 Okay, folks. I think we're ready to go. So I will call the meeting of the Montpelier Board of Abatement to order. The first item on the agenda is to approve the agenda. I assume everybody is satisfied with the agenda as it is presented to you. I'm going to give a little overview of how things are going to work, because by the end of the ones we did, the first round we did, we got so we were making, moving through very efficiently and hopefully we'll be able to do the same thing in these upcoming three meetings. And that is, I will, as Chair, I will rule that all of the filings that the parties have submitted are received into evidence. And so nobody needs to say anything about anything you've submitted in writing. We've got all there, and it's going to be part of the record of the proceeding. Second, we have a set of several questions that we'll need to go through with regard to every property. And it's going to seem like a very mechanical and kind of rope process to go through. However, I developed these questions to identify the specific information we need to get to make the rulings on each of the requests for abatement. And so, for instance, we have eight or so requests for abatement tonight with two different property owners. And so for each one of those is a separate request, and we'll go through the set of questions for each one of those requests. And then, as we did last time, we do not anticipate making a rule that we're going to be able to do. And so, following on the request for abatement tonight, we will, on our third meeting, what we will do is we will have a deliberative session and we will go over all of the requests for abatement and apply the criteria that we have for abatement and to each one of the requests. And we'll be doing that so that we're applying the same standards to every one of the requests and we'll be treating everyone the same and everyone fairly. Does anyone have any questions before we proceed? Mary? One of the items in our packet, not for tonight, but in the packet is somebody asking for abatement based on income, not on flood loss. And I missed some of our meetings. I was curious if we asked for documentation with regard to what their income levels are, as opposed to just a statement that I don't have the income to take abatement? Well, I think what, I haven't read that packet piece of it myself, but we did have someone who applied for an income based abatement last time around and we told her, well, you don't really have enough information and enough documentation so we requested her to come back with more information. And so we'll see what she presents to us. So we'll do that. Yeah. So whatever, I think she's up for the 11. So she can present whatever evidence she has and it will satisfy or not satisfy the members of the board depending on how we evaluate her evidence. You're welcome. All right. And we'll start with Tim Air. Good evening, everyone. Thanks for coming in, Tim. And we have seven properties from here. Looks like, right? Yeah. Yes. And a couple on State Street, one on School Street, and the rest on Elm Street. And so I'm going to ask you to raise your right hand. Do you solemnly affirm subject to the pains and penalties of perjury that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. All right. We will go through the questions and these questions are based on not just on what the board of abatement finds relevant, but based on the standards established by the legislature in the one of the first bills that they passed in this session dealing specifically with the abatements related to the flood. So first property is 15 State Street, and with regard to 15 State Street, was there a reduction of value of at least 50%? No. Did you lose the access to that property for at least 60 days? Yes. And did you lose utilities for at least 60 days? You know, we lost like, no, not utilities for 60 days. Okay, and I guess we can tell you, which property is 15 State Street? It's the one in front of, you know, the clock, the Vermont National clock. It's that one right there. Okay. Vermont National Bank Building. Uh-huh. You did not have a loss of utilities for 60 days? No. Uh, it was not condemned? No. Was it considered substantially damaged by the city? No. Okay. No outbuildings? No. Did you have a loss of income for the property? Yes. And what did that consist of? First floor? This one, yeah, the first floor is still unoccupied. We lost the tenant that was there. We have done, you know, 90% of the repairs. So we've lost the first floor tenant. But this one is a little more unique. There's no damage on the second floor, but our elevator got damaged. So some of the tenants on the second and third floor asked for either relief in the rent or no rent. The Yogo studio left, you know, did not stay. So we had loss of income, you know, I would say 50% on the second and third floor and 100% on the first floor. And the first floor, like I say, is the, you know, still unoccupied at this point in time. But mind you, you know, last week, I think starting April 1st, we've rented one office downstairs, $400 a month. So that will start April 1st. And so you say that the first floor was damaged to the point of being unusable up until April 1st? Well, it's even going to, I don't know if anybody knows it, but it's that office to the right as you walk in is a small office. That's what's been rented. The rest of the space downstairs has not been rented at this point. Has it been restored to the point where it could be rented? Yes. Where it's usable space? Yeah. Okay. And do you have information about the total square footage of the building compared to the damaged area? Yeah, I do. I'm sorry, I only brought seven copies, but I did that on for all the buildings. Great. I could mail this to anybody or what, but I did break that out and I used it off the, you know, the cards that were in the city. And we have the property cards here. Yeah, we included that. Right. Okay. Does