LAKE
FEBRUARY
5, 2008
The Lake County Value Adjustment Board (VAB) met on Tuesday,
February 5, 2008, at 1:30 p.m., in the Board of County Commissioners’ Meeting Room,
Commr. Hill called the meeting to order, and it was noted
that a quorum was present. She asked Mr.
Sandy Minkoff,
Mr.
Minkoff explained that the process that this Board had adopted was set up by
the legislature, which required that all the petitions to the Value Adjustment
Board (VAB) be heard by a Special Master who made the findings of fact and
recommendations of law to the Board. He
related that what they had in front of them today were about half of the cases,
which were all of the cases dealing with exemptions and property
classifications. He also mentioned that
on March 4, they would have a second meeting where they would have in front of
them all the cases on valuation. He
reported that they gave everyone involved an opportunity to respond in writing
to the Special Master’s recommendation and that there had only been one person
who had done that, and they would have that for the Board to consider
today. He noted that they tried to come
up with a good, simple way to look at this, so they color coded the
recommendatons where each one of the colors would require a motion from the
VAB. He stated that he would describe to
the Board what each color represented.
Category
1 – Recommendation to Grant Relief – No Objection from Property Appraiser
Mr.
Minkoff explained Category 1 was color coded as a pink color, and his
recommendation for these was that the VAB grant the Petitioner’s request for
relief. He further specified that these
cases were where the Special Master recommended that relief be granted, and the
Property Appraiser had not responded in writing and indicated that they were
not going to respond or challenge that.
Mr.
Connor inquired whether the Property Appraiser wanted them to pursue any of
those.
Mr.
Ed Havill, Property Appraiser, stated that he agreed with the recommendation
for Category 1.
On a motion by Mr. Strong, seconded by Commr. Hill and
carried unanimously by a vote of 4-0, the VAB approved to uphold the
recommendation of the Special Master to grant the exemption or property
classification for the Category 1 petitions, which are the following cases:
2007-35,
36 William Seidle
2007-47 Laviance Property
Acquisition, LLC
2007-142,
143 Jonathan Shirley
2007-160-L William
Rumph
2007-199-L Robert Hester
2007-205-L Christos Anthony
Category
2 – Recommendation to Deny Request for Relief by Special Master and Property
Appraiser / No Written Response
Mr.
Minkoff explained that the white category, which was Category 2, were cases
where the Special Master recommended that the Petitioner’s request be denied
and that the Property Appraiser concurred that it be denied. He pointed out that none of those property
owners responded in writing to challenge the Special Master’s recommendation. He concluded that for the white category, he
recommended that all of those cases be denied
On
a motion by Mr. Conner, seconded by Commr. Stewart and carried unanimously by a
vote of 4-0, the VAB approved to uphold the recommendation of the special
master to rule in favor of the Property Appraiser and deny the following
petitions:
2007-2 Judy Sears-Reed
2007-4 Donna Campbell
2007-5 Stacy and Jane Zulia
2007-12 Raymond Podkowa
2007-15, 16/56, 57 Prem Eumanth
2007-19 Barbara Harrison
2007-20 Janice Bonner
2007-21 Javier Marrero
2007-22 Manuel Gambini
2007-25 John Miller
2007-37 Lois Daniels
2007-38 Anand Gupta
2007-39 Paula MacGregor
2007-40 Richard and Donna Schlenger
2007-44, 45 Laviance Property Acquisitions, LLC
2007-55 Erica Munoz
2007-73 Paula Lesle
2007-74 Marie Tucker
2007-76 Wayne and Catherine Smith
2007-78 Robert and Virgina Lowry
2007-103 – 111 Concetta Ronco
2007-115 Ashley Hunt
2007-116 Gary and Sheila Norris
2007-123 Steven Lee
2007-124, 125, 126
2007-128 Senice and Dwayne Davis
2007-129 Terry Ratchford
2007-132 Ms. Victoria Winn
2007-135 Richard Bisaillon
2007-136 David Yovaish
2007-140, 141 Jonathan Shirley
2007-144 John Gilliland
2007-153 Mostaque Ahmed
2007-156 Bruce Mitchem
2007-157-L -159-L Mark Machuga
2007-163-L -165-L Robert A. Furnas
2007-168-L Alexandar Nikolaiev
2007-170-L Jane Brown
2007-172-L, 173-L James Panico
2007-174-L Edmund Woolfolk
2007-176-L John and Rosanne Brandeburg
2007-182-L Robert Burnett
2007-183-L Emily Riggen
2007-195-L Todd and Stephanie Ochsner
2007-361-L Jeffery Cagan
2007-394-L, 395-L Mark Campbell
2007-421-L James Langford
2007-497-L Jackie Padgett
Category 3 - Recommendation to
Deny Request for Relief by Special Master and Property Appraiser / Written
Response Filed
Mr.
Minkoff stated that the green Category 3 consisted of only one case and that
the Special Master in this case recommended that her request for relief be
denied, with the Property Appraiser concurring with that. He noted that the petitioner sent in a
response, which was provided for the Board in the package of backup
materials. He commented that the
response did not raise any new issues, but attempted to re-argue the facts. He recommended that the Board deny this
petition.
On
a motion by Mr. Conner, seconded by Commr. Hill and carried unanimously by a
vote of 4-0, the VAB approved to uphold the recommendation of the Special
Master to rule in favor of the Property Appraiser and deny Petition 2007-185-L
from Karena (Fechtenburg) Larrisey.
Category
4 – Recommendation to Grant Petitioner’s Withdrawal
Mr.
