LAKE COUNTY VALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARD MEETING

OCTOBER 2, 1997

The Lake County Value Adjustment Board met in regular session on Thursday, October 2, 1997, at 9:00 a.m., in the Board of County Commissioner's Meeting Room, Lake County Administration Building, Tavares, Florida. Commissioners present at the meeting were: William "Bill" H. Good, Chairman; Richard Swartz, Vice Chairman; and Rhonda H. Gerber. School Board members present were: Jimmy Conner (Mr. Conner was not present for the afternoon session); and Kyleen Fischer. Others present were Sanford "Sandy" Minkoff, County Attorney; Jordan Stuart, Attorney representing the Property Appraiser; Ed Havill, Property Appraiser; Frank Royce, Chief Appraiser; Robbie Ross, Director, Tangible Personal Property and Agricultural Operations; Ginger Casburn, Exemptions Supervisor; Ms. Martha Smith, Tangibles; Frank Driggers, Senior Review Appraiser; and Marlene S. Foran, Deputy Clerk.

Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, informed the Value Adjustment Board (VAB) that the hearings at this time were assessment of value cases, homestead exemptions and agricultural classifications which were either filed late or the Property Appraiser has recommended that the application be denied based on substantive grounds. He stated that the presumption that the Property Appraiser was correct was still in effect per Florida Statutes, however, has been modified and the taxpayer does have the burden of showing that the Property Appraiser was incorrect.

At this time, Mr. Ed Havill, Property Appraiser, introduced Ms. Jordan Stuart, Attorney, representing the Property Appraiser, and staff that were present.

PETITION NO. 1997-38L KARYN PAUL

Mr. Ed Havill, Property Appraiser, informed the VAB that the petitioner, Karyn Paul, filed the application for homestead exemption on September 4, 1997, after the March 3, 1997 deadline. He noted that Ms. Paul would have qualified for homestead exemption had she filed by the deadline.

Ms. Karyn Paul appeared before the VAB and explained that she was in the Lady Lake Branch of the Property Appraiser's Office in January 1996 with her parents and was informed that her name would have to be put on the deed for the property. She explained that, after her name was put on the deed, she returned to the Property Appraiser's Office and was informed that everything was fine and that she would receive the homestead exemption for 1997. She noted that she did not receive or fill out an application for homestead exemption.

Mr. Havill stated that Ms. Paul has qualified for homestead exemption for 1998.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Mr. Conner and carried unanimously by a 5 - 0 vote, the VAB upheld the recommendation of the Property Appraiser and denied the request for homestead exemption for Karyn Paul, Petition No. 1997-38L, based on findings of fact and lack of sufficient evidence to overturn the Property Appraiser's recommendation of denial for late filing.

Ms. Fischer was not present for the discussion or vote.

Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, informed the VAB that his office was drafting an ordinance that would require all closing agents at time of closings to inform purchasers of the requirements for filing application for homestead exemption.

Ms. Jordan Stuart, Attorney, stated that it would be helpful to require that the parcel identification number be placed on the deed so there would be no question as to what notice had been given for what parcel.

PETITION NO. 1997-100 FRANCES B. HARTLE DBA

HARTLE GROVES, INC.

Mr. Ed Havill, Property Appraiser, informed the VAB that Petition No. 1997-100, Frances B. Hartle dba Hartle Groves, Inc. had been continued from September 29, 1997 at the request of the VAB to allow the Property Appraiser's Office time to provide photographs of the parcels in question.

Mr. Frank Royce, Chief Appraiser, explained that this was a 70 acre parcel and currently the Property Appraiser was allowing agricultural classification on ten (10) acres planted in citrus. He stated that Mr. Hartle requested agricultural classification on four (4) acres of pine trees, and was requesting agricultural classification on four (4) additional acres of citrus. At this time, Mr. Royce displayed on the monitor photographs of the four (4) additional acres of citrus, which illustrated the lack of care and the poor condition of the citrus. He stated that it was the recommendation of the Property Appraiser to approve agricultural classification on five (5) acres of pine trees and to deny agricultural classification on the citrus.

Mr. Frances B. Hartle appeared before the VAB and presented photographs of the citrus and stated that the grove was four (4) acres of Valencia oranges. He explained that Hartle Groves has been harvesting small amounts of fruit from this parcel since 1991, noting that the grove did freeze in 1989.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously by a 5 - 0 vote, the VAB upheld the recommendation of the Property Appraiser and approved the agricultural classification on five (5) acres of pine trees for Frances B. Hartle dba Hartle Groves, Inc., Petition No. 1997-100, based on findings of fact and sufficient evidence presented by the Property Appraiser to indicate a bona fide agricultural purpose.

Commr. Swartz made a motion, which was seconded by Ms. Fischer, to uphold the recommendation of the Property Appraiser and deny the request for agricultural classification on four (4) acres of citrus for Frances B. Hartle dba Hartle Groves, Inc. Petition No. 1997-100, based on findings of fact and lack of sufficient evidence to indicate a bona fide agricultural purpose.