anyone have any? Tim. Quick question. We said there are utilities. So how's that building heated? Is it district heat? That was one of my questions here. It is district heat. Okay. So you didn't have heat? Yeah. Because all that got ruined, right? Correct. We still, we got partial heat. Yeah. But it was used. That's a good question, Tim. And I was going to bring it back towards the situation. We've got to build $7,000 for heat for three months based on the previous year's consumption. And, you know, we weren't, you know, one, nobody was there. And two, it didn't work properly that we had to subsidize it with electric heaters. So when Steve Ribellini, my partner, talked to the city about that, they said that had to be abated as well. So, you know, we have not had and still don't have heat working at that, at that building. So you're not getting heat from the district heat system at this point? You know, we are getting some heat. There is some, but it's not working to its efficiency. And, you know, I can get more details. Steve brought me up to speed on that this morning. But, you know, for all intents and purposes, we aren't getting that heat is not working. Okay. Mary. So, that would be a separate abatement request, correct? I think so. As opposed to being rolled into this. Yeah, that's an interesting question. I don't know that we've dealt with a request for abatement for district heat payments as opposed to, like, water. Water and sewer. I mean, we would do it the same as water and sewer, but we need specific information in order to make that decision. So why don't you get us that information? Get it to John. Okay. Sounds great. And what are you looking for there? Just the use of the bill. Yeah. In particular there? Yeah. Some sort of documentation. Okay. Yeah. Do you need to buy certain time? Well, it would be for a separate hearing. Yeah. So, just as soon as you got it to me, the sooner we would be able to. Although, actually at this point, we may be scheduling those hearings into the June meeting. Let me check and tell you about that. Sure. That was a what? The history? You know, what the previous year was and what we got built and what the condition. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. We are required to hold a Board of Abatement meeting June 4th. So, we've started just scheduling folks into that. It's a ways off. Okay. But it's maybe better than keeping this group running straight through for another few months. It was my thinking anyway. So, that can be up for the group though if you wanted to meet earlier. Well. You know what you're getting yourselves into, did you? Yeah. What I'm going to suggest as a ruling if and you can all can let me know if you have any objection to that, is that rather than make Tim come back to hearing to prove his heating losses, that we just hold the record open, allow him to submit documentation and then include that as part of this. Steve lived right next door. I'll have him do that one. He'll be backed by that. Does that seem like a good approach to all of you? Yeah. Let's try it. Okay. Great. All right. We're next to 17th State Street right next door. And so what could you just tell us what building that is? That's right next door. The old Dennis Rickern Brown building. And the same questions I'm not going to ask if you had a 50% reduction in value because I don't think any of these have. That's correct. Did you lose use of the building for at least 60 days? Yes. And how long did you lose use of the building? You know, half the downstairs was, I think about 80 days where the nail tenant is, the nail salon. And then the store actually was back in, you know, somewhere right around 60 days. Steve said this morning that it was, of course July 7th and he think he was back in by Labor Day. So it was only half of the downstairs that was out for more than 60 days and the other one was probably 57 days or something. And which store is that? That's the clothing store? Okay. And did you lose utilities for more than 60 days? No. Okay. That one is not district heat there. Okay. Not condemned, not substantially damaged, no land or outbuildings. Did you have a loss of income? Yes. And what's the period of time? That period of time you were just talking about? It was two months for one tenant that we didn't charge rent and that was three months on the other tenant. Okay. And total square feet versus damaged square feet, that's in the sheet you gave us. Correct. Okay. Next, moving around to one school street. And what building is this? That's the one on the corner, uncommon market. We'll just be there. Yup. Okay. And was there a loss of usage for 60 days or more? Yes. And how long? It's still unoccupied. And it's unusable at this point, right? It is unusable. We are, after a long time trying to get a tenant in there, we're now moving that into apartments. And I would expect another 60 days before they're finished. And I know this is a little tricky to compute, but can you estimate how much of the time of the building being vacant is because of the conversion of use from store to apartments versus the place being, could have been occupied as a store if there were a tenant? You know, if there was a tenant, I mean, one of the problems there was, a lot of the people that were interested in a store was concerned about the flooding again. So we were having a hard time getting a retail tenant in there. So that's when we decided to move it to, you know, the apartments. It is hard. I would guess it would have been four months to try to get it. There was a lot of stuff we had to take out of that first floor and getting back in. And then I still wouldn't have a tenant because of the flood. Yep. But I probably could have had it ready for a store, you know, three to four months. Tim. Upper levels? You've got residential apartments? All residential and not damaged. They all stayed? And they all stayed. Yep. The door going into the upstairs hallway didn't