 Think I haven't done anything. That's what makes it such a great job, right? Wow. Yeah, you can't make it today Yeah, he's still in the board. He's just not here Let us know last night that that wasn't gonna happen Should I be live now? I'd like to call the Citizens Board of Review of the city of Sheboygan Into session, please This time I'd like roll call of those board members present and Ken King Shall we stand for the Pledge of Allegiance? This time I'd like to have introduced those individuals who are present today From the Assessor's Office as well as the city attorney Confirmation from the clerk Appropriate notifications have gone out and have been posted as required. They have all gone out and been posted All right at this time we need to select the chairperson for the board. Are there any nominations? I nominate Ken King. Is there a second? I second. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed same sign. I am elected Selection for vice-chair Do we have a nomination? I nominate Pat. Okay, we have a name any nomination for Pat to be in vice-chair. Is there a second? Second. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed same sign Okay passes. Thank you Pat Verification of training Ken King and Kathleen Donovan have both taken the training this year both have been Certified. Yes. Okay. We would like to verify that the city of Sheboygan has adopted the ordnance Containing considering the confidentiality of income and expense information that's provided to the Assessor Could that be verified by the city attorney? Okay. Thank you. We are in compliance there are no new laws or Procedures at this time That I am aware of Hearing none go off the record. Okay at this point we would like to do some update and training and procedures and as the Function there have been some changes in the procedures If you take a look at the training materials that were provided to you Go right in front of you can't write in front of you can't in front of you Work together on this Sessions more efficiently and eliminate some possibility of objections in the future Okay If you would turn to page 13 in the requirements and turning training manual that's Offer by the extension as part of the education. Okay, if you take a look the Past practice has been that the board would introduce the cases and the clerk should be introducing the cases so the City clerk will be responsible for introducing the cases providing the information that is necessary And also swearing in the individuals that will be testifying At That point We will get the Verification from the assessor as far as what that information is if there's any other changes To the objection form. Okay The clerk in the city of Sheboygan is not a member of this board And therefore does not have the ability or Responsibility of voting on any motion. Okay, if we take a look at the chairs responsibilities, which is the next section we have I'm proud to say have been in compliance pretty much all of the time with all the items and The procedure that would follow and again, just as a quick review the assessor is assumed to be correct until Tight documentation is proven otherwise the objector is the first to testify After they testify the assessor can ask questions the board can ask questions at that point the assessor then will do their presentation and the person or Organization objecting can ask the assessor as well as the board. Okay At that point the chair will ask if there's any additional testimony And if there is none the hearing is closed and no additional testimony Or information can be provided to the board For deliberation purposes, okay At that point the chair's responsibility is to inform the objector and the assessor that in fact the deliberation and Discussion on the objection and that their decision will be made at the end of the hearing At the end of hearings, excuse me and that they will be notified within 10 days by the City clerk of what the outcome is So any questions? All right, so very minor changes in the way that we do business But it allows us to be in full compliance as it's now laid out That is why we don't have a secretary anymore. Right. Okay. The clerk is going to previously We had a secretary that did the clerk's responsibility so any questions concerning Any of the ways we would operate? Okay, or do operate under the guide lines Meredith was there anything else that feel we need to cover? I think I hit all the points Alright, we'll go back on record then We need to review and adopt the policy regarding procedure for sworn testimony and sworn written testimony again, that has been previously approved by the City is that correct? They're attached to board docs. Okay attached to the agenda, but those are the ones that were Adopted last year. Okay So Likewise the waiver of board hearing requests Were approved last year and are still in force. Is that correct and so your attorney acknowledges that in fact that's the case at this time we would like to Receive the assessors qualifications Michael if you could be so kind I'll let the board review these Sheboygan board of review will accept the qualifications and credentials as presented and part of the record for Michael Grotta Darcy Behnick Raeanne Schmitz Those have been passed on to the clerk At this time, I would entertain a motion to accept the role as presented by the assessor For purpose of this hearing Motion second and second to approve the assessment role as presented at this time Do we have any waivers that should be presented? Okay We have a request to waive the 48 hour requirement for a hearing Is that acceptable to the board? Yes. Yes, it is. Yes, okay we will accept that on behalf of Fay Windgrove and And Do we need to schedule a hearing time on that then we can do that this morning? She has not come she has an objection form. I believe Fay is here. Okay All right We will get you on the schedule