Good morning.

This is Clark County Board of Equalization hearing for February twenty fourth, two thousand twenty-six.

County clerk has informed us that this meeting has been posted and properly noticed at this time.

Can we please call the roll?

Terry Farr.

Present.

Tammy Campo here.

Paul Chafee.

Petra Latch.

Here.

Thank you.

Motion to adopt the addenda.

Please cast your votes.

Seeing none, I will close the microphone.

At this time, we need to swear in the petitioners.

Anyone who intends to testify on behalf of the petitioners and members of the assessor's office, please stand and face the county clerk to be sworn in the folks.

If any of you intend to testify, you need to swear to get sworn in with the standard.

The county board of equalization has the authority to determine and then change the correct and correct the value of any property that was assessed by the assessor if the board finds it to be incorrect.

They may change or correct any valuation they find to be incorrect by either adding to it or deducting from it the amount necessary to make it conform to the taxable value.

The county board of equalization does not have the authority to lower taxes or make decisions based on comparison of tax bills.

There are only two situations in which county board of equalization may reduce the assessment made by the county assessor when an inequity exists or when taxable value is higher than full cash value.

Under NRS 361.356, if a taxpayer believes there is an inequity in the assessment and their property was assessed higher than another property that is identical in use and has a comparable location.

Or they may raise or lower the value of the property that was used as the comparable property.

Under NRS 361.357, if a taxpayer believes the full cash value of their property is less than the assessed taxable value for the fiscal tax year being appealed, the board may review the assessor's determination.

If the board finds that the full cash value on the January 1 prior to the fiscal year being appealed is less than the taxable value, the board may correct the land value or fix a percentage of obsolescence that is to be deducted from the improvement value to ensure the total taxable value correspond as closely as possible to its full cash value.

Under NRS 361.355, if a taxpayer believes their property is overvalued by reason of another property being undervalued or not assessed, the board may examine any evidence submitted and then make a determination.

If the board finds the property complained of is undervalued or not assessed, they may increase the taxable value or place the property on the tax roll at its taxable value.

A public officer must disclose potential conflicts in public to the chair and other members of the board.

If a public officer has a personal financial or private commitment that could reasonably affect their decision on an issue, they must publicly disclose this information to the chair and board before taking any action.

Additionally, the public officer must not vote on, promote, or participate in deliberations on an issue if a reasonable person would believe their judgment could be influenced by a gift or loan, a significant financial interest, or a personal or private obligation to another party.

The Clark County assessor is required by law to value all property for tax purposes.

For real property, the statutes provide for a bifurcated valuation system for each parcel, land and improvements.

The land is valued based on market value.

Improvements on the land, such as the homes, commercial buildings, or other structures are assessed at replacement cost using Marshall and SWIFT.

Depreciation is then subtracted from that replacement cost at 1.5% per year based on the age of the property.

The land value is then added to the improvement value, and this determines the total taxable value.

Market value is utilized when valuing the land only and is not used to determine the value of any improvements on the land.

The assessor's office can then test the land and or total taxable value to determine if the valuation is correct.

This process is laid out in more detail in Nevada revised statutes and Nevada Administrative Code Chapter 361.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Agenda item six.

We have assessor recommendations for 2526 and 2627.

Yes, Chairman Farr, uh, Marianne Widener for the record.

Uh page five, you'll find the assessor recommendations beginning on page five of your agenda.

Thank you.

Accept the assessor recommendations on page five.

Please cast your votes.

That motion passes.

Now we have assessor recommendations for approval of property tax exemptions submitted after June 15th.

Yes, Chairman Farr.

These are there's several of the uh petitioners that are in the audience today.

Um, these were not put on the agenda for them to be heard as cases.

These are recommendations that we are making from our office.

We do not have the authority to approve these because they were filed after June 15th, but this board does have the authority to do that under NRS 361.355, and so we are recommending um that you would approve these exemptions.

I motion to approve the exemption submitted after June 15th.

Please cast your votes.

That motion passes.

If that's all you're here for, have a wonderful day.

I'm sorry, not until public comment.

Five minutes.

Well, we we I had the microphone open for public comment already.

I'll have another um opportunity at the end, but you have to listen to the rest of our cases.

