Uh we're going to start the meeting, the Peter BOA for April 24th.

Introduce ourselves.

Great.

Greg Raff now, board member.

Kathy Gould, board member.

Steve Adramie, President of the Board.

Brian Barton, board member.

Kevin Robinson, board member.

We've got several guests.

Can you stand and raise your right hands?

I'm going to throw you all out one time.

Alrighty.

You swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth, so happy God.

Yes.

Okay.

Let me see.

I'll make a motion to accept minutes from last month.

Second.

Then second for any further discussion.

Seeing in all favor say aye.

Aye.

Yes.

Do you have it?

Um just gonna order here.

Yes, please.

By the agenda or by the sheet.

Uh let's go by the sheet, please.

Shane pays to come first.

Shane Ray.

What's the 34 North Capital?

Oh, I'm sorry.

Is that the one I didn't put on?

Okay, so that one's not under your other business.

Um page what?

84.

Page 84 of your agenda.

This is an exemption.

I have documents for the building.

Okay, you want to state your name and good morning.

My name is Chanel.

Well, Ashley, what's the parcel?

It is 10875.

What page did you say it was on?

80.

No, no, it might be.

Yeah, it might not be.

It's 87.

Page 87 of your agenda.

No.

Um 87 of the PDF.

Yeah, but this is 130 stuff.

And it'll be around page 90, technically.

So it was page 84.

No, because those are my injected appeals.

It's not exemptions.

What's the parcel we're talking about?

108075.

Page 90.

Did you guys not get the new agenda?

Yeah.

We forward then the new.

I sent it to you, right?

Is that everyone sent out?

Did you have any other?

Yes.

And when I bring it off.

Okay.

Sorry, we're set.

Go ahead.

Good morning, members of the appeals committee.

My name is Chanel Poole.

I am the executive director of Guidance Life Skills and Mentoring Inc.

I respectfully submit this letter of explanation on the behalf of Guidance Life Skills and Mentoring Inc., a federally recognized 501c3 nonprofit organization that has operated in good standing since 2010 to request relief regarding the failure to file Form 136 for the above reference property and to seek consideration for the waiver of associated tax lien.

First and foremost, I want to express my sincere regret for the this oversight.

At no point was the this omission intentional, negligent, or done with disregard for the statutory requirements.

Rather, it was the result of a genuine misunderstanding based on the on GLAM's ongoing tax exempt status and the circumstances surrounding the acquisition of the property.

Glam has maintained continuous nonprofit tax exempt status since 2010.

At the time of acquiring the property in September of 2022, it was my understanding based on our established exempt status that the organization exemption would extend to property owned and used for charitable purposes.

Unfortunately, I was not aware that a separate filing of Form 136 was required to formally apply for property tax exemption following acquisition.

Compounding this misunderstanding were extraordinary personal and organizational circumstances at the time of closing.

The property transaction was finalized during a period in which I recovered from a serious and traumatic medical condition requiring removal of 30 fibroids and multiple blood transfusion.

As a result, I was physically unable to attend closing in person and completed the transaction electronically while under medical care.

During this time, my primary focus was recovery and ensuring organizational continuity, and I regret that I was not in a position to fully assess or understand all post-acquisition compliance requirements.

Additionally, GLAM did not receive any notice, communication, or indication from any governing body or agency regarding the requirement to file 136 or the status of the property taxes until April 2nd, 2026, when the organization received its first and only notice of a tax lien at our P.O.

Box.

Our CPA firm, who is also our registered agent, a total solutions consulting service, similarly received its first notice via certified mail on March 26, 2026.

Prior to these dates, we had no knowledge of any deficiency, obligation, or pending lien related to this matter.

The property itself holds significant historical and community value.

GLAM acquired 2034 North Capitol Avenue from the from the historic Indiana Federation of Colored Women's Club, a legacy institution founded in 1906 in Indianapolis.

Our intent in acquiring this property was and remains to be preserve and restore this important cultural landmark while transforming it into the Glam Legacy Center, a hub for trauma informed mentoring, youth development, workforce training, and community healing.

This project has been supported through credible and mission aligned partners, including funding assistance from IU Health Foundation through a community impact investment grant.

Additionally, Indiana Landmark has provided guidance and support in the preservation and restoration efforts.

And the City of Indianapolis formerly partnered with GLAM in hosting a groundbreaking ceremony in 2023, recognizing the significance of this redevelopment initiative.

At all times, GLAM has acted in good faith with transparency and in alignment with its charitable mission.

The organization has not derived any private benefits from this property, nor has it been used for any purpose inconsistent with tax exempt eligibility.

The failure to file Form 136 was not an attempt to avoid tax obligation, but rather unintentional administrative oversight due to lack of awareness and absence of notice.

Given these circumstances, I respectfully request the following consideration for retroactive property tax exemption based on GLAM's 501c3 status and the exclusive charitable use of the property, waiver or removal of penalties, interests, and tax lien associated with the failure to file Form 136, the opportunity to come in full compliance moving forward, including immediate filing of all required documents.

GLAM remains fully committed to compliance with all applicable laws, regulation, and has already taken steps to ensure that proper filings and procedures are in place moving forward.

We deeply value our responsibility as a nonprofit organization serving the Indianapolis community and are dedicated to preserving the historic property for public benefit.

I humbly ask for your understanding and consideration in this matter.

Granting this appeal would not only correct an unintentional oversight, but it will also allow GLAM to continue its vital work without disruption and to bring to life a project that honors both history and the community impact.

Thank you.

So it's not even filed on time to see.

April 10th.

Can you give me a brief description?

I've I've read some of your information, but you helped teens or kind of going just a little bit.

I was wanting to just a little bit.

Absolutely.

We provide guidance, life skills, and mentoring to average youth ages nine through eighteen, and we've been doing that for the last 18 years.

All of our services are free.

We provide academic development, college prep, professional development for 12 weeks.

We also provide wraparound services.

It's a two-year commitment-based organization in which we operate inside of the schools.

We work with the juvenile center and also receive referrals through DCS.

And this was the first property that you purchased, and you just gave us your explanation, okay?

Yes, sir.

Uh, we acquire the property with the help of IU Health Foundation to create a permanent facility, which would be a safe haven for you free at charge and to be able to provide them ongoing training for our expansion of our services.

Okay, thank you.

Yes, sir.

This is the first tax bill they got, it was 24.

So the issue was the address that we had on file was not the correct address.

So the tax notices were going to an old address that they were no longer located.

So then they receive a notice from the treasurer's office saying that someone made a bid on the property in the tax ale.

Has that address been corrected?

I believe they are at that address, correct?

The 939.

Uh so yes, the address has been corrected since 2022.

All of our mail was assigned to go to a P.O.

box in which I provided a copy from the U.S.

Postal Services that shows how long we've been active with a P.O.

box, and it's been since 2021.

Uh we originally lived in the Penn Arts building off of 16th of Pennsylvania, but we moved out of that property in 2020.

And so we've always did a um change of address, and so all of our mail has always went to the P.O.

box.

We have no we don't know why any of this information didn't come to our P.O.

box until April the 2nd.

So we did receive a letter from this department April the 2nd to the PO box, but we did not receive anything prior to tax people weren't sent to the PO box.

