I'm glad I got a Peterball meeting started for today's a um December 20 now December 19th restored businesses I guess we'll introduce ourselves Joe Joe O'Connor on the non-voting member of the Peter Boa and the County Assessor Greg Rath now.

Kathy Gold.

Steve Ashrammy President.

Brian Pardon.

Next more business is uh main minutes from last month.

Okay.

Yeah, we still do it, yeah.

I'll make a motion except minutes from last month.

Well second.

See you nine all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

The ayes have it.

We have uh a couple guests.

Is that correct?

Yeah.

If the guests want to speak today, can I stand up and raise your right hand so I can score you all in at the same time?

No, you know there's one more.

No.

Oh you swear yeah, it's fine.

You swear it's out of truth, ho truth, nothing but true, so I'll help you God.

Yes.

Yes.

Okay.

First one is um Steve Ruddick.

Ready?

Okay.

That's correct.

Okay.

Do you want to explain?

So this is this is just a is a 130.

Okay.

On his posted.

Uh subjective appeal of his assessed value.

Um rather than go to the examiner hearing and then hear because uh ASL translators want to do it one time.

So gotcha.

Okay.

It's on.

Uh it's on the agenda on the front page.

Page 28.

So we want to start with the it's our you want to go with county or taxpayer completely empty.

Okay.

Go ahead, stay state your name.

My name's Sadie.

I'll be representing the county assessor today.

Okay.

Um, so essentially he's appealing his assessed value uh for the 2023 tax year of 197,800.

We did two CMAs, which you have in front of you.

Um he does not have them.

Do we want to give him yes?

Just so he can follow along.

Sure.

So the first theme I'm gonna look at is the year um the 2023 CMA, which they're all labeled, um, which is the year relevant to his appeal year.

Um the average, the average sale is about 233,600, and um the square footage price is 139.97.

So about 140 rounded up.

We have him assessed at 116 per square, 116 dollars per square foot.

Um the assessed value from 22 to 23 went up about five percent.

So uh we do have him under assessed as of right now.

Okay.

Does he want to explain his reason?

Sorry.

Yeah, I was uh reading a Zillow.com and to compare uh two other houses.

Uh one house, I think it's two thousand square foot.

Uh the other house that I looked at uh it was the same as mine, it's 1700 square foot.

And in 2016, uh the tax assessment uh for the three 2,000 square foot house was increased by 15 percent, whereas the other house that's the same square footage was increased 15 percent, where mine was increased to 31 percent.

I'm curious as to why that is are we talking about the 2023 payable 2024 tax year?

2016.

So we we can't discuss the 2016 tax year because that's not what's under appeal right now.

Oh yeah.

So from 2016 to 2024, I've noticed that it was already a 210% on my property tax.

And comparing to the other homes, pretty similar.

But I'm feeling that perhaps my uh disability credit for property taxes isn't being applied.

So I think I might be able to address that piece of the balance.

Well one moment.

And compared to the others, uh mine was like 400, 500 less than the other property taxes.

And every year you kept increasing, so it seemed like uh it's kind of even with the others, but my I was born deaf, and it doesn't seem like that's being applied to my tax.

So a couple things.

Um the assessments are based on the market value of the properties as of the assessment date.

And since you know, 2012, that's been pretty steadily on the rise.

Um as for that disabled exemption that you have it doesn't look like it's helping you, it is being applied.

Um every tax bill goes through two calculations.

They take your gross assessed value minus your deductions and exemptions to arrive at a net assessed value, and that's then multiplied by the county tax rate.

That's the first calculation, and then the next one is your gross assessed value times your property tax cap.

And you pay the lower of those two amounts, and in your case, it looks like the lower of those two amounts is the property tax cap calculation, which renders your disabled uh exemption useless as far as your tax calculation is now going forward for your taxes payable in 2026 next year, the state legislature has changed that from a deduction to a credit, so you'll now get you'll you'll see it uh just a minus 125 dollars, I think it is uh the auditor's office is not represented here, but they can tell you uh with some certainty, but I think it's minus 125 dollars off of your tax liability as a result of having that saving exemption and there are other exemptions that you know I don't know if you are when you do turn 65 um, but those historically those exemptions couldn't be stacked, you know.

