[30:34] Thank you.

[31:04] call whenever you let me just turn

[31:07] volume up on this one second here.

[31:23] See,

[31:26] >> the icon

[31:29] turn.

[31:32] » Just one second. Sorry.

[31:44] Sound. Okay.

[31:59] You want me to come to order? Would you

[32:00] like to go to order?

[32:02] >> Would you possibly?

[32:04] >> Okay. So, it's 9:31 on August 24th.

[32:07] We'll call the meeting to order

[32:10] and I'll start with the roll call.

[32:12] Hearing Officer Cohen

[32:14] >> present.

[32:15] >> Okay. And that concludes the roll call.

[32:18] Okay. Will everybody please stand for

[32:19] the pledge of allegiance?

[32:29] » Yes. We'll just

[32:32] >> and begin

[32:35] to flag United States of America and to

[32:39] the republic for which it stands. One

[32:41] nation under God, indivisible with

[32:45] liberty and justice for all. Will the

[32:47] audience please remain standing?

[32:51] I'll now place you under oath. Please

[32:53] raise your right hand. When I complete

[32:55] reading the oath, please state, I do.

[32:57] You do solemnly affirm that the

[32:59] testimony you're about to give in the

[33:00] matter now pending before this board

[33:02] will be the truth, the whole truth, and

[33:04] nothing but the truth.

[33:05] >> Thank you.

[33:16] That takes us to item number five,

[33:18] agenda review.

[33:23] The clerk of the board recommends

[33:24] approval of the agenda reviews by the

[33:26] assessment of by the hearing officer.

[33:28] The agenda review consists of the

[33:29] following agenda items. Item number 10,

[33:33] application number 231155.

[33:37] Francisco and Margaret Swain irrevocable

[33:39] trust denied due to lack of appearance.

[33:42] Item number 21, application number

[33:45] 2410484.

[33:48] Applicant N92714

[33:50] LLC, denied due to lack of appearance.

[33:54] Item number 24, application number

[33:56] 2411067.

[33:59] Applicant Matthew Freeland, removed from

[34:01] the agenda due to the submission of a

[34:02] withdrawal. Item number 25, application

[34:06] number 2411079.

[34:09] Applicant Lucas Sellers Wine denied due

[34:11] to lack of appearance.

[34:13] Item number 26, application number

[34:16] 25100005.

[34:19] Applicant Ohigh Valley Medp Spa denied

[34:22] due to lack of appearance. Item number

[34:24] 28, application number 25100018.

[34:29] Applicant, the Derek M. Olsen Living

[34:31] Trust, denied due to lack of appearance.

[34:34] Item number 29, application number

[34:36] 25100019,

[34:39] continue to October 26, 2026, pending

[34:42] receipt of an original stipulation.

[34:45] Item number 31, application number

[34:47] 2510237.

[34:49] Applicant Aurora Sendas continue to

[34:52] October 26, 2026, pending receipt of an

[34:55] original stipulation.

[34:57] Item number 35, application number

[34:59] 251041.

[35:02] Applicant Maria J. Martinez denied due

[35:05] to lack of appearance. Items number

[35:08] items 36 and 37. Applications 2510437

[35:13] and 2510439.

[35:16] Applicant Frederick Ward L. To tell

[35:18] Trust continue to October 26, 2026.

[35:22] Penny receipt of original stipulations.

[35:25] Item number 39, application number

[35:27] 2510470.

[35:30] Applicant Kenhai continue to October 26,

[35:33] 2026 pending receipt of original

[35:36] stipulations.

[35:38] Item number 40, application number

[35:40] 2510471.

[35:42] Applicant Alona Ferlin

[35:45] removed from the agenda due to the

[35:46] submission of withdrawal.

[35:49] Item number 41, application number

[35:51] 2510477.

[35:53] Applicant Roger Stone, continue to

[35:55] October 26, 2026. Penny receipt of

[35:58] original stipulations.

[36:01] Item number 42, application number

[36:04] 2510482.

[36:06] Applicant Masad M. Afar, continue to

[36:09] October 26, 2026, pending receipt of an

[36:12] original stipulation.

[36:14] Item number 43, application number

[36:17] 2510494.

[36:19] Applicant Anish B. Shestra, denied due

[36:23] to lack of appearance.

[36:25] Item number 44, application number

[36:28] 2510589.

[36:30] Applicant Frederick Silvers, denied due

[36:32] to lack of appearance.

[36:34] Item number 49, application number

[36:37] 2511779.

[36:39] Applicant Charlene Toledto continue to

[36:42] October 26, 2026 pending receipt of an

[36:45] original stipulation.

