The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutR10-052 Taxpayer Generated Abatement Petitions• • Commissioner moved adoption of the following olution: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO Resolution No. 2010 - ~a-- RESOLUTION CONCERNING HEARINGS ON TAXPAYER GENERATED PETITIONS FOR ABATEMENTS AND REFUNDS OF TAXES BEFORE THE EAGLE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners for Eagle County, Colorado (hereinafter referred to as the "Board") is responsible for hearing petitions for refunds or abatement of property taxes pursuant to C.R.S. §§ 39-1-113 and 39-10-114; and WHEREAS, various petitions for abatement have been submitted to the Board by taxpayers for the purposes of correcting alleged erroneous valuations for assessment, irregularity in levying, clerical errors and/or overvaluations; and WHEREAS, said petitions have been previously submitted to the Eagle County Assessor (the "Assessor") for consideration and recommendation; and WHEREAS, the Board has appointed an independent hearing referee experienced in property valuation (the "Referee") to conduct hearings on behalf of the Board, to make findings based upon testimony and evidence presented by taxpayers and Assessor's representatives, and to submit recommendations to the Board for its final decision; and WHEREAS, the Referee has submitted his recommendations to the Board for its final decision, the Board has considered such recommendations and such recommendations are attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by this reference; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Eagle County, Colorado, THAT, the Board hereby approves the recommendations ofthe Referee for the schedule numbers, the tax years and for the reasons set forth in the Referee's recommendation sheets attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and enters orders with respect to the petitions for abatement in accordance with such recommendations. THAT, for each order issued by the Board in which an adjustment to the respective Petitioners' valuation is indicated, subject to approval by the State Property Tax Administrator where required by the terms of C.R.S. § 39-1-113(3), the Board directs the Assessor to adjust the valuation or take such other action as more particularly set forth in the recommendations set forth and attached hereto as Exhibit "A." BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a petition denied, in whole or in part, by the Board can be appealed to the Board of Assessment Appeals within thirty (30) days of the date said decision was mailed to the taxpayer, pursuant to C.R.S. 39-8-108. The appeal forms and instructions for appeal to the Board of • Assessment Appeals maybe obtained from the Board of Assessment Appeals, Department of Local Affairs, 1313 Sherman Street, Room 315, Denver, Colorado 80203. MOVED, READ AND ADOPTED by the Board of Coun Commissioners of the County of Eagle, State of Colorado at its regular meeting held the ~ day of , 2010. COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO BY AND THROUGH ITS BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSI BY: ATTEST: Sara J. n tavney, C Teak J. Simont n, Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners Peter F. Runyon, ~ Commissioner seconded adoption of the foregoing resolution. The roll having been called, the vote was a follows: Commissioner Sara J. Fisher Commissioner Jon Stavney Commissioner Peter F. Runyon 3~ a • April 9, 2010 /~' R043064 62 Highlands Lane ~~~ V ~ ~~,~.