Commr. Good noted that the photographs indicate that there was citrus on the four (4) acres.

The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which failed by a 2 - 3 vote.

Commr. Good, Ms. Fischer, and Mr. Conner voted in opposition.

PETITION NO. 1997-92 CABLE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

Ms. Martha Smith, Property Appraiser's Office, appeared before the Board and explained that the petitioner, Cable Development Corporation, was a cable television system located in Highland Lakes Subdivision. She stated that a review of cable television sales from around the United States show that systems are sold from $575 to approximately $2,600 per subscriber, and that the adjusted amount would be approximately $935 or an assessment of $655,435, which would be the market value approach. She explained that review of these sales on a homes past basis shows that depreciated cost of these systems sell from approximately $300 to approximately $2,200 per home past, and an adjusted amount would be approximately $700 or an assessment of $656,600, which would be the cost approach to value. She stated that the system had approximately 701 subscribers paying $20.85 per month for cable as of January 1, 1997. She stated that market information received shows expenses for cable television systems to be approximately 55% and using a market derived cap rate of 12.07% and capitalizing the income would show a fair market value of the system to be $556,614, which would be the income approach to value. She stated that adjustments have been made to the assessment for Cable Development Corporation based on additional information received, and the new value has been reduced from $665,563 to $576,494 for 1997.

Mr. Ed Blatler, CPA, representing Cable Development Corporation, appeared before the VAB and briefly discussed the methods presented by the Property Appraiser's Office and stated that actual income reported to the Internal Revenue Service has to be considered and, capitalizing that income, the assessment was substantially less. He stated that this information has been provided to the Property Appraiser and questioned how the Property Appraiser could possibly justify the values. He stated that it appears that the Property Appraiser was trying to capitalize the revenue stream and the management techniques of Cable Development Corporation as opposed to following their guidelines of looking at tangible property.

Ms. Jordan Stuart, Attorney, informed the VAB that what constitutes market value was not the actual income of the property involved but an income derived from the market. She explained that the case, Scripps Howard v. Havill, before the Supreme Court, would be the final determiner of whether or not the Property Appraiser's methodology was in accord with the law. She stated that, at this point, she would suggest that the VAB uphold the recommendation of the Property Appraiser.

Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, stated that the three methods of appraising real estate were the cost approach, the replacement approach, and the depreciated value approach. He stated that, in the past, tangible values have been looked at by cost, factor, and depreciation; however, they were litigating now that personal property may be worth far more than what it cost if it increased in value, which was the jest of this argument.

Commr. Swartz made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Gerber, to uphold the recommendation of the Property Appraiser and approve the assessment of value, in the amount of $576,494, for Cable Development Corporation, Petition No. 1997-92, based on findings of fact and lack of sufficient evidence to overturn the Property Appraiser's recommendation.

In response to a question presented by Commr. Good, Mr. Minkoff stated that it was very difficult to perceive the outcome of the Supreme Court decision in the case of Scripps Howard v. Havill.

The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which carried unanimously by a 5 - 0 vote.

PETITION NO. 1997-58 JIM HARMAN

Mr. Ed Havill, Property Appraiser, informed the VAB that Petition No. 1997-58, Jim Harman/Sunshine Peat, was a tangible case.

Mr. Robbie Ross, Director, Tangible Personal Property and Agricultural Operations, informed the VAB that Sunshine Peat was protesting the assessment of their equipment used in a wholesale peat mining operation. He stated that Mr. Harman has been requested to provide additional information prior to the hearing this date, and additional information has not been submitted to support the reduction in value from $287,212 to the petitioner's estimate of fair market value of $129,575.

Mr. Jim Harman appeared before the VAB and explained that there was no additional information to submit. At this time, he distributed a spreadsheet listing Machinery and Equipment and briefly discussed several pieces of used equipment that were inadvertently calculated as new in the year that they were acquired. He stated that the spreadsheet indicates the actual cost of those items and, taking into consideration new as opposed to used, they have been over valued by $144,000. At this time, discussion occurred regarding the equipment in question.

Ms. Jordan Stuart, Attorney, explained that there was no state law concerning the appraisal but that the Property Appraiser has a right to rely on the recorded amount that the taxpayer submits, and Mr. Ross has supporting data to substantiate the value of each piece of equipment over and above the reporting.

At this time, Mr. Ross referred to the Contractor's Hotline Equipment Guide, which list the cost of equipment new and substantiates the Property Appraiser's assessed value of the equipment.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously by a 5 - 0 vote, the VAB upheld the recommendation of the Property Appraiser and approved the assessment of value, in the amount of $287,212, for Jim Harman, Sunshine Peat, Petition No. 1997-58, based on findings of fact and lack of sufficient evidence to overturn the recommendation of the Property Appraiser.

PETITION NO. 1997-124 DACAPO COMPANY, LTD.