No, they were going to 111.

If you click on the ownership tab, it'll show their old address.

It was going to a 11 East 16th Street.

And you did change that with the post office.

Yes, we changed it in 2020 when we moved out of the property.

So they're asking for 2023?

Yes.

Yes.

Once that got through at a tax sale.

I'm sorry.

If we cramped in what happens to the tax sale, they lose it or no.

My assumption is they would give whoever made a bid on it their money back.

They're not gonna get all the money back because there are nuisance fine.

It looks like there's nuisance fines that were on there.

Um and stormwater uh fees, so those won't go back to the taxpayer because those would have had to been paid whether they were exempt or not.

What's the nuisance fines?

What is that?

I don't know.

It could be for anything, it could be um there was trash the city hadn't come out and cleaned it up.

It could be that the city come out and there was you know broken um steps.

I mean, there's many different reasons the city could put it in the city.

They just don't give it an explanation, which wouldn't be entirely their fault if somebody dumped something or whatever it's your property you're responsible for it.

You'd have to call the treasurer to find out exactly what the and this could also be stormwater solid waste fees that everybody pays no matter what.

Mr.

Chairman would like to make a motion based on the information that I'm seeing and the outpour for the community to help teens are I want to approve the uh motion.

Second, maybe recommend recommendation.

Yes, the exemption.

Okay, it's been moved second for discussion.

Seeing none of those say aye.

I uh against the ayes have it.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

I just need to do the second oh Brian did.

Uh Paul Paul Jones is this one on the agenda on my front page?

Yes.

What parcels Paul Jones on?

1052024, etc.

Yes, so this is on the front page, it's the build believe yes.

It's the build believe.

Yes, it's it's on the agenda.

There are four parcels.

Right.

It's on the front page of the cover page.

1097.

Don't forget if you speak, you need to turn on your microphone, please.

Okay.

Oh, build better properties.

Sorry?

Yes.

Build believe.

Page the first one is on page 90.

And then I think it's like 91, 92, 71, 93, 95, 96, and 97.

Okay, yes.

So there's there's four three years, 23, 24, 25, and 26.

So there's four years in front of you.

2023, 2024, 2025, and 2026.

And this is the main parcel.

Okay, go ahead, Paul.

Go ahead.

Good morning, board members.

Um, Paul Jones on behalf of Bill Believe Schools.

Uh the subject property in this case is um owned, occupied, and used by uh nonprofit 501c3 public charter school, uh believe schools.

Um I have with me representatives uh from the school, uh Ms.

Neil, uh Mr.

Singh, and also uh Mr.

Falk, who's a board member uh with the group.

Um the property was previously owned by Ivy Tech.

Um so the this the charter school occupied the property beginning in 2020.

It was owned by uh Ivy Tech at that time.

Um it's been continuously operated as a charter school during all of these years in issue.

Uh at the end of uh 2022, believe schools purchased the property, so they became the owner.

Um and at that point uh no exemptions filings were made, even though we had a continuous occupancy and use as a as a charter school.

Um believe it is filed exemption applications for all of the years that were just mentioned 23, 24, 25, and 26.

Um they were not aware of this uh situation until um approximately March 26th of 2026, uh, when there was a tax sale uh notice that was received.

Um, and so uh as soon as they were made aware of it, uh they reached out to the assessor's office.

Uh they had been working with Mr.

Deaton, who's not here today, but uh before I got involved, there was a discussion with Mr.

Deaton.

I don't believe there's any issue with the assessor's office about the merits of the exemption.

We're only talking about the late filing issue.

Um as we've talked about before this board, there is a statute that allows filings going back for three years if the property was exempt for the immediate year before, which would be 2022, and if they would have been eligible exemption for 23, 24, and 25, which they are in this case.

Uh so we are asking uh that the board approve the exemption for all four years.

Um, and again, if we have questions from the board, I can address those.

I also have representatives of the charter school here to uh explain uh what's needed from the board.

How long they owned it?

No problem.

How long has it been owned by since um they bought it September 13th of 2022?

And the bills were going to oh sorry, that's not the right one.

I have it on the other one.

I have it on mine.

They bought it February 7th of 2022, and the properties were going to 2540 North Capitol Avenue.

So I don't know if this is a wrong address, or if they just got the bills and what's the address for the school?

The school is at 2530 North Capitol Avenue.

Right.

As the address we have now the mailing address, the post office may list it as 2540.

I I don't know, but what they have on here is 2540 North Capitol Avenue.

Well, is it previously not was exempt previously?

Yes by the prior owner for for all prior years it was exempt.

It's always been a school, which was Ivy Tech.

It's always been a school, yeah.

The last exemption file was under community enterprise properties LLC.

Oh because that Ivy Tech?

That is Ivy Tech.

It was an entity formed by Ivy Tech to own the property.

So it's kind of like the last one we had.

Then you get a tax bill, went to the wrong address, but I don't know if theirs went to the wrong address.

I don't know if that's their issue as the last one was.

Were the tax bills ever received by the school?

We never received any bills.

And neither did the mortgage holders who got the March 26 notification, but they never received anything else either.

Everything came March 26 out of the blue.

Where would they go in before?

To the 2033.

2540 North Capital.

Can you pull up 20?

Where is 25?

2540 a building or I mean I I would assume that's the it's it's this because it's such a large lot.

We list our property address as 2530, but the mailing address is 2540.

Right.

See, that begs the question.

If if the property was before them was uh exempt a bill wouldn't go, right?

Would they still not receive?

I mean it was exempt.

We removed the exemption, correct, Brittany?

But there was never but my point was it was never a bill going to Ivy Tech.

They may have gotten stormwater solid waste bills.

Um I'm not sure.

Right.

I believe when IV Tech owned it, there were for the 22 pay 23 bill, there was a bill, but it was a zero bill, and it went to the Ivy Tech address, the community enterprise LLC address.

So Paul, what you I'm not trying to put word.

What you're saying is even though if you don't pay anything, you still get a zero bill.

Yes, exemption, yeah.

I've never had that luxury, so I don't know.

Understood.

Any other questions from the board?

I'll make a motion to allow the exemption.

We'll come back to what 23.

Yes.

23, 24, 25, and 26.

Okay.

What's the question?

Where do we have the address to make sure they're getting the so they shouldn't be getting the tax bill?

The only thing they'll get is stormwater solid waste fee bills that everyone has to pay, whether you're exempt or not.

And a nuisance, right?

Right, if you have a weed fine or something, that gets all right.

I second.

C and none of all in favor say aye.

Again, the ayes have it.

Thank you for coming in.

All right.

Thank you for your time.

I appreciate it.

Did you sign in, sir?

Oh, I do know.

I'm sorry.

I'm sorry.

Adam Rochford.

And are you on business?

Adam Rochford?

Yes.

I do have a partial A exhibition.

195894.

Um, yes, that's correct.

A what?

1958.

It is uh exemption.

No, this is a one three one oh four issue.

Is this the property?

Okay.

Okay.

Um yes, page 65.

Page six actually, sorry, page 69 and 70.

There's two years in question.

24 and 23.

West Green Tech LLC.

Yes.