You you can only get a disabled, or you can only get over 65, you can only get a veteran's and going forward those can be stacked, so you can have multiple exemptions, which would result in multiple prints and tax liability subtracted from your bills.

Uh just a question in regards to the rising of the assessment.

I assume that it just rose with the neighborhood and the neighborhood factor and correct, all rose together, and there wasn't anything done specifically to that property to single it out as a additional assessment.

Correct.

All these sales are from his neighborhood, I believe, excluding one.

They're also all built within 2002 or 2003, same square footage and all two-story homes.

So the factor, the neighborhood factor is the only thing that has change on this property through the year.

Yes.

Right?

No question.

So it's just all neighborhood factory, all neighborhood factory.

Um right, the neighbors have increased, but I've noticed that there's been a change in the area, uh the HOA area.

Um since I bought the house in 2010.

I I enjoyed my neighbors that were good neighbors, but I think in 2015, I lost four or five good neighbors.

They sold the houses, and they became rental properties.

True.

Uh and so people families move in and out, car, well, and causing a lot of problems and a lot of complaints within my area.

It seems like that should uh affect the value of the house.

Possibly drop it because of the rental aspect.

Well, if it could, if we saw that reflected in the sales prices in the neighborhood.

So we're not we're not prospectively changing assessments based on activity in the neighborhood.

We're we have to look at what's occurred as far as sales prices go.

So if those are going up, you know, the values get right.

Yeah, Mr.

Chairman.

Yes.

Sadie, the on these that you gave the given board, excuse me.

Um looks like the latest one would have been 2022.

There's been no properties sold in the last three years.

I'm sorry, there's been no properties in this neighborhood, his neighborhood sold in the last three years.

Correct.

No, no, no.

Oh no, sorry.

No, so since it's just a 23 appeal, we're going to be able to do that.

Oh, we're just yeah, you're right.

Well, I'm trying to his argument was that maybe it's starting to go slip a little bit, but you're right.

We can't do that.

Yeah, everything we do, everything the assessor does is retrospectively.

Correct.

So we're looking at data that occurred in the past and analyzing that and applying that today.

So we're not projecting value, we're not predicting value.

We're following data to determine value.

I got a question.

Uh what does he think is values as home should be uh 220,000?

Okay.

That's right.

And we've got assessed that uh 1900 197, 198.

So we're pretty close to a ballpark.

And he's again his homestead, right?

Correct.

He has a homestead and he has that disabled uh exception employees.

So like we said it's not it's just that it's unfortunate that in some cases those don't help close because their tax cap is already lower than the one per 1% lower than what they do.

They did change that last year, so okay, and that takes effect for 26 a big part of my what I don't understand since buying the house in uh 2010, the disability exemption was a pretty big compared good advantage compared to other houses at similar values.

I saved about 500 worth of that and then 2024, it's almost break it even with the others, and it just doesn't seem like that's there.

That's what I'm not understanding.

Well, property properties have gone up since 2010.

I'm not sure how much area, but a lot and all over Marin County on well, all over the United States, probably a hundred percent, yeah.

And you're Mr.

Reddick, you're right.

It your neighbor's property, you know.

Let's say your neighbor has the exact same house you do.

You both have a homestead deduction, and you have this disabled deduction that he doesn't have your tax bill is likely to be exactly the same as theirs right now because of the tax caps.

And those homes are all about the same up there, right?

Sorry?

Those homes are all about the same, correct?

Yes, for the 2023 feminine, it's true, could be credited.

Could you under neighborhood?

Okay.

Anything else to add?

Yeah.

Sadie.

Um so we just request that we withdraw the appeal.

Sustained the value.

Sorry.

Okay.

Any questions from the board?

Do we have a motion?

I'll make a motion that the assessed value is sustained at the 1978.

Second.

Any other discussion?

Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

The eyes have it.

Appreciate him coming in and hopefully going to break next year, won't he?

Okay, if we're not.

Yeah, I mean it'll be a flat number coming off as tax liability.

After the calculation.

Okay.

Okay.

And there are if there are any other exemptions or deductions that you might qualify for.

Uh now is the time to file for those before the end of the year for them to be applied to the tax bill from so like what kind of exemptions would be as you throw down the order.

I mean, there's there's a lot.

There's veterans, there's over 65.

Where's the orders on the first floor?

Okay, yeah.