get any water, taking water in. That's the wrong side. The wrong side. So yeah, we were fortunate to be able to keep all the tenants there. I think it's great that you're getting more housing in that building. Yeah. Thank you. I think it's going to look neat getting it back to the old look. Yeah. There and the other buildings on the old street. I think it's great. Correct. We need housing. Yeah. No outbuildings, no land, not substantially damaged. Income loss. Yes. And for the same period of time that we've been talking. Correct. Okay. And the total square feet versus the damage square feet, the whole first floor, and none of the rest of the building. That's correct. Okay. Basement, I mean both. Oh yeah. What's the story with the basement? You know, the basement had more electric panels were and the furnace was. So that one was totally under water and removing those units up above the first floor. So I didn't include the square footage of the basement in my calculation. I don't know how you determine that or not. But I mean, the basement was, again, it was probably four feet up in the first floor. Okay. Do you include basement damage? We have not been included in basement damage. Other than taking into account the loss systems. Yeah. Like the heat of the electric. Yeah. And we did lose the electric in the heat in that building. Yep. Okay. Yeah. I forgot to ask that question. Okay. So you had lost utilities for more than 60 days, obviously. Correct. Yeah. Any other questions from members of the board on this one? Okay. 41 Elm Street. We're just moving right down the street. Yeah. Right next door. Okay. And did you use loss of the building, lose use of the building for at least 60 days? Yes. And do you have an estimate of how many days? Well, half of the space is still unoccupied where the restaurant was. And the other one was six months. Okay. And utility loss? Just the heat. Okay. But I don't think we lost it more than 60 days though. We were able to get that back up and running. The electric was already up, so we didn't lose the electricity. So we did lose some utilities, but not more than 60 days. Okay. No land or outbuildings, income loss? Yes. And for what period would you say? Half the building's nine months, and the other half the first floor for six months. Okay. And only the first floor is the second floor? Second floor apartments, same as one school street. We were able to keep the tenants in the second floor. There are two apartments on that second floor. Is there a third floor? Nope. Nope, just two. Okay. Okay. Members of the board, any other questions on this one? Okay. This is, you know, hippie chickpea? Had the restaurant there? Yeah. Okay. This is the building where the Blue Heron used to be many years ago, right? Yeah. We bought it from Jeff Jacobs. I think it's one of the only buildings he maybe sold. And the hot tubs, you know, were left in the middle of the night. And when we bought it, it was just, you know, the holes left. So, yeah, I had quite a bit of history there. And you had your office there for a while? Yeah, we did. Yeah. All right. 57 to 63 Elm Street. That's the next building over, presumably. That's correct. Yeah. Okay. And? Across the street. Across the street? Well, you know, it goes 41 Elm Street, one school. And then on the same side across the street is that, you know, 57 to 63. Okay. And did you have loose usage for at least 60 days? Yes. And do you have an estimate of how long that was? That one was three months for one tenant and five months for the other tenant. Okay. And utilities? Up and running before 60 days. Okay. Land or outbuildings? No. Lost income? Yes. The months you already identified? Correct. And the damage, the total square feet, the damage? It's on that? It's on the sheet. Yeah, on the sheet. I can get it for you though. It's first floor tenants on the second floor. Yeah. They didn't come in for a while, but their space was probably available. We did all the cleaning and all that kind of stuff. So they were probably not there for 60 days, but they had the ability to use the space. Okay. 35 Elm Street. That's to the right of, you know, 41 Elm Street. It's where the chop shop was tattooed in a beauty salon. All three tenants did not relocate back. And the first floor was totally underwater. And the second floor where their attorney's office is, didn't lose, you know, they had the ability to go back in. So it was just the first floor. Okay. And it's still being, you know, reconstructed right now. And we're hoping to have a deli in the store there in the next 30 to 45 days. Oh, cool. This is just 35. And so usage loss for at least 60 days, definitely. Yep. Utilities. Yes. We have lost utilities electric for more than 60 days. And the heat was up on the second floor, so we did not lose heat. It was just electric. And which of those buildings is the land connected to? The parking lot connected to? Is it this one or the other one? I'm sorry? Which one of these buildings is the parking lot connected to? The parking lot is connected to that building. Okay. Yeah. And that's just the one. You know, there was damage. We have filled in the large pothole and that stuff. So we have had some damage to the parking lot. On 59 to 63, the one we just talked about, I did repay the entire front of that building. It got beat up pretty bad with a lot of trucks that were trying to fix the apartment buildings that were connected to that one. You know, dumpsters that were in there trying to load. So that got beat up pretty bad, that parking lot in front of the building. And the other one we've just filled in with some potholes that were eroded. And it wasn't like it was brand new to begin with that parking lot. Yeah. It was kind of rough to begin with. Yeah, kind of rough to begin with. But it certainly didn't help it. Yup. Income loss, we've established that. And the ratio of total squared feet versus damaged square feet, just the first floor. Just the