Okay, on to procedural rules.

This hearing is recorded and part of the public record.

It is difficult to transcribe the hearings with concurrent multiple voices.

Please do not speak if another party has the floor.

If you have the floor, please speak clearly into the microphone.

Please note we do not discuss property taxes in these hearings.

Your net property taxes may not be affected by the outcome of your case.

Procedural rules relative to presenting appeals are as follows.

When we call your case, please come up to the podium, state your name and address into the microphone for the record.

The assessor will briefly describe the property to the board.

You will then present evidence for your case.

The assessor staff will provide their evidence to support the assessor's opinion of the taxable value.

You may then respond to the assessor's case, but you are limited to the rebuttal of evidence provided by the assessor.

Please keep comments limited specifically to your case.

Please do not address the assessor staff.

The board will ask questions of the petitioner or the assessor staff.

The board will discuss the testimony and information provided and move forward with the decision.

If you or the assessor's office are unhappy with the board's decision, both parties have the right to appeal with the State Board of Equalization.

Appeal forms are in the hallway outside the doors to the chambers.

Do we have any general administrative business?

There is no additional business for today.

Great.

Let's get started with case 483 Turtle Healing Band Clinic.

And Mr.

Chair, I do have to swear in that petitioner who arrived late.

Okay.

Please face the county clerk to be sworn in.

Okay, the uh the uh the representative for Turtle Healing Band Clinic is uh Judge probably Judge Ben Zvania.

I'm I'm legal.

Okay, first and foremost, please just uh uh face the clerk to be sworn in.

Okay.

Do you solemnly swear that your testimony you're about to give during this hearing is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth shall be gone.

I do.

Okay, you did not swear in.

I'm an attorney, so I'm not I'm not I'm not testifying about any facts.

I'm I'm giving you the law as as it pertains to this exemption.

Okay, sir.

Please state your name and address for the record.

If you intend to speak, please state your name and address for the record.

I sure will.

My name is Mont Tanner.

Into the microphone, please.

Okay.

My name is Mont Tanner.

I'm an attorney, and I represent Turtle Healing Band Clinic, and my address is 2950 East Flamingo Road, suite G, Las Vegas, Nevada, 89121.

Benjamin Zavinia, PO box 98302.

Las Vegas, Nevada, 89193.

Great.

Ms.

Henry.

Good morning.

Um this case for 83 can be found on page 59 of the master book.

Before I begin, I do want to point that this is for the 2425 fiscal year.

We have not built them for 2526.

The subject of the appeal is for personal property asset located on Flamingo Road and Burham Avenue.

This appeal is for an exemption on personal property for the 2024-25 physical year.

There is no appeal on value.

The appealant applied for an exemption on personal property under NRS 361-140 as a religious or charitable organisation.

The applicant does not qualify as the chairable organization under NRS 361-140 because it is not a registered nonprofit in Nevada.

In addition, their funds are not derived in whole or substantial part from grants or other donations from government entities or donations from general public or both, not including donations from any office or trustee of the corporation.

Additionally, the property is not owned or held in a trust by Indian tribe.

Therefore, the property is not exempt under federal law 25 USC 465.

The assessor's office recommends denying the application and maintaining a non-exempt status based on the district's attorney legal opinion.

Thank you, Mr.

Zvenia.

I'm going to defer to Mont for a second, please.

Dan is the acting manager for Crow LLCs issued by Crow Nation.

It is under Cro Nation's authority in the executive order of Cro Nation out of Montana that created the Turtle Healing Band Clinic as a clinic doing indigenous medicine under 25 USE 1680U for indigenous members as well as those authorized by the tribe to receive that type of health care.

The clinic has been and always is under tribal law, tribal rules, which includes the tribal exemption since it was created as an IRS 7871 entity.

Also, the state of Nevada gave an exemption for the program.

And that was submitted by Dan Royal.

Do you have something published that we can look at a certificate from the state?

Something we do have that.

It's a state of Nevada tax exemption.

Here it is.

Certificate of exemption Nevada State Business License.

I mean, I I think I think your staff has seen this.

But Mr.

Chair, if we could have the petitioner speak into the microphone for the record, please.

