The Lake County Value Adjustment Board met in regular session on Thursday, October 30, 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; and Rhonda H. Gerber. School Board members present: Jimmy Conner. Others present were Sanford "Sandy" Minkoff, County Attorney; Frank Royce, Chief Appraiser; Property Appraiser's Office; Ginger Casburn, Exemptions Supervisor, Property Appraiser's Office; and Toni M. Riggs, Deputy Clerk.
Commr. Good reconvened the meeting of the Value Adjustment Board and noted that Petition No. 1997-200, Harbor Hills Country Club, L.P., had been withdrawn.
PETITION NO. 1997-208 JULIA I. VIERA
Ms. Ginger Casburn, Exemptions Supervisor, stated that this was a homestead case, which was first denied in 1994. She mailed a homestead renewal receipt card in 1994, and it was returned to her from the post office stating that the person had moved and left no address. She followed up with a certified letter that was returned to her marked "Attempted - not known". At that time, the homestead went off of the roll. When the tax bill came, the Property Appraiser's Office received a letter stating that the individual had been living in Puerto Rico since 1992. Ms. Casburn noted that two denials had been sent to the petitioner, one in 1997 and one in 1994.
Mr. Frank Royce, Chief Appraiser, stated that the Property Appraiser's Office was requesting that the VAB hear this case because the address was changed in 1994 to Puerto Rico, and the applicant has moved back to Clermont.
Ms. Casburn clarified that the petitioner had originally filed for homestead and had homestead in 1992. Since that time, the petitioner has asked for it again in a timely fashion, and she sent him another formal letter of denial. The Property Appraiser's Office was concerned that the information may have been sent to Puerto Rico and returned to Clermont, and the petitioner never received it.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, clarified that the Property Appraiser's Office was recommending that the VAB hear the case, because of the mail problem.
On a motion by Commr. Gerber, seconded by Mr. Connor and carried unanimously by a 4-0 vote, the VAB approved to hear Petition No. 1997-208, Julia I. Viera.
It was noted, for the record, that Ms. Kyleen Fisher, School Board member, was not present for the meeting.
After some discussion, it was determined that there was a need for an interpreter, and the case would be postponed until such time that one could be located.
PETITION NO. 1997-209 - JOHN J. HODAL
Ms. Ginger Casburn, Exemptions Supervisor, addressed the VAB and stated that, on November 7, 1997, she received a phone call from Ms. Cindy Crawford who stated that she had been living on the property in question for two years, and she had a lease from 1995 to 1997. Mr. Hodal did not receive notice that the homestead had been removed until October 7, 1997, so the homestead was not late. Ms. Casburn stated that electric and phone were in Ms. Crawford's name, and she pays her rent to someone other than the property owner, and therefore, the Property Appraiser's Office denied the homestead.
On a motion by Commr. Swartz, seconded by Mr. Connor and carried unanimously by a 4-0 vote, the VAB approved to hear Petition No. 1997-209, John J. Hodal.
Mr. John J. Hodal, petitioner, addressed the VAB and stated that he and Ms. Crawford were living at the residence in question, but because of his work hours at Leesburg Regional Medical Center, he sometimes lived in a motor home behind the hospital. He explained his personal reasons for having Ms. Crawford place the electric and phone in her name.
It was clarified that the recommendation coming from the Property Appraiser's Office was denial of homestead, and the VAB would be looking at the merits of the homestead.
Mr. Frank Royce, Chief Appraiser, restated the information the Property Appraiser's Office had received from Ms. Crawford and stated that she paid her rent to Mr. Hodal's father. Mr. Royce explained that the petitioner and his wife have a Eustis mailing address, which is his father's address, and they have a phone number that is not at the residence. The property address is in Sorrento and the address listed on Mr. Hodal's last IRS return is Eustis, which is his father's address. All of the correspondence indicates that his wife lives in Eustis at his father's address, and the Property Appraiser's Office has nothing that can tie them to the property in question.
Mr. Hodal explained that Ms. Crawford paid him some money for the use of the house, and she needed some kind of paperwork to help her with her credit, and therefore, she had a lease. He clarified that he was living on the property on the weekends.
Mr. Connor questioned whether someone could own a home, live there, collect rent from one of the bedrooms and still qualify for homestead, and Ms. Casburn responded that they could still qualify.
Mr. Connor questioned whether Mr. Hodal had any documentation that linked him to the residence in question.
Mr. Hodal explained that he could not provide any documentation that could link him to the residence, but the address of his residence has always been that of his parents, even though he has always lived at Azalea Avenue.
Ms. Casburn noted that Mr. Hodal's wife has a Florida I.D. with a Eustis address.
Mr. Connor stated that this was a clear case where he did not believe, by law, that the VAB could allow Mr. Hodal the exemption, unless he could provide some kind of compelling evidence to overturn the Property Appraiser's decision of denial.