Okay, go ahead, sir.

Uh good morning.

I'm Adam Rochford.

I'm here appealing the 2023-2024 estimated personal property assessment for my business Midwest Green Tech.

Um at its core, I believe this is a clerical mistake.

Um in 2022, I filed a change of principal office address for my LLC with the Indiana Indiana Secretary of State through NBIS, which is marketed as the quote, Indiana's one-stop source for your business.

The Department of Revenue is also listed as an official partner agency.

Uh seven months before the first assessment date issue.

Um the assessor's office of 2023 to 2044 notices were sent to my old mailing address, uh, not the Sanders Street address already on file with the state.

Um when I raised this uh issue with the assessor's office in November of 2025, um, they informed me that they had gotten my old outdated address from the Department of Revenue and responded by issuing um corrected mailing notice on December 12th, 2025.

Um it's on their form and addressed to my correct Sanders Street location, and that's uh exhibit three you have there.

Um they labeled it as corrected mailing and property location, formally treating this as a prior mailing address error that needed correcting.

Um I believe that supports my appeal to the board that has the authority to apply that's the same correction to 2023 and 2024 estimated assessments under uh clerical error code, it's Indiana Code 6-1.1-15-1.1, subsection A4, it gives three years to make those sort of clerical corrections.

Uh, because 2023-2024 notices went to the wrong address, um, I didn't receive them, and the estimated assessments for 20,000 and 25,000 were issued without any input.

Uh if I had received that notice, I would have filed return and claimed the $80,000 personal property exemption.

Uh my actual personal property totals are around $3,000.

That's exhibit 11.

You have there.

Um the corrected uh tax liability for both years would have been zero dollars.

Um I do acknowledge that uh I was required to file the personal property return in the first place.

Um if I had filed uh every year the claim exemption, um form 103 is short and form 104 for 2025 was also sent in and acknowledged and accepted.

Um but yeah, that's a process that's not outlined on the Indiana's one-stop source for your business.

Um, so I was not aware at all that I had to do so.

Um my exemption would have been zero for that as well.

Um I also wanted to note that the 5% burden shift rule I believe applies here.

My assessment year uh assessments jumped prior year's value of zero to twenty thousand to twenty-five thousand, which is more than that five percent, and and puts the burden on the assessor to prove these estimates are correct, uh, not necessarily on me to disprove that.

Um asking the board to uh allow the correction for the 2023-2024 estimated assessments to apply the 80,000 dollar exemption and uh to set that final liability at zero for both years.

Okay, so my head from personal property.

Sorry, I'm filling in for date.

Uh so I have where notices were sent out, a corrected notice was sent out December.

We originally sent the notices out January 13th of 2025 to the 1013 East Moore Street, which is the property location.

Um, and then December 12th of 2025, they resent out the 2025 assessment uh to 934 Sanders Street.

Um 2025, we have no problem with the 23 and 24, were not the appeal wasn't filed on time for those years, and this is a self-assessment, so they're required to file the AP the 103s and 104s every year.

That did not happen.

So if you don't file, we put on an arbitrary assessment.

I believe tax bills went out.

If he didn't change his mailing address with the assessor's office for the tax bills, they would have gone to the address that we found.

Um it looks like from what I can tell they found it through this the state.

And um they did it wasn't updated with the state until I guess it was updated 1022 and 527 or 22.

It was updated with the state to the 934 Sanders Street.

But at the time I don't know that they had those documents.

So this is just basically a Indian law says you have to file.

If you don't, we arbitrarily assess it, then you have 45 days from that date.

You actually have a year to refile.

You can amend your return up to 12 months.

Correct.

If they file original return, you have an extra year.

Whole year to amend your return and make the changes.

They didn't file an original PL, so that's where we're at.

We don't have an issue with 25.

We've accepted 25 as timely.

It's just 23 and 24.

We don't believe it's it's timely.

No.

They didn't file in right.

There was no filing in 22?

No.

No filing in 22.

And then they filed 23 and 24 just this past year.

Yeah.

So no filing in 22.

They came back this in 25 and did, or twenty twenty-five and twenty six and filed for twenty-three, twenty-four, twenty-five.

It never we never had it as a zero based off the BPP statute.

It's never had a zero assessment.

They've never filed.

Can I ask why you didn't file?

Um I was actually W 2 full-time employed uh that entire time.

That was a dormant business that uh had no revenue or activity on it.

Um I was employed W 2 full-time the entire point 2022 through 2024, the entire assessment time.

So I again just uh again acknowledge that was a mistake to not file that.

It was not top of my mind because it wasn't an operating business, it had zero assets.

Uh the assets I actually have listed under the um exam uh exhibit 11 were purchased for my W 2 full-time employment.

Um I since after the assessment dates, um, started working as a consultant under the business now, and so I assessed those as property of the business, but at the time they were purchased, they were for my W 2 full-time employment and not operating for Midwest Green Tech as the business since there was zero revenue and zero business activity.

Zero revenue for 22, 23, 24, no, no, no sales, no nothing.

Nothing at all.

I was full-time W 2 employed with a different company.

I I hadn't done any business with that LLC.

So I have a question.

So if he didn't do any business for three years, why would you need to file?

Because his business was established at a location.

Is that how you found if he filed something with the Indiana Department of Revenue?

We get a list from them.

Um he was on that list.

It doesn't tell that list doesn't tell us what they applied for or anything.

We don't really communicate with the Secretary of State or the Indiana Department of Revenue.

Um we get we get information from them that we in turn use.

Um like we get a list, it's just a spreadsheet that says the name of the business, the address, and um I think that's it, just name the business and address.

So were they the text number on his what some personal property or what's the case?

Yeah, right.

The assets because what was the assets?

Well, that's what it's a self-reporting assessment.

You have to report your own assets as the company, and since he didn't record it, we put on an arbitrary assessment of those of what we believe.

So you made up your own assumptions.

We did an estimated assessment.

And what was that assessment?

20,000.

And what's that based on that's just normally what we give first time?

Yeah, but what is it?

What is it based on?

It's just an estimated assessment, it's not based on anything.

But how can you just throw up a number?

Well, we send them notices that we're hoping that they contact us and then actually file the return within the 45 days.

Did you get the notices?

No, that's the issue at hand.

I changed the business address the year prior to these assessments with the invis one-stop shop for your business, and uh it was with the state, so that I have that official change of address as part of my exhibits.

Um, so I was under the assumption that any notices for my business would be coming to me, but they went to an old outdated address.

I also set up a mail forwarding for a full year after that change of address to make sure anything in the mix uh was sent.

So I tried to do my due diligence on that, but the the assessments were sent to an old address, and I was never informed, so um I I didn't know I had those, even though the secret the secretary of state's office you can do the business entity search, it's a publicly accessible tool.

It has the right address and had it for seven months prior to uh the first assessment.

Um what was the so what is the oh um nine hundred and thirty dollars?

And that's really for one of the years uh believe it should be.

That's for 24 and uh that's just for 24 pay 25.

I don't know.

And then 23, I believe is around the same, but collections.

23 is in collections, so they're not.

Which is how I found out about it from the first place is when it went to collections and they contacted me.

They were able to pull up the business entity.

