Good morning again.

Let's see if we can do this again.

We now have a quorum for us.

This is March 25th, 2026, Value Adjustment Board for Hillsburg County.

Would you please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance?

Pledge allegiance is the United States of America Republic for which it stands.

One nation under God for liberty.

Thank you.

Purpose of our meeting today is approve phase one recommendation recommended decisions, approve of minutes from the last meeting and handle other VAB matters.

The VAB, the VAB welcomes comments from petitioners about any issues or concerns related to their petition or processes of the value adjustment board.

Anyone wishing to speak before the value adjustment board during public comma apportion can do so by either signing up here in person or online virtually we will be calling on speakers by name in the order which the emails or public comment here in person were received, and all callers will be muted and unmuted in the submission after they have been recognized by the chair name.

Three minutes will be allowed for each speaker.

We're going to begin public comment with uh Miss Nancy Sneed and then with Miss Kara Groves.

Are either those here in person or are they online?

Miss Sneed.

Okay.

Is Miss Groves here in person?

Okay.

Mr.

Marlon Briggs.

Would you come up, sir?

Good morning, sir.

Good morning.

Good morning.

I uh I didn't do nothing.

Yeah, you're good enough.

Okay.

My name is Marlin Briggs.

I petitioned uh piece of property that I had back in 2021.

They adjusted the values, but never went ahead and activated on those and uh considered it being reduced.

So it's just been a continuous, continuous increase of more than uh allowed 10% on a non-homested property.

And then finally, when I built the home that I've been working on for six and a half years, they jacked my property tax up to eleven thousand four hundred dollars, which it's just a modest two-bedroom, two-bath, two-car garage with an open carport.

And I have no idea why those values, and I had a petition that I went for the hearing, and I explained to him, and he understood that, gave him my appraisal.

Well, from the 2022 appraisal of the home, there was no home on it.

But I had already reduced the land value, but they never implemented that throughout the following two and a half years that whenever it came and they taxed me on with the home on it, it was elevated.

It was elevated to a ridiculous amount to where I was paying $2700 just for the land, and then you'd think, oh, okay, the house would maybe be $3,500 for a modest two-bedroom two-bath home, then it'd be about $52 to $6200 for the property tax.

That's without being homesteaded.

But no, it was jacked up to $11,412.

And now the property, being how I've been in this process of the petition and this hearing, where I'm at $12,228 for a two-bedroom, two-bath home per year.

I can't afford that.

I'd have to sell the home and move somewhere else.

That's just a that's unacceptable expense to me.

And I actually uh petitioned to Steve Sidebottom.

He's for the uh property appraiser's office, and he understood where I was coming from, and I showed him how the previous years I was never implemented that reduction that I petitioned for previously.

And there were some medical issues I had gone through, like uh I had a stroke in August of 2022, and then I had another stroke in April 2023.

So there was times where there's I couldn't do anything, anything.

And now I'm at the point where hey I I need to slow down.

I don't uh I'm kind of retired now, but I just can't do the things I used to do.

So it takes me eight days to do something, it used to take me six hours.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Can you provide any background for us?

Um my understanding, uh, Mr.

Briggs is this is for petitions number 1669 and 1666.

Is that correct?

Those are the two petitions before the board.

The one I'm speaking about is the 1666.

Yes, the 1669.

Mr.

Sidebottom was forwarded over all the pictures of the flooded area on that property.

Okay.

That was that's a whole different different property petition.

I'm not here.

I don't know if that one's part of this hearing or not.

He didn't they didn't say anything, it was just like this petition was for this 1666.

Okay, yeah, so we're looking at both of those.

And that's the one I'm more concerned about than anything.

And I hate to build a house for six and a half years and then have to sell it because you can't afford the property tax.

It just would be redundant for me to have to stick there.

Understood.

Understood.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

So I I see in the record that it shows that for 1666 a decision was granted, but there was no reduction.

There was a reduction to the just value.

The six it went from 713 to 615.

Or 1666.

I'm looking at 495, 773 for both before and after no reduction in taxable value.

I have the recommendation.

I'm not looking at your list, but I'm having the actual physical version.

Yeah, my list shows that the same value.

Oh, that only shows taxable.

Okay.

Yeah, I'm looking at the just the actual assessed, or I mean the actual just value of the property, the market value.

So that's saying it went down.

That went down.