Ms. Casburn clarified that it would not affect the amount of exemption if someone rented a room, but if the property as a whole is rented, this would be considered as abandonment, and this was the only information she had today, unless she heard something different at this time.
It was noted by the Property Appraiser's staff that it had no evidence that the petitioner was living in the house as of January 1, 1997, and it had not heard anything different today to change its recommendation of denial.
Mr. Hodal stated that he and his wife are currently living at Azalea Avenue.
Mr. Connor made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Swartz, to uphold the recommendation of the Property Appraiser's Office for denial of homestead based on the absence of evidence that the petitioner was asked to produce to substantiate that he was living on the property January 1.
Under discussion, Commr. Swartz questioned whether the petitioner had to refile for homestead.
Ms. Casburn explained that Mr. Hodal has already filed for 1998, he qualifies for homestead, and she knows of no one who has a lease on his home.
The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which was carried unanimously by a 4-0 vote.
PETITION NO. 1997-208 JULIA I. Viera (CONTINUED)
It was noted that Ms. Patty Macarena was present to assist in interpreting testimony to be presented by the petitioners in this case.
Commr. Good explained that the VAB had taken action to hear the case, which involves late filing of homestead.
Mr. Royce restated that the petitioner had applied for and had been granted homestead in 1992. In 1994, the homestead was removed, because the Property Appraiser's Office had reason to believe the petitioners were living in Puerto Rico at that time. He had with him a letter indicating that they were living in Puerto Rico since 1992, therefore, the homestead has been off of the roll since 1994. The petitioners have not reapplied for it other than a letter being received from an attorney in Puerto Rico asking that the Property Appraiser's Office reconsider it and make the homestead exemption retroactive to 1993, which would actually be 1994. He stated that there was some question about the address, because the Property Appraiser's Office has been sending mail to Puerto Rico, and everything has been returned. Mr. Royce noted that this was the extenuating circumstance, and the petitioners did not get the trim notice this year to make application to the VAB on time and have not filed for homestead at this point in time.
Ms. Casburn noted that she sent a denial notice in 1994 and in 1997, and the petitioners were here to respond to the request made by the attorney. She stated that, to the best of her knowledge, the petitioners were not in the home as of January 1, based on the information in the Property Appraiser's Office.
Mr. Viera explained through Ms. Macarena that he has bills for the electric and gas from October, 1997, and he did not have any information for January.
Ms. Casburn stated that the Property Appraiser's Office was not denying that the petitioners own the property, and there was somebody there, according to the letter, receiving the bills, but the mail from the Property Appraiser's Office was not received there, and all of the mail from their office was getting directed to Puerto Rico.
Ms. Macarena interpreted, from conversation with the petitioners, that the reason the petitioners were in Puerto Rico was due to the illness of Ms. Viera's father and his death, and no one was living in their house at that time. She further interpreted that the house was being cleaned by someone while they were gone, and Ms. Macarena noted that this individual was present to provide additional testimony. She interpreted from this individual that the petitioners traveled back and forth from 1992 to 1995, and they returned in June, 1997. It was noted that they purchased the house in 1990 and received homestead for the first time in 1992.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, presented an analogy relating to state residency and explained that it would be very possible to not be in the state at all during an entire year and still be able to have homestead here.
Ms. Casburn explained that the Property Appraiser's Office had to consider the individual's intent as to whether or not they intended to return to their house.
Ms. Macarena interpreted from the petitioners that it was their intent to return to their home, because it was their only home. The petitioners produced their drivers license and voters registration cards, which were all current.
Mr. Royce stated that, if the VAB could establish their residence as of January 1, as indicated from what has been offered today as evidence, the Property Appraiser's Office would not object to the decision made by the VAB.
Ms. Casburn stated that it appeared from the testimony that the petitioners were away temporarily on business, which was not known by the Property Appraiser's Office.
Mr. Connor made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Gerber, to overturn the Property Appraiser's denial of homestead and to allow the exemption in this case, based on the information presented to the VAB and based on what the Property Appraiser's Office presented to the VAB.
Under discussion, Mr. Royce suggested that the petitioners go to the Property Appraiser's Office today and make an application out for the 1997 homestead.
Mr. Connor called for the question.
The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which was carried unanimously by a 4-0 vote.
CERTIFICATION OF THE TAX ROLL
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, noted that this was the final certification of the tax roll, which would be the original roll with the changes that the VAB have made throughout its meetings.
Commr. Swartz made a motion, which was seconded by Commr. Gerber, to approve the certification of the tax roll, with all changes made by the VAB.
Under discussion, Mr. Minkoff noted that the VAB would remain in session, because there may be future cases to be heard, and the VAB would recess its meeting today.
The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which was carried unanimously by a 4-0 vote.
There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the VAB, the meeting recessed at 9:40 a.m., until further notice.
WILLIAM "BILL" H. GOOD, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
JAMES C. WATKINS, CLERK
TMR\BOARDMIN\10-30-97\10-30-97