Mr. Robbie Ross, Director, Tangible Personal Property and Agricultural Operations, informed the VAB that DaCapo Company, Ltd. has set up an eco bank and DaCapo Company purchased the property during 1996 and did not file for an agricultural classification. He explained that DaCapo Company has failed to file an application for an agricultural classification on the property; and the VAB would have to make a determination whether they were going to grant the agricultural classification on a parcel that has not filed for an agricultural classification.

Mr. William Gerber, representing DaCapo Company, Ltd., appeared before the VAB to discuss this request.

Mr. Ross stated that he did have a blank application for agricultural classification that could be completed by Mr. Gerber prior to the VAB hearing this appeal.

At this time, Petition No. 1997-124, DaCapo Company, Ltd., was postponed to allow Mr. Gerber time to complete the application for agricultural classification.

RECESS & REASSEMBLY

At 10:15 a.m., the Chairman announced that the VAB would recess for ten minutes and reconvene at 10:25 a.m.

PETITION NO. 1997-130 CLARENCE E. MIDDLEBROOKS

PETITION NO. 1997-131 CLARENCE E. MIDDLEBROOKS

Mr. Clarence E. Middlebrooks appeared before the VAB and requested that Petition No. 1997-130 and Petition No. 1997-131 be heard at the same time noting that the tangible and the real property were interrelated. He stated that he owns Wekiva Falls Resort, a camp ground, public bathing area, and marina. He stated that the nature of his request for tax reduction was that the resort had a collision with the St. Johns River Water Management District several years ago. At this time, he presented an aerial map of his property, and evidence in support of Petition No. 1997-130 and Petition No. 1997-131, which had been submitted to the Deputy Clerk on October 1, 1997.

At this time, the Property Appraiser's Office objected to the presentation of all evidence that had not been submitted five days in advance of the meeting this date.

Discussion occurred regarding the evidence in question, and the Deputy Clerk clarified that the Clerk's office did inform Mr. Middlebrooks that he did have the ability to submit evidence up to the date of the meeting.

At this time, Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, and Ms. Jordan Stuart, Attorney, presented statutorial requirements for submitting information. Ms. Stuart stated that the five day notice was determined by the Department of Revenue as reasonable.

Mr. Middlebrooks stated that the issue before the VAB was the fair market value of the property on January 1, 1997. He stated that he has provided the Property Appraiser copies of Schedule C 1040 profit and loss statements since 1993 from his personal income tax statements that show he has a net operating loss of $50,162 in 1993, $3,298 in 1994, $137,585 in 1995, and $91,925 in 1996. He discussed the damage that has occurred from flooding and pollution from the adjacent property and explained that he has had to spend far more money than the park has taken in to keep the park open to the public. He stated that Huskey Realty Company has not been successful in selling Wekiva Falls Resort and directed the VAB's attention to an Affidavit from E. Everett Huskey, dated September 23, 1997.

Commr. Good read, into the record, Item 13 from the afore mentioned affidavit which stated that it was the Affiant's professional opinion that on and prior to January 1, 1997 Wekiva Falls Resort property had no commercial value, and could not be successfully marketed, nor sold, based upon the property's present development, use, economic performance, and underlying conditions.

Mr. Ross directed the VAB's attention to a letter from Mr. Everett Huskey, dated September 29, 1997, which indicated that the terms of the September 15, 1995 listing agreement for the sale price of the individual units was negotiable at $16.48 million, the November 11, 1996 listing agreement was listed at $8.23 million, and the current listed price was $8.23 million. He stated that the Property Appraiser's real estate value on Petition No. 130 was $1,481,286.

Mr. Frank Royce, Chief Appraiser, explained that the assessment takes into consideration that the property could be successfully sold for the $8.23 million, as it was currently listed, and that the evidence has not been presented to indicate $6,000,000 worth of problems on the property.

On a motion by Commr. Gerber, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously by a 5 - 0 vote, the VAB upheld the recommendation of the Property Appraiser and approved the assessment of value in the amount of $1,481,286 for Clarence E. Middlebrooks, Petition No. 1997-130, based on findings of fact and lack of sufficient evidence to overturn the recommendation of the Property Appraiser.

Mr. Ross stated that the original proposed tax notice on Petition No. 1997-131 included the water/wastewater system and equipment on site and was valued at $612,978. He stated that Mr. Middlebrooks had not filed a tangible personal property tax return with the Property Appraiser's Office prior to September 26, 1997, noting that a tangible personal property tax return had been filed in 1989.

Mr. Middlebrooks stated that he filed the tangible personal property tax return in February and received a call from the Property Appraiser's Office challenging the dates and the prices that he had put for pieces of heavy equipment.

Mr. Ross explained that the tangible value on the equipment was depreciated to $102,657, and the water/wastewater system on the tangible personal property tax return did not reference any original installed cost on the water/wastewater system. He noted that the total value on the water/wastewater system was $415,520, and the assessment has been reduced to $518,177.