at this time We have currently Two objections and four waivers to be considered so the first waiver is for parcel number Five nine two eight one four seven nine one two zero That is the Walmart stores at three seven one one South Taylor Drive And it was a request for a waiver of the board Okay, we have a request for a waiver Okay, it's been reviewed I Would entertain a motion to accept the waiver on the property stated any questions Okay Motion second second motion and second to approve the waiver as Requested all those in favor signify by saying aye. I post same sign the next Objection the next is a request for a waiver from Washington Schools Apartments LLC And their parcel number is five nine two eight one seven one nine seven two One property address at twelve thirty eight Geely Avenue Or to have the opportunity to review those Okay, any other questions of the board? If not, I'd entertain a motion to approve the waiver at This address have a motion second Motion and second to approve the waiver as requested all those in favor signify by saying aye post same sign passes Next waiver request And this one I might have mr. Grotta Talk about bill our adjourn is going to come at nine thirty because he wanted to make sure that he was here for the waiver request to be present Okay, so we should wait for can we Make sure I would like you to make sure that your Comments are not restricted to a piece of property, but generalization of the assessment process Sure. Okay. Thank you So I think regarding this, you know granting the waiver is I might request the board subpoena information on the two properties that mr. Our adjourn is Bringing forth so it's customary to request information In detail regarding income and expenses is that correct it is okay as well as comparable sales I Believe in this case it is very important this general information. Yes, okay, so just so the board is clear That as we take a look at these waivers those are the things that we are that the assessor is considering invasing his Testimony on Correct correct. Okay. Is there anything else you'd like to inform the board of in general In general regarding waivers. No, sir. There are not waivers filled out for these two properties either They're just objection forms. Okay. They're just objection forms. I'm sorry Okay, but there's more too. Yeah, all right Thank you very much We will defer This property until 930 hearing is There another objection form that needs to be reviewed There's one other objection, but they have appointment at 10 Okay, say would you be ready to? Okay, all right This point would you Have a copy of the objection form Present to the board right so the objection form is brought by Bay Wing Grove for tech hub LLC It's filed this morning and the Property address is for 807 Center Avenue 532 North 8th Street It says this assessment shown total value was 400,000 456,000 100 and their opinion of the assess value is 325,000 100 would you like me to swear everybody in yes, please All right, so I need everybody that's going to be testifying to raise their right hand Do you solemnly swear affirm that the testimony in which you are brought to give in the matter now in this hearing? Shall be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God Yes And could you each state your name and your address for the record? They win Grove 807 Center Ave. Sheboygan home address 322 North 7th Street Sheboygan Probably Test okay as the objector you have the opportunity to present your case Thank you. This will be brief So purchase the property in January of this year paid 325,000 for it the It was reviewed. I had submitted that and the tax bill was amended to 456, which is what I'm presenting here Exhibit a page 2 of what you have Just did a quick comparison of the adjoining adjoining properties, which there are several adjoining properties That are similar then that were built all in 1864 that whole oughten block block was built in 1864 so when I was just comparing to my neighboring businesses that Or buildings in the area comparing their tax rate to to the tax rate for for my property it Didn't quite seem Seem in parity with with the the other items so you can see that The middle section there two and three properties in total. There's two tax bills Those are praised at 39,200 that's 68 percent 68.5 percent of the value that that my building is appraised at and number four Which is the Freakazoid toy retail short store that property is appraised at forty six point five percent of what? My building is appraised at and I'm looking at the very far column on exhibit a I Completely agree with the land value. We match between properties. It's the improvement value that for it for the buildings and I May not be privy to all the information Any questions of the assessor? Would you step up to the mic, please? How long was the property on the market? I don't know exactly. I think it has been over a year And what is the condition on the interior of? It's okay. It's dated Scott. I would like to put money to invest in it rather than paying money The 17,000 a year for taxes sure second floor is that rented? So I occupy the second floor with my business But it's only half of it and half of it is Is Tentative right now. It's a short term lease Okay, how about the first floor with occupancy the first floor? I have rented a Very minimal charge at this point Half of it is rented Okay, no further questions. Thank you Questions of the board Do you happen to have the appraisal? Did you have an appraisal I did not have an appraisal you did not have an appraisal done. No I had an inspection So there was no appraisal fired prior to the financing I sell financed and The income numbers What are the what is the income on the property? Again, I'm paying the majority of the rent right now to myself. Okay lower level You said is not rented or is partially rented half of it is rented and half of