Yeah, but then the taxable value still remained the same.

Yes.

But that doesn't make sense.

Can you explain that for us?

Um, how one may or may not impact the other?

Well, if the the assessed value is only gonna go up 10% per year, whereas the the just value will be the actual value of the property today.

So that if that goes up, you know, that's a different thing, but they can maximize from the previous year by 10% on the assessed.

In other words, the prior value was you know, even though the value of the property went up more than what the property taser is taxing it for.

Okay, but then that really doesn't have an influence on the taxable value because if the just value goes up in taxable value does in well, it depends how much it goes up.

You know, if it goes up by two percent, they can't really tax it to 10 percent.

But if it goes up by 20 percent, then they can adjust it by 10.

So I guess the question is why it was granted on here, but then the before and microphone?

I'm trying to is it on?

No, okay.

Yeah, it says granted, but the before and after value are still the same, and there's no reduction in taxable value.

Correct, because the assessed value is changed.

I mean the tax the just value is changed.

Oh, okay.

That's why you it's not on your list that it shows that.

Okay.

So but his issue really dealt with the prior year, which this board is limited to only looking at this year.

So we we don't have the power to go back prior years, that would be handled by the circuit court.

So he's saying it wasn't adjusted in the prior years.

Okay, so his petition was granted for this year, but it didn't adjust the prior years.

Okay, and we're legally bound not to be able to even by statute not be able to even.

Right, that would be addressed by the circuit court because once you've certified prior years, we can't go back to change right, right?

So his recourse would it what would the circuit court be able to do in that particular case?

Generally speaking.

Well, he would be able to take this recommendation and go to the just like an appeal level.

They would look at it brand new without for a set of eyes.

Yeah, and he would be able to present what other additional evidence.

You're limited to what's in the recommendation today.

Okay.

Okay.

Thank you.

Is there a way that we could defer this to a another meeting while he can maybe pursue that action?

Um I think it's better if we rule on it so that he can go to the circuit court and get relief.

Okay.

No, but that's not what they're asking.

They're just saying that can they put it to the next meeting?

I mean, what is it?

I guess if if it doesn't help him, if we're not make if we take no action, then he has nothing to appeal.

I guess right.

Well, the only other option would be to wait till the next meeting, which their point is it'll come to the same decision.

Yeah, you're better off moving it forward.

It won't.

Um I have to look at this, but I think until it's certified, he's got time anyway, and we're having another meeting anyway for some other recommendations.

I think he's okay.

Ms.

Rendon.

Okay, question for you.

So we've got on here that the taxable value before and the taxable value have not changed, but you're saying that the actual market value has changed, but that's not reflected here.

So the market value is higher than the taxable income.

Yes, the taxable value before the board's action was 713,875,000.

Um after the magistrate heard it, it went down to 615,730 dollars.

Okay, so our taxable value is still less than, and so we do need to move on this in order for it to then be able to for if he wants to appeal it to the circuit, correct?

George, we have to have a judgment on to move it because we've got to approve right what the magistrate said so that he can choose to appeal that.

Well, he can appeal at any time.

He doesn't, I mean he can go today without you doing any action, but you'll have to do it anyway, so you might as well just move forward.

So our hands are bound in that regard.

Yes, sir.

Yeah, yes.

I'll give you 30 seconds.

Do you had something you wanted to say, sir?

Okay.

Come back up to the mic, please.

Come back up to the mic.

I'll give you 30 seconds.

It just has to be on record.

Yes, the the just values is the taxable value on this.

But when I went to the petition, Mr.

Sidebottom, he agreed and dropped it down to the 613 or 614, but he had it at 786.

It cost me 131 to build it.

The fair market value of building a home in Lutz, Florida in 2019 was 165 dollars a square foot.

So where this increase in cost and expense doesn't reflect the the market or the the building, the the national home buildings association.

So and I know that you're here, we're here to approve what he sent for the 613, and I figured that's about what we'll get, and I will have to take it to the circuit civil because that's still above and beyond my means.

Right.

We we want to be able to provide you with all the information that you can to make uh a decision, but it in some regards we're bound by what we have to do here, you know, legally.

Um so but your your um your issues have been noted on the right.

So by the property appraiser not following and implementing a rule that I petitioned previously that's irrelevant during this case right now that for this particular goal to circuit.

Correct, yes, sir.