There's two.

I'm referring to a money to speak in this microphone.

Oh, this one too.

Okay.

Okay.

I'm I'm referring to a certificate of exemption issued by the Nevada State Business License.

And I believe this was part of the records that were supported in support of our request for appeal from the assessment.

I think the point to be made here is you know, it's not the money, really.

That's the issue here, is this has been a tax exemption from federal taxes under IRS Code 7871.

It's a charitable or organized as a charitable organization under the city of Nevada, and it's been tax exempt since its beginning in 2019.

And if we concede that they're subject to this personal property tax, it threatens their very you know sovereignty as a crow entity doing business for the benefit of a crow tribe, and it threatens their IRS status.

It threatens their status with the Secretary of State's office.

We're happy as a maybe as a conciliatory resolution, we can make a donation.

I don't think the tribe has any problem, Turtle Band Healing Clinic to making a donation to cover this, but we cannot accept a finding that says you're subject to this assessment and you're responsible to pay these taxes because they're not.

It's tax exempt under 7871.

The state of Nevada issued a tax exemption uh with the Secretary of State's office.

We're happy to make a donation to cover the cost, but but we can't accept that, and we're gonna take it to whatever level the next level is.

Um that's that's really our legal position.

So I hope you'll understand that.

We did see the letter or the internal memo from Wolfson's office.

That's dated February 9th.

But the certificate of good standing was actually given in May 27th, 2025.

So I didn't know if there was cross-communication or non-communication, but normally if it's a trouble economic engine, even understanding U.S.

case law.

I mean, Maryland just suffered a loss trying to hit Cherkasaw Nation for their entities working in Maryland where they can't tax them.

So there is standing U.S.

case law.

Okay.

Talk to me.

Lisa Loxton County Counsel for Clark County.

Um, as you can find the DA opinion that was issued to the assessor's office on page 71.

So while the applicant asserts that they um have an IRS exemption under IRC 7871, those are recognized exemptions for federal income taxes.

And through the opinion, you can see the various federal income tax exemptions that those apply to.

Income for a state gift taxes, income for income taxes.

We don't have income taxes in the state of Nevada, so that's not applicable here.

Um there's you know other things, eligibility for tax-deferred annuities, lobbying expenses.

There's a whole list there you can find on page 72.

So we've reviewed federal case law, state case law, and while the IRS exemption provides an exemption for federal taxation, it does not provide an exemption from state taxation.

And so while they have that IRS exemption, it does not apply to the taxation, does not excerp the state's ability to tax these this property.

Um further, under the the fact that they have a state of Nevada sales tax exemption, or um is not the same standard that's in the property tax exemption.

I think to have a um uh exemption from sales tax in the state of Nevada, you just have to be a certain type of of corporation or um domination, but it's very clear under uh NRS 361140 that it's not all charitable organizations that those funds have to be derived in part from grants and donations from governmental entities or the general public.

So it's not not every tax-exempt entity in the state of Nevada gets a property tax exemption, and we've seen these cases uh before before this board.

So that's the um the district attorney's position, and you know, the uh assessor's office is relying on on that information.

But we've reviewed the federal case law.

We believe that this is taxable.

We tax other um you do tax other tribes?

Well, again, this is not uh property owned by a tribe.

It is owned by the tribe.

But in my opening statements, I I asked not to speak directly to the staff.

Please.

The property is owned by an LLC.

Now, while the LLC was created under tribal law, it does not make it property of the tribe.

So for that reason, we believe the property is taxable in Nevada.

I I do have one final point.

If you when you're please, there's more.

I I think it's it's worth noting that as tribal judge Ben Zivania pointed out here, the certificate of exemption from the state business license was issued after your analysis of whether or not this was a taxable entity and your February 9th, 2026.

I thought you said the tax thing was issued in 25.

It was 25.

Yeah.

So my analysis came.

Would we aware of that?

But here's the point.

Exemption code governmental entity.

Uh maybe I didn't understand your point as to whether or not you are aware of the certificate of exemption from the state business license.

If you have that, then that's the only point that I want to make sure you're aware of that it has been determined to be exempt from a state business license, which is revenue generated from business.

That that is property.