Mr. Middlebrooks explained that he had been asked only for the capacity of the water/wastewater system and the number of connections and not the value of the water/wastewater system. He further explained that he had purchased the used sewer treatment plant for $25,000, and the water plant was a used tank. He stated that his estimate of value would be his refurbishment cost, and the cost that he paid for the units used, which would be $35,000 installed for the sewer plant and approximately the same for the water system.

In response to questions presented by Commr. Swartz, Mr. Ross discussed the methodology used in establishing the tangible property value and comparables of other systems.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously by a 5 - 0 vote, the VAB upheld the recommendation of the Property Appraiser and approved the assessment of value in the amount of $518,177 for Clarence E. Middlebrooks, Petition No. 1997-131, based on findings of fact and lack of sufficient evidence to overturn the Property Appraiser's recommendation.

PETITION NO. 1997-112 RUSSELL & GLADYS BLAKESLEE

Mr. Frank Royce, Chief Appraiser, informed the VAB that Russell and Gladys Blakeslee have failed to file an application for agricultural classification and would have received the classification had they filed by the March 3, 1997 deadline. He stated that Mr. Russell Blakeslee, Jr., who was present representing the petitioners, did have an application to submit at this time.

Mr. Russell Blakeslee, Jr., representing Russell and Gladys Blakeslee, appeared before the VAB and explained that his parents, Russell and Gladys Blakeslee, had serious health problems and failed to file their application for agricultural classification. He stated that he had documentation to show that there was citrus on the parcel.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Mr. Conner and carried unanimously by a 5 - 0 vote, the VAB upheld the recommendation of the Property Appraiser and approved the agricultural classification for Russell and Gladys Blakeslee, Petition No. 1997-112, based on findings of fact and sufficient evidence presented by the Property Appraiser to indicate a bona fide agricultural purpose. PETITION NO. 1997-39 PHYLLIS CHESNUT

Mr. Frank Royce, Chief Appraiser, informed the VAB that Phyllis Chestnut was appealing the assessment of value on a mobile home.

Ms. Phyllis Chesnut appeared before the VAB and expressed concern that the assessment of value on her mobile home had been increased $4,000. She further expressed concern that, although she was not paying any taxes on her property at this time, if the assessed value continued to escalate, she would be paying taxes next year.

Mr. Royce stated that the assessment of value of Ms. Chesnut's mobile home for 1996 was $18,578, and the assessment value for 1997 was $22,849. At this time, discussion occurred regarding the structures that had not been assessed in the past, and the three percent (3%) cap on the assessed value. He explained that the value of the land for 1996 was $6,780, and that the value of the land for 1997 was $8,814. He stated that the total market value was $21,613 and the assessed value was $21,316 because of the three (3%) percent increase in the previous years base value plus the value of the improvements that were not previously assessed. He stated that the mobile home was assessed at $13,822, and that a small utility building was assessed at $163.

Ms. Chesnut stated that there was no small utility building on her property; at which time, Mr. Royce stated that the utility building would be removed decreasing the assessment of value to $21,450.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously by a 5 - 0 vote, the VAB upheld the revised recommendation of the Property Appraiser and approved the assessment of value in the amount of $21,450 for Phyllis Chesnut, Petition No. 1997-39, based on findings of fact and lack of sufficient evidence to overturn the Property Appraiser's recommendation.

PETITION NO. 1997-105L CHARLES D. SELLARS

PETITION NO. 1997-106L CHARLES D. SELLARS

Mr. Robbie Ross, Director, Tangible Personal Property/Agricultural Operations, informed the VAB that the petitioner, Charles D. Sellars, had filed a petition for appeal on a denial of an agricultural classification after the July 15, 1997 deadline. He stated that they were not recommending approval of this request.

Mr. Charles D. Sellars appeared before the VAB and explained that he has a lease property for the cattle business. He stated that he filed the petition late because Mr. Clyde Rogers, the owner of the property, was in Kentucky and that he was not aware of the July 15, 1997 deadline for filing an appeal.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously by a 5 - 0 vote, the VAB denied the request to hear Petition No. 1997-105 and Petition No. 1997-106, Charles D. Sellars, based on findings of fact and lack of sufficient evidence to indicate extenuating circumstances for failure to file an application by the July 15, 1997 deadline.

PETITION NO. 1997-124 DACAPO COMPANY, LTD. (CONTINUED)

Mr. William Gerber, representing DaCapo Company, Ltd., informed the VAB that he has now submitted an application for agricultural classification on the parcel. He clarified that the property was comprised of citrus and wetlands. At this time, he submitted an engineering data sheet of a survey of the parcel.

Mr. Robbie Ross, Director, Tangible Personal Property/Agricultural Operations, informed the VAB that the petitioner, DaCapo Company, Ltd., had failed to file an application for agricultural classification by the March 3, 1997 deadline and that the application being submitted at this time was a new application for agricultural classification. He explained that evidence submitted by the petitioner indicates a total of 1007 acres and that 152 acres of citrus trees were removed in 1996.

