The Lake County Value Adjustment Board met in regular session on Thursday, August 13, 1998, 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: G. Richard Swartz, Jr., Chairman; Welton G. Cadwell, Vice Chairman; and Catherine C. Hanson. School Board members present were: Tom Chapman; and Mary Fletcher. Others present were Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney; Valerie Fuchs, Assistant County Attorney; Ed Havill, Property Appraiser; Frank Royce, Chief Deputy Property Appraiser; Ginger Casburn, Exemptions Supervisor; Robbie Ross, Personal Property and Agricultural Operations Director; and Marlene S. Foran, Deputy Clerk.

Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, informed the Value Adjustment Board (VAB) that the hearings at this time were 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 Value Adjustment Board has the ability under Florida Statutes to consider the petitions that were filed late if sufficient evidence was presented indicating extenuating circumstances.

Mr. Ed Havill, Property Appraiser, informed the VAB that the deadline this year for filing applications for homestead exemption and agricultural classification was March 2, 1998 due to March 1, 1998 falling on a Sunday.

PETITION NO. 1998-26 JEFFREY A. WAALEWYN

Mr. Ed Havill, Property Appraiser, informed the VAB that the petitioner, Jeffrey A. Waalewyn, filed the application for homestead exemption on March 27,1998, after the March 2, 1998 deadline.

Mr. Jeffrey Waalewyn appeared before the VAB and explained that he had received a letter from Inland Title Services, Inc., dated March 23, 1998, informing him that he needed to file for homestead exemption. He stated that he filed for homestead exemption on March 27, 1998 and was informed that the deadline was March 2, 1998. He stated that the date of occupancy was November 21,1997.

Mr. Havill noted that Mr. Waalewyn would receive homestead exemption for 1999.

Mr. Minkoff stated that, at the direction of the VAB in 1997, he has researched ways in which to compel attorney's and title companies to provide a notice containing homestead exemption information to buyers at the time of closings, and he has determined that the County did not have the authority to discipline attorney's or title companies for failure to provide a notice.

On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Mr. Chapman 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 Jeffrey Waalewyn, due to findings of fact and lack of sufficient evidence to overturn the Property Appraiser's recommendation of denial for late filing.

PETITION NO. 1998-7 EDWARD C. AND SHARON M. PELTZ

Mr. Ed Havill, Property Appraiser, informed the VAB that the petitioners, Edward C. and Sharon M. Peltz, filed the application for homestead exemption in January 1998 and provided social security numbers for himself and Sharon Peltz; however, Mr. Peltz has failed to provide the information required on the application. He stated that Mr. Peltz has been provided a copy of Florida Statutes 196.011, Subsection B, which states that failure to file a complete application by the date constitutes a waiver of the exemption privilege for that year.

Mr. Edward C. Peltz appeared before the VAB and distributed a letter addressed to the VAB, dated August 13, 1998. Mr. Havill interjected that all information must be submitted five (5) days in advance of the date of the hearing.

Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, clarified that the applicant has been denied the homestead exemption because he has not provided sufficient evidence to indicate that he was a Lake County resident. He explained that a driver's license, automobile tag, and voter registration card are evidence of residency and, without sufficient evidence of residency, the Property Appraiser and/or the VAB would be entitled to deny the homestead exemption.

Mr. Peltz stated that his determination, pursuant to Florida Statutes, was that it only requires a certified statement that he was a resident of Lake County, and that there were no requirements in Florida Statutes that require specifically a driver's license, voter registration card, or automobile tag be furnished. He addressed his letter, dated August 13, 1998, and stated that he has provided sufficient information to the VAB indicating that he has provided the Property Appraiser with sufficient information in determining eligibility for homestead exemption. He stated that the issue was not that he would not provide additional information but that he does not feel he should be intimidated to provide the information when it was not required.

Mr. Minkoff stated that this was not a legal question but a factual question of whether or not the applicant was a bona fide resident in order to claim homestead exemption and, in order to make a factual decision, additional evidence must be submitted for consideration to tip the scale one way or the other. He stated that, in this case, an address, deed, and social security number were the only evidence that the applicants have submitted and the Property Appraiser has indicated that said evidence was not sufficient to prove that the applicants were residents of Lake County.