We're talking about furniture here.

I mean, they've assessed the the assessment here in this case involves furniture, the business furniture.

But but the business license involves you know income that's donated through its business to the Crow tribe and and to providers under First Nation Medical Board and under the Turtle Band Healing Clinic.

These are medical providers that provide you know homeopathic indigenous practices, medical practices that benefit the Crow tribe, and it's incorporated with the Crow tribe.

So look, I I don't know whether that certificate of exemption from the state of Nevada bears any weight with you, but but this tribal judge and I've said that this is a Crow tribe entity.

It's incorporated with the Crow tribe, and and it's exempt under federal law, it's under state law.

Now your county, I mean, I guess you're coming under the the county's assessment, right?

Well that's correct.

She's kind of hit an NRS, but when this was generated by the state, it does not say private tribal LLC.

It says governmental entity, because tribes are entitled to do their health care programming, just whether it's an Indian health service clinic like we have at Las Vegas Paiute.

You can also do any other type of entity set up as long as it's under the tribe's regulations and health care is an arm of tribal governmental funds.

We were created by an executive order of Cronation.

We were done and created by the Crow LLC through their secretary.

Crow Secretary did it.

IRS agents and Treasury came into our office and they said, Yep, your IRS 7871.

We have no jurisdiction.

We made sure we got the state certificate that said governmental entity.

Not sure what else we can do.

It's not the amount.

It's a jurisdictional issue, really.

It's just about jurisdiction.

And you're stepping into areas that involve sovereign immunity.

Cronations incorporated in the Cronation with the Cronation.

And if it's a matter of money, this this turtle ban healing clinic can make a donation to cover the can cover the tax.

We've got no problem doing that.

We're creating a light compact, but to say it's personal, no, everything is owned by the tribe for the tribe.

The tribe, this entity doesn't want to lose its tax exempt status with the federal government or with the state for that matter.

So that's why this is important to maintain its sovereign immunity from taxation by the state and by this county by this board.

Okay.

Thank you.

What changed between last year and this year?

They applied for the exemption for the 24-25.

That was the first year for them applying.

Last year.

Correct.

And so subsequent or uh prior to that, what was going on where they weren't being taxed?

And so I believe that this was be your second year.

The second.

We've been here actually over 10.

Over 10 years.

Yeah.

So with that, we will have to check the records, but they have been assessed and taxes have been paid.

In the past.

That's correct.

Does that align with your records?

No.

I don't believe that.

Not that I'm aware of.

It's either that or they never submitted a personal property declaration.

That's the only way these get picked up.

So I mean, they would have had to somebody submitted a personal property declaration.

We looked at it, it got taxed, they filed for the exemption.

So I mean, we don't go out and buying businesses.

You know, usually it's a personal property as a self-declaring mechanism for property taxes.

That's kind of wondering what changed and how this popped up in the first place.

Yeah, this is the first time that we've looked at it for an exemption.

So how it got on the tax roll, we'd have to go back and do some more research.

But generally, personal property gets on the tax roll by a personal property declaration filed by the property owner.

So I thought he didn't so they probably hadn't applied for one before, they just assumed that they didn't that they were exempt.

That would be my and then somebody said, Oh, we should apply, and then now they find themselves here is my guess, but I don't know.

I don't know where to go with this.

Okay, I'm just gonna make a motion that we accept that they are exempt and see where it goes.

Motion's been made.

Please cast your votes.

That motion passes.

The county does have the right to appeal.

Just so you're aware.

I appreciate it.

Thank you.

Like I said, we're happy to do something donation.

We want to be good neighbors anyway.

That's not the share of the.

Well, and just to your point, yeah, the the same rules you have to abide by the assessors to abide by those as well.

So you know, they they it's not about how we make this go away, it's what's the right thing to do.

Yeah, totally agree.

Yeah, for both parties.

Very good.

Thank you.

I appreciate your time.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Case uh 842, West Sahara Senior Housing Limited Partnership.

Please state your name and address into the microphone for the record, sir.

Uh good good morning, Mr.

Chair, members of the board.

George Jake is 2655, South Rango Boulevard, suite 401, Las Vegas.

Thank you, Miss Henry.