At this time, it was the decision of the VAB to hear this case and that extenuating circumstances would need to be presented as to why this application was not filed by the March 3, 1997 deadline.

Mr. Gerber explained that the property was purchased by a family trust three years ago, and in July 1996 the family trust sold the property to DeCapo Company, Ltd. He further explained that the current owner resides in New York City, and that his firm manages the property for the current owner.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously by a 5 - 0 vote, the VAB denied the request to hear Petition No. 1997-124, DeCapo Company, Ltd., based on findings of fact and lack of sufficient evidence to indicate extenuating circumstances for late filing.

RECESS & REASSEMBLY

At 12:12 p.m., the Chairman announced that the VAB would recess for lunch and reconvene at 1:00 p.m.

PETITION NO. 1997-200 HARBOR HILLS COUNTRY CLUB, L.P.

Commr. Good informed the VAB that the discussion before the Board at this time was regarding a request for postponement of Petition No. 1997-200, Harbor Hills Country Club, L.P., which was scheduled to be heard on October 3, 1997.

Mr. Jimmy Crawford, Attorney, representing Harbor Hills Country Club, L.P., appeared before the Board and explained that he was requesting continued discussion on the postponement of Petition No. 1997-200 from October 3, 1997 to a later date. At this time, he directed the VAB's attention to a letter, dated October 1, 1997, to William "Bill" H. Good, which addresses the issue of the continuation of this appeal, and stated that he was again before the VAB requesting a continuation and noted that his client would have no objection to a Special Master. He stated that he received the notice of the hearing seven days prior to the hearing date and had only two days to submit evidence to the Property Appraiser. He stated that it was his understanding when he left the morning discussion on September 29, 1997 that the continuance was granted. He suggested that the hearing date remain open and, if an agreement with the Property Appraiser was not reached by October 16, 1997, the petition could be scheduled on the date that late petitions were scheduled.

Mr. Ed Havill, Property Appraiser, stated that he had no objection to Mr. Crawford's request.

Ms. Fischer made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Gerber, to postpone Petition No. 1997-200, Harbor Hills Country Club, L.P., in order to accommodate the petitioner to a date to be determined.

Ms. Fischer stated that the VAB needs to show a willingness to accommodate a case that has extenuating circumstances within the confines of the Property Appraiser's Office.

Commr. Swartz explained that the problem was that the information that Mr. Crawford would need to provide to the VAB would not be available prior to the certification of the tax roll. He stated that said information could be submitted to the Property Appraiser at any time during the year for the same consideration.

The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which failed by a 2 - 2 vote.

Commr. Good and Commr. Swartz voted in opposition.

Mr. Conner was not present for the discussion or vote.

Mr. Crawford stated that he would talk with the Property Appraiser's Office and the Deputy Clerk after he has spoken with his client to determine whether they would appear before the VAB on October 3, 1997, at 10:30 a.m., or withdraw the petition.

PETITION NO. 1997-107 JOSEPH T. LEWIS

PETITION NO. 1997-108 JOSEPH T. LEWIS

Mr. Frank Royce, Chief Appraiser, informed the VAB that the petitioner, Joseph T. Lewis, was appealing the assessment of value on the Mount Dora Marina.

Mr. Joseph Lewis appeared before the Board and stated that the property in question was currently zoned R-3 (Residential) operating under a special Conditional Use Permit (CUP) as a marina. He stated that the best use for the property was a marina and that the property was too small for any multi-dwelling development and was not expandable since all surrounding and adjacent properties were owned by the City of Mount Dora. He stated that the value of the property for commercial use should be predicated on its ability to produce income. He stated that location was key to retailing and that the problem with the current location was that it suffers from very low traffic and visibility from the downtown Mount Dora area. He stated that the marina was in close proximity to a public boat ramp; therefore, there was no need for the storage facilities. He discussed the pollution factor of Lake Dora. He presented two comparables using Venetian Cove Marina, and Dead River Marina and briefly discussed same. He stated that his facility was worth no more than the Dead River Marina valued at $561,676. He noted that his facility was appraised at $841,723.

Mr. Frank Driggers, Senior Review Appraiser, noted that the property in question was rezoned in 1996 and was now zoned commercial. He addressed comparable properties and explained that the comparable was in the market and not in the assessed value. He explained that all of the properties between the City of Tavares and the City of Leesburg, along Highway 441, were slated for reevaluation for the 1998 tax roll year and explained that in 1997 all of the properties in the City of Mount Dora were reevaluated. He noted that the Dead River Marina has approximately a forty (40%) percent to fifty (50%) percent occupancy in the dry docks and that the Mount Dora Marina has approximately a ninety-five (95%) percent occupancy rate. He presented an aerial photograph of the property in question and discussed the amenities. He stated that Venetian Cove Marina could not be adequately compared to the Mount Dora Marina.