Yes, sir.

That that sounds like that's the the path that you need to follow.

And you can also um continue to work with the property appraiser just because this board decides today to approve this.

The the property appraisers office is always open to speak with you.

I don't have a problem with with it.

And I'm gonna contact him after this too later today.

Okay.

Explain to him.

He probably knows what's happening, so very good.

All right, sir.

All right, thank you.

My office can help with that as well.

Thank you.

So I uh I would just like to add that um, like Mr.

Briggs said, this is a small, modest two-bedroom, two-bath, and twelve thousand dollars a year seems to be an exorbitant amount of money for such a small modest house, and I uh really hope you get this fixed, and I'm willing to help it also in any way that I can as well.

Thank you.

Yeah, not on the ocean.

Right.

Yeah, thank you.

Thank you, sir.

I would agree with that sentiment that it does seem like this is a high um assessment for that, yes, for what he's described.

Yes, absolutely in loops.

Um okay, we're gonna move on to uh Mr.

Will Shepherd telephonically, is Mr.

Will Shepard's still online?

I am okay, sir.

You have three more.

Yeah, good morning.

My name's Will Shepherd.

I'm the attorney for the Hill Sport County Property Appraiser's Office.

Uh we have a number of petitioners here today seeking further review of the special magistrates' positions as the last speaker was.

I want to point out that uh there is PA, the property appraiser staff in the audience.

Uh property appraisers always willing to take another look at these.

Sometimes petitioners show up at hearings and they don't quite have the right evidence or that kind of stuff.

Uh the office has always been willing to take another look at these, so it may be that there's somebody in the audience there that they can uh get with, and property appraisers can sit down and take another look.

Um I want to uh walk through the board's options here with regard to other petitioners.

Um board, of course, has the option to ask the property appraiser to review it, and again the staff is in in the audience there.

The board can ask the special magistrate to have a second hearing on the matter, or the board can have a hearing itself.

Um the board choose to review those decisions itself.

We anticipate the board would be mindful of the due process requirements of notice in a hearing in accordance with the Florida Administrative Code Section 129, in which case the board would after notice conduct its own hearing in accordance with uh the rules under 12 D9, which allow for notice to the parties in a hearing exchange of evidence and cross-examination and a written decision that complies with the rules.

Um I will remain available if the board has questions about a specific petition.

Uh, if you want, I can probably give a little more insight to the last petition just from a technical standpoint, but I'll uh defer to you as to whether you want me to respond to that.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Shepard.

Does any board member wish to hear any more on the last one?

Well, thank you, Mr.

Shepard.

Um moving on, we'll go to um Amy Lupin, also I believe online.

Is Ms.

Lupin online?

I'm here.

Oh, hello.

Sorry.

You have three minutes, ma'am.

Turn your microphone off.

Okay.

Um, I petitioned uh for commercial real estate um property taxes, and I received my um decision, and um it was in favor of me.

And my question that I have is this was for um last year's taxes, and what happened with our properties is in 2020, the assessed values are all the same for all the taxing authorities for 2020, 2021, and then in 2022, the school values um are different, they're higher than the assessed values, so there's no cap.

And then in so in 2022, it was 58,000.

In 2023, it was 98,000.

In 2024, it was 106,000, but I talked to the property appraiser's office and provided them with information, and they reduced it 10 percent.

So it was now 96,000, and then in 2025, it went up to 131,000.

So that's obviously why I petitioned, but my concern is well, first of all, after I get this you know, decision, and you all vote to um accept it or whatnot.

My question is what happens for the taxes, you know, they've obviously I've already paid.

So do I get a refund?

Does it get applied to my next year's taxes?

So how does that work?

And then secondly, what I'm pretty sure this is gonna happen again next year, and I don't want that.

I don't have I spent a lot of time, a lot of you know, money basically doing this.

I don't have time to do this.

I'm a uh business owner, but out of principle, I was like, I can't let this keep happening.

You know, my taxes in 2020 were 931 dollars a unit, and I have four units, and now it's eighteen hundred.

So that's unacceptable, and that's just not feasible.

And the way that the property attacks um off uh office, property appraisers office.

Um I guess they you know, they in their presentation, they did not do the cost approach because they said the building is too old to do that, so they did the income approach and the sales um approach, and then the income approach, they in their calculations, they did not use a loaded um cap rate, including the taxes in there, so their value was overestimated, um, which is what the special magistrate um concluded, and they also didn't apply a 15% cost of sales um deduction, so that also increased it.