Sharon Henry, Clark County Assessor.

Case 842 can be found on page 544 through 565 of the master book.

The subject property is a 4.02-acre parcel consisting of 175,000 111 square foot income housing project.

Located on Sahara Avenue between South Cimarron Road Avenue and South Buffalo Drive.

The appeal is for an exemption for the 2024-25 fiscal year.

There was no appeal for value.

The appealant applied for the exemption under NRS 361082 as a low-income housing for two for 2024-25 and 2025-26 on May 6th of 2025.

The exemption was granted for the 2025-2026 fiscal year.

Fiscal year 2024 25 was denied because his application was submitted after the deadline, and the units were not occupied or used exclusively for persons with low income.

In addition, the board does not have jurisdiction to hear the case for the 2024-25 fiscal year because the appeal for this fiscal year should have been filed by January 15th of 2025.

The assessor's office recommends that the board does not take jurisdiction and uphold or denial of the application for the 2024-25 fiscal year.

Sir Good Morning.

Well, that's the worst time in the world to file.

I mean, you're intimidated with all every all these deadlines and everything else.

In the past, we filed when we were received a certificate of occupancy and a rent roll.

We received the C of O in August of August 29th, 2024.

I'm asking for tax exemption for the third and fourth quarter of 2025.

We have been granted tax exemption uh for the upcoming year, this this particular period.

Those funds, which was approximately two hours 125,000, will go back to Clark County and start paying down the loan it has under CHF grant under CHF loan.

So basically I'm asking for the refund on that those two quarters, and then we'll go and will be uh those funds will go back to Clark County uh to pay down the six million dollar loan.

Ms.

Henry Lisa Logson County Council for Clark County, as you can find the DA opinion on page 556.

So here the the applicant's request is for a partial year tax exemption.

So in Nevada, there are only uh two exceptions for partial year tax exemptions, which are when governments purchase property, they become tax exempt at the time the government purchased the property and churches.

So here the request is just not permitted under Nevada law.

There is nothing in Nevada law that lets us prorate affordable housing tax exemptions.

As you heard the applicant state, they are tax exempt for the 2526 going forward, but here at this point in time, they were not eligible as of the lien date, July 1st, as it was not occupied for affordable housing yet.

So that is the reason that the county cannot grant the partial year tax exemption.

And you can find the opinion again, like I said, on page 556 that goes through that analysis as well.

If you have any questions, and Chairman Farr, if I may, Mary Ann Widener for the Clark County Assessors Office.

This this appeal is really no different than any of the other notice of appearance appeals that we've had in the past.

The dilemma here, and it it's different than the folks that you voted on earlier that got they they filed a little bit late.

They filed after June 15th.

It was in the same fiscal year.

They appealed within the same fiscal year.

We made an assessor recommendation.

He he's just said under oath that um August 29, 2024 was when they knew that they were going to be this facility.

So their time for appealing would have been prior to January 15th of 2025.

If he had appealed during that time, we would have been here having that hearing on the exemption.

This hearing is really more about the fact that he didn't appeal at that time frame, so you would have to take jurisdiction to even hear really the merits of the case with regards to whether he qualifies for the exemption or not, even though I know that's the kind of the testimony that's already been put on the record.

So really what's a what's what's really the decision the board has to make right now is are you going to take jurisdiction on an appeal that should have been filed as of January 15th of 2025?

Members of the board so correct me if I heard you right that the two ways you can do this is if it's the government or a church.

That is correct.

That's the only thing under Nevada law that allows for a partial year tax exemption.

Why does a church get to do it?

That's just statutory under um C.

It is uh NRS um 361125.

And so they say at the point in time they own it, it becomes tax exempted.

So is the spirit of that that because they're a church and they're tax exempted that they get to do?

I mean, why a church and no other tax exempted use?

I think that's a question from the Nevada legislature.

That's a policy call that they made at that point in time.

Um you know, unlike a nonprofit corporation that acquires property, you know, you generally when you're acquiring it, you pay the you know the taxes when you buy it, and so then next year it comes to be, then you apply for the exemption.