it. I'm just renting for Currently the rent is a thousand a month. Okay. Thank you. It had been not Fully occupied for a very very long time On your comparables Do you have the square footage of these other properties I Wasn't able to find that in the public record Although I can tell you that the real estate agents seem to list the square footage all over the board including basements and seems like just all over the board so the I Did do do a little checking on that the 520 property was listed at 13,221 square feet the two This the two proper not positive, but I saw something again. This is it's not public the square feet 3,200 but I think that was only a portion of either 522 assessor First handout that I have for you is a copy of the property record card and This particular building is 9,760 square feet and look at the last page we look at the assessment history of the property Starting back to the digital records that are available 2005 The property was assessed at 486,000 There was a reassessment back in 2006 it went up to 695,000 That property property value carried to the revaluation of 2014 it went down to 592,000 Until there was a reduction this year in consideration of the present use in carrying capacity of The subject property to 456,000 one of the things that's unique in the market in Sheboygan is Since the last reassessment 2014, which is the basis for all assessments you know properties have gone in different directions residential commercial and then within each of those classes their significant Changes based on market forces None of those market forces have been exerted You know in the assessment process changing individual properties That leads us to our next handout which Is paperclip together here called? 2021 Board of Appeal Considerations for the city Sheboygan and essentially this document talks about Not changing assessments in a non Revaluation year unless something is materially changed With the specific property you know there was The square footage was in listed incorrectly There were additions or remodeling or deterioration Something that would material material e change The performance of the property is something that could also change based on its income and expense revenue And I think that that is Inacceptable practices and not change the assessment clearly just for Market force by which everybody else is Treated by the same yardstick and only if there's something that's changed with the property originally the property was valued in 2014 Using acceptable practices professionally acceptable appraisal standards Using mass appraisal process And it would behoove the assessor to simply change One property when many of its peers are treated by the same yardstick The board to review and circuit court of course have a different standard that they can apply They're looking at an individual property So I think it's a mistake for the assessor to simply in this case or in others Whether the the sale price is higher or lower than the assessed value to simply chase that particular sale There's some guidance in the in the Second or the the back pages of that handout that's labeled 2021 property assessment information And this is a February of 2021 Response from the Department of Revenue and it was a response to the Wisconsin Association of Assessing Officers and addressing their concerns of the new market forces as That COVID brought with us and The essence of this document is in a non-revaluation year Don't make changes for The COVID in particular and what it has brought upon us And So I think that's the stance on behalf of the assessor's office is non-revaluation year Don't make a change that can't be justified by a change in of the static information I've got nothing further at this time any questions of the chapter yes my presentation related to the comparison to the properties adjacent to To the 532 North a street and their value which had been set for some time prior to COVID and I'm wondering if you might be able to address that The only property I was able to look up is You know 532, which is your building is at 9,760 square feet 526 North 8th is at 6,750 square feet So it's It's about two-thirds the size. I didn't get to find 520 so there are there are two tax bills That are so you looked at the combination of the two tax bills that I've got delineated. I Just looked up the address quickly while While you were presenting a both tax bills though because I'm my comparison here has both 526 and 522 together When I look as as far as parcel numbers go 522 and 522 is listed by itself correct within our system and That's at 3,200 square feet if I look at 520 which includes 518 That is 8,766 square feet But I don't show an address specifically listing 522 No, I'm sorry. I meant 526 and 522 to yeah 526 right I don't show a separate address. So the combination of those two properties is Is more than more than double but showing up on the area of One if I understand you correctly. Yeah, that's all again that I'm showing is 522 is Listed at 3,200 square feet What's the score footage on? 532 on 9760 Do we have any recent sale information on either any of these comparables? that The objector has noted Mr. Chair, I did just find the 526 North 8th and That is 6,750 square feet and if I'm looking at The sales of any of those properties 526 I Don't show show a sale I See the most recent transaction is Toby Watson in December of 2013 Had a listing at 536,000 But I think that was from another entity that he owned so I don't see it in arm's length sale The same thing for 522 and 520 The most recent transaction I see is December of 2011 For a hundred and sixty thousand There I noticed there was a reduction 2021 What was that based on? Improvements were reduced from 558 800 down to 421. Yes I I related that to a change in the information regarding the income and expense Approach to to valuation And the change in its use