Just give you a switch.

It's just the one that I have the disability.

It's not I'm not 65, you know.

Okay.

Can we have your name for the record?

Randolph Nicola.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thanks for coming in.

Appreciate your help.

Moving on to Julie.

I was here last name.

It's Amber Marks.

Oh, Amber.

Okay.

Did Amber sign in?

Yes.

Oh, you signed in?

She's with the second one there.

They're both together.

Okay, but her name's not off.

And you were here last month too, right?

Okay.

Sure.

And then we thank you.

Okay.

Yes.

This is on 300.

Correct.

So what page?

235.

235 and 236.

Okay.

So we're easy.

We ready?

Yes.

We zoom in or yes, she is she is on.

And if you have questions, or I don't know how you guys want if you want them to speak.

I need to know who's who though.

I mean.

Oh okay.

My name is Amber Marks.

I'm the founder and president of German Shepherd House Community.

And Julie Boxa is my treasurer.

Thank you.

And she's I lived out of state, so this is why.

Okay.

So I think you guys last month asked that she come because you had some questions.

Do you remember what the question is?

Amber called that they had previously filed.

Um just didn't hear anything about it.

Oh I had shared that that was not the case, and that Julie did not share that with me after last month's meeting.

What happened was they filed um July of 2024, and anybody's grant could include 2025 for that year.

So it seemed as though it took a long time for the mention application to be approved, but they had never filed before that.

Correct.

And so then after they got the 2025 grants they they didn't hang out in October of this year and filed for 2023 and 2024.

Is that your feeling amber two?

Or you have different uh um as noted or Julie has something different.

As we were waiting, well I assumed first of all that I did have the tax exempt on the prospect street uh property and we moved it over, and then um I filled out the application, and as we were waiting for a response, I I did pay um as you see I highlighted the days that I paid as we were waiting for response.

But um yeah, Julie, since she's my treasurer and she's she was also a volunteer, so we spoke you know three times a day, and um I she was just waiting to hear back on how to proceed because I think in in the interim I didn't know I get the tax bill and I wanted to pay something because I didn't want to risk losing the property, but um she was emailing back and forth with the appropriate person at the time, so I'm not sure where I stand today on it on the tax exempt status.

Okay is approved 23 and 24 we start to 23 and 24 when you closed in 2022.

Did you transfer it?

Or you thought it was or well I I thought it was, and then somewhere in that time period as in our move there.

Um I realized I had to submit another application and I filled that out, and it's it felt like um I waited quite a long time because my questioning was there's a log cabin on the property and it's about 750 square feet, and that was the only part of the property that wasn't being specifically used for rescue, however.

Um my mother, she does foster senior dogs from time to time, but um that's that was my only thought.

I was being held up on the decision, but I don't know what was the year as I Julie, you can't hear us, correct?

Oh she's fine.

Oh no, wait.

I can hear you fine.

I can't I can hear I can hear Amber a little bit.

I cannot hear the other people.

Oh yeah, okay, yeah.

Okay.

Um what was your old location?

1831 Prospect Street.

And you had an exemption on that?

Yes.

There it is.

In 2018 on the old property, it had an exemption.

Okay.

When she bought the property in 2022, she should have switched it.

Yeah.

At this point, it's a lane filing.

Right.

So yes, when they bought the other property.

Oh no, then they should have uh done that.

But the other property were in homestead, right?

No, that was on her house.

On 31 or 1831 prospect.

No.

She had another house, though I can't remember the address, but she had a her personal residence.

I had that removed in time.

Yeah.

Yeah.

So the 1831 prospect, was it a similar use property?

Someone lived there and the rescue.

It's a commercial property.

And then I bought it by them.

And I was there from 15 to 22.

So you were residing and working there?

Uh no, it's just a commercial property.

I have my own uh residential home.

Okay, so it was just a place of business where you showed up for the rescue portion only, and that's the only thing the property was used for.

Correct.

Okay.

And now this property in Franklin Township is being used as a residence in the rescue.

Okay.

Can you have Julie mute herself?

Julie, can you mute yourself until we need to do that?

Or you can do it for her then.

Yeah, sorry.

There.

Thank you.

Okay.

I wasn't, I'm sorry, Mr.

Chairman.

I wasn't here last month, so I'm playing catch up, but um it looks like you did pay the taxes though.