[36:48] Item number 50, application number

[36:50] 2511816,

[36:52] applicant Bolt Chiropractic, continue to

[36:55] October 26, 2026, pending receipt of an

[36:58] original stipulation.

[37:00] And item number 51, application number

[37:02] 2511837.

[37:05] Applicant Linda Santianis, continue to

[37:08] October 26, 2026 penny receipt of

[37:11] original stipulation.

[37:16] » The agenda is so approved.

[37:17] >> Okay.

[37:33] Sorry, I'm having issues.

[38:06] Okay. Item number six, public comments.

[38:09] Is anybody in attendance that does not

[38:11] have an item on the agenda?

[38:15] Okay. There are no requests to speak.

[38:19] Okay. Item number seven, hearing officer

[38:21] comments.

[38:22] >> No hearing officer comments.

[38:23] >> Okay. No comments. That takes us to um

[38:27] the first item on our agenda. Would you

[38:29] like to read it out or would you like me

[38:31] to take us through the agenda?

[38:32] >> Would you read it for us, please?

[38:34] >> Okay. First item, item number eight,

[38:36] application number 2310594,

[38:40] Martin Family Investments LLC, and we

[38:43] have David Misco here in person.

[38:47] Misco,

[38:48] >> morning.

[38:49] >> Good morning.

[38:50] >> Let's hold it over. I'm still waiting

[38:51] for all the refunds. I know resolution

[38:53] came from you folks in April, but we're

[38:54] still not [clears throat] getting the

[38:56] checks real fast.

[38:57] Okay.

[38:58] >> The assessor is good with that.

[39:00] Actually, our notes are there. He's

[39:02] waiting for the refund to withdraw his

[39:04] book deal basically.

[39:05] >> Okay. And so you'd like a a continuence

[39:07] until that has occurred.

[39:09] >> Okay.

[39:10] >> How how long do these refunds usually

[39:11] take?

[39:13] >> Has the assessor any idea?

[39:15] >> I don't want to have idea for the the a

[39:17] has some issues there. I don't know. You

[39:18] might contact the auditor's office.

[39:20] >> Okay. I got I got one in May and one in June. Haven't seen one since.

[39:26] So, our options for continuance are

[39:29] October 26, 2026, which is 63. And this goes for everyone requesting a

[39:34] continuence today. Um, we have October

[39:36] 26, 2026, 63 days from now. Um, I'm

[39:39] assuming there's no data, but if you

[39:41] need to provide data, it would be due by

[39:43] September 26, 2026, or February 22nd,

[39:47] 2027, which is 183 days from now. Data

[39:50] would be due January 23rd, 2027. Sorry,

[39:53] that's my typo.

[39:57] And uh you have a waiver on file so you

[39:59] can continue to whichever date you'd

[40:01] like.

[40:01] >> Let's do the February.

[40:02] >> February done there.

[40:04] >> Okay. Any um questions about that

[40:07] continuence date or issues from theor?

[40:09] >> Our the assessor has done everything

[40:12] need to get done at our end

[40:14] check.

[40:15] >> Okay, good. That was February 87.

[40:18] >> February 22nd 2027.

[40:20] >> Okay. Uh and so this matter is continued

[40:23] to February 22nd, 2027. Thank you.

[40:27] >> Thank you.

[40:34] » And then just to confirm the assessor,

[40:36] there's no data providing nothing.

[40:55] » [clears throat]

[40:56] >> And that takes us to item number nine,

[40:59] application number 2311125.

[41:02] Applicant David R. Williams.

[41:06] Do we have Mr. Williams in attendance?

[41:09] Okay. I did speak with the applicant

[41:11] last week. Um he was hopeful that a stip

[41:13] was going to be signed. Um but he

[41:16] understood that if it wasn't um he he

[41:19] was okay with the deny due to lack of

[41:20] appearance and so

[41:22] >> right

[41:23] >> the recommended action would be to deny

[41:25] application number 2311125

[41:28] for lack of appearance

[41:29] >> and that application is denied for lack

[41:31] of appearance.

[41:41] That takes us to items 11 through 13.

[41:44] Applications 2311849

[41:48] through 2311851.

[41:50] Applicant Dean Delorenzo.

[41:55] We have a Dean Delorenzo here.

[41:59] Okay. Um, I did speak with the applicant

[42:02] last week and he confirmed that his um

[42:09] that his appeal has been resolved. Um,

[42:11] and he wanted to continue for refund

[42:14] processing, but as he did not attend.

[42:16] Uh, we would recommend denying the

[42:19] applications due to lack of appearance.

[42:21] Uh, the issues been resolved. He'll get

[42:23] refunds regardless. Um, I think he just

[42:25] wanted to keep them open as a formality.

