COMMISSIONERS MINUTES July
1, 2008
The Elmore County Commissioner met in special session on the above date in the
Commissioners Room, basement of the Elmore County Courthouse, 150 South 4th
East, Mountain Home, Idaho.
Present at the meeting were Chairman Arlie Shaw and Commissioners Connie Cruser.
Commissioner Larry Rose was not present. Also present was Assessor Jo Gridley,
Deputy Appraiser Jody Soboslai, Deputy Appraiser Michelle Boothe and Deputy
Clerk Barbara Steele.
Motion by Shaw, second by Cruser, to re-convene as a Board of Equalization.
SHAW - AYE
CRUSER - AYE
ROSE - ABSENT Motion carried and so ordered
The first assessment appeal was from Ferrell L. & Mary H. Freer, parcels
RP002490010190A, RP002490010330A, RP002490010350A, and RP0024900100380A.
Appraiser Jody Soboslai gave an overview of the property assessment stating Mr.
Freer had phoned to protest his values. Mr. Freer stated the increase in value
of 23 to 26 percent is excessive. It was explained to Mr. Freer values are based
on sales in the area therefore setting market value. Mr. Freer did not send in
information on how much he paid for the property. The Assessor’s Office provided
sales in the area to determine the value of like properties. The Assessor’s
Office feels Mr. Freer’s assessed values are fair and equitable.
Motion by Cruser, second by Shaw, to uphold the assessment from the Assessors
Office on RP002490010190A, RP002490010330A, RP002490010350A and
RP0024900100380A, Ferrell L. & Mary H Freer.
SHAW - AYE
CRUSER - AYE
ROSE - ABSENT Motion carried and so ordered
Commissioner Rose joined the meeting.
The next appeal was from Robert T. Bartimoccia. An email was received from Mr.
Bartimoccia that Appraiser Soboslai read into the record: Subject: Concerning
appeal of RP000080010090A - 2 years ago Steve Jensen bought a lot in Atlanta for
$31,000. He had contacted the owner over a long period of time expressing
interest in buying it since he owned the land bordering it. The owner decided to
sell and realizing he had Steve over a barrel got a realtor and jacked the
price. Steve’s neighbor Alan Lake bordered the other side and was also
interested in the property. That is not an unmotivated buyer or seller, that is
a bidding war. My property (land) assessment went up $8,000. The only property
that is being reported to the assessor is the property sold by the realtors.
They are creating an artificial market. In this same time period Ric Gill and
Tom Sewell bought lots in the $18,000 range. The following year (last year) my
property was raised another $10,000. When I protested it was backed off 8,000.
This year my property was raised $4,000. I have made no improvements. The
interesting part I noticed was the raise in assessments was just enough to
offset the property tax breaks the legislature has been trying to give us. Andy
Ersted (might be misspelled) bought the greenback millsite and the monarch
placer last year, slightly over 8 acres. It has riverfront property on part of
it. The selling price was $175,000. That is under $22,000 an acre. My property
is .718 acres. The house that sold for $60,000 went with 2 lots and a small part
of the third. It had been on the market for 2 yrs for $90,000 and the price was
finally lowered to $60,000 to offload it. I suffered roof damage early last
winter in an ice storm and it hasn’t been repaired yet. The power plant broke
down and we had little or no power all last summer. We are facing a rate hike of
over 60% this year on power and another rate hike for water. I fail to see how
any of these factors constitute a real estate boom in Atlanta, when the whole of
the US has seen a decline in real estate value and massive mortgage defaults.
Thank you for your time Robert Bartimoccia, 210 Yuba Vista Drive, Atlanta, ID
83601.
Ms. Soboslai stated Mr. Bartimoccia’s lot value did not change in 2008, but the
residence raised 5% due to the Local Cost Modifier (LCM). The LCM is the cost to
build in today’s market. The LCM rose from 1.65% to 1.75%, this increase is
based on an annual study performed using sales of newly constructed homes. This
percent is then applied to the base costs of the appraisal, the appraisal is
then adjusted for age. Appraiser Soboslai reviewed the two lot sales they have
for comparable sales. Discussion followed on the lack of reportable sales in the
Atlanta area.
Motion by Shaw, second by Cruser, to uphold the Assessor’s Office assessment on
parcel RP000080010090A, Robert R. Bartimoccia.