So that assessment was based on income and expense that was provided by the objector the previous assessment Was based on income and expense and I don't didn't feel that that any longer applied Because now it's primarily owner occupied Any other questions of the board? You the party you the party have a summary comment Sure, yes, thank you The comparisons then as I understand it based upon the square foot is There's there's a significantly less square footage in in one than in two and three combined. I Don't know if we have any history on what Toby Watson purchased two and three four But four was purchased for I believe you said one hundred some thousand One hundred and sixty some thousand The building one Was purchased at a high price and it was at a praised at a high price back when it was originally purchased By that my the previous owner To me it appeared it was one of those situations where They needed the loan They wanted the sale made everyone happy and made the price match what was what was being offered and it was in my opinion much higher than Was reasonable for a building that was built in 1864 that has the bones of that building How are you aware of this of the sale? You're saying that the sales were Excessive or not arms length so I did see the appraisal that was done back in About I think it was ten years ago or so and it was a about a half a million dollar appraisal But it was I know I've done business appraisals in in my opinion It didn't have the elements that you typically look at it was It was the appraisal you were talking about ten years old It what the appraisal that you were talking about is ten-year-old appraisal that you saw yes Yes, but it was like a half a billion dollars, but I believe that's what the appraisal in Part had been based upon at that rate in comparison to these other buildings that are listed So the assessor is any closing comments sure the last sale of the subject property was in December of 2002 for 545,000 again to project to the board is the assessor I think is Not reasonable for him to make a change simply due to a sale to chase it the change for 2021 was made based on a change of use and change of Going from income approach to The cost market modified cost approach Which the neighboring properties were also created their assessment was created on I? Did feel compelled to make that change for uniformity and equity Without changing the market forces of the assessed values. Thank you Okay All right This will conclude the hearing We will go into deliberation at the end of today's hearings And you will be notified of the findings of this board within the next 10 days from the city clerk No additional testimony is allowed. Thank you. Wait till 930 for the next objection Is there any place I can get is there a drinking fountain? Water Yes, sure So we will stand in recess For the next 15 minutes Because they already Because they're already on the line. You're contacted. No. We have to waver. We have to agree to give all parties time to play together. Good. So they haven't done it yet. There's nothing in court that they haven't even done. No. So they're in court. That's the case. Looks like they're in court. Are you getting all this? Yes. Good. Better than I did the first time. She's not backing the court in the background. That's this way, right? There's one over there. Just the water on the side of my mouth. So dry. So dry. Oh, is it high? High. So now what do you do? I work somewhere in the... I work at the Crow Gardens. I'm the education specialist. Previously, before we moved up here, I worked for a construction management company in St. Louis for about ten years. And then I worked for a local electrician for four years up here. And so when I was representing the quorum at the chamber, I think I've never converted to my own. And so when I was representing the quorum at the chamber, I think I've never converted to mine. Mayor Ryan was in our same ward. And so after he got there, he wanted to see me and had some of those. And he says, I look on your LinkedIn and you've got a lot of constrictions and screens. I think you might be good for the quorum and videos. Oh, nice. But yeah, so I'm doing something completely different now at the quorum. I just send field trips and work with children ages and preschool to the fifth grade. And so I'm working with the quorum to the fifth grade. Mm-hmm. Well, you know, I don't know. I was appointed by three or four mayors before. I was in the church and that's probably why I got on. And oh my gosh, I've been retired for 13 years. I was on it for probably five years. And then I was off. I didn't realize it when we got a new mayor. He appointed his people and I, oh, I was surprised. And then that last about a year and they appointed me to end the journey. Thank you. I'm sorry. I'm currently an education specialist at Perform Gardens. But previous to that, I worked for the district and I'm happy. Thank you so much. I should bring my own. Oh. So I would like to see if I would be interested. So I have a protector. You do a lot of construction. So I'm not a secure person. And how I just once together, I used to go to our areas. We just celebrated seven years up here. Oh. You're still learning. You're still like exploring. I've been on this course for almost 20 years. You know, once you get on, you don't get off. That's all right. It's an interesting one. Yeah. Yeah. And he's been on longer than I have. I've been retired for 13 years. So I've been at least five years. When they have to for days and days we haven't had that because I have a bit of her days. Yeah. We have. I know we went at least two or three days when they were the city. That was when I was still working. I've never had been. At least 10 years. It's not longer. Yeah. All right. This day and this day and then we'll be back and they took us to dinner. They brought pizza in. We were here. Yeah. Because