~~ ~~"~ ~~ Assessor's Value: $ 4,735,620 Petitioner's Value: $ 3,750,000 Referee's Recommendation: $ 4,500,000 Classification: Residential Reason: Application of time adjustment Analysis of market segment Adjusted sales comparison grid analysis ranges Support for individual adjustments Limitations of sales comparables and similarities Gross/net/absolute adjustment percentages of each analysis ~161f A ~~ ~' ~~ ~' April 18, 201.0 (~' R014579 225 Eagle-Crest Road ~~~~~ C~,b~~~J~b Assessor's Value: $ 2,548,640 Petitioner's Value: 2 020 000 $ , Referee's Recommendation: $ 2,200,000 Classification: Residential Reason: Relatively well supported analysis by respondent and petitioner Limited by specific data and market support Disa reement o g n key adjustment amounts and elements of com ariso p n Lack of agreement on market effects for some characteristics i.e, view " time location Amende respondent's value estimate to $ 2,400,000 ,~ y • April 17, 2010 ~/~ /'y R028861 136 Holden Road ~ilJ~-~~ 1~~(,~L ! ~ ~(~ Assessor's Value: $ 4,384,560 Petitioner's Value: $ 3,450,000 Referee's Recommendation: $ 4,000,000 Classification: Residential Reason: Adjustments to limited supported time adjustments Location amenities i.e. golf course Revised quality of improvements classification Weight to most recent sales comparables ~a.~~ ~ • • April 17, 2010 R04967Z 602 Granite Springs Trail Assessor's Value: $ 377,200 ~~ ~~ Petitioner's Value: $ 280,000 Referee's Recommendation: $ 310,000 Classification: Residential Land Reason: Sale of subject property under contract within the base data period closing under original terms ~~ ',° '~' April 17, 2010 R048535 85 Bear Paw Assessor's Value: $ 2,050,000 Petitioner's Value: $1,715,000 Referee's Recommendation: $1,800,000 Classification: Residential Land Reason: • Respondent's amended value estimate, supported by petitioner`s grid analysis, as well. Time adjustments account for any additional consideration without adequate support. Limited data points for any specific time adjustment; however, little counter support. ~~ • • April 18, 2010 R046444 15 W. Thomas Place ~/~-'~1~ ~~~~ ~ v~ Assessor's Value: $ 4,289,410 Petitioner's Value: $ 3,300,000 Referee's Recommendation: $ 4,000,000 Classification: Residential Reason: Large adjustments, large adjusted range, large revised time adjustments by petitioner Support exists for a revised time adjustment; amount is unsupported at a high level Contribution adjustment amount varies significantly between analyses Difficult to derive adjustments from limited data Y, • April 18, 2010 R048569 294 Bachelor Ridge ~~~~ ~~~°~~ ~" ~ " ~ " Assessor's Value: $ 2,205,310 Petitioner's Value: $ 2,000,000 Referee's Value: $ 2,205,310 Classification: Residential Reason: Burden on petitioner to prove existing value in error Lack of quantification of large adjustment amounts Although every effort is made by petitioner, proving a negative with lack of data is difficult Support exists for a revised time adjusted amount, specific amount is unquantified ~aqe ~- f • • April 9, 2010 "~ 1, ~ R011733 219 Borders Road ~' ~~~~ ~~ ~lrt ~~ Assessor's Value: $ 5,212,980 Petitioner's Value: $ 4,575,000 Referee's Recommendation: $ 4,575,000 Classification: Residential Reason: Level of support for adjustments within Petitioner's analysis Support for individual adjustments and rationale for amounts General disagreement over adjustments and amounts of adjustments Overall grid range and validity of comparables and adjustments ~~~ ~ • April 10, 2010 R041506 17 Chateau Lane t~~f ~ ~~~~ U t~(~~ Assessor's Value: $ 3,228,200 Petitioner's Value: $ 2,375,000 J Referee s Recommendation: $ 3,000,000 Classification: Residential Reason: Assessor's reliance upon a mass appraisal time adjustment for the general market Petitioner's neighborhood developed time adjustment for price ran a of sub'ect ro ert g J p p Y Lack of compelling data to support petitioner's analysis Paired sales analysis by petitioner to support time adjustment Additional elements of comparison taken into account by petitioner's analysis Petitioner's detailed, comprehensive verbal support for narrative and elements of comparison ~~ ~ April 17, 2010 / , R044022 192 Elk Woods Road ~~U~ L~~~ Assessor's Value: $ 460,000 Petitioner's Value: $ 280,000 Referee's Recommendation: $ 350,000 Classification: Residential Land Reason: Minimally adjusted respondent's sales comparison grid analysis Little narrative support for nonspecific grid analysis Lack of sufficient data support for petitioner's