We received the address from the Indiana Department of Revenue list that we received, and that's the only address we have.

Um we don't typically go in and search anything until there's several years in collections, and then we'll go in to the Secretary of State.

I mean, we have thousands of files, so we need each one of them.

Can you stay for name from the recording?

I'm sorry, Melody Ivan says so.

Based off the notes, it looks like we did uh and Form 113 was sent 1016 of 23 for the 2023, then 2020 then January 9th of 2025, they did another form 113, and then October 31st they at 25, we did a 2025 notice.

For 35 for thirst, so I'm sorry, for 35,000?

Yes.

So what so I'm just I don't get the okay.

I uh it's we're following Indian establishment.

I I know, I know, but yeah.

I mean, I I get it, but this is a self-reporting uh a lot of businesses.

I mean have uh have accountants that file this for them.

Um I just don't miss Clinton confused because to file a business, you go to the Secretary of State, but you said you got your information from the Indiana Department of Revenue, right?

But the gentleman also said there was no money.

The business made no money, so I don't know how the Indiana Department of Revenue got.

He had to he filed something with the Indiana Department of Revenue.

It may have been a was it your personal that you filed?

No.

I'm not sure.

I contacted the Department of Revenue about the communications because the Department of Revenue is listed as an official partner on Invis, so I was calling to ask them about the address, but I didn't know that there was a trigger for why it was sent.

I had assumed that they had reached out to a department of revenue.

I had submitted a Indiana um whatever the FOIA request is for Indiana about the communications there, and I I don't know if I got anything on the uh who initiated the request from DOR to uh the assessor's office, but I called them and they just said, yeah, we sent over the address we had, but I'd already updated on the Secretary of State's site, which lists the DOR as an official partner.

So I've I understand there are different departments, but clearly they're fine with going to a different department to get the information.

I I just figured the business entity search would be the primary location where you would go to get official business records since that's where we have to go to the so your business is a LLC?

Correct.

So doesn't it all flow to you on your personal anyway?

Uh yes, if I make any income, which I I didn't through that business during the years of questioning.

Okay.

But I do know now Indiana Biz does send an email to business owners reminding them to file, but that to file business once with our office.

That didn't start until last year.

We got invaded with calls.

So they are doing it now.

And then the they did not know.

And again, we don't communicate with either department.

We we we can do a search on the Indiana Secretary of State website.

We don't typically do that until there's a problem.

Yeah, but we get a list from the Indiana Department of Revenue.

Right.

That's how we set up the business, and that's the address that we had at the time.

And I believe it was the property address that we oh great.

So it was going to the property.

It just wasn't going to where he went, the where the standard's address is.

A question for you, sir.

An important distinction for me is you said the business made no revenue.

Was did it make no revenue because it was inactive, or it just wasn't successful?

I was not working on that business at all.

I had a full-time job with another you, but was anyone else working for that?

No, it's a single personnel.

So yeah, I was I had that set up as a consultancy for in between jobs.

I work in the solar industry, which is very up and down.

Uh, and this would have been dormant for years at that point.

I hadn't worked on that business at all.

Uh during that time period, I think it was for four years uh prior to that.

I hadn't done any business at all with that company.

I had a full-time W 2 employment during that entire stretch.

And then we're talking about $18,000 with one year being in collections?

No, $1,800.

Oh, 1800.

$1,800.

And um that's right, yeah.

I mean, if if the business is dormant, I guess my question is we're still updated, he's still updated with the Secretary of State.

So he was still doing something for that business to keep it active and not like being closed down.

So if he's doing that.

I'm not understanding that question.

Well, I'm saying if you're keeping your business open with the Secretary of State, then you know that there's filing some things you should be doing as well.

And if he would just file zero amount, we wouldn't be in this problem.

Yeah, but there I'm I'm sure there's a lot of people who have started a business and it didn't go anywhere, and they just like say he didn't file.

I get I get your point, I get his point, but no revenue, no income taxes filed.

Uh and again, you're not showing you're not giving us anything, so we're taking your word for it.

So that's another thing.

So I apologize.

I thought you guys had the feel I have a copy there with the exhibits also of uh so my point is it just I get what you're saying, Mrs.

It's just like there wasn't anything concrete to show any sales or income or anything.

And you probably should have shut it down, but you did.

No, I with my business uh businesses go out of business all the time in the solar industry, and I I was receiving notices from the Secretary of State's website for uh the business entity filing updates, which is why when I moved, uh it triggered me to go, oh yeah, I'd better update this address.

I was not actively doing expenditures on the business, not purchasing, and also not receiving any revenue.

I was full-time employed with another company, which would be against my employment contract.

I can send you a copy of that as well.

It would be a direct conflict with the solar company I was working for at the time for me to be doing business like that on the side.

But there's no personal property anymore, is there now you filed in 25.

So yes, the EW is.

So he filed in 25, he's not required to file on Wednesday.

In 250.

And 25 was okay.

Yeah, 25 we accepted.

Correct.

Right.

Yes.

Okay.

Any other questions on the board?

I'll make a motion except 23 and 24.

Second.

Accept it as on time or staff recommendation.

Uh I don't I guess we need that clarification except it for a BVE.

Um, I don't know that he actually proved those return.

I don't know.

I don't know that he filed any return.

No, I meant in the packet that I have there.

Uh yeah.

Uh nope that's his appeal.

The right part of my appeal request was to submit the corrected forms so we could uh have that.

No, no, no forms for 23 or 24.

Okay, so the motion is to allow him to file for 23 and 24.

Are you gonna give a deadline when that needs to be done?

Only because if you just say file it, not saying that he would, but he can forget and then we'll back up this again.

Um I can the the forms are no longer available online because they're too old.

Um I do have them that I can email him.

Um if I if you can just do a 10-day period, I can work.

If you guys if you guys are in the middle of the day, of course, I'll file work with them as soon as I get the files.

No, I mean if I yeah, they'll be done as soon as I get them, yeah.

Within 10 days, you have to follow it up with the popper eight thousand, right?

Is that you want to pop for eight thousand?

Um it's the the years in question, I believe is like one thousand.

I'll check the dates on the purchases, but I'm using those assets now for the business, so I guess retroactively they would be associated with the business.

Um I could take a look at the dates for those purchases though.

It'd be like one between one and three thousand dollars.

So you got file for 23 and 24.

The motion is to file 23 and 24 within 10 days or notion meeting taken away.

And is that 10 days from receiving the I will send it to you as soon as I get back at the end of the day?

10 days from the page.

May 1st.

10 business.

I don't know.

I got A.

Okay.

Yeah.

Yes, May 8th.

Okay.

That's a May 8.

That's my motion.

Seven.

See an off there say I.

I guess you guys have it.

And we got the correct address on probably now, right?

Yes.

It's a 534 sound there's yes.

You just facts her.

Oh no, that's fine.

Those are copies.

You want to go in 934?

It's my house, yeah.

Okay.

I just have one question.

Are you allowing the 25 dollar late fine to be removed as well?

Oh.

Okay.

So that will be a $25 late fine.

For $23 and $24.

If you don't get the email to the of course, yeah.

So we didn't get the email.

Yes, I have it.

All right.

It goes back as well.