Mr. Havill stated that homestead exemption would be granted to Edward and Sharon Peltz if the applicants would complete the form and provide sufficient information to indicate residency.

On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Ms. Fletcher 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 Edward C. and Sharon M. Peltz, due to findings of fact and lack of sufficient evidence to indicate residency on January 1, 1998.

PETITION NO. 1998-19 J. MARK ZELINSKY

Mr. Ed Havill Property Appraiser, informed the VAB that the petitioner, J. Mark Zelinsky, filed the application for homestead exemption on March 10, 1998, after the March 2, 1998 deadline. He stated that Mr. Zelinsky would have qualified for homestead exemption had he filed by the deadline.

Mr. Mark Zelinsky appeared before the Board and explained that he closed on his home in the Groveland area in December 1997 with the thought of being able to obtain homestead exemption. He stated that he relied on information provided by the realtor and the closing agents and was told that, after he received the closing package, he would need to file for homestead exemption. He stated that, after numerous phone inquiries, he was furnished a copy of a document, after the March 3, 1998 deadline, indicating that he was a resident, and was not furnished a closing package until April. He stated that he was furnished bad information and was before the VAB appealing for relief.

Mr. Havill stated that Mr. Zelinsky would receive homestead exemption for 1999.

On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Ms. Fletcher 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 J. Mark Zelinsky, due to findings of fact and lack of sufficient evidence to overturn the Property Appraiser's recommendation of denial for late filing.

PETITION NO. 1998-9 NANCY DUNCAN

Mr. Ed Havill, Property Appraiser, informed the VAB that the petitioner, Nancy Duncan, filed the application for homestead exemption on March 19, 1998, after the March 2, 1998 deadline. He noted that Ms. Duncan would have qualified for homestead exemption had she filed by the deadline.

Ms. Nancy Duncan appeared before the Board and explained that it was necessary for her to travel to and from Lake Placid to care for her grandfather, who was ill from a bad back, and her grandmother who had suffered a stroke. She stated that her father had informed her that she was required to file for homestead exemption on April 1, 1998 and that she was informed by the Property Appraiser's office in March that the deadline to file was March 2, 1998. She stated that she has been in her home since January 1997.

Mr. Havill noted that Ms. Duncan would qualify for homestead exemption for 1999.

On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Mr. Chapman 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 Nancy Duncan, due to findings of fact and lack of sufficient evidence to overturn the Property Appraiser's recommendation of denial for late filing.

Mr. Harvey Carrier, the applicant's father, appeared before the Board and explained that he holds the mortgage on Ms. Duncan's home and takes responsibility for her late filing for homestead exemption. He explained that his father had broken his back and his mother had suffered a stroke in February 1998, and he and his daughter were in Lake Placid for six (6) weeks caring for family and were under extreme duress. He stated that he was to blame for the late filing and that it was unfair of the VAB to deny homestead exemption for 1998.

PETITION NO. 1998-25 MARGARET M. KING

Mr. Ed Havill, Property Appraiser, informed the VAB that the petitioner, Margaret M. King, filed the application for homestead exemption on March 24, 1998, after the March 2, 1998 deadline. He explained that Ms. King was the co-owner of the property, and would have qualified for homestead exemption had she filed by the deadline.

Ms. Margaret M. King appeared before the Board and explained that she and her husband leased their home prior to the closing in November 1997, and that her husband asked for a divorce after the closing and moved from the premises. She stated that she became a single parent to her fourteen (14) year old son, could not locate the necessary papers, and did not understand details of the closing or the need to stay in touch with the realtor. She stated that she was hospitalized for one (1) week in January and was starting to put her life back together by returning to Vo-Tech for career training. She stated that she was not aware of the deadline for filing homestead exemption until after March 2, 1998, and that she was under extreme stress between November 1997 and March 1998 as a single parent and not aware of the ramifications.

She stated that she and her husband completed a legal separation in the Spring of 1998 and that her husband returned to the marriage in June.