Mr. Frank Royce, Chief Appraiser, discussed the income approach in establishing the value of property and explained that using the information that was submitted, the Property Appraiser's Office has established a value (using an eleven (11%) percent cap rate) of $1,321,764 that represents the property and business value of the Mount Dora Marina. He stated that there were two mortgages for over $1,000,000 on the property, and that the petitioner has not shown any sales of comparable properties to establish a value. He stated that using the income value, what the property previously sold for, and the amount of money in mortgages, the value of the Mount Dora Marina was fair and just at $821,723.

Mr. Driggers noted that an error had been made in miscellaneous improvements which has resulted in approximately a $40,000 reduction for a total revised value of $781,723 for real estate and tangible property.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously by a 4 - 0 vote, the VAB upheld the recommendation of the Property Appraiser and approved the revised assessment of value of $121,265 for Petition No. 1997-107; and the assessment of value of $659,326 for Petition No. 1997-108, for a total assessed value of $780,591, Joseph T. Lewis, based on findings of fact and lack of comparables, sales, and sufficient evidence to overturn the Property Appraiser's recommendation.

Mr. Conner was not present for the discussion or vote.

PETITION NO. 1997-119 LOMA LINDA CORPORATION

Mr. Robbie Ross, Director, Tangible Personal Property and Agricultural Operations, explained that the petitioner, Loma Linda Corporation, filed the application for agricultural classification on September 17, 1997.

Mr. Jim Thomas, representing Lama Linda Corporation, appeared before the Board and explained that the property was purchased in 1994 and was a seven year old citrus operation. He stated that the Schedules of Citrus Revenue and Citrus Expenses supports that they have continued the citrus operation. He stated that this was a 10 acre parcel adjacent to a 450 acre parcel, and that they were not aware that they were not receiving agricultural classification on said parcel. He stated that the parcel had an agricultural classification through 1994.

On a motion by Commr. Gerber, seconded by Commr. Swartz and carried unanimously by a 4 - 0 vote, the VAB upheld the recommendation of the Property Appraiser and denied agricultural classification for Loma Linda Corporation, Petition No. 1997-119, based on findings of fact and lack of sufficient evidence to indicate extenuating circumstances to overturn the Property Appraiser's recommendation.

Mr. Conner was not present for the discussion or vote.

Commr. Good noted, for the record, that Mr. Jimmy Conner, School Board Member, had a prior commitment and would not be present for the afternoon session.

PETITION NO. 1997-111 PHILIP E. GLIDDEN

Mr. Frank Royce, Chief Appraiser, informed the VAB that the petitioner, Philip E. Glidden, was protesting the assessment of value of a 1.19 acre parcel located in the area of Highway 27, the Florida Turnpike, and south of S.R. 19.

Mr. Philip Glidden appeared before the Board and submitted an aerial photograph of the parcel in question; at which time the Property Appraiser acknowledged that he would accept the aerial as evidence. He stated that a 90 foot wide easement was taken in 1994 by the Florida Power Corporation rendering the property worthless. At this time, he discussed the aerial photograph.

Mr. Royce stated that the property had been on the market for $70,000, and explained that Mr. Glidden, at this time, had a parcel to the east listed on the market for $80,000. He stated that consideration has been given to the easement and that properties of this size sell in the $40,000 range in the area because of the size and location of the property. He stated that the assessment of value was $26,675.

Commr. Swartz made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Gerber, to uphold the recommendation of the Property Appraiser and approve the assessment of value, in the amount of $26,675, for Phillip E. Glidden, Petition No. 1997-111, based on findings of fact and lack of comparables and sufficient evidence to overturn the Property Appraiser's recommendation.

Mr. Glidden stated that he was never told to bring in comparable appraisals of other property. He stated that the fact that an easement was going through the parcel reduces the value.

The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which carried unanimously by a 4 - 0 vote.

Mr. Conner was not present for the discussion or vote.

PETITION NO. 1997-132 MICHAEL AMBROSIA/SIMKINS INDUSTRIES

Mr. Frank Royce, Chief Appraiser, informed the VAB that the petitioner, Michael Ambrosia/Simkins Industries, was appealing the assessment value of 22 lots in the Bryn Mar On The Lake Subdivision, and a parcel located east of the subdivision.

Mr. Bob Skinner, Realtor, representing Simkins Industries, appeared before the Board and provided a brief history of Bryn Mar On The Lake subdivision. He explained that Phase II and Phase III were not recorded and that the City of Umatilla does not recognize Phase II and Phase III as a platted subdivision. He stated that they had an offer in 1992 for $150,000 for the 22 lots and the adjacent 11 acres, and that they had an offer of $170,000 in 1996; however, due to the legal problems and mistakes in the deed restrictions, the property cannot be sold. He stated that the assessment of value was $287,730, and they were requesting that the assessment be reduced to$150,000.