I know we've done some remodeling on our housing projects. We did that reassess which was fine because it was like that does happen. Kitchen modern and it was updated. I was and I was talking about I remodeling my bathroom and then I used to remember my coffee and I came home myself. Right. Sure enough within the month I got this. I said according to my no no give me a break. But I knew how I wanted to for them to actually make an appointment she brought three. Yeah. Yeah. No. They were getting ready because it's doing a check. So we I that they must mean. There's something extra really they had just done can't tell me that wheels in an 1896 house can only imagine you know the whole detail and where is this I'm saying but you know the channels wasn't this big barricade with the blinking time we go in our front bedroom yeah I my office was that building on corner seven that's someone that has bottles and stuff around it. Yes, that's where I was state farm agent my office was my husband first worked up a spider as an IT project manager by brick house houses down I think because of the still the six feet away that's if that we would be right next to each other yeah since I which one renting downstairs or half of it rented downstairs or something I mean it's a huge beautiful I mean yes it's built I know we're going to discuss it but she provided that why to next door you have to have more proof but it's your problem I don't know how they sell all that toys I know what they sell because my son moved I waited in this place and he had all these things they were just so valuable so yeah and it didn't give him anything his brother said you what they said you know how much I said right but they weren't there down the street yeah I don't think they're coming mm-hmm square footage okay mm-hmm yeah because I think one of them is a little bigger than the two tax bills well then they would be you know like 800,000 mm-hmm so the next one we're not giving granted away it's going to happen Michael's going to ask for a subpoena we're going to grant a subpoena we're going to get them to agree that it's okay it's here I'd like to recall the citizens board of review of the city of Sheboygan in the session at this time we'd like to review the next objection two objections brought together one from FCE Morningside LLC agent name Bill Ardern property address 3431 North 13th street and parcel number 529281719360 assessment shown on notice as 2,368,400 opinion of assessed value is 1,250,000 the next one that was presented together was nationwide health properties agent name Bill Ardern property address 3129 Michigan Avenue parcel number 1213161 assessment shown as 3,137,400 opinion of assessed value 2,240,000 the assessor has a request yes I'd like to request the board not to grant a waiver at this time but instead to issue a subpoena for information alright is there a motion motion and second to grant the request is that acceptable to the objector assessor all right thank you for your cooperation we will therefore instruct the subpoena to be issued and we will postpone this hearing until later date to be determined any questions by either party if not thank you for your participation and agreement we will now go into recess for 20 minutes they might be coming early we can convene early I'll see what you do identify specific you should get the okay okay get the provided work through it okay alright that's good thanks I'd like to call the citizens board the city of Sheboygan back into session this time we have the next objection to be heard the objection is from rcs and powers Inc and the address is 2213 2235 Calumet Drive in Sheboygan the values the assessment is shown at one million 328,500 and the opinion of the assess value is $675,000 one note to make about this hearing is that board president ken king is requested to be removed from the hearing I can swear everybody in so I need who's ever going to be testifying to stand up and raise your right hand for me please and do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony which you shall give in the matter now on hearing shall be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God I do I need each of you to state your name and address into the microphone over here for the record Martha van de Leest did you need our work address or person personal address Martha van de Leest 1102 Creeks Cross Court Kohler Wisconsin Assessor City of Sheboygan 828 center Monica Sengphile 2460 Eastmark Drive in Sheboygan okay who wants to speak for yes at the microphone and state in your opinion the amount of the fair market value of your property and what you're objecting to I'm sorry I didn't hear you oh I thought I was okay now you state what you feel is your opinion of this property the fair market value and what you are objecting to again my name is Monica Sengphile and I am the senior vice president of HR and administration at RCS and part of my role is managing properties for RCS and the fair market value that we identified on the objection to the real property assessment is 675,000 we identified land at 400,000 and building at 275,000 we don't have a fair market value because we haven't had the property assessed or had any opinion on that okay do you want me to continue yeah okay so first of all we just want to thank the board for giving us the opportunity to present our objection this morning we have provided the clerk with copies of the objection form and supporting information regarding Calumet Square as a courtesy we also provided the financial information a copy of the objection form and materials to you we also provided that to the assessor last week for his review is it okay for me to distribute copies of the information at this time to all of you we have I believe I do except for the attorney would need a copy of everything please I prepared five copies so you can have them all and distribute