first floor. Yup. And 38 Elm Street. Across the street, the Thai restaurant, isn't that building? Okay. We have a seamstress to the right of that. The seamstress got totally wiped out. We had put an apartment in the back of that on the first floor. And that got totally wiped out. The basement, we lost electricity there. Downstairs it affected the restaurant. I don't know if it was a total 60 days. You know, it was one of the situations where we had it up and running right after and then, you know, determined that we needed to replace the electricity. I don't think the electricity was out for more than 60 days there. Okay. And then the restaurant, because of, you know, two things, people weren't coming downtown. With the flood, we gave them a relief on their rent as well. So we had, you know, I think on 38 Elm, I put 40% of the first floor. I didn't know how, you know, the restaurant didn't get damaged itself. You know, so again, that was somewhat of a guess to the extent that we, I base that more on income than on square footage. Uh-huh. And what's in the upper floors? Is that apartments? Yeah, we had just been putting apartments in, you know, when we bought the building from Jay Hooper, there are five apartments on the second and third floor. Not damaged at all. Not damaged. Right. Just the one on the first floor that we put in. So just one apartment. Utility loss, you said not 60 days. Income loss. Yeah, I mean, we had loss of rent at the restaurant. We lost the seamstress for six months. And the apartment is just about ready to be put back with a tenant. Uh-huh. And the total square feet versus damaged square feet that is in the sheet you submitted? Yeah. Again, I didn't know, like I said, I base that 40% more on loss of income. Yeah. Probably the actual square foot that was damaged under water was probably more like 25% or 30% of the first floor. I didn't know how to really enter that question. Yeah, that's fair. We'll have to deal with that. Okay. I didn't want to make it too easy for you guys. Yeah, I appreciate that. Okay. Do you have any members of the board closing? For any of these properties, are there things that you could have done to make any of the repairs faster or was it lack of available contractor or suppliers? You know, some of it was funds. Tried to get the money to do it. And we've only had so many people to go out there. I don't know what we had, but seven or eight buildings. Steve had some other buildings. So it was a matter of trying to get contractors in and funds to do it. Jack, these are all asking also for abatement of personal property. Is that something that we should deal with now or? I don't think I realize that. I don't think, can I fill that form out? We didn't have any personal property other than the store. I know I bought out the assets. Yeah, it's just part of that. The section checked off. So I just wanted to bring it up in case. Yeah, we really didn't have any substantial personal property. Okay. Thanks, Val. All right. Do you have anything else you'd like to tell us before you go? No. Thank you for that information on the heat system. And I'll get back to you with that additional information. And thanks for everybody taking the time out of their livestock panel. This is not an easy job. Thanks for coming in. Okay. Have a great night. You too. Okay. CY Norwich Hotel. Sorry. We should be trying to make room for everybody. Do you want to both sit up at the table? They're all three. All right. Hi, folks. Thanks for coming in. So who's going to be testifying tonight? Okay. Did you saw the only firm the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth under the patents and penalties of perjury. Okay. Great. Why don't you tell us who you are? So my name is Hithas Patel, actually. And this is Steve. And this is Rory, actually. So we are the owners of Capital Plaza Hotel. We just took over the property back on, purchased the property back on July 6th. As you probably, everybody's aware of it. Yeah. And we had a major flood. And we've been working ever since on the property to get it open. We are very close to open now. Hotel, we are looking to open in the next few weeks, actually next, within the next two weeks. And restaurants, probably. Jay Morgan is probably going to be a few weeks after or maybe in the middle of May. So, I mean, I'm here to see if there is a bit many requests I have made, which if there's anything you guys can do for us so that, you know, we can help us, you know, pick up. Now, we have the two requests for the hotel building, the commercial real estate and the personal property tax and the one on 8 Bury Street. But we'll take them in order with regard to the hotel. And I think we know the answers to all these questions. So, I'm going to go over them all with you. You did suffer a loss of usage for more than 60 days. Yes. And as of today, you still have no use of any of the buildings. Is that accurate or? Yes. So, yeah, the hotel, the restaurants, all the parking spaces, you know, I mean, we have a use of it, but it used to generate a revenue which had a value in the past, you know, which we paid for, but right now there's no value on it. And as far as the, we have some tenants right now. All the major tenants are not paying any rents because they cannot use their facility there. We have very small tenants, about 6 or 7 tenants they're paying, which is very small. They will manage to get them in place probably about depending on the time, you know, about four months ago, I think. And really? Are these tenants in the office towers? Office towers now. No. The six-story towers, we had a tenant up on the sixth floor. Actually, he's leaving right now. He vacated the property today. Uh-huh. And the bank is, they're in a box. They are not paying anything. And they are looking to open back, going back in the space next month. So, and then we have, those are the two big tenants we had. Only everybody else is up. These are small tenants. You