So this is uh these ones are listed, sir.

Highlighted.

Yeah, okay.

I think she's I paid a portion.

So she's not current.

She still owes all of 24 pay 25.

Are we looking at that year, or are we looking at these also going backwards?

So what's before he's 23 and 24?

Okay.

Um it looks like she's paid most of 23's tax bill and uh 24.

And I think the I don't know if the uh the the exemption was granted on the old property.

I think what happened was when they bought the new property, Julie was here as the person who may have was supposed to file those paperworks or reach out, and I think they claim they did, and there was you know, at the time uh the employee that no longer works for me, works in the assessor's office uh was according to Julie not responding, and so but I don't know.

We we didn't have any records of any paperwork that was filed or any kind of notes that you know anything was a good effort was made to get these get this exemption transferred to this new property.

So I think we're here today, not on the substance of the grounds for receiving the exemption, it's more you know, they had a lapse in time of filing the paperwork, so it's truly just I think a late filing in most regards for this case.

Okay.

I don't know if I don't know if Julie will be able to reiterate on any of that.

She may be able to speak.

Right, and I think that's why we had her zooming in today was to just share her experience with what she did and what she who how she was responded to or lack of response from us um during that time frame of when they were supposed to file.

So Julie, can you speak on she's on the um the lapse of time of time between the filing from the old location to the new location?

Uh I can't hear you, Julie.

Doesn't show that she's muted.

No, she's not she's unmuted, but I just can't hear you.

I love technology.

Right, I just love it.

Something's happened to the sound on my end.

That's fine.

No, she's just told her that's right.

She's still there, but oh, it's because now maybe there we go.

Now can you hear us, Julie?

Yeah, I can hear you.

Okay.

Sorry, technology.

Uh we're good.

So did you hear my question of if you could speak on the time from yeah, I I'll go back to when she bought that property.

Um, so we started she bought that property in October 22, and then I started getting involved.

I think my first conversation is with Becky Wilbur.

We went back and forth trying to find someone at your office that actually dealt with nonprofits um to get this tax issue resolved once Amber received the tax bill.

So that goes back to uh early 2024 was my first conversation with Becky.

And she had mentioned to me that the reason that um at her old property, I guess it was a non-profit business to a nonprofit business on the other purchase.

This one, because the previous owner is running a profit business, um is where the mix up came because she she had told me that if they were running a nonprofit business, then it would be no big deal with the lapse in time or whatever that we uh because it was already I guess scheduled as a nonprofit.

So uh we went back and forth, and then she told me that I had we had about the 136 form with three years of financials and a bunch of other paperwork, um, which Amber did file that.

Um so basically it was just a lot of kind of communication between me and Becky, because she didn't really um know where to go from there, and we were just trying to get it resolved because I did see that Amber paid um the last payment on it was 1182 for the bill that she had received.

Okay, any questions I have conversations up until through and then I guess I was told she retired, so that's when Ashley got involved, and I had mentioned to Ashley's like, hey, we we want to get this resolved.

You know, I mean Amber's been running a nonprofit business for 15 years in Marion County.

I don't understand why we can't get this resolved, and um and actually was a good help and told us to file the paperwork again for the previous years, so that's what we sent.

Um that's the start of these meetings back in September.

Um I think my first conversation was uh like September 15th of this year with Ashley.

Um, and I asked her if you can file forgiveness for late because of all this communication and run around, and we didn't really know what we were supposed to do, and she said yes.

Um, because I see that going forward it's gonna prove it's just that lack some time from the purchase of the property until now.

Great.

So I mean, because it was in Marion County, I mean basically staying exactly the same.

It was just kind of the basic communication of what we really needed to do, and I was trying to learn on you know what we had to do to get this all resolved.

Okay.

Any questions from the board?

Is there a record of one of the first conversations with Becky took them?

No, just you got all hair early in 2024.

Julie, do you have when the first conversation started out with you and uh Becky Wilbur?

Or no about I had the first physical physical contact.

I did a spreadsheet actually.

I have the first physical contact with her was March 18th of 24 at 1247 p.m.

regarding it because I had talked to someone else in your office, I forget who the name was, but they no one dealt with nonprofits, but that was the issue.

Um I had to specifically speak with her.