adjustment amounts • ~~~ ~D ~~ ~~`~ April 18, 2010 R050746 829 Gore Trail Assessor's Value: $ 45,000 Petitioner's Value: $ 30,000 Referee's Recommendation: $ 30,000 Classification: Residential Land Reason: Better sales comparison grid support and narrative support by petitioner 2007 appeal by owner; abatement for 2008 only Total value supported at $ 300,000 (both parcels) • f~a~j~ I ~ • April 18, 2010 R050747 829 Gore Trait ~~; ~r~~ t,~~ '~~ Assessor's Value: $ 351,900 Petitioner's Value: $ 270,000 Referee's Recommendation: $ 270,000 Classification: Residential Land Reason: Better sales comparison grid support and narrative support by petitioner 2007 appeal by owner; abatement for 2008 only • ~~~~ ~~ • • April 11,2010 ,, '; r R052124 94 Eagle Feather ,~~~ ~~ v (DWG Assessor's Value: $1,048,050 Petitioner's Value: $ 740,000 Referee's Recommendation: $ 850,000 Classification Residential Land Reason: Detail of Petitioner's sales grid analysis Narrow resulting adjusted sales grid analysis View adjustments Respondent's grid less supported Petitioner's selection of sales comparables supports revised values Lack of support for time adjustment at hearing with data ~o~~ l • April 9, 2010 R016275 w. Lake Creek Road (TBD} Assessor's Value: $ 2,436,210 Petitioner's Value: $ 1,200,000 & $1,489,000 Referee's Recommendation: $1,500,000 Classification: Residential Land Reason: Lack of any analysis by Respondent Lack of any verbal support by Respondent Petitioner's analysis and narrative Suggestion by petitioner for a finding "reasonable" @ $1,489,000 Without suggestion lent by Petitioner; recommendation would have been $1,200,000 as requested due to lack of any support, analysis or rebuttal ~ i4 • April 10, 2010 ROb0812 1 Willow Bridge Road #37 ~~-~~. Assessor's Value: $ 5,270,350 Petitioner's Value: $ 3,953,700 Referee's Recommendation: $ 5,270,360 Classification: Residential Reason: Failure of the petitioner to provide any additional information Last moment cancellation of hearing by petitioner's agent Respondent present and prepared • April 7:0, 2010 //11 ~i R044018 31 Elks Woods Road UVU, ~ ~~~ ~ v0 Assessor's Value: $ 460,000 Petitioner's Value: $ 328;000 Referee's Recommendation: $ 400,000 Classification: Residential Land Reason: Moderate site with good views Both analysis well supported Views/view corridors primary issue Unable to determine from evidence which viewpoint is accurate Both analyses ranges narrow Road influence minor issue Respondent suggests combination of adjacent lot ifqualifies/common ownership i~ • • April 18, 2010 ' R053812 130 Daybreak Ridge ,~~'~ (~.6 1~j(, ,~ ~~~-~ Assessor's Value: $ 7,208,620 Petitioner's Value: $ 5,450,000 Referee's Recommendation: $ 6,500,000 Classification: Residential Reason: Large adjusted sales range, each containing the recommended value. Large adjustments within each grid analysis Inability of market to quantify adjustment amounts Circumstances regarding some comparable sales unclear ~~~~ • April 10, 2010 y R011671 825 Holden Road ` Assessor's Value: $ 4,265,360 Petitioner's Value: $ 3,385,000 Referee's Recommendation: $ 3,850,000 Classification: Residential Reason: Petitioner's sales comparison grid range is $ 2,553,830 to $ 4,465,800 Sales later in sales date within data period suggest lower end of range Petitioner's grid more detailed and comprehensive Respondent's grid unsupported in a few instances Mass appraisal general time adjustment suspect for market segment, not document Sales confirmations and market inconsistencies mask analyses .