know, we have a few tenants on the second floor who left. Few of them are still there. Uh-huh. And along with the health salon and the adult care, but they are still there actually right now. Uh-huh. And, uh, from on public radio, if they moved out, they're still there. They're still there. And was there a point where they were unable to use the space or did they pretty much stay? Yeah, so, yeah, they were unable to use the space until we got them some electricity. So the, as you probably already know, the building was built in phases. So we had to redo all the electrical, all the HVAC, all file alarm, sprinkler, modify all the sprinklers on the space there as well as all the finishes. And we had to, when we opened up the walls and everything, you know, we had to do a lot of major repairs also, also, because the building was so old. Um, so until, until we got them, they couldn't use the space. And even when we had them, we didn't, we don't have working elevators. We're still working on one right now. That was the one in the lobby, which only serves the four-story part. The six-story part, the elevator is still not in operational and they even started working on it because they're so blacked out with the material, which they are promising us to get that one up and running in end of May or June sometime. So, so, so the public radio, women's public radio, they got up and running as soon as we got the power, which was also after quite a bit of time, you know, so they've been in and out. I'm not sure how much time they spend over there, but they've been in and out since then using the stairs. Uh-huh. And the, and the six-story hotel tower, will you be able to open that up even before the elevators back in? So we, the six-story tower does have access until the fourth floor through the lobby elevators. So we do have inspections on those elevators, also coming up on Monday. So we will, if the blessings form the elevator, state elevator inspector, you know, we should have that elevator operate in operation until the fourth floor. Uh-huh. So the other two floors, we may not be able to do anything, plus the biggest talent that we have on the sixth floor, on the sixth-story tower, they vacate it actually right now. They empty out all the furniture and everything, and they're doing it right now. And is that because of the access issue? Um, it could have been because of the access issue, or they just found a different spot, different place, you know, that's better. I'm not sure, um, right now. But they did, all they tell us is that they're downsizing. Uh-huh. That's all they say. Yep. You definitely had more than 60 days loss of usage. You definitely had more than 60 days loss of utilities. Um, the property was not condemned by the city. No. Um, and it was not considered substantially damaged more than 50% loss and value. Um, are there any damage to land or outbuildings on the property? So the parking lot, yeah, we had a, we, I mean, we had to redo, we had to dig all the, we had to relocate all the transformers from, you know, and then redo everything on exterior side also. So there's a lot of parking lot is going to be, have to be redone as well, you know, just because we had to dig all the, redo all the underground electrical for it. And income loss? Yeah. Virtually a hundred percent. Virtually a hundred percent, yeah, we had. From, from June, or from July up to April. And possibly more in the future as well, because we don't know like what's, how things will be coming around, you know. Carrie, you wanted to correct me. Yeah. I'm a little unclear on which tenants have been there when. So, I just want to get really clear about that. Yeah. So your six-floor tenant just left? Yeah, we just left. We just left. They were not paying any rent since. But they were there, but they weren't paying any rent? Yeah, because they couldn't get access to the six-floor. Okay. And then, and the bank is not there now, right? Bank is there. Bank is, they did the box out there just for the, for the, you know, and then we didn't want them to leave also so we kind of had to work with them, you know, at the time. Yeah. But they are not paying any rent as well until they move back. Okay. And that was closed for a long time. Yeah, yeah. And then the hair salon is open now. Hair salon is open now. And you said it was about four months ago that it opened back up. And is there another smaller tenant? Yeah. So there is a tenant, the adult. The adult. Yeah, the woman adult care one. So about four months ago, they moved back in. They moved back in. Okay. But they have a pretty small tenant on rents and everything compared to the other. And there's a, we do have four other tenants upstairs. The other woman radio is one of them. And they're there. On the second floor, they are there. They moved back in when you got power back. Yeah. They kind of going in and out, but they were not really realized completely. And then there are other tenants up there too? Yeah. There are a few small other tenants. You know, one of them is the social worker. Yeah. I think the total rent is about $2,500 right now between them. And so they were out for a while, but they came, when did they come back in? So we actually, as soon as the power, we were able to manage actually the power. So we had to do it in little bit phases, right? It took us like a few months for us to get temporary power there. Then it had to be down again when we were changing the transformers and all that. So at first we had to redo the power, temporary power, so to know exactly where things were first, because the building was such a hole. And we had to bring in all the subs from different places to get this going. So we had to do that. And then we had to change, move all the power from the basement to all these upper floors for entire building actually. So that took us, because of that there was a shutdown as well for them. So we actually gave them the space as soon as the power