SHAW - AYE
CRUSER - AYE
ROSE - AYE Motion carried and so ordered
Prosecutor Kristina Schindele joined the meeting.
A & R Properties represented by Wally Cornford and Chris Stroh from Colliers
International appeared to appeal several manufactured home assessments.
Appraiser Michelle reviewed the appeals and comparables, stating she had spoke
to Ms. Stroh several times explaining to her Elmore County has to use market
value per Idaho Code 63-205 and 63-314. Ms. Stroh feels the County should use
values from the NADA Guide. Ms. Stroh asked about the scale used for assessing
and Appraiser Boothe explained. Ms. Stroh presented the Board with a packet
including NADA values of the manufactured homes. Ms. Stroh stated Ada and Canyon
accept NADA values. Ms. Stroh questioned how the assessor’s office appraised the
manufactured homes and the method was explained by Appraiser Boothe, Appraiser
Soboslai and Assessor Gridley. Appraiser SoboslaiThe total purchase price of the
manufactured homes and the property is still higher than the assessments on the
manufactured homes. Ms. Stroh revisited the NADA value and stated that is how
the manufactured homes should be valued. Ms. Stroh stated the book the
Assessor’s office was using was old. Appraiser Soboslai stated the State does
not recognize the NADA value on assessments. The multiplier mechanism was
discussed. Appraiser Soboslai stated she phoned Canyon County and Ada County and
they were told they appraise manufactured homes the same as Elmore County.
Discussion followed on market value and the State requirements. Mr. Cornford
stated he feels personal property should not be assessed the same as real
property. The first group that were discussed are MHTR0000453700A,
MHTR0000467300A, MHTR0000473500A, MHTR0000480800A and MHTR0000480800A
The second group consisted of six (6) manufactured homes Mr. Cornford and Ms.
Stroh felt needed adjusted due to repaired damage: MHTR0000473200A,
MHTR0000493900A, MHTR0000494000A, MHTR0000499400A, MHTR0000499500A, and
MHTR0000501800A. Mr. Cornford stated he could bring in pictures of the damage he
is describing to the manufactured homes. Ms. Stroh is asking for relief on the
assessments. Chairman Shaw stated we have to follow the State law. Appraiser
Soboslai stated we can not use NADA values. Ms. Stroh stated she would supply
the Assessor’s office with the appraisals and any information she has. The
appeal will be continued to Monday, July 7th.
The next appeal was Roger and Joanie Smith, RP05S10E281830A. A fax received from
Roger and Joanie Smith was read into the record by Appraiser Soboslai: June 26,
2008, Elmore County Commissioners, We are unable to attend this meeting today so
we are asking this Board to re-evaluate our tax bill for 2008. I called the tax
assessor’s office and asked questions regarding the increases from 2006-2007. No
two explanations were the same. First I am told the increase is due to the
garage that is being built by us to save costs and another explanation is no its
not the framing but the garage pad that we are being charged 2625 for next
year’s taxes. I was told before when asked if it was the garage pad we were
being charge(d) for, I was told no that it was included with the pad for
foundation on preview (the previous) tax year. Now, I am told that we are being
charged 2625 for garage pad because it was missed the previous year when
inspected. We tried to re-finance our loan on this home after the first of this
year and no bank would except the comps for this area and we appraised at
199,000 house and land and the County wants us to pay higher taxes when the
banks would not take our loan. There is something bad wrong here. I understand
land sales were good in 2006 but things took a turn for the worse in 2006 late
in the year and early 2007. We accepted charges for last year taxes but we do
not agree with these and would like them reconsidered and re-billed to us for
2008. The tax bill for last is more in line then what you are asking us to pay
for next year. We cannot sell our place for what the County seems to think it is
worth, so we would greatly appreciate your time and help with this matter. We
would like to see the fees reduced on home and pad and feel land is in line with
what County fees are. Sincerely, Joanie Smith
Appraiser Soboslai stated when she talked to Mrs. Smith she was told they had
tried to refinance their home and were turned down by the banks. Appraiser
Soboslai asked Mrs. Smith if she could see the appraisal and the comparables
that were used and the only information Appraiser Soboslai received were three
MLS listings all of which have lower assessed values than the sales prices. The
improvement value increased 11% for the 2008 tax roll. This is due to the Local
Cost Modifier and sales. It was explained to Mrs. Smith the time period the
Assessor’s Office is required to use and that Idaho Code states the County must
be at market value.