Minkoff stated that the yellow Category 4 was the easiest category, and
petitions in all of these cases were withdrawn by the property owners prior to
the time the Special Master heard the case or after the Special Master had the
case but before it got to the Board. He
recommended that the VAB approve the withdrawals and deny the requested relief.
On
a motion by Commr. Hill, seconded by Mr. Strong and carried unanimously by a
vote of 4-0, the VAB approved the granting of the Petitioner’s withdrawal and
denied the requested relief in the following cases:
2007-1 Richard Passenti
2007-3 Deborah Dorn-Ruhl
2007-6 John Connell
2007-7
– 9 Alan Dye
2007-11 Roberta Harvey and Rob Sherrill
2007-14 Michelina Marchlinski
2007-17 Mavis
2007-18 Robert Emick
2007-23 Richard and Apryl Clark
2007-26 Irene Berthold
2007-27 William Dieden
2007-28 Craig and Dorendra McCall
2007-29 Cornelius Caldwell
2007-30 Ann Williams
2007-31
– 33 Daniel Bellons
2007-51,
53, 54 Laviance Property
Acquisition, LLC
2007-58 J. Michael Rutig
2007-59 Mitchell and Nancy Walk
2007-71,
72 Clay Frankel
2007-75 Bobby Salter
2007-77 Gregory and Karen Knopf
2007-79
– 82 Louis Meucci
2007-84 Carrol Fulmer Management
Co. Inc.
2007-112,
113 Rudy Weber
2007-114 Bruce Higgins
2007-127 Mark Douglas
2007-131 Aaron and Jennifer Drone
2007-133 Douglas Hill
2007-137 Stephen Meyerhoeffer
2007-138 Laurel All
2007-139 Sunstar Media, Inc.
2007-155-L Donald and Eunice Stapleton
2007-161-L Estle Baker
2007-162-L Nancy Wilcox
2007-184-L David and Sandra Weiss
2007-200-L Adrian Ryerson
2007-420-L Manuel D. Martin
2007-494-L Ms. Thelma Phillips
2007-496-L Ms. Lynda Blackford
Category
5 – Recommendation to Grant Petitioner’s Agricultural Exemption
Mr.
Minkoff stated that the blue Category 5 cases were the agricultural
classifications that were controversial last year, most of which were denied on
the three times value. He explained that
last year they were pending appeal in a court case, and the Fifth District has
issued an opinion. He reported that the
Property Appraiser’s Office has recommended that all of the petitioners
highlighted in blue that were denied the classification based on the three
times rule be granted the classification.
He pointed out that the Special Master had recommended denial on some of
them because they did not show up at the hearing or other similar reason, but
in order to treat everyone the same, the Property Appraiser was recommending
that all of those be approved.
On
a motion by Mr. Strong, seconded by Mr. Conner and carried unanimously by a
vote of 4-0, the VAB approved the granting of relief and the agricultural
classifications for the following cases:
2007-13 Abdool
and Nazeela Ghani
2007-24 Ronald
Ingles
2007-34 Charles
Clayton
2007-41,
42, 43 Ronald
Roberts
2007-46,
48, 49, 50, 52 Laviance
Property Acquisition, LLC
2007-60
– 65 Charles
Cook
2007-66
– 69 Charles
Cook
2007-70 James
Fant
2007-83 Mayro,
LLC
2007-85 ACR,
LLC d/b/a ACR
2007-86/480-L,
87/481-L Howey Groves,
LLC
2007-88/477-L,
89/478-L, 90/
2007-91,
92, 93 Gordon
Tender, LLC, et al
2007-94
2007-95 Davidson Harvest, LLC et al
2007-96 Curtis
Hospitality, LLC et al
2007-97
– 99 Baker
Heritage, LLC et al
2007-100
– 102 Ames
Holdings, LLC et al
2007-117 Cole
Clayton
2007-118 John
Gray
2007-119
– 122 Avery
Roberts
2007-130 John
Baldwin
2007-134 Nalina
Sombuntham
2007-145 Pride
Homes of NFL, LLC (Tim Williams)
2007-146
– 148 Daryl
Carter
2007-149,150 Steve and
Brenda Carlan
2007-151,
152 Ronald
Black
2007-154 William
Brannon Ruderman
2007-166-L,
167-L Robert
A. Furnas
2007-189-L Onsi
Derias
2007-267-L
through 273-L Drew
Pastures, LLC
2007-278-L
through 281-L Montverde
Investments, LLC
2007-366-L Jeffery
Unnerstall
2007-410-L
through 2007-419-L Richard Jerman
2007-477-L
through 2007-481-L Dan Harbridge (
Mr.
Conner commented that he thought the Property Appraiser did the right thing
regarding this issue.
Mr.
Havill pointed out that the exemptions were just for the appeals to the Value
Adjustment Board, and he did not go back and grant these exemptions to people
that were denied them because of the three times rule and did not appeal to the
VAB. He also commented that if those
people wanted to reapply for 2008, they would take those into consideration
based on the decision by the court.
Mr.
Minkoff informed the Board that that was all of the business they had that day,
but they would be back on March 4 with a whole other set of cases regarding
people who challenged valuation and that they would have recommendations from a
different Special Master who was an appraiser for those cases. He assumed that the procedure would be
similar to this one. He also related
that they were going to try to have the forms that would be required on that
day. He thought that the only issues
that might be in front of the Board might be to arbitrate a question of law
regarding a response claiming that the Special Master applied the wrong
law. He commented, however, that they
had never really had that problem with valuation cases, only with exemption or
classification issues.
The
meeting was adjourned at 1:40 p.m. Mr.
Minkoff announced that the VAB would reconvene on March 4, 2008, at 8:30 a.m.
__________________________________
JENNIFER HILL, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
__________________________
NEIL
KELLY, CLERK