Commr. Cadwell made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Chapman, to overturned the recommendation of the Property Appraiser and approve homestead exemption for Margaret M. King, based on the findings of fact and sufficient evidence to support extenuating circumstances based on testimony presented indicating that Ms. King was legally separated from her husband after closing on their house in November 1997, she become a single parent to her fourteen (14) year old son, she did not understanding the details of the closing, she was hospitalized in January for one (1) week, and was under extreme stress between November and March as a single parent.

Commr. Hanson stated that, although the husband was not living in the home, he does share in the responsibility of paying the taxes.

Mr. Havill noted that Ms. King was in possession of the house on January 1, 1998.

Commr. Swartz concurred that there were extenuating circumstances but also concurred that the husband has some responsibility in paying the taxes.

Ms. King stated that she was legally separated and her husband was out of the home on January 1, 1998.

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

PETITION NO. 1998-16 HALDUN SENTURK

Mr. Ed Havill, Property Appraiser, informed the VAB that the petitioner, Haldun Senturk, filed the application for homestead exemption on December 30, 1997; however, in order for an alien to receive homestead exemption in Florida, you must be a resident alien and have a green card. He stated that Mr. Senturk has submitted a Declaration of Domicile; a driver's license, a car registration tag and an employment authorization card, which is not valid for reentry to the United States.

Mr. Haldun Senturk appeared before the Board and stated that he has received the recommendation for approval of a green card and that he was awaiting the results of a mandatory investigation from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). He submitted a letter of recommendation for approval of a green card to the Property Appraiser.

Mr. Havill reviewed the above noted letter and stated that it was a recommendation for approval of a green card, however, indicates that final approval could not be given until the Immigration and Naturalization Service receives the results from the mandatory confidential

investigation. He stated that Mr. Senturk is required to be a resident alien on January 1, 1998, and his contention was that Mr. Senturk was not a resident alien on January 1, 1998 and, therefore, does not qualify for homestead exemption.

Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, stated that the Property Appraiser was correct and, in order to obtain homestead exemption, you have to make this your permanent residence. He stated that, as of April 2, 1998, Mr. Senturk did not have the approval from the Federal government to become a permanent resident of the United States. He stated that Mr. Senturk would receive homestead exemption for 1999 if the background check was completed favorable.

Mr. Havill noted that, if Mr. Senturk brings his Immigration and Naturalization green card to the Property Appraiser's office when received, information can be added to the current application and applied toward homestead exemption for the following year.

On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Ms. Fletcher 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 Haldun Senturk, due to findings of fact and lack of sufficient evidence to indicate residency on January 1, 1998.

PETITION NO. 1998-17 REDA J. STEWART

Mr. Ed Havill, Property Appraiser, informed the VAB that the petitioner, Reda J. Stewart, filed the application for homestead exemption on April 3, 1998, after the March 2, 1998 deadline. He noted that Ms. Stewart would have qualified for homestead exemption had she filed by the deadline.

Ms. Reda J. Stewart appeared before the VAB and explained that she purchased the home on December 12, 1997 and was required to go to Chicago to care for her grandchildren during her daughter's hospitalization in December. She stated that she returned in January, at which time, her former mother-in-law suffered several strokes during a six week period, and she was involved with the care giving of her mother-in-law prior to her death. She stated that she became ill in February, was hospitalized a week after her mother-in-law's death, and was recuperating from her illness on March 1, 1998. She stated that she called the Property Appraiser's office the first week in March and was informed that she had missed the deadline and could file the application for appeal at a later time.

On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Mr. Chapman and carried unanimously by a 5 - 0 vote, the VAB overturned the recommendation of the Property Appraiser and approved homestead exemption for Reda J. Stewart, based on the findings of fact and sufficient

evidence to support extenuating circumstances due to testimony presented indicating Ms. Stewart's inability to file by the deadline due to the hospitalization of her daughter, her mother-in-law's strokes and death, and her hospitalization and recuperation during February and March 1998.