was back on, but they could not really, some of them couldn't really utilize it because there was no elevator in there to take steps. What was the construction zone still? So it was kind of dangerous for them to work through. Great. So you weren't charging rent until those several tenants moved in four months ago and then you said it was $2,500 a month between all of them that you've been getting for the past four months? It's probably, it says she's been a little generous, it's probably two months that there's one. Yeah, I mean, we had to do some work for her so long just so that she can come back over there. You know, we kind of helped her with she's exploring and this, that and all few items, you know. So as far as the loss goes, yes, there is a hundred percent loss on the parking side. I mean parking side, we're still waiting on the parking system. That is, there is a delay, you know, they're saying another three weeks for it to come in, but we don't know exactly right now. And obviously we're waiting for the parking lot, we'll be waiting for it for the better weather to finish it off after, you know. And as far as the other loss goes, I mean, you know, I don't think we will be able to replace the talent at the moment, the way things are going in the market, you know, that that's on the sixth floor. So I am, we are projecting that that's going to be stay vacant for a little bit until because it's on the sixth floor as well. But when that, when the elevator is restored going all the way up to the sixth floor, then if you don't get a tenant into that space it'll be because of market conditions rather than because of the flood, right? Yes. Okay. I've got one. Go ahead. So I have read a new story that you all have been planning to do a bunch of renovations as soon as you bought the building and you actually had folks on site. Can you estimate how much of the building you had plans to have vacant while you did renovations versus, I mean, obviously things changed? Yeah. But what was your initial plan? Initial plan, actually, only that building was just converted to Hilton Tapestry. So there was not much of a punch list that they have given us to the property. There was only a few minor items, you know, that we were supposed to connect to Hilton the TV, you know, the services that comes up by Hilton and all that. They did not convert it that, so we needed to do that part. Then they also wanted the parking system to be connected to the Hilton property management system so that the guest would be able to use their guest key card instead of paper tickets and all that. That was one of them. And then we had to change a desk chair, you know, just one chair in the room and vanity mirrors. They wanted lighted mirrors, you know, which half of the rooms already had them and half of the room didn't have them. So it was very minor peep, actually, from them. We didn't have to do a lot, lot, you know. So did you plan to have any hotel rooms offline during that process or you were just going to work that into? No, we didn't have any plans. We were just going to work that online all day long. Okay, Tim. Just a process question, Jack. So we had a series of these hearings before and we decided we were just doing the first two papers. Are we continuing with that? Are we looking at something bigger? I think that's a question we should discuss when we come when we come to our deliberative session because we're obviously now into the new year. So we asked those first two installments. Everybody else was able to come back where they have. Yeah, exactly. Do we have anybody coming back? Oh, by coming back I meant they were open. I'm sorry. Like the other requests, they were back in business. Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Except for the previous meeting. Right. She's moved across the street. She's moved across the street, but hasn't done anything to her. Yeah. So we can just tag that as a question we need to resolve. Because obviously in those terms, the properties that were substantially damaged, we abated for the full year. Yeah. Okay. Any other questions about the hotel itself? Okay. Now we can move on to the personal property. I'm not sure. I was trying to go through and see, well, which is the personal property, which is the real estate personal property. Okay. So the personal property that this is for furniture and fixtures for the restaurant and what else? So we kind of lost everything that was on the first floor and this meant that's about it. You know, everything upstairs was still good. I'm not sure what the elevator would qualify under, you know, maybe building site maybe. But we lost all the furniture from the function space. We lost the furniture that was in the lobby. Not substantial, but there was some. We lost all the furniture from the restaurant and we had to we lost a lot of equipment in the kitchen because of the everywhere they were on the water, we kind of lost them. We kind of beginning to find out that some of the other stuff are not working too now. It's not working. It's the one piece we're trying to fix. And so Is there a separate sheet? Yeah, I have duplicates of the There is. And what John pointed out to me is that if you look at the at the bill, the one that's up at the upper corner where the account number starts with 800, that's the personal property bill and the total was $2,844. Can you estimate because this personal property bill covers not only all the property on the first floor but all the furniture, TV and everything on the upper floors. Do you have a way to estimate what fraction of the total I think kitchen equipment plays a bigger role on this one in the furniture from the slashtown. I would probably say about maybe 45%, 50%, you know. Taking into consideration the basement buying stock and all that stuff Yeah, I'm not including all the inventories and all that also that we lost I mean, I'm just looking into it all. Any questions from members of the board? Jack, is there I don't find anything in the papers I have with the value of the property. Right, I agree. I'm not seeing a value of the personal property. It's 317,000. 