Motion by Shaw, second by Cruser, to uphold the Assessor’s Office assessment on
parcel RP05S10E281830A, Roger and Joanie Smith.
SHAW - AYE
CRUSER - AYE
ROSE - AYE Motion carried and so ordered
The next appeal was from Ivyl Wells on the Rose Cottage Holding Trust, Sears
Holding Trust, 3rd Street Holding Trust, Office Holding Trust, and Laser Inv.
Trust. The appellant Ivyl Wells, Trustee was not present.
Appraiser Soboslai reviewed the Rose Cottage Holding Trust, RP03S06E247710A,
which is Mr. Well’s residence, and read the letter attached to the appeals into
the record: Declining Real Estate Market, Pressure on Home Prices. Fannie Mae –
On housing prices
At their recent annual shareholders meeting in New Orleans Fannie Mae’s
president and CEO, Daniel Mudd, said he expects US home prices to fall as much
as 25% from their highs of mid-2005. Fannie Mae expects losses from defaulted
mortgages to worsen in 2009. Commenting on the most severe housing slump since
the Great Depression, Mudd said that we are “Likely to be about halfway through
right now.” Federal Reserve – On housing sector and credit. Fed Governor Randall
Kroszner recently said the U.S. housing sector will gradually recover as an
excess home inventory is reduced. So far this year banks have raised $80 billion
in capital, according to Kroszner. “While the recent ability of many financial
institutions to raise capital from diverse sources has been encouraging,
additional capital raising by financial institutions would support the extension
of credit to households and businesses, and thus economic activity. “Positioning
for recovery – “Furthermore, larger capital cushions will not only provide a
more solid footing for the broader economy, but will place firms in the position
to benefit from profit opportunities as conditions in the financial markets and
the economy evolve,” said Kroszner. He further believes that pressures in the
credit market have eased “somewhat.” Impact on household wealth – Down $1.7
trillion The Federal Reserve reports that declines in home values and the stock
market have hit American’s net worth by an estimated $1.7 trillion in 1Q08. This
has not affected consumer spending. According to Michael England of Action
Economics, consumers have actually spent more in recent months, particularly at
the gas pumps and grocery counters. Consumers “are spending everything in their
wallet and borrowing more. But because the pump takes so much more of their
dollars, they are buying fewer t-shirts.” Increased consumer debt – Jumped by
$8.9 billion. With diminished access to home equity loans, homeowners are
increasingly turning to consumer debt (personal debt). Revolving debt was lower
than expected and fixed-payment loans higher, irrespective of a colossal dip in
auto loans, usually a large slice of non-revolving debt. This is puzzling
economists. The Federal Reserve was expecting a slowdown as banks have been
tightening their lending standards.
Ms. Soboslai stated Mr. Wells states in his appeal letter that our market should
be in a decline as it is in most of the nation, but the Assessor’s Office ratio
study still shows a slight incline. Idaho Code requires the County to be at
market. The Elmore County Assessor’s Office feels Mr. Wells was treated fair and
equitable.
Motion by Rose, second by Cruser, on RP03S06E247710A, Rose Cottage Holding
Trust, Ivyl Wells, Trustee, to uphold the Assessor’s assessment.
SHAW - AYE
CRUSER - AYE
ROSE - AYE Motion carried and so ordered
The next appeal was from Ivyl Wells, Trustee, on the Sears Holding Trust,
RPA3S06E257260A. Appraiser Soboslai stated since this is a commercial building
the occupancy in September of 1997 was obtained using the Marshal and Swift
manual and on two occasions the Assessor’s Office has trended this in order to
stay current, the value of this building has not changed since 2002. The land
raised in 2005. The building permit was obtained in March of 1997 for $164,000
using just a modest 5% increase every year in building cost the building would
be valued at $267,138. If the updated values are used from Marshall and Smith
using an 85% depreciation the value of the building would be $295,587. Both of
these values are more than what they are assessed for currently. The area along
American Legion Boulevard has shown no decrease in market values. The Assessor’s
office feels Mr. Wells has been treated fairly and equitably.
Motion by Cruser, second by Rose, to uphold the Assessor’s assessment
RPA3S06E257260A, Sears Holding Trust, Ivyl Wells, Trustee.