~~ l ~ • April 18, 2010 R049654 552 Gore Trail Assessor's Value: $ 391,000 Petitioner's Value: $ 275,000 ~~ ~ ~~~ ~'V~~ Referee's Recommendation: $ 350,000 Classification: Residential Land Reason: Better constructed/supported petitioner's sales grid analysis Lack of adjustments specific to subject by respondent, brief narrative Lack of adjustment amount support for petitioner's grid to specific characteristics ~~ r ~~ April 18, 2010 R053043 121 Elk Spring Trail ~~~~ ~~~. ~~~ Assessor's Value: $ 450,000 Petitioner's Value: $ 330,000 Referee's Recommendation: $ 375,000 Classification: Residential land Reason: Minimally adjusted respondent's sales comparison grid analysis with little narrative support Detailed petitioner's sales grid analysis Adjustments lack sufficient market support Reasonably good general data despite specific adjustment quantification ~~ • • April 10, 2010 R011598 190 Holden Road Assessor's Value: $ 4,455,600 Petitioner's Value: $ 3,365,000 Referee's Value Recommendation: V~ ~~~ r, U v b $ 4,000,000 Classification: Residential Reason: Adjustments made to location/site/view by respondent inconsistent with public data Effective age of sales comparables used by respondent inconsistent with public data Respondent's reliance on large time adjustment amounts, not well supported Both analysis have ranges; petitioner's use of additional timely sales comparables ~ z~ April 17, 2010 R049663 795 Gore Trail Assessor's Value: $ 391,000 Petitioner's Value: $ 300,000 Referee's Value: $ 350,000 Classification: Residential Land • Reason: Lack of respondent's analysis to account for differences in elements of comparison i.e. site size, views, site amenities ~~2~-I • April 17, 2010 /~~ R049664 591 Gore Trail Ul~~~ ~~ ~~~ Assessor's Value: $ 391,000 Petitioner's Value: $ 300,000 Referee's Recommendation: $ 350,000 Classification: Residential Land Reason: Lack of adjustments for elements of comparison by respondent Size, view, site amenities lack verbal support, no rationale Narrative not specific to elements of comparison Petitioner's analysis optimistic in adjustments given actual support data • X23 • April 17, 2010 `~(~~\ ~ r R011602 210 Holden Road v "V~ U~`~' ~~ ~~ Assessor's Value: $ 4,740,390 Petitioner's Value: $ 3,600,000 Referee's Recommendation: $ 4,100,000 Classification: Residential Reason: Revised respondent's value estimate to $4,300,000 Revision of site land values Adjustment to time adjustments Change of quality of construction classifications Limited support data points for either party's position ~q~2~ • Apri19, 2010 /~ ~- R040934 400 Redtail Ridge ~~ ~`lG~~, ~V~ Assessor's Value: $ 505,000 Petitioner's Value: $ 380,000 Referee's Recommendation: $ 450,000 Classification: Residential Land Reason: Unable to determine actual view corridor differences Proximity to golf course of sales comparables versus subject property Both sales grid analysis supported Other stipulations of no value in analysis • ~~ ~5 • April 10, 2010 /,~ R011606 278 Halden Road /~V 1 ~;1(,~ ~~(~~ Assessor's Value: $ 6,501,080 Petitioner's Value: $ 5,525,000 Referee's Recommendation: $ 6,501,080 Classification: Residential Reason: Petitioner's range of $ 3,697,200 to $ 8,682,700 has two values well above, ane near and three below assessor's value Time adjustment issue even less supported in this price range due to lack of data Respondent's grid analysis shows reasonable support for value in narrower range Primary issue of time adjustment and falling sales prices less supported ~~e zee >,t • April 9, 2010 R005931 6204 Bellyache Ridge Road ~~~ ~ C~,~. /~~~ Assessor's Value: $1,070,000 Petitioner's Value: $ 750,000 Referee's Recommendation $ 900,000 Classification: Residential Land Reason: Reconciliation of Petitioner's and Respondent's sales comparison grid analysis Value of each supporting narrative and rebuttals Motivation of buyer of property as comparable Access to sales comparables versus subject property Lack of additional similar sales (characteristics) BLM adjacent access and privacy ~e~~ • April 10, 2010 R011576 431 Holden Road Assessor's Value: $ 3,564,020 Petitioner's Value: $ 3,200,000 Referee's Value: $ 3,564,020 Classification: Residential Reason: • -~ ~ r~ C~,ti~IL(11 ~U ~' Petitioner's adjusted sales grid analysis range of $ 2,983,061 to $ 4,103,100 has two below, one at value and three above concluded value Respondent's grid analysis is narrower and nearly as well supported The time adjustment is less of an issue for the majority of sales comparables ~~2~