Would that have been timely at March 24 because it's for April, or are we talking about a 20?

What that would have been timely for 24 pay 25.

Not 23.

Not 23 pay 24.

When was the perceptor purchase?

It was purchased October 26, 22.

That was uh last okay.

So we'll need now is 23 and 24, right?

Correct.

So if the filing occurred at the time that she'd spoken with Becky, it would have been timely for 24.

23.

Yeah.

Okay.

Um Gabe, can you say that again?

That's gonna be a motion.

Based on what I just said.

Yes.

So I think the 136 had been filed.

Um if you want to say 136 was filed when Becky made contact with Julie, it would have been timely for 2024.

Mr.

Chairman make a motion to accept uh 2024 for exemption.

Exemption, yes.

And denied a 23.

Yes.

Okay, so it's been moon's second item for session.

So none, all fairs say aye.

Aye, aye.

Against it, so we've granted a 24 payable 25 exemption and the 23 payable 24.

You still got a still liable for.

Yeah, 22 and 24.

23 pay with 24, you're liable still.

And 24 pay with 25 is exempt.

Okay, and then uh the payments that I made during those years.

Am I still in our years?

I don't have the paper.

What did you audit off something?

Treasure paper.

I don't know what what taxes are.

I don't know what taxes are still owed.

So if you paid your 23 pay 24, then you don't have to do anything else.

If 24 pay 25 hasn't been paid, we'll do an auditor's correction and remove those so you won't make a payment on that.

Thank you.

Okay.

So Julia, uh, thanks for joining us online.

Thank you.

We appreciate it.

Oh, thank you.

And then are you gonna send an updated with what is actually owed?

Uh Gabe is going to walk her down.

Gabe is gonna walk her down right now to the treasurer's office to get all that information for her.

Okay, so they they took care of uh I'm sorry, it was hard for me to hear.

And so it was just 23 pay 24 taxes that would still be owed.

Okay.

Okay.

That makes sense.

I'll put that in my notes.

Well, thank you very much for your time.

You're welcome to thank you.

Thank everybody.

Thank you.

You too.

That's moving on.

That appeals.

Pages uh one through 24.

Page one, parcel 1039291.

Was it one last month?

Tabled or I don't.

I don't believe this one was tabled.

Okay, he's been suppressed.

That's not okay.

Uh yeah, no, I I don't it wasn't on last month.

Okay.

I think you've we've had a few of these.

With that type of issue.

Do you have a question?

Good.

Um, I have a question.

It's on page three.

It's parcel number one zero zero nine nine five zero.

So it says that due to the one thirty-four not being returned timely, and based on the petitioner and the rep's failure to attend, testify, or provide evidence in support of claim, the county recommended this value.

And it's a decrease of 182,000.

I don't understand if nobody presented any evidence or testimony.

Where did that value come from?

Why would why was it changed?

So when the analysts worked up the appeal, they agreed that the value should be lowered based on the evidence that they looked at.

Um they didn't get contact with the um they either didn't make contact with the uh taxpayer or the taxpayer never got back with them.

So Alicia is looking at our evidence, and she agrees with our value that it should be less, and that's what she could present it to the board.

If you guys are in agreement with it, then it's up to that taxpayer to eventually contact us to say and get us the paperwork to receive any sort of refund.

Okay, so the evidence that you're referring to is evidence that you came up with on your own.

Yes.

Okay.

That that's where I I was confused as there if nothing was presented, how did that value get changed?

No, it's just our research based on the appeal.

We agreed that it yes, it should be lower.

Okay, but the con but the taxpayer neither never got back with us or never came to hearing, and Alicia agrees with our um recommendation, and now it's in their court if you guys prove it.

If they never contact us, then we never get it.

But the value is still changed.

Oh, so the value remains at the 274?

Yep.

Remains at the 274 until they get back with us.

Oh, gotcha.

Okay.

And then that's what initiates the actual change in assessment.

So to need to sign 134.

Before you change it to 91,000, whatever.

Okay.

I think I was misunderstood out.

I'll tell you an agreement for the 91,400, but they didn't sign 134, so but that makes sense now more than it did before.

Yeah.

And I think that and that's kind of the same question I had on a few others in here, but I think that's well is all gonna be relevant.

Just agreeing with our value, our what research we did, and we agreed that yes, it should be lower, but they never got back with us.