Mr. Royce explained that the platted subdivision was comprised of 22 lots in Phase I known as Tract A, and the adjacent parcel was 11 acres known as Tract B. He stated that, in 1990 and 1992, the interior lots sold for $21,000 and the lake front lots sold for $60,000. He stated that the current assessments on the lots range from a low of $7,474 to $9,518. He explained that an 11 acre tract adjacent to the east of the parcel in question recently sold for $340,000 or $30,250 per acre. At this time, discussion occurred regarding the deed restrictions.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously by a 4 - 0 vote, the VAB upheld the recommendation of the Property Appraiser and approved the assessment of value, in the amount of $287,730, for Michael Ambrosin/Simkins Industries, Petition No. 1997-132, based on findings of fact and lack of sufficient evidence to overturn the Property Appraiser's recommendation.

Mr. Conner was not present for the discussion or vote.



RECESS & REASSEMBLY

At 2:30 p.m., the Chairman announced that the VAB would recess for ten minutes and reconvene at 2:40 p.m.

PETITION NO. 1997-186 CECILIA BONIFAY

Mr. Frank Royce, Chief Appraiser, informed the VAB that the petitioner, Cecilia Bonifay, was appealing the assessment of value, in the amount of $27,040 per acre, of two parcels located on the Wekiva River.

Ms. Cecilia Bonifay, Attorney, representing Phillip E. "Ted" Arthur, Stuart Culpepper, and Fred Clark, explained that there were several parcels owned by the same Trust and that Mr. Ted Arthur, Trustee, was present in the audience and has been involved with the property since the property was purchased over twenty-five (25) years ago. She explained that the two parcels before the VAB at this time were an 11.50 acre parcel assessed at $296,214, and a 7 acre parcel assessed at $192,780, for a total assessed value of $488,994. She stated that the parcels were located in the Wekiva River Protection Area with a land use classification that limits density on the property to one unit per 40 acres. She noted that a small structure was located on one parcel, and explained that there have been no lot of record determinations or vested rights determinations issued. She further explained that Mr. Mark Knight, Chief Planner, Planning and Development Services, has issued a letter stating that it was his opinion that vested rights would not be forthcoming from Lake County. She stated that Mr. Ted Arthur has talked with the State of Florida Department of Community Affairs at length about purchasing the property rights, at which time she referred to a letter from Mr. Daniel Wright, Department of Community Affairs, addressing why DCA has reduced their evaluation and contract amount for the property in question from $400,000 to $255,000. She noted a difference of $41,214 between what the State of Florida was willing to offer for the property and the Property Appraiser's assessed value. She stated that the property has no value today other than as open space, a recreational area, or limited agricultural use, and that there was no County road access to the parcels.

Mr. Royce stated that the property in question was approximately 1,000 feet of river front and questioned if Mr. Arthur would be willing to sell the parcels to the State of Florida at the reduced value.

Mr. Ted Arthur, Trustee, appeared before the Board and stated that the property owners have agreed that the reduced offer of $255,000 from the State of Florida was not a reasonable price and that they would not sell the property at that offer.

Mr. Royce stated that comparable one acre to one and one-half acre buildable lots in the area were selling for $34,000 to $39,000 per acre. He explained that the assessed value was based on $27,000 per acre for the land, $14,083 on the home, and $356 on a detached garage and structure.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously by a 3 - 1 vote, the VAB upheld the recommendation of the Property Appraiser and approved the assessment of value in the amount of $488,994 for Cecilia Bonifay, Petition No. 1997-186, based on findings of fact and lack of sufficient evidence and comparables to overturn the Property Appraiser's recommendation.

Ms. Fischer voted in opposition.

Mr. Conner was not present for the discussion or vote.

PETITION NO. 1997-203 LAKEWORTH MHP, LTD DBA EMERALD LAKE MOBILE HOME ESTATES

PETITION NO. 1997-204 LAKEWORTH MHP, LTD DBA EMERALD LAKE MOBILE HOME ESTATES

Mr. Robbie Ross, Director, Tangible Personal Property and Agricultural Operations, explained that the petitioner, Lakeworth MHP, dba Emerald Lake Mobile Home Estates, was appealing the assessment of value of the mobile home park and the tangible equipment within said property.

Ms. Jerri Blair, Attorney, Blair & Reid, representing the Lakeworth MHP, dba Emerald Lake Mobile Home Estates, appeared before the VAB and explained that the assessment of value of the property has increased by $808,744.

Mr. Ross stated that the mobile home park sold in 1996 for $5,925,000, and that the assessment of value for 1996 was $2,313,223.

Ms. Blair stated that the concern with the valuation on the tangible personal property, in the amount of $172,000, and noted that the bulk of the personal property being assessed was water and sewer connections. She stated that the Property Appraiser informed her that he had based that number on the value of the entire water and sewer system which, according to case law, was considered tangible personal property. She stated that the Property Appraiser's method of calculating did not appear to be an appropriate method.

Mr. Ross stated that there were 211 units assessed at $172,270 with a depreciated value of the equipment at $27,735.