317,000. Oh, okay. There we are. Yep. Oh, I see. This is a different program. Okay. How many floors is the hotel? I'm just trying to kind of get a sense of it. It's four-story on one part and six-story on the other. So even excluding all the space that's rented. Just looking at the hotel. So on the four-story part there's only tenants on the second floor and first floor and on the first floor, second floor and sixth floor. So how many floors other than the first floor do you have hotel stuff? Four-floor. Four-floor. But they used to store majority of the inventory was in the basement, actually. Because not many enough storage rooms are there. So do you lose extra furniture and stuff like that that was stored down in the basement? Yes, we did. But we don't have of knowing because it was all in the flood in the muddy. Some guy just threw everything out. And we don't know the count also what was given to us from the previous owners, actually. We have some count of that, but not much on that part. So not even counting on those items. Did you do any kind of insurance claim for that? So we have insurance claim, but they don't cover anything in the basement. So all my loss that happened in the basement, it doesn't cover. And right now for some of the stuff, they still haven't paid 100% yet. They're still fighting with that part. Okay. Any more questions rearing the personal property claim or are we ready to move on? We've generally done personal property right away rather than waiting. So I guess my question is whether we feel comfortable taking that the base value of 45% of the amount, or do we want more documentation? I don't think there's going to be more documentation. So I would just entertain a motion for what anyone thinks is fair of Apement. Tim. We think 45% of the personal property for the year for 100 states. Is there a second? Second. So that would be of the $2,844. Carrie. Did you need the whole entire tax, even though it's been replaced already back in there now? Yeah, but they're about to open in a couple weeks. So presumably it's all been replaced. Close. More or less. Yeah. It will be replaced. That's for sure. Maybe not the same thing, but a little bit different. 45% for two thirds of the year. We were talking about April 1st of last year alone, right? Next year is July 1, or what? Right. So it's July. For the others, we've done the first two, or it could be through April 1st, this year, because that's when they're reopening everything. Which is eight months from this tax year. Yeah. Since we're dealing in rough approximations anyways, maybe it would just make sense to pick a number like 35%. So 45% of two thirds of the year. So 45% of the total is $1,280. And then we want two thirds of that. Are we missing the math a little bit if we assume they're good to go on April 1st, that means it's three quarters, not two thirds, because six months plus the first three months of 24. The restaurant isn't open until at least almost in May. But the personal property's in there, right? Yeah. Not yet. We're supposed to be getting delivered tomorrow, let's say. Okay. Hopefully. So three quarters of 45%. Does that sound like workable? I just wanted to say this value that's on here is what they filed on April 1st of last year for this fiscal year. So we have to calculate it based on the correct value. Which is not what is written here. I don't think so. When we're doing abatement, it's the tax bill. And so the tax bill is $2,844 for the full year. 45% of that is $1280. 75% of that is $960. $960. So is the motion to abate $960 in personal property tax? Yes. And is that seconded? Any further discussion on that? Wait one second. Yeah. That's how much they lost. Oh. So my numbers are coming out a little bit differently. Okay. So the total bill for the year is $2,844 and so we're only talking about abating three quarters of the year. So three quarters of $2,844 is $2,133. And so times 0.45 means okay. So maybe that, is that what you said? Okay. He said $960. Okay. Yeah. So $950,985. Yeah. Everybody happy with that number? All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Oh, you know, before we wrap up and I know we're close to the end, but I should ask the members who are appearing remotely, Sarah Carter to signify themselves. Sarah Carter, we know that's what you said even though you're muted and telling. But you called this due to. Great. Thank you. Okay. So we've gone through that and now the last item on the agenda is 8 Berry Street. And this is the Laundermat. Yeah. Okay. And why don't you tell us about the damage to that property? Actually, we did not had any damage to that property from the flood, but I mean, so Laundermat actually was mostly fed by the hotel on the south. It was income generating from the local businesses as well as the hotel as well. I mean, we managed to keep all the employees there, but the revenues income is like almost nothing, you know. So I wasn't sure if there's anything that this can do on the taxes as well. That's one of the reasons why... Well, that's a very interesting question that we'll have to have to consider, you know. The question is, is that an abatement that we can consider attributable to the flood? Yeah. Because this is a property that had no physical damage. It had economic losses based on its biggest customer. And does anyone have any questions to the taxpayer on this? Because we want to know what you're asking for in terms of an abatement and what the income loss was. Well, my income was, from that one it was generating like a little bit over $300,000, and so far it generated not even $50,000 $150,000 you said? No, not even $50,000. So it was projected to be over $300,000? And it's now... It's less than $50,000 so far we have over there. Since we acquired the... I'm