PETITION NO. 1998-3 JEFFERY H. GRZELAK

Mr. Robbie Ross, Personal Property and Agricultural Operations Director, informed the VAB that the petitioner, Mr. Jeffery Grzelak, has filed for agricultural classification on a five (5) acre hay field and was denied the classification because it did not qualify as a bona fide commercial agricultural use. He submitted two photographs of the parcel and explained that inspection of the property did not indicate that there was an agricultural use on the parcel. He stated that Mr. Grzelak did indicate that he has sold some hay; however, the property has been flooded during the last several months.

Mr. Grzelak appeared before the Board and explained that he has had the five (5) acre parcel mowed for hay since he has owned the property; however, because of the heavy rains in January and February, his pond has overflowed and flooded the parcel. He stated that he has sold the roles of hay to his neighbor and has receipts indicating said sale. It was noted that Mr. Grzelak's net income from the parcel was $125.00. He briefly discussed the history of the property and stated that there were two residences on the nine (9) acre parcel and noted that he leases out two (2) acres on the back portion of the nine (9) acre parcel and that there was an old sawmill on the back two (2) acres. He stated that he purchased the property in 1995.

At this time, Mr. Minkoff read Florida Statutes Chapter 193.461, which states that only lands which are used primarily for bona fide agricultural purposes shall be classified agricultural and that bona fide agricultural purposes means good faith commercial agricultural use of the land. It also states that factors for consideration in determining whether the use is bona fide were the length of time the land has been so utilized, whether the use has been continuous, the purchase price paid, size as it relates to specific agricultural use, and whether an indicated effort has been made to care sufficiently and adequately for the land, in accordance with accepted commercial agricultural practices including fertilizing, liming, tilling, mowing, and reforesting, and whether the land is under lease and the length of terms and conditions of said lease.

Mr. Grzelak distributed two photographs illustrating the location of the sawmill, the two residences, and a dirt driveway. He stated that he would like information on what he must do to indicate that this was a bona fide agricultural purpose.

On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously by a 5 - 0 vote, the VAB upheld the recommendation of the Property Appraiser and denied agricultural classification for Jeffery H. Grzelak on a five acre parcel, based on the findings of fact and the lack of sufficient evidence to indicate a bona fide agricultural purpose.

PETITION NO. 1998-6 STANLEY AND DOROTHY HARRIS

Mr. Robbie Ross, Personal Property and Agricultural Operations Director, informed the VAB that the petitioners, Stanley and Dorothy Harris, filed for agricultural classification on March 4, 1998, after the March 2, 1998 deadline, for a nursery classification for Spring Oaks Greenhouses, Inc. He stated that Mr. Chad Penley, representing the applicants, has been given a tangible personal property form to complete and submit to the Property Appraiser.

Mr. Frank Royce, Chief Deputy Appraiser, stated that the policy of the Property Appraiser has been to recommend to the Board approval of the late agricultural classification if it was a bona fide agricultural purpose. He stated that it was his recommendation to approve agricultural classification for this parcel.

Mr. Chad Penley, representing Stanley and Dorothy Harris, appeared before the VAB and distributed two photographs illustrating the commercial agricultural use.

Commr. Hanson made a motion, which was seconded by Ms. Fletcher, to uphold the revised recommendation of the Property Appraiser and approve the agricultural classification for Stanley and Dorothy Harris, based on findings of fact and sufficient evidence presented by the Property Appraiser to indicate a bona fide agricultural purpose; subject to submittal of a completed tangible personal property form to the Property Appraiser's office.

Discussion occurred regarding the Property Appraiser's policy of recommending approval of agricultural classifications that have been filed late.