[42:28] >> Can the same as other children. The um

[42:31] we did everything on the assessor side

[42:32] or just wait for the auditor read button

[42:35] to check.

[42:35] >> Okay. Was it a stipulation?

[42:37] >> Uh

[42:39] I probably was. I do not know top of my

[42:41] head.

[42:41] >> All right. Uh so this application is

[42:43] denied for lack of appearance.

[42:55] And that takes us to item number 14.

[42:57] Application number 2311886.

[43:01] Applicant Sunil Raj Po Pro

[43:06] and we have Sil here in person.

[43:08] >> Yeah. Good morning. Um and at this time

[43:11] we continue to authorize those lies

[43:13] office and uh Mr. Jeffrey and uh today I

[43:17] would sincerely request continuence.

[43:20] >> You're requesting a continuance.

[43:22] >> Yes. And um I had a little difficulty

[43:24] hearing you. Could you tell me the

[43:26] reason you're requesting the

[43:27] continuence, please?

[43:28] >> Sure. As I uh mentioned uh we've been

[43:31] working very closely with uh M Jeffrey

[43:33] who's our assessor

[43:34] >> and there have been a lot of information

[43:36] additional information over the the

[43:39] course of last three or four weeks we

[43:41] have sent out information for the

[43:44] assessor's office to consider. So I

[43:45] would imagine it would take a limited

[43:46] time for them to suitably incorporate

[43:48] that and uh we can then proceed with the

[43:50] process.

[43:51] >> Okay, I see. Uh to the assessor could

[43:54] >> the applicant is correct. Um we're still

[43:56] working from this. Jeffree is still

[43:57] working with him and going through the

[43:58] process. So hopefully we don't have to

[44:00] hear but um

[44:01] >> Okay.

[44:01] >> Going through the process.

[44:02] >> Um okay, very fine. Um would you prefer

[44:05] the February uh the October the 26 2026

[44:10] date or the February 22 2027 date? Let

[44:14] me ask the assessor what they think

[44:15] first and I'll come back to you.

[44:18] >> Um either or would be f actually either

[44:21] or would be fine. I would actually say

[44:22] the February 22nd um 2027 would be

[44:24] actually the best for the assessor. Just

[44:26] as Jeff um asked some plans coming up.

[44:30] So I was wondering if they could push

[44:31] out where possible.

[44:33] >> All right. Thank you. Uh would the

[44:35] February 22nd, 2027 date work for you

[44:38] for to continue this matter?

[44:40] >> Well, I would effort to you know

[44:42] whatever works for the office. It's been

[44:44] pending for you know some time now and

[44:45] the information uh in the data request.

[44:47] So hoping there's not too much the

[44:49] additional data request but at this time

[44:52] we would prefer October but I was happy

[44:54] to sort of refer to the assessor's

[44:55] office you know not an issue.

[44:58] >> Did she give you any any estimate of how

[45:00] much time it would take for her to get

[45:02] back with you?

[45:03] >> No uh we didn't have conversation to

[45:06] that effect. We're still trying to sort

[45:07] of you know absorb the information and I

[45:10] would imagine that we receiving this

[45:11] hearing and busy so we didn't get to

[45:14] connect uh but as I said obviously it's

[45:16] been pending for some time so you know

[45:18] prefer October but then I would refer to the assess office happy to

[45:22] support the February timeline as well

[45:24] >> I see it's a 2023 appeal application

[45:28] um do you think it would be reasonable

[45:32] for October 26 in this case

[45:34] >> okay thank Thank you. So this matter is

[45:37] continued to October 26, 2026.

[45:41] >> Thank you.

[45:41] >> Okay. And you are available on that

[45:43] date?

[45:43] >> Yes.

[45:44] >> Okay. Perfect. And you have a waiver on

[45:45] file. So you are all set. Any additional

[45:48] data would be um turned into by

[45:50] September 26th.

[45:52] >> Thanks.

[46:12] That takes us to

[46:15] item number 15, application number

[46:18] 2311946.

[46:20] Applicant Thompson Family Trust.

[46:24] Do we have anyone checked in for

[46:27] Thompson Family Trust?

[46:30] No.

[46:32] Okay. So, looks like no one has checked

[46:34] in for this item. Um, I did speak with

[46:36] the applicant last week and confirmed uh

[46:39] Rita would be intendance in attendance

[46:41] for a continuence request, but it looks

[46:44] like um it'll be a denied due to lack of

[46:47] appearance.

[46:48] >> Yes, this this shall be denied for lack

[46:50] of appearance.

[47:01] And that takes us to item number 16,

[47:03] application number 2311957,

[47:06] Reed Trust, dated March 7th, 2023.