SHAW - AYE
CRUSER - AYE
ROSE - AYE Motion carried and so ordered
The next appeal was from Ivyl Wells, Trustee, 3rd Street Holding Trust,
RPA0082022023AA. Appraiser Soboslai stated the 3rd Street Holding Trust’s parcel
located at 385 S. 3rd E. rose in assessed value by 6% which is the city wide
average. Idaho Code requires the County to be at market, which is done by
running a ratio study every year using sales reported in a certain period of
time. Similar properties are adjusted to reflect the new value. The State Tax
Commission performs a similar ratio study by category to verify we are in
compliance based on recent sales. Mr. Wells states in his appeal letter that our
market should be in decline as is most of the nation, but the Assessor’s Office
ratio study still shows a slight incline. The Elmore County Assessor’s office
feels Mr. Wells was treated fair and equitable.
Motion by Shaw, second by Rose, on parcel RPA0082022023AA, 3rd Street Holding
Trust, Ivyl Wells, Trustee, to uphold the Assessor’s Office assessment.
SHAW - AYE
CRUSER - AYE
ROSE - AYE Motion carried and so ordered
The next appeal was from Ivyl Wells, Trustee, Office Holding Trust
RPA3S06E254330A. Appraiser Soboslai stated the Office Holding Trust’s parcel
located at 592 N. 6th E. raised in assessed value by 5%. Idaho Code requires the
County to be at market, a ratio study is performed every year using sales
reported within a certain time frame. Similar properties are then adjusted to
reflect the new value. The State Tax Commission performs a similar ratio study
by category to verify we are in compliance based on recent sales. Mr. Wells
stated is his appeal letter that our market should be in a decline as is most of
the nation, but the Assessor’s Office study still shows a slight incline. The
Assessor’s office feels Mr. Wells has been treated fair and equitable.
Motion by Shaw, second by Cruser, to uphold the Assessor’s Office Assessment,
parcel RPA03S06E254330A, Office Holding Trust, Ivyl Wells, Trustee.
SHAW - AYE
CRUSER - AYE
ROSE - AYE Motion carried and so ordered
The next appeal is the Laser Investment Trust, Ivyl Wells, Trustee, which are
two vacant land parcels, RP03S06E286010A and RP04S05E105410A. Appraiser
Sobosolai stated the land parcels raised in value by 23% in 2008. Idaho Code
requires the County to be at market, a ratio study is performed every year using
sales reported within a certain time frame. Similar properties are then adjusted
to reflect the new value. The State Tax Commission performs a similar ratio
study by category to verify we are in compliance based on recent sales. Mr.
Wells stated is his appeal letter that our market should be in a decline as is
most of the nation, but the Assessor’s Office ratio study still shows a slight
incline.
Motion by Rose, second by Shaw, to uphold the Assessor’s Office assessment on
RP03S06E286010A and RP04S05E105410A, Laser Investment Trust, Ivyl Wells Trustee.
SHAW - AYE
CRUSER - AYE
ROSE - AYE Motion carried and so ordered
Motion by Shaw, second by Cruser to recess until 1:30 P.M today.
SHAW - AYE
CRUSER - AYE
ROSE - AYE Motion carried and so ordered
At 1:30 p.m. the Board of Equalization continued.
The next item on the agenda was Paula Gayle Matthews Yarnot, RP01S05E328210A and
RP01S05E328810A. Ms. Yarnot is representing her deceased parents as the property
is still in their name. Ms. Yarnot could not attend the meeting today. Appraiser
Soboslai reviewed the appeal and said Ms. Yarnot stated the values on her
properties seem excessive since both parcels are open grazing land and have been
since the late 1800’s. When asked if Ms. Yarnot was using it for grazing Ms.
Yarnot stated no, but she believed that there were cattle on the land sometimes.
The Assessor’s Office told Ms. Yarnot if she obtained a Dry Grazing lease that
the land would be placed in the appropriate AG category. Ms. Yarnot responded
that a lease would interfere with her plans for the property. Idaho Code 63-604
states land must be actively devoted to agriculture. The Idaho Supreme Court
upheld a similar instance in Ada County, Board of Equalization v. Highlands,
Inc., Smith Family LLC. Idaho Code requires the County to be at market value.
The Assessor’s Office feels Ms. Yarnot’s assessed values are fair and equitable.