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

PETITION NO. 1998-21 IRIS AND CAROLIN KROENER

PETITION NO. 1998-22 JUERG AND URSULA ALBERS-MUELLER

PETITION NO. 1998-23 RUDOLF AND LILLIANNE NUSSBAUMER

PETITION NO. 1998-24 RUDOLPH AND TRUDY BLUM

Mr. Robbie Ross, Personal Property and Agricultural Operations Director, informed the VAB that the petitioners, Iris and Carolin Kroener, Juerg and Ursula Albers-Mueller, Rudolf and Lillianne Nussbaumer, and Rudolph and Trudy Blum, filed the renewal applications for agriculture classification on properties located on the east side of Little Lake Harris which were

originally purchased in 1994 by FCP Management Services, Inc. He explained that FCP Management Services created a large lot split on the total 179 acre parcel and sold off the lot splits to the above noted owners. He stated that the property was annexed into the City of Astatula in 1996 and zoned R-1-B which will allow four (4) houses per acre. He explained that Petition No. 1998-21, Iris and Carolin Kroener, purchased two (2) parcels, one (1) being 5.75 acres for $125,000 and one (1) being 5.6 acres for $137,500; Petition No. 1998-22, Juerg and Ursula Albers-Mueller, purchased a total of 3.88 acres for $95,000; Petition No. 1998-23, Rudolf and Lillianne Nussbaumer, purchased 23.71 acres for $310,000; and Petition No. 1998-24, Rudolph and Trudy Blum, purchased two (2) parcels for a total of 82.08 acres (43 acres in swamp) at $119,200 and $189,000 and sold five (5) acres for $63,000 in January 1996. He stated that there was a citrus grove on the property; however, agricultural classification has been denied based on the purchase price of the property, the fact that there was a large lot split on the property, and the annexation into the City of Astatula and rezoning from A (Agricultural) to R-1-B at the request of the owners.

Mr. Ed James, representing Iris and Carolin Kroener, Juerg and Ursula Albers-Mueller, Rudolf and Lillianne Nussbaumer, and Rudolph and Trudy Blum, appeared before the VAB and explained that the four (4) parcels in question are worked as one (1) grove, and that he was the citrus grove manager for said parcels. He stated that all of the grove owners were misled and taken advantage of by the seller and management firm. He stated that documentation indicates that, on this investment per acre, the owners could make ten (10%) percent to twenty (20%) percent on their investment per year. He stated that for two (2) years the owners were paying the management firm grove care costs that were not being performed. He noted that the majority of the groves were good producing valencia groves and that approximately 42 acres were swamp and unplantable land. He explained that the parcels that he manages are worked on a cooperative basis and production costs and returns are pooled. He explained that, for the 1997/1998 fruit season, the growers have spent $55,873 to-date on grove production costs; expect to spend an additional $22,000 before the end of 1998; and, for the 1997/98 fruit season, $97,000 has been returned on fruit to the growers income with another $40,000 still owed on the 1997/98 fruit crop. He explained that, currently, the profit was $48,751 and the expectations for the year will be a profit of $59,000 after grove expenses.

Commr. Hanson stated that the above noted parcels were a legitimate agricultural enterprise, and the County wants to encourage the legitimate production of citrus in Lake County.

Commr. Hanson made a motion, which was seconded by Mr. Chapman, for the VAB to overturn the recommendation of the Property Appraiser and approve the application for agricultural classification for Iris and Carolin Kroener, Juerg and Ursula Alers-Mueller, Rudolf and Lillianne Nussbaumer, and Rudolph and Trudy Blum, based on the findings of fact and sufficient evidence provided in testimony to indicate a bona fide agricultural purpose.

Commr. Swartz expressed concern that the cost of the parcels was approximately $975,000, and it appears that there was only approximately 75 acres of citrus grove.

Mr. James stated that it was the intention of the growers to keep the groves as a long term investment in citrus. He stated that the City of Astatula request that the parcels be annexed into the City and rezoned.

Mr. Rudolf Nussbaumer appeared before the Board and explained that, at the time that he purchased the land from FCP Management, he was told that the City of Astatula wanted to annex the property, and FCP Management assured them that they would still receive an agricultural classification if they were annexed into the city. He stated that the Mayor of Astatula also informed them that they would continue with agricultural classification as long as they were a bona fide agricultural purpose. He stated that, if they are denied the agricultural classification, they will be forced to sell the land to developers.

Mr. James stated that the growers have installed a 1,800 gallon per minute, 50 horsepower pump and irrigation system, at a cost of $20,000, in 1998 after the heavy rains in January and February, which indicates that they do intend to keep the property in citrus.