Until they get back with this, it remains exactly where it was.

We've had some of these where it's gone, it's gone years, and they've never gotten back with us, so it's dead.

It's what kind of time frame is it for them to respond?

We don't really have a time frame as far as I know so they could get interest with all that as well then is that a county decision or is that a statute statutor?

I mean that they have so many or they they can it's indefinite indefinite time that there's no timelines on there.

Is that just a county decision or is that really part of the I think it's a county okay, but we can definitely put in a time frame on that in that um notice that she puts out that it's up to them to not contact us, but that's definitely put in in a time frame for them to get it.

Well, legally can you do that?

Well statutory at all.

I don't think so.

I don't know.

I think you can do it as a policy.

I mean it's just our policy that we're doing it that way.

Rather than just leave it.

We could just leave it where it is showed up here, yeah.

Provide any information and we leave it at that, but we give them the benefit that yes, we agreed that it should be lower.

Um make contact with this.

And and I get that, um, you know, can throwing it in the the ball in into their court.

I think just uh like Missy said, if they go on indefinitely and they come back five or ten years from now and say, Oh, now I understand this, and then they get all that interest accrued and they get that refunded.

That's where I kind of see it.

All the years after that.

But usually appeals only for that year.

So yeah, yeah.

But if you can go back whenever and say, Yeah, I had this filed and now I'm contacting you.

If they come back three years from now, and the count now the county's having to then they say they agree with what you suggested now, then the county also has to pay that interest.

That's why I wondered if it was something that was statutory or just a county policy on and then I assume we're correcting it going forward so they don't if it says it in there that we are we have fixed it going forward.

Okay.

So is it is it being changed?

It's not being changed, it's just being held in a holding pattern until paperwork is signed.

So there won't be any notice of assessment change even after this decision.

Correct.

It'll just be they don't get a 115 on this?

They do.

They hit the 115 after this hearing.

But what was a 115 state?

A sustained assessment?

No.

It will show you.

Exactly what it's printed right there.

The assessment sustained um how did it read?

Um it reads uh that they've agreed that the value should be lowered by our due to the form 134 not being submitted or returned timely and based on the petition's failure to attend, the value is submitted to PTBOA and then regarding any refund.

So it's going out as yes, they're getting a lower SS value.

But it does state in there that they have to contact us for that refund.

So are we are reflecting a value change going forward?

It's just they're not claiming the refund.

They have not yet.

Yeah.

And I think that's probably an auditor policy, not an assessor.

I mean, you're gonna claim the refund at the auditor.

We just facilitate it and hand over paperwork.

So I don't know if this auditor is driven by statute on how long you can claim a refund after the county changes a value to a new value.

I think that's where I was still a little confused on because I was not sure that they were changing the value that that initiated also the value getting changed.

I agree, I was confused too.

And I I think correct me if I'm wrong.

This is this is what we call cattle call, and people I mean, we're just trying to drive these to a resolution because no one will pick up the phone or respond to us.

So if that happens, they just hang out there in limbo forever.

And so we drive these to a hearing, um, hoping that they show up, but if they don't, you know, they sit in this situation.

But I I think it may be, you know, and I think just being a good policy of hey, you know, we we don't disagree that the value is overvalued or undervalued or whatever, it's it's you know, we can't we came up with our own evidence that's just a change in value, um, and we're willing to make that change.

Um so maybe we need to look at a policy and get with the auditor and say, well, maybe it's we sustain the original value that way it doesn't end up in a refund limbo.

Um because that I mean we don't issue refunds, right?

We assist with the paperwork because we're in contact with the petitioner, but all of that paperwork is just you know funneled through to the auditor who has their own statutes they uh abide by in delivering that refund.

So there may be a cap with them like three years, and sorry, that's it.

So but I don't know the answer to that.

Yeah, I think I was looking kind of more at the uh the valuation issue of it and how that actually were we actually changing it to the 91, or was it staying at the 274 until something was done?

Right, no, I agree.

You've put it on the okay.

Okay, on page nine, parcel three zero zero one one three seven.

It was withdrawn for uh 2023 on page 19, same parcel 301137 value went down from what it was in 23 and 24 and then plus I got a reduction.

Is that based on income or you follow what I'm saying?