[47:10] We have

[47:11] >> Brandon, John, Senator on behalf of my

[47:13] client Patty Joe Reed. We spoke with the

[47:17] assessor's office and agreed to

[47:19] continue, but that's okay.

[47:22] >> Okay. And for what reason though?

[47:24] >> Still working with my client on trying

[47:26] to figure out a resolution. Just not quite an error on figuring out

[47:30] a resolution to the

[47:33] >> Okay.

[47:33] >> Sorry.

[47:35] >> I see this is a 2023 case. Uh to the

[47:38] assessor, could you brief me on where

[47:40] you are on this?

[47:43] >> Um my notes don't show that right now.

[47:46] Um my notes say attorney will continue.

[47:49] Um

[47:50] actually Jose Angel can you come up and

[47:54] speak to that?

[47:57] >> Yes with the assessor's office. Um so we

[48:01] did our review but we don't see

[48:05] uh how to resolve the issue. Um so the

[48:08] attorney has to decide if they want to

[48:09] present

[48:11] resolution.

[48:14] >> So that's what I'm working with my

[48:15] client on. We're trying to work on

[48:16] figuring out what we want to do, whether

[48:19] we want to submit more information or

[48:21] how to resolve it.

[48:22] >> Okay.

[48:23] >> Just not there yet.

[48:24] >> Okay. So, I'm understanding the assessor

[48:26] that there's no recommended reduction

[48:28] that you the assessor would be

[48:30] supporting the role value. Correct.

[48:33] Okay. How much time do you feel you

[48:35] would need to speak with your client and

[48:38] >> probably the February date would be best

[48:40] if it's enough time for preparing?

[48:43] >> Okay. Okay. Uh, what type of property is

[48:46] this?

[48:47] >> It's a single family residence or home.

[48:49] >> Uhhuh.

[48:50] >> Yeah.

[48:51] >> Do you need till February to prepare

[48:55] appraisal for single family residents?

[48:57] >> Maybe

[49:00] it's a change in ownership issue. Yeah.

[49:02] >> Oh, it's a change in ownership issue.

[49:05] Okay. Rather than a valuation issue.

[49:07] >> Correct.

[49:08] >> Oh, I see. I see. Okay. Okay. Um, all

[49:13] right. This matter is then continued.

[49:15] Does the assessor by the way have any

[49:17] objection to or or any thoughts about

[49:19] continuing to the February 2027 date?

[49:23] >> No, we do not.

[49:24] >> All right. Okay. So, this matter then is

[49:27] continued to February 22nd, 2027.

[49:31] >> And then I just want to confirm is there

[49:33] a data provisal on that?

[49:36] >> Um three I have a 30-day provisal

[49:39] hearing. Do you have any objections to

[49:40] providing any data to the assessor's

[49:42] office at least 30 days prior to

[49:45] >> just in case?

[49:45] >> No objection.

[49:46] >> Is that data requested by the assessor?

[49:49] Is that is that how that works?

[49:51] >> It's a change ownership. So, it's a

[49:52] little different to recording deeds and

[49:54] that aspect of it, but we do like a

[49:56] 30-day previsor if we do need something

[49:57] different from the applicant. Would that

[49:59] be triggered by a request from the

[50:01] assessor or is that just a blanket

[50:03] request where you're asking the

[50:05] applicant to send

[50:07] any information that he may feel is

[50:09] pertinent?

[50:09] >> A blanket within 30 days. If Jose is

[50:12] still going through the files and trying

[50:13] to well, he did go through the files,

[50:15] but anything else he could provide us,

[50:16] the applicant can provide us for his

[50:18] case may help us out.

[50:21] >> Is there any information that you need

[50:23] at this point?

[50:24] >> Um, from our review, it does on the

[50:26] plan. We just need to know if they're

[50:29] going to withdraw or they're going to

[50:30] >> Okay. Thank you.

[50:31] >> And we don't see a resolution

[50:33] data received everyone the situation.

[50:36] >> All right. Thank you.

[50:37] >> So if it helps the data proviso is if

[50:40] they provide additional data, it needs

[50:41] to be 30 days prior to give Jose and Joe

[50:44] enough time. Um I don't think they're

[50:46] asking for anything at this point, but

[50:48] if they do, just 30 days prior. If

[50:51] there's data that you'd like the

[50:52] assessor to review that you would be

[50:55] presenting that you feel is pertinent

[50:57] then um the uh order is going to be

[51:01] asking you to present that to the

[51:03] assessor no later than 30 days prior to

[51:06] the hearing which is going to be

[51:08] February 22nd 2027 and that is so

[51:11] ordered.

[51:13] make it. We'll be fine.

[51:20] » And you have a waiver, correct?

