City and Borough Assembly

ASSEMBLY CHAMBERS CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA 330 Harbor Drive Sitka, AK (907)747-1811 Minutes - Final City and Borough Assembly Mayor Mim McConnell Deputy Mayor Matt Hunter Vice-Deputy Mayor Phyllis Hackett, Pete Esquiro, Mike Reif, Benjamin Miyasato and Aaron Swanson Municipal Administrator: Mark Gorman Municipal Attorney: Robin L. Koutchak Municipal Clerk: Colleen Ingman, MMC Monday, May 5, 2014 6:00 PM Assembly Chambers SPECIAL MEETING I. CALL TO ORDER II. FLAG SALUTE III. ROLL CALL Present: 7 - McConnell, Hunter, Hackett, Esquiro, Reif, Swanson, and Miyasato IV. NEW BUSINESS: Board of Equalization All sides received or had access to the packet that included an overview memo on procedures. Presentations could also be provided orally. It was noted the Assessor would present first, then Appellants. Any witnesses would speak and then the BOE would deliberate. The main purpose being to get all the information needed to make a decision. A written decision would also need to be done. It was stated the decision needed to be made seven days after the closure of the hearing. Municipal Attorney Koutchak reminded that the burden of proof was on the tax payer for the property tax appeals. Any appeal of this board would be to the Alaska Supreme Court . Mayor McConnell outlined the presentation, assigned 3 minutes for each testimony/rebuttal, and asked if there were any objections to proceeding in this manner - none were heard. Disclosures: None noted. A 14-088 Hear an appeal and reach findings and decision filed by Ty Barkhoefer in regard to Lot 3 A, Wingert Subdivision - Parcel 3-0645-003 Municipal Assessor, Randy Hughes, presented his oral argument. Hughes stated he consistently used a cost approach method using the Marshall and Swift cost CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 1 City and Borough Assembly Minutes - Final May 5, 2014 estimator. He argued that his recommended land and improvements values were appropriate and were in accordance with State Statutes. Appellants Ty and Valerie Barkhoefer were not present. A motion was made by Hackett to convene as the Board of Equalization. The motion passed by unanimous consent. A motion was made by Hackett to direct the Municipal Attorney to formalize the board’s findings. The findings and decision on the Ty and Valerie Barkhoefer valuation of real property appeal were as follows: 1. The Assessor consistently values all residential improvements within the CBS reconciling on the cost approach method. 2. The use of the Marshall and Swift cost estimator was appropriate 3. The Assessor’s recommended land and improvement values were appropriate. Based on these findings and the following roll call vote the appeal was DENIED. Yes: 7- McConnell, Hunter, Hackett, Esquiro, Reif, Swanson, and Miyasato B 14-089 Hear an appeal and reach findings and decision filed by Chris Fondell Lot 2, Bayview Subdivision - Parcel 1-1180-000-0000 Assessor Argument Assessor Hughes gave his formal argument. He informed he consistently valued all commercial improvement within the City and Borough of Sitka reconciling on the cost approach method. Hughes stated he uses the Marshall and Swift cost estimator and believed that to be appropriate and what was recommended by the State. He believed his recommendation on the land and improvement values were appropriate and within the guidelines and percentages set out. Appellants Fondell Argument Fondells argued they had a recent appraisal from a respected appraising firm that showed the value less than that of the Assessor. They noted this was the document that the banks went to and officially processed loans from and not from the city’s assessment values. Fondells favored a market approach and believed that was fair. They added the market was not there. Assessor Rebuttal Assessor Hughes continued to contend that his valuations were fair and appropriate. He did note that it was difficult to do commercial valuations , especially since there were a very limited amount of comparisons. It would take another year to determine if the market had softened. Appellants Rebuttal Again the Fondell's mentioned their appraisal document and suggested that the BOE take into consideration that the market had changed. Their assessment did not take into consideration the market. They feared the values would drop even farther over the next year. They noted they have had to lower their rents and were still experiencing difficulty getting renters for their commercial operations . Their residential operations were rented but they were not experiencing the demand of years past. They added, that as the Assessor said, he would not know for another CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 2 City and Borough Assembly Minutes - Final May 5, 2014 year when sales go in to effect if the market had really softened . He also said he had very few commercial comparables. Assessors Closing Argument Hughes reiterated what he had already said. Municipal Attorney Koutchak pointed out that the appellants provided no evidence that the market was soft. Another sticking point was the value needed to be excessive. She added that under court law the court favored uniformity versus actual value. Unless the value was grossly disproportionate or intentional then you would find in the courts that the deck was stacked against you. The courts believed that the Assessor had the job of assessing uniformity. Appellants Closing Argument Fondell's didn't have much to add. They still were seeking fairness and believed their appraisal and the fact that the market was soft should be contributing factors in consideration to their appeal. After some clarifying edits to her motion, Hackett moved to direct the Municipal Attorney to formalize the board’s findings and decision on the Chris and Tamara Fondell valuation of real property appeal. Based upon the evidence and arguments presented at the hearing of May 5, 2014, the Board of Equalization denies the appeal based on the following findings: 1. The Assessor consistently values all commercial improvements within the CBS reconciling on the cost approach method. 2. The use of the Marshall and Swift cost estimator was appropriate. 3. The Assessor’s recommended land and improvements values were appropriate. On the following roll call vote the appeal was DENIED. A motion was made by Hackett to reconvene as the Assembly in regular session. The BOE reconvened as the Assembly in regular session. Yes: 4- McConnell, Hunter, Esquiro, and Reif No: 3- Hackett, Swanson, and Miyasato A motion was made by Hackett to reconvene as the Assembly in regular session. The BOE reconvened as the Assembly in regular session. V. PERSONS TO BE HEARD: None. VI. ADJOURNMENT A motion was made by Hackett that the meeting be ADJOURNED. The motion PASSED by a unanimous vote. The meeting ADJOURNED at 6:50 PM. ATTEST: _______________________ Colleen Ingman, MMC Municipal Clerk CITY AND BOROUGH OF SITKA Page 3