On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Commr. Gerber and carried unanimously by a 4 - 0 vote, the VAB upheld the recommendation of the Property Appraiser and approved the assessment of value in the amount of $3,122,017 for Lakeworth MHP, Ltd. dba Emerald Lake Mobile Home Estates, Petition No. 1997-203 and Petition No. 1997-204, based on findings of fact and lack of sufficient evidence to overturn the Property Appraiser's recommendation.

Mr. Conner was not present for the discussion or vote.

PETITION NO. 1997-205 SOUTHLAKE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION, INC.

PETITION NO. 1997-206 SOUTHLAKE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION, INC.

Ms. Jordan Stuart, Attorney, informed the VAB that the petitioner, Southlake Community Foundation, Inc., was requesting a total charitable exemption on an apartment complex in South Lake County. She stated that this case was in litigation and that no application has been filed for charitable exemption for 1997. She explained that the VAB must determine whether or not to hear this appeal.

Commr. Good declared, for the record, that he had previously been a member of the Board of Directors for the Southlake Foundation, which was a different group doing a different activity, and not associated with Southlake Community Foundation, Inc.

Ms. Jerri Blair, Attorney, representing Southlake Community Foundation, Inc., explained that this case was in litigation and that there has been no exemption application filed for 1997. She stated that an application was filed in 1996 and, after speaking with the Property Appraiser's Office, researching the issues, reviewing Florida Statutes, and their understanding from the Property Appraiser's Office and Ms. Jordan Stuart, Southlake Community Foundation did not file an application for exemption.

Ms. Stuart explained that where there was no existing exemption, an exemption could not be contemplated and, in this case, the Property Appraiser has denied the exemption for 1994, 1995, and 1996. She explained that the circuit court has upheld the Property Appraiser in the 1994 litigation case and the taxpayer has appealed the ruling, and the case was now pending in the 5th District Court of Appeals. She stated that there has never been an exemption for the Southlake Community Foundation, and that there must be an application where there was no existing exemption.

Ms. Blair stated that the issue before the VAB today was whether or not the VAB would consider the exemption for Southlake Community Foundation. She stated that the petitioner relied upon information from the Property Appraiser's Office as well as the fact that they felt that the statute indicated that there was not a need to continue; therefore, extenuating circumstances did exist for the VAB to allow Southlake Community Foundation to proceed with the petition. She noted, for the record, that the trial judge ruled that Southlake Community Foundation, Inc. was a non-profit corporation, it was appropriate to receive a charitable exemption, and that the property in question was being used for a charitable use.

Commr. Swartz made a motion to deny the request to accept the late application for exemption for Southlake Community Foundation, Inc., Petition No. 1997-205 and Petition No. 1997-206, based on findings of fact and lack of sufficient evidence to indicate extenuation circumstances.

The motion failed for a lack of a second.

Commr. Gerber made a motion, which was seconded by Ms. Fischer, to approve the request to hear Petition No. 1997-205 and Petition No. 1997-206, Southlake Community Foundation, Inc., based on findings of fact and extenuating circumstances as to why an application for charitable exemption had not been filed.

Commr. Gerber stated that an admission that there was a miscommunication signals that circumstances were present that were out of the ordinary.

The Chairman called for a vote on the motion which failed by a 2 - 2 vote.

Commr. Good and Commr. Swartz voted in opposition.

CONTINUATIONS

Commr. Good noted that the following petitions would be continued until October 3, 1997 as the petitioners were not present for their scheduled time:

PETITION NO. 1997-78 CUTRALE CITRUS JUICES

PETITION NO. 1997-40 LAKEPORT PROPERTIES

PETITION NO. 1997-41 LAKEPORT PROPERTIES

PETITION NO. 1997-42 LAKEPORT PROPERTIES

PETITION NO. 1997-125 WINN DIXIE STORE #2224

PETITION NO. 1997-166 ORLANDO TENNIS ASSOCIATES, LTD.

PETITION NO. 1997-171 ORLANDO TENNIS ASSOCIATES, LTD.

PETITION NO. 1997-172 ORLANDO TENNIS ASSOCIATES, LTD

PETITION NO. 1997-172 ORLANDO TENNIS ASSOCIATES, LTD.

PETITION NO. 1997-149 DEVON TAX GROUP, L.L.C.

PETITION NO. 1997-150 DEVON TAX GROUP, L.L.C.

PETITION NO. 1997-110 MALCOLM & KELLY BRINSON



Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, informed the VAB that he would not be present for the morning session on October 3, 1997 and that Ms. Valerie Fuchs, Assistant County Attorney, would represent the County Attorney's Office.

There being no further issue to be brought to the attention of the VAB, the meeting recessed at 3:50 p.m.

WILLIAM "BILL" H. GOOD, CHAIRMAN



ATTEST:





JAMES C. WATKINS, CLERK



msf\boardmin\10-2-97\10-16-97