Mr. Nussbaumer stated that his 25 acre parcel was zoned into five (5) acre parcels, and he has rezoned the parcel into one (1) 25 acre parcel.

Commr. Swartz stated that he was not confident that the parcels in question would remain as a commercial agricultural use.

The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which carried unanimously by a 4 - 1 vote.

Commr. Swartz voted in opposition.

PETITION NO. 1998-10 JOYCE M. AND JUDY C. SMITH

Mr. Robbie Ross, Personal Property and Agricultural Operations Director, informed the VAB that petitioners, Joyce M. and Judy C. Smith, filed for agricultural classification after the

March 2, 1998 deadline and that they were requesting agricultural classification on 9.9 acres of crop land. He distributed photographs of the property that indicate that the 9.9 acre parcel was a burned out citrus grove, and noted that one of the photographs indicates a watermellon crop which is not typically considered a row crop. He stated that the 9.9 acres was not a bona fide agricultural purpose.

Mr. Joyce M. Smith appeared before the VAB and explained that he has owned the property for three years and purchased the land to plant 9.9 acres of watermellon in March 1998. He stated that the intent of the land was to plant vegetables and different crops with the assistance of Mr. Williams, the adjacent property owner, who farms his 15 acre parcel; however, due to the poor weather conditions, the watermellons were very small.

VALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARD

It was noted that Commr. Cadwell departed the meeting at 10:45 a.m.

PETITION NO. 1998-10 JOYCE M. AND JUDY C. SMITH (CONTINUED)

In response to questions present by Commr. Hanson, Mr. Smith stated that he did not have the receipts for the fertilizer, however, could get the receipts from Mr. Williams and provide the Property Appraiser's office with said receipts.

Mr. Ross explained that, to qualify for agricultural classification for 1998, the crops would have to be an agricultural use on January 1, 1998.

Commr. Hanson stated that, if the adjacent property owner has agricultural classification, and he can provide the information that includes Mr. Smith's property, the VAB should look at the parcel. She stated that the Property Appraiser would need a farming plan for the remainder of 1998 and on into 1999.

On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Ms. Fletcher and carried unanimously by a 4 - 0 vote, the VAB upheld the recommendation of the Property Appraiser and denied agricultural classification for Joyce M. and Judy C. Smith on 9.9 acres of property, based on the findings of fact and the lack of sufficient evidence to indicate a bona fide agricultural purpose.

Commr. Cadwell was not present for the discussion or vote.

Commr. Hanson informed Mr. Smith that it would be up to the Property Appraiser's office to overturn the motion if he could furnish sufficient evidence to indicate a bona fide agricultural purpose.

Mr. Ross indicated that he would send Mr. Smith a letter requesting the additional information.

PETITION NO. 1998-11 DONALD D. WILSON/MICHAEL URQUHART

Mr. Robbie Ross, Personal Property and Agricultural Operatons Director, informed the VAB that the petitioners, Donald D. Wilson and Michael Urquahart, filed the application for agricultural classification on July 9, 1998, after the March 2, 1998 deadline. He distributed photographs to the VAB and stated that the photographs indicate that the property was planted in timber. He stated that it was his recommendation to approve the agricultural classification.

On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Mr. Chapman and carried unanimously by a 4 - 0 vote, the VAB upheld the revised recommendation of the Property Appraiser and approved agricultural classification for Donald D. Wilson and Michael Urquhart, based on the findings of fact and sufficient evidence being presented by the Property Appraiser to indicate a bona fide agricultural purpose.

Commr. Cadwell was not present for the discussion or vote.

VALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARD

Commr. Cadwell returned to the meeting at 11:05 a.m.

PETITION NO. 1998-13 EARLE A. WILDER

Mr. Robbie Ross, Personal Property and Agricultural Operations Director, informed the VAB that the petitioner, Earle A. Wilder, filed the application for agricultural classification in May 1998, after the March 2, 1998 deadline, for an agricultural classification on six (6) acres of citrus, and five (5) acres for a bee yard. He stated that it was his recommendation to approve agricultural classification for this parcel.