And I think part of it is probably um government um financing, you know, being able if we're if we're continually changing taxes mid-year, that's really hard for the government, maybe not necessarily Clark County and as large as we are, but smaller jurisdictions, so probably some fiscal stability in that as well, too, for taxes is probably partly why the legislature wouldn't would make those types of uh policy decisions.

I mean, does anybody else find that kind of curious?

I I would like to comment on that too.

Um, I know that Lisa didn't say that um about exemptions are supposed to be strictly construed.

Um we've had some other exemptions that have come before you.

Um, I'm gonna just remind the board, veterans exemption in the past.

We we asked the gentleman to provide information for us because the DD 214 did not say that they were um they had been honorably discharged, and we need that form.

Not all veterans get an exemption.

There are certain qualifications that they have to have to get an exemption.

Affordable housing, just because you call it affordable housing, doesn't mean you get the exemption, and even uh Nevada hands an example, they they buy land until the project is complete, and people have actually moved into the project, they don't qualify for that exemption and they know that.

And so they have to make provisions for that when they're actually under construction and building a project.

If the legislature wanted that to be in place, they could have said, as soon as you buy the property and you have it in your possession and it's under the umbrella of the nonprofit organization or the future potential affordable housing, they would have granted the exemption on that point.

Again, we're getting into the weeds of what the exemption is about.

Your decision right now is are you gonna take jurisdiction to even consider those things?

Because to consider those things, he should have filed as of January 15th of 2025.

So, Mr.

Chair and Madam Secretary uh attorney the question I have about jurisdiction and taking jurisdiction over this is are there any implications for the board today if we do take implication uh take jurisdiction over this?

And has there been any precedence set in the past about taking jurisdiction over a case that should have been held a year ago?

We had NOA hearings earlier, we which we call notice of appearance hearings that we had um two different hearings this year already.

On that hearing list were people that had exemptions under this very scenario that did not file timely for the year that they were filing an exemption for, and so they did not qualify.

Um, there are other people that have it, whether it's an exemption or whether it's an appeal for a real property or a personal property, if they don't file on a timely basis, this board has continued to upheld that they did not take jurisdiction.

Um, and those appeals have actually gone to the state, and they have upheld um that they did not take jurisdiction.

So if it's not filed on a timely basis with regard, I mean this is a full year later.

This could have been filed January 15th of last year, and we would be here debating the actual issues of or surrounding the exemption, but that did not happen.

And did this petitioner here attend any of those two meetings that were before this?

No, because they weren't noticed for those hearings because they weren't on the agenda.

If if I I can say that 2024 December, we were fully occupied and uh had the qualified waiting qualified rent roll that showed we do uh meet the uh Nevada NRS 361.

There's no filing period in January 15th that I am even aware of.

The only one we were able to apply for was the one in May by May 15th.

So this is all new to me.

I I don't know anything about the 2025 filing in January.

Or we would have filed for it.

We provided you a rent roll uh December uh of uh uh that was 100% occupied in December of 2024.

Why wouldn't I file for January 15th, those two quarters?

That makes sense.

I I want to just explain this for the gentleman.

We're talking about two different things.

We're talking about the filing of an application for an exemption, and we're talking about the filing of an appeal when you did not get an exemption.

So the filing of a uh of it may be that they couldn't have filed, and that's the thing, that's the merit of the case.

And I think that's what Ms.

Loxton here is to is presenting again, the merits of the case.

So right now we're just looking at jurisdiction.

He if he wanted an appeal, if he wanted to have an exemption last year, there's nothing preventing somebody from filing for an exemption at any time in the year.

It doesn't mean that it's timely, but they can call our office at any time and they can apply and send an application in.

Our office may very well deny it because it's it's a late filing, or for whatever reason they don't meet the criteria.

Um, but there's nothing in the law that says, oh well, you know, we're not gonna accept the application if you file it to us.

We're gonna accept it, we're gonna review it, and we're gonna determine whether it qualifies or not based on the the laws that are in place that we are allowed to rule by.

The issue was yes, he didn't apply for the exemption, but in addition, he didn't file an appeal last year for that.

He's trying to file apply for a back year exemption now, and file an appeal for a back exemption now.

So there are two separate issues.

The first issue is do we have jurisdiction to hear a back year appeal?