as you feel necessary is that everything that you provided to me yes okay okay so RCS purchased the property in 2015 for 1.875,000 at the time we were looking at an opportunity that would require us to expand our operations however after we made the purchase the opportunity and the options had changed for us so why are we here today that's a very good question we filed the objection to the assessment quite simply because we weren't aware until now that the process it even existed Mr. King is a member of our board of directors which is why we have asked him to recuse himself from participating in the hearing because we certainly do not want there to appear any conflict of interest after Mr. King had toured our facility he was amazed at the condition and the high vacancy of the property so he asked us if the property had been assessed or if we had it inspected by the city assessor's office which we had not made us aware of the process and that's why we are here today there are circumstances that have changed in the last six years since RCS purchased the property first we don't consider the location any longer to be a high traffic retail area we have had other interested parties in the property however none of them pursued it further with us we were able to secure polyfab as a tenant for retail space in the former pick-and-save store unit however that only accounts for about 15,000 square feet of the 53,000 square feet of the building we are also being assessed we believe as this property has air conditioning which it does not we have had two we have two additional vacant properties there are unapproved retail spaces that amount to about 2700 located at the north end of the building we believe these vacant units are being assessed as occupied retail buildings another concern that we have with the assessment in valuation and assess value of the land currently we have a parking lot that has very little utilization and options we'd love to sell a parking lot but it's not very marketable especially in this area we also want to cite the value of the parcel located on north avenue which was previously north bowl lanes this parcel is approximately the same size but is valued and assessed at less than half of the assessment of our acreage the parking lot on north avenue on this property is still paved but does not have the maintenance costs or upkeep and responsibilities we have for snow plow etc therefore we are requesting the assess value of the land and improvement be adjusted to accurately reflect a more equitable assessment along with our objection we provided a number of exhibits to support our objection and I'd like to go through each one of those with you at this time exhibit one is the financial statement and I'm going to ask Martha to step up and go over that with you first okay so exhibit one is a comparative of two financial full financial years 2019 and 2020 2019 shows income of 187 to 30 2020 shows income of 180 to 69 this income represents polyfab which Monica had mentioned which is warehouse space currently king walk which closed in 2020 so that's why there's a reduced income reduced amount of income the dollar tree and papa Murphy's the last remaining the income reduction again was king walks after the first quarter and the revenue includes the current rents less the rebates we have to give because the pick and save area was never rented out as additional retail so there's rebates we have to give as a percentage of that property not being vacated as retail space the bottom line is a loss of 32,679 in 2019 and a loss of 16,152 in 2020 thank you on exhibits two and three merely represent a summary of the maintenance needs for the property in both the years 2019 and 2020 exhibit four identifies the occupied versus the occupied space the important thing we want to note here is that 57% of the total property is currently vacant in addition of the total square footage of that property percent is not air conditioned and that is made up by the entire pick and save unit as well as the vacant north unit exhibit five represents the property assessment from the city for the old pick and save unit it identifies the designated use as a neighborhood shopping center and it really should be designated as warehouse again this unit has no air conditioning exhibit six there are three pages the first set of photos represents the interior of the old pick and save unit showing the least space for warehousing and the remainder as vacant space the next set of photos represent the smaller vacant units the north unit is unfinished and then you can see the old vacant boost mobile unit the final set of photos shows the vacant parking lot and the back alley to the property exhibit seven represents comparable land at the old north bowl location on north avenue this property is comparable in size at approximately six acres and is assessed at $363,300 the six acres of land at Calumet square is assessed at $980,700 exhibit eight represents the most recent property tax bill for the property at this time both Martha and I would entertain any questions that anyone has regarding the property assessor do you have questions for them Mike do you have questions I'm sorry hand out I don't have any of the exhibits has there been a concerted effort to do any listing or to get tenants in the vacant spaces not other than the ones that RCS has been approached by we've had probably four to five different interested parties over the time we have owned the property and we have fully explored all of these options every time that we have been made aware I've got no other questions does anyone from the board of review have questions sure we purchased it after pick and save had vacated okay when was that 2015 and since then you still lost tenants correct when we purchased the property boost mobile occupied one of the units they vacated shortly after we purchased in 2020 