COMMISSIONERS MINUTES July 3, 2007
BOARD OF EQUALIZATION MINUTES
The Board of Equalization convened on the above date in the Commissioner’s room,
basement of the Elmore County Courthouse, 150 South 4th East, Mountain Home,
Idaho.
Present at the meeting were Chairman Larry Rose, Commissioners Connie Cruser and
Arlie Shaw. Also present was the Clerk, Marsa Grimmett; Assessor, Jo Gridley,
Chief Appraiser, Jody Soboslai; and Deputy Assessor, Connie Dorr.
The Board began the hearing at 9:00 a.m. Thomas Turner, who was the first
appellant, was not yet present, so the Assessor presented their argument on why
they assessed the property at the value presented to the owner.
The Clerk played the phone message from Lake Cascade requesting a continuance on
their hearing. Lake Cascade is waiting to hear from Central District Health as
to whether they can place a septic tank on the property. Assessor Gridley
recommended not continuing the hearing, but placing a stipulation on any
decision they make that Central District Health’s decision would be reviewed.
The Board took up Mr. Turner’s case again at 9:20. Mr. Turner was still not
present, so the Board made their decision. Motion by Rose, second by Shaw to
uphold the Assessor’s Office in their valuation of Parcel #RP01N09E130210A.
ROSE................................................ – AYE
SHAW............................................... – AYE
CRUSER........................................... – AYE Motion carried and so
ordered.
Robert McEntee appeared at 9:30. His argument was that his home was a
non-standard home (it is a dome home). Many lenders will not lend and many
insurers will not insure this type of home. On his appeal he wrote “ The 14.3%
increase in the land value and 13.8% increase of the building seem excessive
evaluations during a period of slow growth or actual declines in market value.
At that rate, taxes double in 5 years – just excessive.” Chief Appraiser
Soboslai explained how the Assessor must be at market value and that they valued
his home at 84% of the value that he paid in 2001. She also produced comparable
properties to show that his home was showing a much lower value for comparable
square footage homes in the same area. Mr. McEntee was told that the Board would
review his appeal and he would be informed by mail of their decision.
The Board discussed Mr. McEntee’s case further with the Assessor and Chief
Appraiser and reached a decision. Motion by Rose, second by Shaw to uphold the
Assessor’s Office in their valuation of Parcel #RP00140001001EA.
ROSE................................................ – AYE
SHAW............................................... – AYE
CRUSER........................................... – AYE Motion carried and so
ordered.
A brief recess was taken.
An appeal of Idaho Fresh-Pak was reviewed by the Board at 10:30 a.m. Thane
Mitton, the Controller of Idaho Fresh-Pak, stated that his company reached an
agreement to sell the property in question for $1,253,799 in the fall of 2006.
However, Idaho Fresh-Pak returned the cost information sheet to the Assessor
stating that their total investment in the property was $4,114,531. Assessor
Gridley suggested that the Board uphold the Assessor’s value, Idaho Fresh-Pak
appeal, and then each party could gather more information and possibly reach a
resolution on this matter. Motion by Rose, second by Shaw to uphold the
Assessor’s Office in their valuation of Parcel #RPB0049021001AA.
ROSE................................................ – AYE
SHAW............................................... – AYE
CRUSER........................................... – AYE Motion carried and so
ordered.
A brief recess was taken.
An appeal by Glen B. Matthews, Jr. was reviewed by the Board at 11:00 a.m., Mr.
Matthews was not present. Assessor Gridley and Chief Appraiser Soboslai
explained why the land was assessed at $50,648. Mr. Matthews wrote on his appeal
“This is unimproved open-range desert land with no water and is land locked with
no legal access. It is highly doubtful that market value is anywhere near the
new appraised value. The land has been in my family for 100 years and I do not
wish to sell.” Motion by Rose, second by Shaw to uphold the Assessor’s Office in
their valuation of Parcel #RP01S05E320040A.
ROSE................................................ – AYE
SHAW............................................... – AYE
CRUSER........................................... – AYE Motion carried and so
ordered.
A brief recess was taken.
An appeal by Frank Hegy was reviewed by Board. Mr. Hegy was present. On his
appeal Mr. Hegy wrote “Large increase last year. Lost appeal (big surprise) feel
revenge now coming. Will need complete comps justifying yet another increase.
Land worth $33,000 more than cabin. Double frontage still here. No new
improvements on cabin including fans. Twenty-three year old log cabin, 23 year
old carpets, 23 year old kitchen, 23 year old bathroom, etc. Once again, need
comps. You have made it real plain that you are equal or more qualified than fee
appraisers. I strongly disagree. No licensed appraiser would ever use or suggest
using a newspaper for listing prices. If I listed this property for $2,000,000,
does that make this and all the surrounding properties now worth $2,000,000.
Common sense tells me assessed values should be based on sales, not wishes.” He
wrote on the appeal on another lot “Once again, all 3 lots bought for and used
as one lot. I was told that if I combined all three lots (re-platted) that the
value would remain the same. If this is true, it is now time to give me this in
writing and show comps for 1.33 acres with a twenty-three year old log cabin
worth $285,839. Don’t tell me this isn’t revenge. It was stated in the narrative
from the appeal to the State Board of Equalization, that we had never made an
attempt to re-plat.” Chief Appraiser Soboslai explained how the comparable
properties were valued and how his property was compared and valued. Assessor
Gridley explained to Mr. Hegy how to possibly re-plat his property and to have
Central District Health assess whether a septic tank could be placed on one of
the lots. The Board stated that they will review the case and notify him by mail
of their decision.
Motion by Rose, second by Shaw to uphold the Assessor’s Office in their
valuation of Parcel #RP000680020020A, #RP000680020040A, and #RP000680020030A.
ROSE................................................ – AYE
SHAW............................................... – AYE
CRUSER........................................... – AYE Motion carried and so
ordered.
Motion by Rose, second by Shaw to recess for the day. The Board of Equalization
will resume on July 5, 2007 at the hour of 9:00 a.m.
ROSE................................................ – AYE
SHAW............................................... – AYE
CRUSER........................................... – AYE Motion carried and so
ordered.
/S/ LARRY E. ROSE, Chairman
ATTEST: /S/ MARSA GRIMMETT, Clerk