[51:21] >> Yes. Yes. That application has a

[51:23] two-year waiver on file. So, you're all

[51:25] set.

[51:25] >> Thank you.

[51:26] very much. I appreciate it.

[51:30] >> Thank you.

[51:32] >> That takes us to item number 17,

[51:35] application number 2410265.

[51:38] applicant Christine Chia uh Fang.

[51:44] Do we have anyone here for that item?

[51:47] Okay. Looks like we spoke with uh the

[51:55] applicant last week and she indicated

[51:58] she'd be submitting a withdrawal, but we

[52:00] did not receive that withdrawal. Uh the

[52:02] recommendation would be to deny due to

[52:04] lack of appearance.

[52:05] >> Okay. It's ordered that this is denied

[52:07] due to lack of appearance.

[52:16] That takes us to item number 18,

[52:18] application number 2410392,

[52:22] applicant Charles Elliott. Do we have

[52:24] anyone checked in for Charles Elliott?

[52:31] Okay. Uh, my notes indicate that we

[52:34] spoke with the applicant last week and

[52:36] he indicates he sold the vessel and will

[52:38] no longer pursue the appeal. Um, I did

[52:41] send over those withdrawal instructions,

[52:42] but we did not receive a withdrawal. So,

[52:44] the recommendation would be to deny due

[52:46] to lack of appearance.

[52:47] >> It is ordered that this is application

[52:49] is denied due to lack of appearance.

[52:57] » Okay. Items 19 and 20 can be handled

[53:00] simultaneously. These are applications

[53:02] 2410399

[53:04] and 251171.

[53:07] Applicant Vidal Valencia. Uh we we were

[53:10] expecting this application these

[53:12] applications to move forward today. Uh

[53:15] the applicant called our office this

[53:16] morning and indicates that he will not

[53:18] be pursuing the matter and is fine with

[53:20] a denial due to lack of appearance.

[53:23] >> Okay. Then it is ordered that the two

[53:26] applications shall be denied due to lack

[53:28] of appearance.

[53:39] That takes us to applicate to item

[53:41] number 22, application number 2410492.

[53:46] Applicant William Huninger and we have

[53:48] Mr. Huninger here in person.

[53:51] >> Thank you.

[53:52] >> Good morning.

[53:53] >> Just for investigate continuence. I've

[53:54] been working with my the assessor's

[53:56] office um and he asp.

[54:03] » All right. And um if this is going to be

[54:07] approved for continuence, would you

[54:08] prefer October the 26 26 or February 22

[54:13] 27?

[54:15] >> Whatever this means.

[54:16] >> Okay. Let me check with them and see how

[54:18] they're feeling. Um

[54:21] could you brief me on this please?

[54:24] This is an aircraft actually.

[54:26] [clears throat]

[54:29] Um, we got late data on 8526.

[54:32] So, we need some time to process it.

[54:34] That's the pro what we're doing right

[54:35] now.

[54:35] >> Uhhuh.

[54:36] >> Um, a continuous be for the assessor for

[54:39] 20 26 2026.

[54:42] >> Okay. Is there any other information

[54:43] that you need?

[54:44] >> I always like 30 advisor just in case

[54:46] there's some information that we come up

[54:48] with that we may need or the applicant

[54:49] has some more data want to give to us.

[54:51] >> Okay. So, the provisor, the 30-day

[54:54] provisal would be if the assessor

[54:55] requests information from you, they

[54:57] would uh or would like to have it um

[55:01] what will be ordered that it will be

[55:03] turned in to the assessor no later than

[55:06] 30 days prior to the continued hearing

[55:09] which um is October the 26, 2026. Would

[55:13] that work for you?

[55:14] >> Yes.

[55:14] >> Okay.

[55:16] >> And there's a waiver on file.

[55:18] >> Mr. Ninger just provided a waiver, so we

[55:20] are all set.

[55:21] >> Okay. So, it is ordered that this

[55:23] application shall be continued to

[55:25] October 26, 2026 with a 30-day uh

[55:30] proviso and with waiverss on file.

[55:34] >> Thank you.

[55:36] >> We're set. Thank you.

[55:43] » Okay. And so that takes us to item

[55:45] number 23, application number 2410576.

[55:50] Applicant AM2

[55:53] fly Susan Ying here in person.

[55:57] >> Good morning.

[55:58] >> Morning. Uh I've made three copies here.

[56:02] >> Okay. Are you prepared to go forward

[56:04] with hearing today?

[56:05] >> Yes, I am.

[56:06] >> Okay, good. You know what we're going to

[56:07] do? Uh, let us finish this this agenda

[56:10] first and then you'll be the first one

[56:12] up for hearing.

[56:13] >> Oh, okay. Sure.