Thank you so much, appreciate it.

Um I have email.

Okay, yes.

Okay.

So that's the same.

Yes.

Yes.

No.

I'm sorry.

No, this is a 130 appeal.

Um I had sent the board uh email that was forwarded to me.

Um the board also has my information on it as well.

Um here's a copy for you all.

Uh this is in regards to the old Dairy Queen at 6320 West 38th Street.

Uh it's a 130 appeal for 2025 K 2026.

It used to be a Dairy Queen.

It's no longer a dairy queen.

No, those are his comps that he sent in an email uh after he was notified that it was gonna go in front of the board for a hearing.

Okay.

Or let's take your name and yeah, good morning, board members.

Uh my name is Mahesh Konsal.

I own this property uh in 2024.

I bought this property in 2024, like a daddy queen business, so interested to run the restaurant.

You speak up a bit.

Uh yeah, I bought the Daddy Queen uh in 2024, April, like uh to run the restaurant, but unfortunately we closed the restaurant because of losses and conflicts with the twin to invest more money there.

So we decided to close the business and uh the business is closed.

And uh I'm gonna I respectfully uh the assessment in 2024 for that building is two thirty-four thousand or two thirty-four thousand.

Uh I respectfully request a reduction in assist value of the current assessment given by the assisted office.

Like they gave me 394k.

So, but I'm requesting uh to reduce that to 290,300 based on the pump's comparable sales uh provided.

Uh uh so the same analysis is like the they are comparing the corporate restaurant properties like uh RB's Jaggers and the Queens or uh Starbucks.

Uh those sales includes premium pricing because the franchise blanks and long-term basis.

And this property is now an independent, not corporate building with non-national tenants or franchise premium.

So that's why uh that is one compatible comparing things and uh what pages?

Um I just again I'm having another crazy week.

Um thank you, Alicia.

And uh the recent uh sale on the same 38th Street, 5090 S38th Street, which is the size of the building sound five hundred and forty eight square feet sold in September 2045.

The sale price is 465,000, which is price per square feet is $61.60.

If we compare that, uh it comes if we compare that to get property, which is $3,941 square foot, which comes at all $242,742,000, $718.

So this is almost the same assessment in like 2024.

So there is a lot of evidence like uh $515.

They just at all $83 plus $50.

So the current assist value is $394,100 is $100 per square feet, which is not equal comparing these comparables.

Uh this printing is 1968 building, which is the reward building, and uh independent location, no franchise pinions, and uh so there's all this evidence is I respectfully requesting the board uh to reduce the ex value to 290,300, which is the value given to me when I contacted the SSSL piece initially, so that is the original value I got on based on this recent by saying $61.60 plus fair board and uh property from Fed Foods, independent market areas, and uh additional property.

Uh so I look at this uh edition of just rental.

I just went paid my face up with that district laborable.

So I thousand three hundred yes, yes.

So it should be noted that he was working with Gabriel Lewis or Gabrielle Lewis worked on this property.

I had spoken with him, and then Gabriel got him.

Gabriel offered him 290,000, and I pulled that offer.

Um so that's why he's requesting her original offer.

That I believe that offer to be too low, he paid 567,000 for this property.

So I did not see a justification to lower to 290,000.

That's I mean, that's right, that's half almost, and um so I pulled sales, um you have them in your packet.

I only used five sales, and they were all Gary Queen's at one point, or they're older fast food restaurants, um, and they are more in line with uh his property on West 38th Street.

Um he has two mortgages on this property, which you have in your packet for me as well.

One for 228,000 and one for 315,000, which totals the 567 that he paid for the property, uh based off of the comps I use.

So I used uh property on Kentucky Avenue, one on Southeast Street, one on East Washington, one on Pinola Pike, one on East 38th, and one on North Keystone, and uh based off of those sales, the nice summary.

Um the average is 106 dollars a square foot.

They range from anywhere from $58 to $191 a square foot, with the average being $106 or square foot, and we're offering him $100 a square foot, which is still below the sales price.

Um but I mean it's a number I feel okay with and granting or offering to him, but I I will not go below $390,000.

He paid $567 for it, and I'm taking an account that he possibly bought some franchise paid franchise fees or something for the Dairy Queen that is no longer a dairy queen.

Gary Queen pulled their franchise from them.

So it's no longer a dairy queen.

It's got a restaurant in there now.

So it wouldn't be when you purchased it.

Was there a franchise?

Did you disclose that on your sales disclosure?

So the SDA loan that you recommended.

So sales disclosure says all they did was pay 507,000.

Right.

And there's a spot that you need to put on there if those things are included.

So by putting that on there, you're saying my building and my land is five, that's what I'm paying 500,000 for so and uh he had stated the mortgage for 228,000.

He said was a business loan for or it was for the personal property, but if you read the mortgage in there, it is for the real estate, it says nothing about personal property.

It's it's a company that uh it's that gives property or loans to smaller businesses if they can't get the full amount approved by a bank, then this company comes in and approves the additional amount.

So to me, he paid $567 for this property, and we had it assessed at that, and that's why he called.

And based off the location, the age and stuff, we are willing to go a hundred dollars a square foot to 390,100, unless the board has a different number.

So that's what we're seeing here on page 72.

Your your offer.

Yes, you're seeing my offer.

So when you bought the property, it was a dairy queen, correct?

He said they're in business.

Why did you what why did you shut it down?

So they gave a couple of things.

This is my new business that I screened plus 90 minute business.

So I was an ID.

ID guy competes, but I won't discard a business, I started this business.

Seeing the sales of the business, he's uh $600,000 every day.

I mean if he uh so if you say to buy the business, we have income on the I did the business based on the case we provided with the landowner's office.

We didn't ask the landowner, hey, I'm buying this property, so you want to like land it on the name.

So I I go to the project.

So we provided the case, the venues and homes and everything, and even the SBA local 238, those types of things that he also has collect no B and my other business.

So you have an SDA one on the property.

Yeah, why did you close it?

That's all right.

That's all I'm asking.

Why did it shift?

Uh that A Green Queen came up to ask me to invest more money for one of the building immediately offered by eight months.

They asked me to put more money for the more three months.

So you bought the did you buy the building from Dairy Queen or somebody else?

Okay, so then after you bought it, then they wanted you to invest money into it.

I I marketing and money all off it, and I'm spending it back, like money into it from my other income.

But you didn't you didn't talk to Dairy Queen before you bought it, you talked to the person that rent that owned the building and Dairy Queen.

Yes.

Uh that was okay.

All right, I got you.

Thank you.

I I guess I do have a question about the um you said in 2024.

2024.

2024, somebody assessed it for sorry, for 2025.

We assessed it for uh 545.

Yes, 545,000.

Sorry, I think it says I thought somewhere you said someone assessed it for one, yeah.

He he was offered by a staff member of mine 290,000, and there was I had the appeal, and then he contacted my staff member, and my staff member worked it at 290,000.

When I went to go look at it, I found the 290,000 offer, went to the taxpayer and said, Why did we offer him this much off?

Um she provided the information.

I started contacting him, I pulled up comps, I looked at his um loans and everything, and I came in with a 390,000 value.

Gabe has spoken with him as well.