Motion by Shaw, second by Rose, to uphold the Assessor’s Office assessment on
parcels RP01S05E328210A and RP01S05E328810A for Paula Gayle Matthews Yarnot. The
property is in the name of Paul G. Matthews.
SHAW - AYE
CRUSER - AYE
ROSE - AYE Motion carried and so ordered
The next appellant was Elk Valley Ranch, Inc., Dave Mickelson, being represented
by his attorney Jay Friedly. Both Mr. Mickelson and Mr. Friedly were present.
There are three parcels Mr. Mickelson filed an appeal on. Mr. Mickelson is
withdrawing his appeal on two parcels, RP03N10E210700A and RP03N10E211210A. The
only parcel being appealed is RP002490010140A. Mr. Friedly stated the increase
was unfounded due to the current economy. Mr. Mickelson feels the values on the
property seemed excessive since the parcel is agriculture. No lots in the
subdivision that includes this parcel have sold for over a year. Mr. Mickelson
stated the property would have sheep on it this year, and did last year. Ms.
Soboslai asked if he had a signed lease from a rancher to graze sheep on the
property and he stated no. Ms. Soboslai explained the sales that have been
reported to her office reflect an increase. Assessor Gridley stated if Mr.
Mickelson can get a signed lease on the property by next Monday, July 7th, then
the Assessor’s office can adjust the property to agricultural land used for
grazing. A decision will be made on Monday, July 7th.
A small recess was taken.
The next agenda item was Danskin Properties, attorney James Underwood, c/o
Barbara Waite, parcel number RP001970010190A. Mr. Underwood and Ms. Waite were
not present. Appraiser Soboslai stated the property increased in value by 28% in
the 2008 assessment year. The increase is due to sales the Assessor received in
the Danskin Subdivision and surrounding areas. Ms. Waite stated in the notice of
appeal form under brief remarks setting forth grounds of this appeal, that this
property is located in the Indian Creek 100 year flood plain and should be
treated as an unbuildable lot and was encumbered by various easements to benefit
other buildable lots in the Subdivision. Ms. Waite was asked to provide
documentation from Central District Health stating that all or some of the
21.160 acres are indeed unbuildable. No documentation has been received. The
Assessor’s office does not dispute that it is in the flood plain but without
this documentation the next step is to compare land sales that are located in
this same flood plain to see if it has affected sales. The Assessor’s office
feels Danskin Properties has been treated fair and equitable.
Motion by Shaw, second by Cruser, to uphold the Assessor’s assessment, on parcel
#RP001970010190A, Danskin Properties, c/o Barbara Waite and Attorney James
Underwood
SHAW - AYE
CRUSER - AYE
ROSE - AYE Motion carried and so ordered
Rhonda Morton, appealing her assessment on parcel RP01N04E343750A appeared
before the Board. Ms. Morton gave the Board a printout and explained why she was
asking for a reduction in her assessment. At one point the land had been mined
and there was no topsoil. Appraiser Soboslai stated land has significantly
increased in value around the Morton’s. Their residence and 1.840 acres
increased by 18% in the 2008 assessment year, the biggest jump being the land.
In Mrs. Mortons appeal she states: The assessed value of CAT 18 (.84) acre is
substantially higher than parcels listed by the Elmore County Appraiser as
comparisons used to establish the value. In addition, the .84 acre is a ravine
instead of flat useable land. Appraiser Soboslai stated in appraising there is a
principle that is called “economy of scale”. A definition of this is basically
the cost per unit decreases as the units/or production increase and the
remaining acre values follow this principle, the more acres you have the less
per acre is charged. Appraisers that visited the property, after Mrs. Morton
reported there was a ravine, stated the ravine behind Ms. Mortons property was
owned by BLM. They were unable to make an adjustment. Ms. Morton stated the land
in front of her house is not usable. Discussion followed on the calculation of
the assessment. A report will be run by the Assessor’s office to see if there
are other properties comparable to hers in size. A decision will be made on
Monday the 7th of July.