Missing I am following this is corrected neighborhood factor to one for storage units and double AC on apartment.

So if this is a uh storage facility, right?

Um and we have to assess those based off of cost, direct cost, so they can't have a trend factor higher than one, uh kind of like the apartment.

So it's not based on income.

It's not based on income, it is really based on the statute requires us to base it off a cost.

So the cost went down, it's actually the lowest of three, which is generally cost because they're just garages, right?

But the incomes, I mean, are fully released, most of them are apartments, so warehouse it's uh got a lot of legislation, it's no longer market value.

But would it cost go down from 23 to 24?

Well, I think well it's the trend factor.

We re we had to remove the trending factor.

Okay, and we took we took steps to get these things into a neighborhood with a trending factor of one, so we didn't okay, but some of them slip through the cracks right there.

I thought it was based on income there on their full most of our foliage least anyway, so we're getting a full benefit of that, but and then the costs are probably cheaper than the incomes coming in, so okay.

Okay, so I just think question 25.

That's okay.

It's all on the same yeah, it's in the wrong neighborhood.

Okay.

I'll make a motion to set pages one through 28.

Second.

And move secondary for discussion.

Seeing none, all in fair say aye.

Aye, aye.

Do you guys have it?

Pages uh twenty-nine through one twelve.

Um you may want to change your motion to stay on page 28.

That was already decided because that was with the interpreter.

Yeah, yeah, okay.

With the exception of page 28.

Amend my motion to shut pages one through 28 with the exception of the one we did earlier on page 28.

Yes.

Second.

Second.

For discussion.

So none of those say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Against the eyes have it.

Page 29 through 112.

Page uh 40, parcel 600, 9268.

Where's that at?

Is it saw garden trial trail trail?

It's uh an apartments.

No, it's an office park.

Yeah.

No, 9268.

Page uh 40 parcel six zero zero nine two six eight where's that at saw garden trial trail trail it's uh apartments no it's an office park yeah do the right nope nine two sixty sixty seven it's right here uh so I had to think of Kaufman and sixty second and Kaufman basically okay so it's the road it's the roadway that's the roadwood like Georgetown or yeah uh over here is Georgetown.

Yes Georgetown.

Yeah what would he what did we do to that uh a little bit oh okay so we do um on anything that's yeah we do 50% off the land and improvements uh for roadways that aren't listed or deed it as common area we give a 50% reduction off of it based off of that because there's a lot of business parks and stuff that don't do common area and still get built okay page 68 or well it's through 83 moonstone street are they building homes there or no surely I think that's apex reality group yeah developers on that or is it just based on a sale one in parses is six thousand three oh one surely yeah yeah I think we have these assess uh twenty thousand well what we're assessing there's houses now what happened is they just started selling all these lots for twenty thousand a lot okay I think that's what Sparkle is but they got homes are now they're building their now yeah this is early access as this is as of November uh twenty twenty five okay I was kind of wondering what they were up there and those houses went up fast those are new roads yeah it looked like it'd be coming to 70 different it had been platted and somebody walked away from it and now somebody else bought it looks like somebody old house is still there it looks like an older home that's still there on the selling out yeah they're not selling out right there it's like I'm staying on multi scores right now where's that uh Michigan Road yeah these were all landlocked until recently they just painted roads too Michigan and 79th in Michigan okay I'm not sure if it's fire apartments or houses handles most of the apartments but okay and uh 6302 Kaufman or I'm sorry page one oh eight six oh three oh one five five you know number again six oh three oh one five five yeah and that's based on a new construction it's mine sure see what they did uh yes so it looks like for twenty five page twenty six maybe we have them on at a hundred percent and they were only we had them on at a hundred percent and if I go probably to documents there's photos that show I'd like to know what percentage we gave them I guess these are from March I mean they had to be close to a hundred cut it in half oh well it was three point two million down at one point three million so to the one point four million probably half or sixty percent maybe yeah looks like that's what we it yeah he doesn't have a note in here as to what percentage he took it to he just said due to partially complete construction okay

I mean they had to be close to a hundred.

Oh well, it was 3.2 million down to 1.3 million, so to the 1.4 million, probably half or 60%, maybe.

Yeah, looks like that's what we it yeah, he doesn't have a note in here as to what percentage he took it to.