[56:14] >> Okay. Not not yet. Not quite yet.

[56:16] >> Yeah. So, you can just hang on to those.

[56:18] Um, you're checked in. We're moving

[56:19] forward with the hearing today. So,

[56:20] we'll get the continuences out of the

[56:22] way and then um the assessor, are you

[56:24] confirming you're prepared to present?

[56:25] >> Assess our mic and um Kristen will be

[56:27] ready to present. Yes.

[56:29] >> Okay. Okay.

[56:34] » Okay. And that takes us to

[56:36] item number 27, application number

[56:39] 251006.

[56:43] Applicant Kayn Glazer. And we have

[56:45] Kaylin here in person.

[56:46] >> Yes.

[56:48] >> Good morning. Could you brief me on what

[56:50] we're going to be doing today?

[56:52] >> I think I'm asking for a continuence

[56:53] because we're resubmitting everything.

[56:57] >> Okay.

[56:59] >> So, just a little background on this

[57:00] one. Um there are two marks in the

[57:02] assessor's office that they've been

[57:04] working with

[57:05] >> and so they believe they provided all

[57:07] their data

[57:08] >> to the assessor's office but

[57:11] >> not to Mark Stove

[57:14] >> in the appeals department. So just a

[57:17] little

[57:17] >> they told you that?

[57:18] >> Yes. Yeah. Yeah. We had a little

[57:20] [laughter]

[57:20] >> Yeah.

[57:21] >> You just discovered that did you how

[57:23] long ago?

[57:25] >> On on Thursday when I called say I

[57:27] gotten a call saying submit everything

[57:28] like I submitted everything to Mark.

[57:31] And it was the wrong part. Oh,

[57:33] >> okay. So, Mark didn't forward it over.

[57:35] >> No, usually our departments or

[57:37] residential or um property transfer

[57:39] division works the everything up front

[57:42] and then they file appeal. We get the

[57:43] data from applicants. So, fresh eyes

[57:45] look at the appeal. We could not get

[57:48] skewed by what our departments did.

[57:50] >> Okay. But Mark didn't forward.

[57:51] >> Mark didn't forward it. No. And we

[57:53] usually don't get forwarded um

[57:54] information unless he did it recently.

[57:56] >> I see. All right. Okay. Um so then um

[58:01] forgive me if you've already said when

[58:03] did you for forward the information over

[58:05] to the assessment appeals mark?

[58:08] >> Uh

[58:12] just approximately we'll be fine.

[58:21] the uh the the the mark that is supposed

[58:24] to review your material from appeals.

[58:26] Was that just recently?

[58:29] >> No, was it just recently? It was

[58:32] >> she she's asking about this this note.

[58:34] [laughter]

[58:37] » Sorry, I forwarded all the emails that I

[58:39] sent to

[58:40] >> When did you send it to this Mark?

[58:42] >> Just this past Thursday.

[58:43] >> Oh, you said so. Okay. Okay. Thank you.

[58:45] I forgot you said that. I'm sorry. And

[58:47] which date would you like to continue to

[58:49] the

[58:51] >> Okay. And then um Mark, is there any

[58:53] more information that you have you had a

[58:55] chance to review?

[58:57] >> Okay.

[58:57] >> So I imagine your procedure will be

[58:59] review and let the applicant know if you

[59:01] need more.

[59:02] >> Yeah.

[59:02] >> And then how much time before the

[59:04] hearing would you like to see that

[59:05] information? Uh

[59:07] >> 30 days should it shouldn't take uh too

[59:09] much documentation to prove your

[59:12] >> Okay. Thank you.

[59:14] There you go.

[59:15] >> Okay.

[59:17] Um, all right. And then there is a

[59:19] waiver on file.

[59:20] >> Uh, this So, if you're okay signing a

[59:22] waiver, we have a a paper there for the

[59:25] application. Um, and that's for the

[59:27] continuence request.

[59:30] >> And you're all right with signing that

[59:31] waiver and turning that in to the clerk?

[59:34] >> Yes. Is there any reason I shouldn't be?

[59:36] >> It's up to you. You don't have to sign

[59:38] it. Um, we have deadlines to get your

[59:42] appeal resolved. And so if you sign a

[59:44] waiver, it just kind of gives you more

[59:47] flexibility with working with Mark. Um

[59:51] it's up to you,

[59:52] >> but you can if you sign it. By the way,

[59:55] uh we have two years to hear your case

[59:58] in from from filing. So um I don't think we normally ask for

[1:00:04] them from 25 cases, do we?

[1:00:07] >> Um we have been because it's

[1:00:09] >> been an issue um

[1:00:11] >> Okay.