I spoke to Gabe on this.

Gabe believes my offer is reasonable considering the sales price and everything.

Um, and Gabe agreed with me that the 290,000 was too low.

Like there was no, I I can't justify why we came up with the 290,000.

I don't know if if we took out the 228,000, but that would still be at 315,000.

Um, if we took out what he says was for the Dairy Queen and stuff, but I've looked at the Dairy Queen franchise, and it is not 225,000 for a Dairy Queen franchise.

It's 35,000.

So when I have a I want I have one question.

So you bought the building for 500 and the business, yeah.

What did you pay for it?

535, right?

567.

Okay, so he based on I'm just asking this question.

Based on him purchasing that business that the Dairy Queen sales had to come into play with that.

I don't I'm just asking, so why would you buy a building for 535,000 with with no revenue?

So he had uh that that needs to be, and I'm asking you or whoever doesn't that calculate into the sale sales of the you know the building and the sales that the the building generated.

Does that all we don't look at what the building generates?

You look at the real estate.

We look at the real estate, and then my purchase it, it doesn't include the income coming into the building, it's just land and uh land and improvements.

Okay, and my other question is when and and tell me how this flows in the office.

So if your employee makes an offer, did they say I have to get this approved, or can you come in and go, no, we're gonna pull that because how can how can you guys say tell him we're gonna give you 290 and he's thinking he's gonna get 290, and then you guys come back and say, No, we're gonna do 390.

I just want to know what the flow is of that.

Well, the flow will more than the flow is changing now.

Um we I have requested that if staff is lowering a property by I don't I at least said 50 percent, if not more.

Um, even if it's less than 50 percent, if it's a big drop, it has to be um brought to me first because this is also because of coming here to the board, and you the board has been questioning our larger um drops in value.

Um so I've been trying to be more proactive on that end on us to try to stop sending out 134s with signatures and then having to take it back and redo it.

But but my thing is again my question is when the when the when your staff member gave him the 290 and they agreed on that, and then y'all come back and pull it and say, No, we're gonna do 390 now.

How is that how do you explain that to the tax?

How do you explain that to the gentleman here?

Well, we explained it as that I knew when this came to the board, the board would question the huge reduction.

The reduction, okay.

So I was trying to be proactive and tried to get it corrected before it came to you because you have the right as board to either accept or deny that agreement.

That agreement is not final until the board approves it.

But for moving forward, you're saying that before your their staff gives a number, they need to get approval first.

Correct.

We're doing that now.

And see that that yeah, that's yeah, that's so that we can stop this.

Yeah.

Um that's that's confusing uh right to him and whoever else we give a you give a number to, then they pull it.

Yeah, I think we uh that's a good idea to do that now.

Right.

And I get, yeah, we've been seeing large reductions, and we question it.

And we probably would have questioned this one, but I didn't know the flow, I didn't know that they was already given the number, and then you guys are pulling the number back.

That that's when they come here, they've they've signed a 134, but they don't get the uh the signed 134 with the assessor stamp on it until the board approves it.

Because on every on every note or form that they fill out, it says pursuant to the Indiana Code.

This agreement is not final until the Marion County Property Tax Board of Appeals approves it.

Gotcha.

So that right there to me says it can change because it can.

And so, and knowing that it sold for 567, and we cut it by more than a half.

I would almost more than half.

I had concerns with that because he paid that for it.

Right, I get it.

I get it.

I understand.

Okay, any other questions.

I'll make a motion to accept the 394 second second first discussion.

See it not all in fair say aye.

All right, I guess you guys have it.

Thanks for coming in, sir.

Thank you.

You need your paperwork back, or yeah, back.

Oh I need to keep one copy for the board.

Not mine, yes.

What did he get?

This is right there.

Right here.

Okay.

I just keep on usually that's for your thing, right?

Josh and Matt, you too better.

We'll make an adjustment.

Okay, okay.

Good morning.

My name is Josh Schweiki.

I'm the Vice Cellar.

I'm also joining my colleague Matt from Iceman on the board here on behalf of the Indianapolis Housing Agency and joined uh answer from the IHA as well.

Hearing this is an uh an appeal um for taxes assessed on the 16-part property, which is an affordable housing.

Um affordable housing uh property on that 16th and part.

Uh at our last meeting, we walked through why we didn't believe that the property should be assessed subject to assessment or exemption.

At the end of that discussion, there was a question from the board to the board's council as to whether or not Form 136 needed to be filed.

Our position is that it doesn't need to be filed.

There are a couple of statutes that lay out why we feel that's the case.

6-1-sor 6-1.1-11-4 says that a governmental entity like the IHA isn't subject to assessment.

And also 6-1.1-4-9 says that a 136 is not needed to be filed on on property owned by a governmental entity.

I'm happy to take further questions on that or anything, but I uh I believe you kind of kicked it to corporation council, and we're happy to talk through any of that.

Okay.

So I spoke with corporation council um earlier this week, and I looked at the statutes that were cited.

It it states uh one, they have to be a political subdivision of the state, and then two if they don't they have to own the land and the building, so it has to be being used by the owner of the land, they and the improvements.

So they own the land, but not the improvements.

And that's where we're at.

Uh and they're wanting to go back to 23.

I don't know for 23, did they own it?

The improvements, or it was under somebody else.

I think it was the same structure in 2023.

As we four and 25.

Well, um, and so the entity that would own the improvements is a limited partnership for which IHA is the general partner controls the entity.

There are third party um investors for tax credit purposes, but this remains an IHA program for the years at issue.

It was an IHA property, it was controlled by IHA, the land is owned, and then leased to this limited partnership that IHA controls.

So IHA owns the land?

Yes.

And uh they'll lease out the buildings to somebody else?

Correct.

Nonprofit?

Yes.

I'm sorry, it's a limited partnership, but it's controlled by IHA.

Okay, well, if there's a nonprofit and unlimited liability.

So in the affordable housing context for um section 42 tax credit purposes, you often see these structured as a limited partnership where the general partner, the controlling partner here has you know, has the charitable or governmental purposes, but then in order to encourage for-profit investors to come in and invest, it needs to be done through a limited partnership so the tax credits may flow through to those investors, but the property is being used for the exempt purpose of affordable housing.

So question.

So how do the profits flow to the investors?

They're making money off the property, right?

But not the land.

They're making property off the improvements, but not the land, correct?

Sure.

So explain to me how that works.

How would how would they how would the investors make money off of a property that are getting tax exempt status on?

Kevin, if you don't mind, I'll I'll chime in here.

It's a it's uh they're getting the tax credits.

Uh manager's so sorry, Matt Angler from Ice Miller.

The the structure is these structures are the investors get the tax credits on the project.

And so, yes, they're technically owners of the project, but what they're really receiving are the tax credits.

So it's just a funding mechanism that the federal government has approved to assist IHA in building these kind of projects.

So this isn't this is an IHA project, it's an affordable housing project by the city of Indianapolis.

They just brought in, they just got tax credit to help support the funding of the project.

So who got the tax credits?

The investors?

The investors got the tax credit.

So what is the what is the amount of value on the tax credits?

It's the in terms of what they invested to get it.

No, not what they invested.

What are the tax credits that the investors are receiving?