On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Ms. Fletcher and carried unanimously by a 5 - 0 vote, the VAB upheld the revised recommendation of the Property Appraiser and approved agricultural classification for Earle A. Wilder, based on findings of fact and sufficient evidence being presented by the Property Appraiser to indicate a bona fide agricultural purpose.

PETITION NO. 1998-14 JUAN R. DENIS

Mr. Robbie Ross, Personal Property and Agricultural Operations Director, informed the VAB that the petitioner, Juan R. Denis, filed for agricultural classification on five (5) acres of row crop for growing squash. He explained that the property was leased for the above noted purpose and that Mr. Denis has submitted a copy of a check, in the amount of $137.50, as income received from the lease, and has submitted a copy of the lease which states that the property was owned by Rejer Investment Corporation and that the Lessee was Jack G. Baker. He stated that the sum of the lease was for $11,000 per year in advance payable upon execution of the lease. Mr. Ross submitted photographs of the parcel indicating that the parcel was not being used for growing squash.

Mr. Juan R. Denis and Mr. Herbert Arenas, translator for Mr. Denis, appeared before the VAB. Mr. Arenas explained that the term of the lease was for a period of four (4) years beginning November 1, 1994 and ending at midnight on October 31, 1998, and that the property was being leased for growing squash and grazing cattle. Mr. Arenas stated that Mr. Denis lives in Miami and has questioned why he would be receiving $137.50 a year if the parcel was not being used for cattle grazing and general farming. Mr. Arenas stated that Mr. Denis has indicated that he did not know if the parcel had been used for agricultural purposes in 1997.

Commr. Hanson informed Mr. Denis that he would need to furnish sufficient evidence to indicate that the parcel was being used as a boni fide agricultural operation for the grazing of cattle or for growing row crops, and information from the lessee indicating profits and expenses for the operation.

Mr. Arenas requested a correction to a letter, dated June 22, 1998, addressed to Mr. Denis which stated that the lease appears to end on October 31, 1994.

Mr. Ross noted that he would make a correction to the letter, dated June 22, 1998. He stated that the lease that has been submitted to the Property Appraiser's office was an unsigned lease between Rejer Investment Corporation and Jack G. Baker and that they do not have a lease in the name of Juan R. Denis.

On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Ms. Fletcher and carried unanimously by a 5 - 0 vote, the VAB upheld the recommendation of the Property Appraiser and denied the request for agricultural classification for Juan R. Denis based on findings of fact and lack of sufficient evidence to indicate a boni fide agricultural purpose.

PETITION NO. 1998-2 GEORGE A. STARLING

PETITION NO. 1998-8 CLIFFORD E. AND MARY G. HOLSTEIN

PETITION NO. 1998-15 DARRYL AND MICHELLE BLANFORD

PETITION NO. 1998-18 CHARLES AND CONNIE GILMAN

PETITION NO. 1998-5 PAUL AND GAYLE HARVEY

PETITION NO. 1998-20 ROBERT L. KINDLE, 3RD

PETITION NO. 1998-28 JEFF BAKER

It was noted that no one present wished to discuss these appeals.

On a motion by Mr. Chapman, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously by a 5 - 0 vote, the VAB upheld the recommendation of the Property Appraiser and denied the following appeals based on the findings of fact and lack of sufficient evidence being presented:

Homestead Exemptions

Petition No. 1998-2 George A. Starling

Petition No. 1998-8 Clifford E. & Mary G. Holstein

Petition No. 1998-15 Darryl and Michelle Blanford

Petition No. 1998-18 Charles and Connie Gilman

Agricultural Classification

Petition No. 1998-5 Paul & Gayle Harvey

Petition No. 1998-20 Robert L. Kindle, III

Petition No. 1998-28 Jeff Baker

There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the VAB, the meeting was adjourned at 11:20 a.m.

_________________________________ G. RICHARD SWARTZ, JR.,CHAIRMAN

ATTEST:

_________________________________

JAMES C. WATKINS, CLERK

msf\ 8-13-98\8-20-98\boardmin