[1:00:11] >> lately. Okay. But I didn't mess up.

[1:00:14] >> No.

[1:00:15] >> Okay, good. So, um, yeah. So, it there's

[1:00:19] just basically

[1:00:21] the appeals board has two years from the

[1:00:24] date of filing of your application to

[1:00:26] render a decision. Okay? And if they

[1:00:29] miss that, um, then

[1:00:33] the value that you put on your

[1:00:34] application goes on the roll until the

[1:00:36] case can be heard. Now, um so that

[1:00:40] waiver, um is waving your right to have

[1:00:43] your application heard within the 2-year

[1:00:47] deadline.

[1:00:48] >> Okay.

[1:00:48] >> And if you sign that, you do have a um

[1:00:51] the option to um resend that waiver in

[1:00:56] writing.

[1:00:56] >> Okay.

[1:00:57] >> And are the instructions on the waiver

[1:01:00] by chance?

[1:01:01] >> Uh yes, I believe so. I believe it it

[1:01:03] explains um

[1:01:05] >> they can be revoked at any time.

[1:01:07] >> Yeah. And so

[1:01:08] >> so you'll get a copy of that if you

[1:01:09] decide to sign that. Are you all right

[1:01:11] with signing that?

[1:01:12] >> But if she doesn't sign it,

[1:01:15] >> um then they just terminate the case.

[1:01:19] >> No. No. Um if she doesn't sign it, um

[1:01:22] basically we make sure to get your case

[1:01:25] heard before that two years is expired.

[1:01:29] >> So her original application was in

[1:01:32] [clears throat] 2023.

[1:01:35] When was that application filed? What

[1:01:36] was the date?

[1:01:37] >> So, that's a separate um that that

[1:01:40] application wasn't accepted. It was

[1:01:41] filed outside of the

[1:01:42] >> Okay. filing peri. So, this is this is a

[1:01:44] 2025 application for a change in

[1:01:46] ownership.

[1:01:47] >> So, we're we're we're going by the 2025

[1:01:49] application. The 2023

[1:01:52] is not on the agenda here. We're talking

[1:01:55] about this 2025.

[1:01:57] And that was filed when?

[1:01:59] >> Um July 2nd, 2025.

[1:02:05] Okay. Do you want to do you want to

[1:02:07] speak with each other and then we'll

[1:02:09] come back to you. You can decide.

[1:02:12] >> Is all right.

[1:02:15] >> Yes.

[1:02:16] >> If she has data for us, can is those

[1:02:18] copies? Can we can you hand them to Mark

[1:02:19] now? So we don't have to mail them in or

[1:02:21] email them or

[1:02:23] >> documentation. That'd be great if you

[1:02:26] or or give Jose.

[1:02:28] >> Do you have your You're keeping your

[1:02:30] original, right?

[1:02:31] >> They're all just copies.

[1:02:35] So we don't have

[1:02:37] >> Okay. All right. So then um let's see

[1:02:41] here. Um then um

[1:02:45] we're talking about continuing till

[1:02:49] for this. What do you think? October.

[1:02:51] Yeah,

[1:02:51] >> I think you said so.

[1:02:52] >> It should be.

[1:02:53] >> Okay. Thank you. Um how uh would October

[1:02:56] the 26, 2026 work for you for this

[1:02:59] hearing to be continued to? Okay. So

[1:03:02] it's so it's ordered that this uh

[1:03:04] hearing shall be continued to October

[1:03:06] 26, 2026

[1:03:09] um with the data proviso of 30 days

[1:03:13] prior to hearing no later than and

[1:03:17] that's with signed waiver which the

[1:03:19] applicant has consented to. That's so

[1:03:22] ordered. Thank you.

[1:03:25] >> You're all set.

[1:03:33] Okay, that takes us to item number.

[1:03:36] >> Somebody has a question.

[1:03:37] >> I just wanted to ask, are you a judge?

[1:03:39] >> No, I'm an attorney. I'm an attorney.

[1:03:42] >> Know who? Everyone.

[1:03:44] >> Yeah, I'm not uh employed by the

[1:03:46] assessor's office, by the way. I'm

[1:03:48] independent

[1:03:50] here to provide unbiased opinions.

[1:03:53] Okay.

[1:03:56] » Okay. Thank you. And then sorry, can we

[1:03:58] get your name for the record?

[1:04:00] >> Glazer.

[1:04:03] » E L I N.

[1:04:05] >> E L L E N

[1:04:08] G L A C E R. I'm

[1:04:14] supposed to

[1:04:18] » Okay, thank you. You're all set. As soon

[1:04:20] as we get that waiver, you can.

[1:04:22] Okay, that takes us to item number 30.

[1:04:24] Application number 2510179.

