISER'S APPEAL TO THE BOARD TO <br /> DENY SPECIAL MAGISTRATE'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR <br /> PETITIONS 2007-0393, 2007-0394, 2007-0395, 2007-0396, 2007-0397 <br /> Property Appraiser David Nolte felt his memorandum dated February 1, 2008 (copy on file in the <br /> office of the Clerk to the Board) "stands on its own," and he asked the members of the VAB not <br /> to accept the recommendations rendered by the Special Magistrate for the above five petitions. <br /> Wayne Bibeau, Commercial Appraiser for the County Property Appraiser, reviewed the <br /> memorandum for the Board advising them that the situation at hand covers three years of history <br /> with the same Special Magistrate and the same Tax Representative. Mr. Bibeau declared that <br /> over the past three years, Special Magistrate John Robinson had been inconsistent in his <br /> evaluations. He responded to Chairman O'Bryan's inquiries regarding the methodology used by <br /> the Special Magistrate over the past three years. Mr. Bibeau said that this change gives CVS <br /> stores an improper and competitive advantage against their biggest competitor Walgreens. <br /> Board Member Brombach questioned if it was usual to hear the petitions one at a time, and <br /> Attorney Eric Barkett responded that the cases were heard simultaneously, one after the other at <br /> the Special Magistrate hearing level. He explained that it was at the Special Magistrate's <br /> discretion whether to hear all petitions at once, or separately. He clarified that because all of the <br /> petitions were of the same type of property with the same tenant, the Special Magistrate <br /> considered all the evidence and made his ruling. <br /> County Attorney Collins II clarified the Property Appraiser's argument to be that a number of <br /> factors are supposed to be considered in determining market value. It appeared to him that the <br /> Cor <br /> Value Adjustment Board Meeting Page 2 <br /> February 25, 2008 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.