King Walk closed his restaurant and we did not observe any rent from King Walk for the entire year or almost the entire year of 2020 and that impacted it as well but the subject property at 2213 Calumet Drive is composed of a parcel sitting 6.254 acres the building itself is approximately 53,457 square feet it's a multi-tenant with an anchor currently the anchor it's a vacated space looking at the back page of this handout gives the short history on the current parcel configuration and the assessment the assessment hasn't changed you know since 2018 and if I look at the assessment history for this property going back throughout the years in 2009 the property was assessed at $4,150,000 and then during the years 2010 through 2013 there were other reductions that were made in 2014 the last citywide revaluation the assessment was reduced to $1,290,000 from my perlusal of the record it appears that the concerns relative to the condition of the building have been addressed there had been a 93% discount to the useful life of the building so the building 53,000 square feet has a total assessed value of 347,800 so the building is a contributory factor to the total property is very small the 6.254 acres is assessed at 980,700 or approximately 157,000 per acre there was mention of a property at 2022 north avenue that's a former bowling alley the bowling alley was removed the land value has remained the same that is at approximately 60,000 per acre it does appear to be on the low side for what the property sold for I think it sold for eight and a quarter with the bowling alley and subsequently that was raised there is irregular shape to that property and it does on more of a secondary road however it was close to Calumet Drive I did do some research looking at other commercial parcels in that similar area and there's the property at 2033 north avenue and that on a per acre basis is at 415,000 per acre it's smaller 2610 Calumet Drive is at 327,000 per acre property at 2619 Calumet Drive is at 870,000 per acre and then the last property at 2713 Calumet Drive was at 653,000 per acre so by my prusel of looking at common or neighboring assessments because those parcels are a little bit smaller than the subject property they should command a higher per acre value the subject property at 2213 Calumet in my opinion is assessed uniformly and equitably at 157,000 per acre the loan property that I could see in looking here was that sticks out is the north avenue property which appears to be quite a bit less per acre so I not bringing sales of other similar properties because I don't think that there's a similar property in the condition that the subject property is there is a sale of the subject although I wouldn't call that recent it's certainly an indication of the value of the property present state which has declined over the years so I think that the present condition is considered in the total assessment of 1,328,500 in that the assessment is reasonable in light of the sale of the subject and in looking at comparable land values the land appears to be reasonable as well being both equitable in uniform with one isolated case that looks were that assessment is too low thank you questions for him or can I make a statement yes so there's definitely something to say about location location location and the properties the north bowl property we feel has a lot of similarities between the property on Calumet square again it's the same size the adjacent property is not retail it's industrial and commercial the property has a large paved parking lot which again does not need to be maintained as we mentioned earlier parking lots just have very little value unless they complement an ongoing business the property is deep in area and has limited frontage for access and therefore limits the appeal for development and if that property was developable if that's a word it would have been developed by now the major difference is that our assessed land value is approximately two and a half times that of the north avenue property for approximately the same size the current best use of the property at Calumet square is warehouse other than the two current retail operations thank you I've got nothing further to add I think in the end of my testimony I kind of already provided a summary and I believe that the issues with the property in my opinion are have been addressed in an adequate fashion thank you okay board members I just, when you keep saying the north avenue property does not have to be maintained why not somebody has to plow or somebody has to so it's not being used so I can only make the assumption that they don't have snow removal costs for the property like we would for Calumet square well I think it's always plowed okay that's all anything else any other comments questions thank you we will take deliberations at the end of our session and make a decision from us within 10 days are there any other objections that have been filed nope there are not having no other objections be filed we will close the hearings for today should be noted that there is based on superior subpoenas previously mentioned and offered that we will be meeting on that item and objection at some time to be determined in the future having nothing else the hearings will therefore end as of today we will go into deliberation within the next 10 minutes okay in case anybody needs a break pardon are you doing deliberations no it will be open it needs to be open we will give everyone a chance to if we don't need a break continue that's acceptable alright we will reconvene for the sake of going through deliberations should be noted at this time the testimony is allowed by any party and we will move forward the first objection clerk the first objection was property address 532 north 8th street the assessment was for 456,100 the opinion of the assess value was for 325,100 observations questions