And and thank you for that, because as we're going into the weeds here, if we don't even have jurisdiction over this, I don't even know why I would no offense.

I appreciate what you do for the seniors and everything, but if I don't have jurisdiction over this up here, then why am I voting on anything all about it?

That's just that's my opinion on it, because if it's if it's a moot point on jurisdiction, then why are we even?

I appreciate what you're doing.

I really do, but if I don't have jurisdiction over it, I can't perform on it.

Well, your conclusion is I couldn't even file for an appeal, it would be denied at the time of filing.

So I think I just want to clarify the record.

I'm sorry.

I'm sorry.

Don't put the court before the horse.

I mean, I I can only file in a timely manner when you say I can file.

And I think that's kind of to intuitive of what the exemption filing deadlines are.

So you file by June 15th of the year in which you're going to be eligible for an exemption.

So in this situation, the eligibility for the exemption didn't happen until after that.

The filing deadline would have been June 15th of 2024.

As he's testified, there he didn't have the rent rolls until December of 2024.

So the application period would really be it's gone for 2024 or 25 because you didn't qualify for the exemption during that period.

And I think that's to Mary Ann's point that that's why this is more of like a notice of appearance, because instead of filing that tax exemption by June 15th, he instead filed a direct what I'm gonna call a direct appeal to this board as a as an appeal without even getting an exemption denial.

Because he never applied for the exemption and he didn't apply for the exemption because he wasn't to his point eligible at that point in June 15th of 2024 based on the information and testimony provided.

I'm gonna motion that we deny jurisdiction.

Please cast your votes.

That motion passes, sir.

You do have the right to appeal.

Forms are at the table outside the door.

Okay.

Thank you.

Next case is 843.

Volunteer Bermuda LP.

Mr.

Chair, um, eight three four, eight four-four, and eight four-five are all similar.

Okay, and um the same basis.

We'd ask that those would be combined.

Okay, we're gonna combine eight forty-three, eight forty-four, and eight forty-five.

Do we have anybody representing volunteer Bermuda LP?

Oh very good.

Please take your name and address again for the record, sir.

George Jacaikas, 2655, South Rainbow Boulevard, suite 401, Las Vegas, Nevada, 89146.

Very good.

This is another affordable housing development in Henderson for families.

262 units.

It again has received a million.

Excuse me.

Over 10 million dollars in funds from Clark County.

Sir, let's have the uh assessor's office introduce the case and then I'll ask for your well.

I I'm going to pull this from the agenda.

Okay.

Okay.

I mean, I was denied on this first one.

This one is in development stage, so I'm not filing, but we will work with the legislature on this particular item coming up.

Okay.

So you are withdrawing cases 843, 844, and 845.

Is that correct?

Yes.

But if if you if he appeals, he has no I mean if he withdraws, he has no right to appeal.

Is that right?

If he withdraws, there's no right to appeal to the state.

But if he goes forward and we deny him, he has the right to we don't even know what the case is about yet, sir.

Right.

It's just it's just uh regarding uh a new uh we're petition in the legislature to provide uh tax exemption on the point of signing Clark County home documents at this but at that particular time instead of filing uh after C of O and uh a rent roll so I don't have this problem in the future, but on the point of signing all the Clark County documents and point of construction.

Okay, thanks currently vacant property.

Good luck with that.

I think you should get that on, but we don't have to do that.

It'll be on the 27th legislature.

Yeah, okay.

Thank you.

Okay.

Then I motion to accept the petitioners withdrawal on cases 843, 844, 845.

Please cast your votes.

That motion passes.

That does it for the cases.

Let me go back to my notes.

I motion to accept the assessor's recommendation on any cases where the petitioners did not attend this hearing, and those that have been stamped stipulated or withdrawn withdrawn, please cast your votes.

That motion passes.

Microphones open for any public comment.

Seeing none, I'll close the microphone.

Do we have any other business, Ms.

Widener?

Um, just to inform the board that we have only eight cases left of our over 800 that we started with this year.

So uh eight cases for tomorrow's hearing um the 25th that will begin at 8 a.m.

tomorrow morning.

Okay.

Thank you for your time.

Meetings adjourned.