He just said due to partially complete construction.

Okay.

It's just for 25.

Just for 25.

For 26 is 100%.

Well, 26 paper 27, you're uh you're not assessing yet, are you?

We're still working 26 pay 27.

So uh, but it should still be in there as a hundred percent, yeah.

It's in there at a hundred percent still that's all I'm quite for pages twenty-nine through one twelve.

I'll make a motion accept pages twenty-nine through one twelve.

Second.

So that move second on further discussion.

Seeing none, all fair say aye.

Aye, against the ayes have it.

We got uh hearing officer subjective appeals, pages one thirteen through one seventy-nine.

She don't have any force, did she?

She did not say that she had anything.

Okay, I'll make a motion except pages one thirteen through one seventy-nine.

Second.

Ben moon second in your first discussion.

Seeing none all those say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Against the ayes have it.

We've got withdrawals, page one eighty through two thirty-four.

I'll make a motion to set page one eighty through two thirty-four.

Second.

I'm right behind you, Mr.

Chairman.

Uh it's been moved and seconded.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Against the ayes have it.

Exemptions pages two thirty-five through two forty-six.

The exception one we already done.

Correct.

Good.

Actually, anything on these.

Okay.

I have one question page 238.

Also 108-4193.

147 East Maryland.

Don't the PACES rent that space or what was that page?

238.

The pages are they were in that.

I believe they're still.

I used to occupy that building back in the day.

Wasn't it Graham's electronics too?

All the time.

Gordon Graham was one of the owners, yeah.

Yeah.

But as of January 1 of 2025, 81.

So it's Indianapolis amount of that wasn't.

Only the uh economic development or downtown any was the Pacers had moved out.

Correct.

Building is owned by not renting any space out to anybody.

They are, but the lease didn't start until February.

So as of January 1.

There was no okay.

So then this will be reviewed for 26.

Okay.

So I'll make a motion to set page 235 through 246.

Second.

Second any further discussion.

Seeing none on there say aye.

Aye.

Against the ayes have it.

Any else come before the board?

Would you guys like calendar invites sent to you for the Pita Boa dates?

That would be awesome.

I got you.

Just thinking ahead.

We did it for Vanina, so she didn't have to ask us.

I had a question or something.

Do we do we need an update on next year's changes to the laws?

I'll check the seat there.

I'll check.

So no changes that happen.

That makes sense.

I mean we we did a couple years ago.

Yeah.

With regard to assessments.

Yeah, assessment taxes basically, I guess a little bit of everything.

Like you said, uh passed a new deduction.

Like the January board meeting?

Yeah, we'd be quite a 20-minute legislation update or something.

Yeah, that would really be nice.

A lot of uh detail at the winter conference.

So I think one of the classes is on that.

Go ahead.

Oh yeah, because I was gonna do a meeting then.

I was gonna sneak into that.

21st of January.

20, 21st, 22nd, every moment.

It's the week of Martin Luther Key.

It's the week of PTBOA, right?

No, no, I our ours is the day after or the next week.

I made our last for the next week after because that we don't have to worry about it.

Yeah, so we don't notice that.

Probably just do that class at that beginning of that first PTOA.

Okay.

Just the basics.

I mean, uh I heard there are a lot of changes, but maybe what that's too much, but do we need to do ethics training once in a while?

Usually they send it out to you guys, and then I get emails.

Yeah, I just did mine.

Okay.

I haven't I haven't heard that you guys have.

Oh no, what about the uh statement forms they have to fill out?

Yeah, yeah.

Have you guys done those?

Yeah.

Okay.

But that's not the ethic training, is it?

No, that's not ethics training, but I also get emails on that.

That's why I was like I don't remember doing that.

It says on a form or so.

I think they do have to do edits training.

How would they do it without less than we do?

Is it all through the website?

Yeah.

Yeah.

Everything we do now is through uh like the internal system.

Because it does say on our ethics or not our financial disclosure when are you ethic training or not recently.

And just you know, January's meeting is in here, and then the rest will be down the hall in the other room for the rest of the year.

Oh we got you come for your chairs.

They kept denying this room, and I said, you know what?

I'm gonna do it all over there.

And the first one was approved, so I was like, we'll just do the rest of the year.

Okay.

Anything else?

Merry Christmas, happy new year.

Yes.