and discussion this has already been forward we make sure it's on that was my question go ahead this has already been reviewed and lowered correct any other observations my observation or what I'm looking at she provided information on comparables not really comparables just her neighboring places where I believe to have a more accurate value on appraisal would have been better versus the properties right next door she's just comparing saying my neighbors are x, y, z value that's hers I just think we need more information on appraisal something that gives us a more accurate value in order for us to determine a better like saying yes her value is true she just purchased it at the beginning of the year she did not have an appraisal done so she just bought it as is also this property was listed for a considerable period of time so my question that I would like to have answered with an appraisal or a current appraisal would be what would the fair market value really be given the fact that this appears after commercial properties on the market for a year or more or any properties on the market for a year or more is a distressed property and is it truly a price-length transaction yes because she also has stated that last time that it was sold it was sold for a lot more also so we don't have that information I mean what was it 10 years ago I believe further the tax rolls that were provided by the assessor you can see that the property had a significant reduction in 2021 and revalue revaluation 130 plus thousand any other observations or questions comments I would entertain a motion then excuse me was she already had her business in this I didn't ask her that when she bought it I don't know if her business was in there prior to the purchase or not but as of right now she's the only tenant upstairs and paying herself rent so I'm assuming that she has a tenant downstairs that pays the thousand a month but we don't know what the upstairs is so there was no income or expense justification provided either in this case considering all of that I make a motion that we uphold the assessor I make a motion that we uphold the assessed value I second so we have a motion in second to uphold the appraiser appraiser and assess value at 456,000 100 do I have a second second if I am saying aye aye let it be known that all members voted in favor of upholding the assessor I need to step away and turn this over to Pat for deliberation okay the next property we are looking at is $13,235 that is owned by RCS incorporated it is assessed at 1,328,500 and they would like it to be $675,000 and they presented a lot of information any questions I do and I don't know who the question would be for but possibly the assessor so when we assess properties we assess it has to be discussion based on the testimony we have heard I guess my discussion would be based on the property is there a difference between warehouse and real is there a difference between how we value a warehouse versus retail buildings so I don't know if that is a discussion or question or what we can ask those questions of the attorney in essence what I would say is this you are basing your determination on the information that came in at the hearing so if you don't have information from the hearing then you can only base it on the information that you have in front of you now I do believe that there were some exhibits provided that at least provide a modicum of detail on that but that's all you can really rely on as far as making that decision because just simply what was presented to you either orally or in an exhibit the other thing I noted they said this is not air conditioned well the whole warehouse apparently is not air conditioned and and there was a it's been assessed at having the HVAC warmed and cooled air and I don't know it's like 100% of the area and then there's so that's a discrepancy I don't know whether that on that part I can see from the pictures that the parking lot looks pretty bad and the grocery store doesn't you know it's just used for storage however they bought this property with the idea that it would be self-sufficient or a money maker and it turned out it isn't and we cannot value it the fact that it didn't turn out to be a money maker anyone else have a thought it says 59% of the building is vacant unoccupied and on the other hand she also said that they were not pursuing it out looking for tenants they had said that opportunities would come to them but it didn't seem like they were actively trying on their own to get the building occupied but that doesn't determine the assessed value so they just bought this in 18, oh 12, 18, 15 so they only had it for 6 years and they bought it for a million 875,000 I would say keep the value as is for now based on the information provided you know they could still come back and question it later and provide other documentation or maybe change the status of the building itself but as is it still retail it's still yes it's not being used for that but it's still being asked that I agree no changes have been made to change the designation of the building it's still got a lot of the retail aspects to it so maybe they can apply for a change in what type of building it is and that could change the value later I agree okay so I think so too so the do I have a motion to uphold the assessor? I will motion to uphold the assessor's value at this time and I will second that motion the motion passed we will uphold the assessor's value call for the vote vote all in favor say aye aye opposed thank you I turn the meeting back over to Ken that completes the that completes the hearings and the citizens board of review we will now stand in adjournment for this year thank you we will stand in adjournment and tell a future date to be determined specifically for the hearing on the properties regarding the subpoena alright thank you all for your time service