This text was pulled from the PDF automatically and may contain mistakes. The PDF is the official record, so check it before relying on this.
Page 1
City Council’s
Board of Assessment Appeals
February 28, 2011
The Board of Assessment Appeals was brought to order at 8:41 A.M. by the City Assessor
Cheryl Russell. Board Members present were: James Welsh, William Garfinkel and Todd
Stonesifer. Staff present was: City Assessor Cheryl Russell and Administrative Assistant Annette
Hart.
AGENDA ADDITIONS/DELETIONS
Mr. Stonesifer moved for approval of the minutes of the meeting held on December 01, 2010, Mr. Welsh
seconded. Motion carried 3-0
Discussion Walker Woods Properties LLC
Ms. Russell explained to the board that the purpose of the meeting was a request made by Walker Woods
Properties LLC for the board to withdraw the original decision of denial from the December 01, 2010
appeal hearing. Walker Woods Properties LLC would like the opportunity to produce another appraisal
based on individual units.
Mr. Mandalas (legal council to Walker Woods Properties LLC) asked Ms. Russell if he could address the
board and explained that he and his client had a few discussions over the weekend and handed out a letter
to the board members which was dated February 27, 2011, he introduced Mrs. Ordway, the owner of
Walker Woods Properties LLC as well as Mr. Hoffman, who is an Associate of Mr. Mandalas.
Mr. Mandalas explained that one of the reasons Walker Woods would like to appeal the decision was, that
Tyler Technologies was not a Delaware Certified Real Estate Appraiser at the time the revaluation was
done. Ms. Russell interrupted Mr. Mandalas to clarify that the reason the board met today, was to discuss
the withdrawal of the decision from the December 01, 2010 hearing.
Mr. Mandalas went on to explain that in his opinion proper valuation would be a price someone would
pay for the property. He explained that the value Tyler Technologies gave the property was to high as
well as the readjusted value the Assessor assigned to the property.
He asked the board to withdraw the decision and give Walker Woods Properties LLC the opportunity to
present the original appraisal one more time, one of the reasons being that the City always appraised this
property as a whole and split the parcels during the revaluation. He would like to present the board with
additional information as well as go over the original appraisal at a new hearing.
Mr. Mandalas explained that Walker Woods had been purchased for $3,065,000 in 2008, which was
approximately $59,000 per unit; Tyler Technologies assessed the individual units as $107,500 to
$215,600 (or $5,863,400 as a whole). The Assessor adjusted the value to $78,500 to $90,700 per unit (or
$4,234,900 as a whole), which is about 38% over the purchase price.
Mr. Mandalas urged the board again, to withdraw the decision made December 01, 2010 and give them
the opportunity to provide the board with new information. He also explained that the 30 window for
Page 2
Walker Woods Properties LLC to file with the court would end at 5:00 P.M. today, and that they would
rather not file an appeal with the court, but try to come up with a reasonable figure that everybody can
agree with. If an agreeable value cannot be reached, the board would submit another decision letter which
would give Walker Woods Properties LLC another 30 days to file an appeal with the court.
Mr. Welsh asked if the property is currently listed for sale, Mrs. Ordway acknowledged that the property
is currently listed at $72, 000 per unit (52 units); she explained that she will not be able to sell these units
as single units. Mr. Stonesifer pointed out that the property was for sale at the December appeal hearing
as well.
Mr. Garfinkel asked Mrs. Ordway what would happen if would make some improvements to the
properties. In her opinion, if she could raise the capitol to make some improvement, it would perhaps help
her sell the properties, but would not increase the selling price.
Mr. Garfinkel asked Mr. Mandalas, if there is new evidence he will be providing at the next hearing,
should they be given the opportunity? Mr. Mandalas replied that it would not be new evidence, but that he
would like to go over the purchase of the property, which happened two years ago, he believes that those
numbers were not discussed in the December 2010 hearing.
Mr. Welsh made the motion to rescind the December decision, which was seconded Mr. Stonesifer, who
wanted to make sure that the Assessor’s Legal Council has been informed of this meeting. Ms. Russell
assured that Mrs. Schrader as well as Mr. Rodriguez is aware of the meeting and its purpose.
Mr. Welsh made the motion to extend the December decision and to allow the appellant to be heard again
sometime in May, which was seconded by Mr. Stonesifer. Motion carried 3-0.
Meeting was adjourned at 9:01 A. M.