That's what's negotiated on the project itself.

I'm asking what is the amount.

Yeah, I I don't know.

Well, I need to know that.

Okay.

If they're benefiting from a tax credit from a property that they invested in to receive tax credits, then I'm not under I'm just and completely understand.

More than happy to get you that information if if that's what the board is is interested in, and we're also we're happy to provide you as much information as you guys want about it.

This is this is not unlike any of the other projects that IHA has in the city of Indianapolis.

All the other projects have been recognized as exempt from property tax.

And I had no idea, well, I I maybe kind of had an idea, but not significant of the amount that there are private limited partners who benefit off of IHA.

As far as tax credits, um I just I don't know, that's a gray area for me.

I I just want to know how that how that works, because the county's the one that's suffering the burden on them receive receiving uh the tax credits because they're not paying taxes.

So sure, understood.

Okay.

That's my but your contention is basically that you don't need to file 136 because it's owned by the an agency with the city.

It's owned by the city.

IHA is a part of the city of Indianapolis, so yes.

And corporation council says they do need a right.

Well, I yeah, I'm wondering what your uh definition of political subdivision is.

I mean when you say uh it's a it's not really the city of Indianapolis.

It's a what do you mean by public political subdivision, and then would that be the same as like a body corporate in politics?

Yeah, Indianapolis housing agency is a municipal corporation, and the definition of political subdivision includes municipal corporations.

So if you follow if you if you look in the definitions of 6-1.1, it specifically defines a political subdivision as including municipal corporations and IHA is a municipal corporation.

Which I I don't disagree that they're a political subdivision.

It's just that I don't believe based off of the setup, it's IHA who owns the land, but this company owns the improvements.

IHA doesn't own the improvements based off the agreement, from what I understand.

So if you don't mind missing, because I I don't I don't disagree with that.

Well, it land and improvements have to be assessed together.

So for property tax purposes, it is as if the um it is if IHA owns both the land and improvement on on the project because that's how it is assessed.

There's another there's another statute.

We've talked about 6-1.1-11-4 that says a municipal corporation's political subdivision doesn't have to file 136.

There is then another statute that says if an exempt entity owns a project and then leases it out, they have to come and tell the county assessor that there's a lease, right?

An exempt entity owns the property, but it's then leased out to a third party because we don't know who the third party is, right?

You have to disclose that to the county assessor, and then if the property tax exemption might have to be removed.

There is a specific exception for leases to affordable housing projects.

And so there is not an obligation to raise our hand when there's a lease to an affordable house.

If it was a lease to another third party, IHA would have had to come in and say we've leased this to a third party, and therefore you might have to evaluate the exemption.

There's a specific exception under 6-1.1-11-3.8 that says if it's leased to an affordable housing project, you don't have to provide that notice.

Okay.

What's your view on that?

I mean, or you want to review it some more, or yeah.

Okay.

Yeah.

We did we did offer to talk to corporation council before this meeting so we could walk everybody through this, and and that request was declined.

But we're more than happy to sit down with anybody and have this conversation.

But at the end of the day, it right right now from our perspective, it would be the county taxing the city at the end of the day if this was uh all the all of IHA's properties are exempt from property tax.

This is a unique circumstance, I understand.

Um, but more than happy to sit down and just project any similar to any other properties out there.

That's what I was going to add.

IHA property.

Yeah, IHA has used this structure many times, and it's always been exempt.

So how many properties are split like this, like land and they don't own the structure?

How many properties?

Do you know a number?

Well, I think six to eight properties, it sounds like you have a question.

Uh yeah, um, because I just find it interesting that I do believe your political uh it is a political subdivision, but corporate c corporation council is the law office for the city and county, and they don't seem to agree with this.

Yeah more than happy they gotta make it easier for us.

And also the tax quotes that we asked about yeah more than happy to provide that okay go ahead that this comes up on a lot of other boards um as your board attorney you're my client and I mean I'll give the information to you and you decide right um for me to speak with any other attorney I can't come I can't say oh I get it and I'm gonna tell the board that okay so that's why that was declined.

That's fine.

Thank you.

So I'll make a motion to table these first question so you know if they would say aye.

Thank you guys you need a partial numbers on those or just see that all the meeting and you have a guess MG legacy group we've had something on that one right uh they did not even so I'm sorry to keep it on Brian's about take off so we still got a quorum so he was here for the court and stuff it's good seeing you Brian pages one through twelve three parcel one oh three oh five four eight five sixty seven to four oh four based on square footage negative value I don't know what was this I don't know what the square footage value was Gabriel what square footage was corrected on this um 2415 Broadway sent me the information on the new square footage and we verified and updated it so I would have updated it in 26 that was good we had five thousand nine forty eight and they changed it to four thousand nine twenty four they also paid five sixty five for the property yeah so it was objective so I only corrected the square footage that was all I did and that square footage with that much square footage change in a residential house that much an assessed value it's a four unit so it's it went from five thousand to four thousand yeah it went from five hundred and sixty seven thousand to four oh four okay so we're okay with that yeah seven parcel one one zero one three oh one one one zero that was pretty fast see what was that one fast no one one zero one three zero one page seven there's a lot of ones in there was a lot of ones okay that's residential surely so there's that pricing for condos yes I know it is being priced as condos 301 to 161 yeah so we had it was we had it in it we had it added in two different ways um it's being priced as an HPR which is a percentage of the whole building itself but then somebody had gone in and put the actual unit within the dwelling so it was essentially being taxed twice.

Yeah, so we had it listed.

We had it in it, we had it added in two different ways.

Um it's being priced as an HPR, which is a percentage of the whole building itself.

But then somebody had gone in and put the actual unit within the dwelling, so it was essentially being taxed twice.

Okay.

So we were moved the one allowing it just to get the um retro condo pricing.

Okay.

Yes.

I'll make uh page one through twelve.

Is that good?

We got one thirty subjective appeal to pages thirteen through sixty-eight.

Page eighteen parcel eight oh four, eight two three nine.

Uh there's no minutes.

That'd be correct.

We want to send notice out.

Let's see what we did.

One again, eight oh four.

Eight two three nine.

I was actually on that page.

I just happened to be there.

Um that's me.

Oh, yeah.

So um that's my fault.

Elise, will you fix that for me, please?

Uh yeah.

This had a property that was demoed from 2023, and we were still assessing it.

So building torn down?

Yep, the building is torn down.

Okay.

Um page 20.

So 1105271.

That's me again.

So change the caps, correction.

Correct.

So this is an apartment complex um downtown that has apartments in a parking garage.

So much space is of the parking garage is for the tenants, and then the other uh space is for the retail clients.

So we moved a portion of the parking garage in the cap two and then left the rest out, and then we also adjusted the land between cap two and cap three as well.

So CAP2s apartments.

Cap two's apartments, cap three is the commercial real estate.

Okay.

Or retail.

50 South Parker.

What we lowered it to.

102628.

For 25.

Yep.

That was a 23 sale.

I don't uh I don't know that we should have lowered it to two years later to the sales price.

Uh what was it originally at 287?

Um table it and take a look at it.

Yeah, let's because that's an that's two years ago.

I don't know that we would use that.

1026828 is table.