The next appeal was Laurence Saenger who was present. Mr. Saenger stated he is
appealing the assessment of parcel RPA0072004004BA and made a schedule of
adjustments of $20,000. Mr. Saenger stated there is no dining room or recreation
room in the residence. On both sides of the duplex, appliances are more than 10
years old, improvements are needed to the furnaces, and the carpets need
replacement. Appraiser Soboslai stated Mr. Saenger has repeatedly appealed the
assessed value of his 1977 duplex, parcel RPA0072004004B. He has stated that his
Duplex is outdated and in need of a great deal of repair. Elmore County has
already given him a minus 5% wear and tear adjustment from an exterior review
done by our appraisers for the 2006 Board of Equalization. Mr. Saenger’s Duplex
receives a minus 25% depreciation for the year built. In order the Assessors
office to adjust Mr. Saenger’s property again they would have to establish that
the wear and tear on his duplex was more than typical for that year built. The
Assessor’s Office has made numerous attempts to review the interior of the
residence to make sure the assessment is correct, and to observe the wear and
tear that Mr. Saenger repeatedly speaks of but have been unsuccessful in all
attempts. It is the decision of the Assessor’s Office to stand by the assessment
until Mr. Saenger allows us to do an interior walk through of the duplex, so we
can ascertain if any additional wear and tear is warranted. Mr. Saenger stated
last year he did not agree with his assessment and was not notified in a timely
matter. The Board asked Mr. Saenger if the Assessor’s office can look in both
sides of the duplex and Mr. Saenger stated it is his decision not to allow the
Assessor’s office in to the duplex. Mr. Saenger gave the Board a letter
regarding his appeal of the assessment: Re: Appeal of Assessment RP0072004004BA,
To Whom It May Concern, Attached is a schedule of adjustments for the above
property totaling $20,000. Request a new property valuation of $200,000.
Sincerely, Laurence Saenger. Background for appeal of assessment of Laurence
Saenger RPA0072004004BA. A. Errors 1) No dining room at 1020 East 13th North. 2)
No recreation room at 1020 East 13th North $2,000.00 B. Omissions 1) All
appliances except refrigerator more than 10 years old $4,000.00. C. Improvements
needed…Furnace replacement (2) @ 1,500 each - $3,000 Carpet (2) @ 2,000 & 1,000
- $3,000.00 Appliances $6,000.00 Air Conditioner (1) $2,000.00 Total $20,000.00.
Prosecutor Schindele asked the Assessor questions regarding the condition of the
Duplex and what affects the assessment. The questions were answered.
Motion by Rose, second by Cruser, on RPA0072004004BA, Laurence Saenger, to
uphold the Assessor’s Office assessment.
SHAW - AYE
CRUSER - AYE
ROSE - AYE Motion carried and so ordered
The next appeal was from John Walter on parcel RPA00830003001CA. Mr. Walter
appeared before the Board and thanked the Board for their time and explained he
had just moved in to the house, he paid $268,500 for the house, it was appraised
at $275,000.00. The house is assessed at approximately $297,000.00. Appraiser
Soboslai explained the comparisons used on the assessment. An appointment was
requested by the Assessor’s office but no visit was made to the property. Mr.
Walter first gave a purchase price on the Homeowners Exemption as $168,000 and
later corrected that as the amount he had financed and the purchase price was
actually $268,500.00. Mr. Walter did not provide the Assessor’s office with an
appraisal of the property. Mr. Walter agreed to have the Assessor’s office do a
walk through of the property today. A decision will be made on July 7, 2008 on
this appeal.
The next appeal was from Stuart Cole on parcel RPA3S06E363240A. Mr. Cole was
present and explained the circumstances regarding the house. The house is his,
but is in his son’s name. The Assessor’s office adjusted the assessed value
after two appraisers reviewed the house from $72,744 to $68,896 due to the
square footage of the attic and the roof material changed, two ceiling fans were
added and the rate for the porch was changed. Appraiser Soboslai explained what
a life estate was,it could remain in his son’s name, but Mr. Cole could be
eligible for certain tax breaks.
Motion by Rose, second by Cruser, on RPA3S06E363240A, Stuart Cole, to uphold the
Assessor’s Office amended assessment of $68,896.
SHAW - AYE
CRUSER - AYE
ROSE - AYE Motion carried and so ordered
Motion by Shaw, second by Cruser to recess as a Board of Equalization
SHAW - AYE
CRUSER - AYE
ROSE - AYE Motion carried and so ordered
/S/ ARLIE SHAW, Chairman
ATTEST: /S/ MARSA GRIMMETT, Clerk