So I'm just worried that this is gonna happen next year and have to be on repeat, and I don't want that to happen.

Thank you very much.

Amy Lupin is anybody have any comments regarding this?

Um how could our questions get answered through this the property appraisals office?

Um I'm happy to answer any of her questions after the meeting too.

Okay, yeah, or the property appraiser office can help you with those.

Um but I'll be happy to chat with you if you like.

Okay, can you stay for a few minutes?

Sure.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We'll move along quickly.

I want to go just back to the it was listed as telephonic, but would Nancy Sneed ever get online?

Uh no, Mr.

Chair.

I do not see Nancy Sneed online.

Okay.

And there's no care of growth here.

I will conclude public comment and thank you.

So we have uh the decisions that are before us for the phase one recommended decisions.

Is there a motion to accept make a motion to accept the decisions of the magistrates?

Second.

Okay.

I need to um sorry, did I not?

Okay.

I'm sorry, I need to um accept the petitions 2025-umate and 2025-00029.

Um I need to abstain from those because I have a compliment.

So I would just amend the motion to exclude those two and then do a separate motion for those two where she can abstain.

Okay.

Clark, we good with that.

Did you catch those numbers?

Okay.

So okay, so my motion is to accept abstaining the two numbers.

Correct.

You're amending your misclay.

Amend my motion.

All right, so we have a second the amendment.

Thank you.

So we have a motion that's been seconded to exclude the two portfolios that you described.

All those in favor in the motion as amended, say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Did we didn't vote on the amendment?

No, we this was it.

We should have voted on the amendment.

That's what he seconded the amendment.

So we have to vote on the amendment.

Then we have to vote on the motion.

Sorry.

I missed that.

Apologize.

So we're all good on the vote on the amendment.

Now we have to vote on the motion as amended.

All those in favor voting on the motion as amended, say aye.

Aye.

All opposed, same sign.

Motion is approved.

Uh so now we need a motion to accept the report for the two portos that we pulled out.

Can you have the numbers?

Yeah, can you list those out for us, please?

2025.

You want me to you want me to list them where it looks like 2025-00028 and 2025-00029?

So we have a motion to accept the report.

And we have a motion to accept the findings of the magistrates for 2025 0008 and 2025-00029.

Second.

Second.

All those in favor.

Hi.

Aye.

Abstain.

Me.

All those opposed.

Hearing none.

Motion passes.

So we moving along.

We have the minutes for the last meeting we need to approve from September 16th, 2025.

Is there any additions, deletions, or corrections to the minutes?

I move to approve the motion.

Or the uh the amendment from the previous meeting.

Second.

Second motion's been made and seconded to approve the minute minutes for September 16th.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

All those opposed.

Same assigned, hearing none.

Motion is approved.

Ms.

Sharon, do you have some other matters coming forward?

Um so we just have some forms um in your backup from the property overtime property tax oversight regarding that, and it's just some new forms that we have to do.

Now we have to um actually we record the the meetings, but we have to do audio visual now, so we're we're doing that.

And it's pretty much what all this backup is about.

Um and then 5B is just showing that we properly advertise the meeting, and our next meeting will be May 19th at 9 30.

Correct.

Until we start before we serve, yes.

Right.

Um I did want to ask one question.

Is there any other matters for other members want to bring up before you have anything you want to bring up?

Um I know we had an audit.

Can you provide any insight as to our recent audit from the state where we are with that, how that went?

It's still in process.

It's still in process, everything's going along.

Yes.

Okay.

I know I had to sit down with them.

Right.

And uh I don't know if any other board member did, but um, you were the only one.

Only one.

When do we expect any um and when we met with him?

Um, I guess that was back in January.

He did say it would be sometime April, well, March, the end of March.

So I'm still waiting to hear back.

Okay, and there hasn't been any follow-up as for any other information or anything.

Um well they sent back some information that they you know that they wanted us to follow up on, but I haven't heard back from that.

Okay, okay.

So they're still looking in the documents and getting records and checking agendas and just making sure the process is being followed.

Very good.

Do you all have anything you want to bring before us before we can join?

No.

No.

Okay.

It is 10 a.m.

meeting adjourned.

Thank you.