Yes, gotcha.

What about 804 8239?

That was page 18 is it on that.

Page 47.

Okay.

Um this is a missed demo permit again.

Yeah.

Was that my meaning they had a structure?

Um, so I can pull it up, eight or four pieces.

No, I think it was tore down.

Oh yeah.

It used to be um a that's not the right address.

Portion counter.

Just portion time.

It was yeah, this was it.

This is up off at 96 street.

It was a car dealership.

Um, and now it's just a parking lot.

So this is the current picture, and then um I gotta go to 282.

They're tearing down, they were tearing down the building in uh November of 2022.

Oh okay.

And we still we were still assessing the building on there, so now the improvement value on there is just for the paving.

Used to be a car business, and I think I don't want to say it was like Falcon or something.

These people's this car lot still owns it.

So page 50, parcel 106, 1161.

720 North Park.

This is part of the program recognition, but don't say why it's changed from 890, 600 to 558 700.

Gabriel, this is yours.

You just have corrected effective age.

Yeah, I just want to those that uh field staff that bumped it up like 20 years, so I cracked that down somewhat.

So let's see.

We had the effective age at 2004, and then in 2025.

Well, it the effective age didn't change from 24 to 25.

You changed it to 1989 and 26.

Yeah, but it's been 2004 for what for a while.

An office building.

Uh yes, this is an office building on park.

Park.

Uh you want to take another look at that one?

Yeah, let's take a look at that one because that's not based off of field staff from what I can see.

Um page fifty-two, parcel one oh eight eight seven oh six.

Washington is based on a sale.

I mean, that sale was from 2022, and we marked it as an invalid cell of a hundred and sixty thousand, and we're dropping it even below that.

I don't know if that maybe that's not the right reasoning for why we did it.

Um let's table that one because that I mean that's a sell from four years ago.

I want to lower it before that below that sales price based off of a sale.

Maybe there's another reason why page 59.

Uh-huh.

6010663.

Would view trace.

This was based off of uh the income approach.

They got the income statements from the business and based off of the income.

Um the value is lowered.

This is one I looked at before he made the offer.

So what kind of business is this?

This is an office building.

Oh, like a rent, they rent out.

They run out space, yeah.

Okay.

And they have some vacancy right now.

Uh page 61.

G healthcare 7004 51.

GD Healthcare, yes.

So this one was based off of I corrected the effective age.

Um there was a remodel done on this property.

And in 24, the effective age was um 1996.

And in 25, my field staff changed it to um 2015.

And based off right, um, there's several of those that I'm finding where field staff kind of just jumped it up 10 to 20 years.

Um the work that was done for the permit that was pulled was just some fresh paint and stuff that wouldn't justify bringing the value up that high.

Um so I worked with the taxpayer and um we lowered the effective age down to uh I put it back at the 1996 because it was just paint.

It was one space that was remodeled.

The rest of the building hasn't been touched, and it's got vacancy.

This is that Methodist medical building that's back on East Washington Street if you're going towards Washington Square Mall.

Oh, I already talked about it.

Okay.

Okay, I'll make a motion to set pages 13 through 68.

Second.

So move second, step for one retable.

So move second aim for discussion.

See a none all in favor say aye.

Aye.

We've got a subjective appeals from the officer, page 69 through 72.

Let's stand on these.

No.

Okay.

Um so page 69.

You already decided that was the midwest screen.

Um, as is page 70.

Uh 71 was listed on your agenda, but they did not show up, so you do have to vote on that one.

Uh page 72.

You already voted on.

So really you just have to vote on page 71.

Okay, I'll make a motion to check page 71 recommendation to denial.

Exactly.

See not all pairs say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

You guys have it.

We got withdrawals, pages 73 through 89.

I'll make a motion to set pages 73 through 89.

Second.

See you none on favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

The audience have it.

We got exemptions.

Pages 90 through 115.

The acceptance is the ones we already did.

And I would like to table parcel 503, 7719 on page 92.

Yes.

I just I just went to that page as you were reading that.

It's like I knew page 93.

R so 103 2297.

Uh, there's no minutes.

Yes, I already had an update.

I need to address the church.

Uh yes, it's a religious exemption.

Okay.

On page 94.10 East Southport, that's all we had before, right?

The church on Southport, Jim Goday.

Is that a church?

Yes.

5025.

We came in one and file back a couple years, but we denied it.

Is that the McGold and associate?

Uh-huh.

Yes.

So he sent me up.

He sent me an updated lease.

So that's why it's back on the agenda.

And at least allows for charitable yes, um released, uh, they're leased out to uh charges.

That's right.

You did have this one.

I thought low income, but doctor's office.

Oh, he was a doctor.

He was a doctor.

But he was having like a help lesson.

I thought they were churches.

I looked at a ton of them.

Whatever it is.

This is the church where the pastor was killed.

Yeah.

In the parking lot.

Yeah.

We did have them.

We denied and we allowed the error.

Yep.

And uh page uh 97.

Article 105 6438.

So parking garage, I guess, 225 East Ohio.

Police stop their prosecutor and a public defender, but aren't they moved out?

They are moved out.

The prosecutor's office moved over to the new building at the CJC.

Which one?

It's next to the gold building right across the street.

Do they have a current lease still?

I mean, they're not there, so I do not think one in blue rider.

Yeah, that's the parking garage.

And I thought that part that parking garage was closed down.

I don't think they're using it because they have to do some work on it.

You want to take a look at it again?

Or yeah, I can take a look at it.

Yeah.

So taking it.

So we'll know what they take.

The prosecutor wasn't a gold bin right there next to it.

No, they were in this building.

So Ohio and Maryland and Alabama.

Alabama.

Yeah.

Alabama and Ohio.

They still have some tenants in here, but like the prosecutor's child support office used to be over there and stuff, and it's not they're down at the CJC now.

So we're taking our look at it.

Yes.

Okay.

Just table it, please.

Okay.

I'll make a motion to set pages uh 92115 with the sections one directly.

Second.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any else come before the board?

Um next month.

It's it's pretty quick turnaround for us from April to May because of Memorial Day.

So we meet um is it May 15th?

Yeah.

May 15th is our next meeting.

Uh we do already have guests for that agenda as well.

Um some exemption issues and I think some uh real estate issues.

I know you don't, it's not on your yeah.

We've I it's it's a delicate one.

Um so if we can have everyone in attendance again, I would not be here.

Well I already know that thanks a lot, Kathy.

I live on vacation on the 14th, so I know I won't be here.

All right.

I need you three to be here.

May 15th, it's a Friday.

Uh you or Brian have to be here.

I'll talk more.

I don't know.

I won't be here either.

Oh, or okay.

See, this is why I'm glad I'm saying something now.

Um, and then I think in June we're gonna do the um overview after the meeting of the uh new bills and stuff and the pilot.

Okay, good and remaining we'll we'll just we'll do everything and then we'll do that last.

Okay.

Um yeah, it has to be on record.

Right.

Anytime we meet have to be on record.

Right.

So we'll just do it at the end so that the tax if we have guests and stuff, they don't have to sit through it.

Right.

Okay.

All right.

That's it.

That's it.

Thanks for letting me uh send it out late.