sorry, I just jumped in. No, it's okay, Mary. The income was projected, I assume, that $300,000 was for a year? Yes. And in the three quarters of a year that you've owned it, it's at $150,000. Oh, $50,000, got it. So you've lost $250,000 is your testimony. Yeah, we projected... Hotel was doing some... I think I'm giving some around $175,000 to the government. And the rest of them was just a local business, you know, which has been down as well, I'm not sure. And is there a distinction between the building itself and the business that is conducted in that building? Distinction, I'm sorry, I don't understand. Is this a loss of the business income or is it a loss of the value of the property, I guess? Well, I mean, we look at it loss of the income has a loss of value as well, that's how we look at things. So I'm not sure how the board, everybody looks at it, but if the business has no income then I'm not sure what the value would be for the property is. So that's the only thing, you know. Tim, were you raising your hand there? Okay. That's going to be the value of the property from a business perspective as opposed to a, say, grandless perspective. Yeah, I only look at it that way only because that's how we purchase the property back in July, so that's the only reason why I say that right now. I assume that's not a category covered by the state bill. I assume that's right, yeah. So we'll figure that out like we figure everything else out at the end, I think. It's an interesting one. Sorry? It's an interesting one. It definitely is, yeah. Does anyone else have any other questions? Tim. So with the laundromat, because the hotel was a big user customer of it, in the future, are you going to still have the hotel laundry done there, or are you going to do it at the main facility? We want to do it at the main facility, but there's some infrastructure has to be done for it, which we were not able to do at the moment right now, you know, or so. So our plan was to do that as well, but not at the moment, you know. So when we open the hotel, all the hotel onto it, we'll be there. Sure. The reading of the, well, we can discuss it. I guess we just will have to see what happens then under the statute for abatement. Yeah. Okay. Anything else? Okay. Then I think we can suspend tonight's hearing and reconvene next Thursday at 6.30 p.m. And then you obviously don't have to be here next week, but then on the 11th, we'll go into what we call we'll discuss all the hearings we've heard and make decisions. And then the clerk will get them up to you. Thank you. Okay. Nothing, you guys. The business taxes have hit the men for business people and some of the flood is coming in. Some of the folks that have had to buy all new equipment are worried about getting tax bills because they were forced for business property. Personal property. Yeah, they've had the restaurants have to buy, they've had to buy new equipment, new furniture, so they're worried about their tax bills. So as the abatement board, we may have to consider possibly sending out tax bills equal to last year's values or something creative. So, just something to keep in mind because it's going to have to come from the abatement board. If there's a sort of blanket solution like that that's decided on, couldn't that be something that could be decided at the council level like we did when we provided I think it would have to come from the council from what I understand. So, that might be if there's one size fits all for that and that's something I'm going to look into this week with Jane and with Charlotte on if we can do that or not. So, we did something like that once before, right? Didn't we, Charlotte? There was some sort of one-off everybody would get a one-off for oh, I cannot remember to say, I'll think about it and I'll come back to you. Because I know the tax bills are created from the grand list Right. So, yeah, I can't imagine that it would initially come from the board of abatement because we address abatement requests that come to us but you know, we've got our city personal property tax that's based on on value and if there were a proposal for the to treat it differently this year because of the it would have on people's tax bill I assume that would be something that would be brought to the council that just seems like the sensible if the council wanted to tell the assessor send the bills out differently this year and this is how I think that's a policy decision for the council rather than I was just thinking we get preemptively ahead of it instead of getting hit with all these abatements when the bills hit the mail Yeah Well, there's a meeting next week Correct, so we have to figure out how to parse that out too Well, another very interesting question Well, maybe 2011 1992 I don't know I don't know Well, that's something to look into between now and when the property tax bills go up I guess I could say I don't think it's unprecedented but that doesn't necessarily matter And yeah, because you Well, I don't know what the policy should be here Do we treat this person who decided to buy a new refrigerator because they wanted a new refrigerator differently from the store that had to buy a new refrigerator because they were flooded And do you treat it differently if insurance covered it versus not Right And some of the complaints that I have gotten are from people that have not had to pay in years because they have old equipment and are now going to have to pay tax where they haven't in previous years Do they have a sense of how small a personal property is? This person has not seen a bill ever Because these guys had $300,000 worth of personal property and a $3,000 bill That's wonderful Yeah It's way more than $300,000 in real life Yeah And we'll only give them a $900 break Right Yeah, nearly got a $900 break Yeah Okay Well, that's something to think about And I think we are done, which means we are in recess not adjourned Thanks everybody Thank you