[1:04:28] Applicant Ashan uh Gai and Shaham Fatmi.

[1:04:33] Do we have anyone checked in for this

[1:04:35] item?

[1:04:38] Okay. My notes indicate that we spoke

[1:04:40] with the applicant last week and they

[1:04:43] were going to submit a withdrawal. Um,

[1:04:45] but we're fine with deny due to lack of

[1:04:47] appearance. If they did not get that

[1:04:49] withdrawing, the recommendation would be

[1:04:51] to deny the lack of appearance.

[1:04:52] >> It is so ordered.

[1:05:03] That takes us to item number 32,

[1:05:06] application number 2510346.

[1:05:09] Applicant Kai Chiron.

[1:05:12] We have Kai here in person.

[1:05:16] » Okay. Uh, do you want to give us an

[1:05:18] update on your appeal?

[1:05:20] >> Yeah. When I find the paper for the

[1:05:22] appeal, I submitted on the paper. If not

[1:05:25] understanding, I think I spoke to you

[1:05:27] and he told me to call Mark and he said

[1:05:30] he didn't receive the copy of the paper.

[1:05:34] So, I'm here to submit it again, I

[1:05:37] guess, and hopefully resolve it.

[1:05:40] >> Okay, let me ask the assessor. Let me

[1:05:42] get their thoughts on this

[1:05:45] >> um to the assessor. Can you brief me on

[1:05:46] this, please? The notes my notes

[1:05:48] basically say that he submitted with his

[1:05:50] application the information the clerk of

[1:05:52] the board

[1:05:53] >> does not for that to us because of the

[1:05:55] application. Oh.

[1:05:56] >> So we never got it. Um and we still

[1:05:59] haven't received the data. So today he

[1:06:01] was to give us the data and we can

[1:06:02] proceed from here.

[1:06:03] >> Okay.

[1:06:04] >> Do continuence.

[1:06:05] >> All right. All right. Uh and and you

[1:06:07] have information for a copy for the

[1:06:10] assessor today. All right. Um and um

[1:06:16] then uh would you would you need um

[1:06:19] proviso uh after you re for after you

[1:06:22] review the information if you should

[1:06:24] need more?

[1:06:24] >> Yes, there's always yes 30 proviso would

[1:06:26] be great.

[1:06:27] >> Okay.

[1:06:27] >> Any of the hearing dates those two

[1:06:29] dates.

[1:06:30] >> Okay. And which date do you prefer?

[1:06:32] >> I prefer not to come again because I

[1:06:34] posted border to Arizona. So for that

[1:06:37] matter it seems like commute. Oh,

[1:06:39] >> who renders the whole process worthless?

[1:06:42] I rather

[1:06:43] >> provide the information whatever they

[1:06:45] decide they decide and don't want to

[1:06:47] come here.

[1:06:48] >> Is it a base year appeal?

[1:06:51] >> It's actually from the assessor's

[1:06:53] office. I'm handling our appeal for you,

[1:06:55] sir. Um, it's not a base year appeal.

[1:06:57] It's you sold the vote just after lean

[1:06:59] day. So, it's that sale information we

[1:07:01] would need to try and evaluate whether

[1:07:02] or not we should revise our lean date

[1:07:04] assessment. [clears throat]

[1:07:05] >> Oh, I see.

[1:07:06] >> We just don't have to date again for the

[1:07:07] sale price.

[1:07:08] >> All right. All right. Would you be the

[1:07:10] person accepting the information? Okay.

[1:07:13] >> Okay. Um,

[1:07:14] >> thank you.

[1:07:17] >> All right, then. Um,

[1:07:28] make sure

[1:07:30] >> in case you decide and change your mind

[1:07:32] and decide.

[1:07:34] >> No, let me just ask you this way. Okay.

[1:07:35] because I have I have to have one of two

[1:07:37] dates in case you were to decide to

[1:07:40] change your mind. Would you uh want to

[1:07:42] come up?

[1:07:43] >> It would be February.

[1:07:44] >> February. Okay.

[1:07:47] So, this matter is then continued

[1:07:49] to February 22nd, 2027

[1:07:54] uh with a 30-day proviso. And this is

[1:07:56] the waiver waivers.

[1:07:58] >> Um so, we don't have a waiver on file.

[1:08:00] It sounds like he's not going to proceed

[1:08:02] if the

[1:08:05] >> Do you want to get him to sign a waiver

[1:08:07] if he will do so?

[1:08:08] >> Are you willing to sign a waiver for the

[1:08:09] two years?

[1:08:10] >> Since it was since last year, it gives

[1:08:12] you another year. So, I see no point.

[1:08:15] >> Okay. So, he's refusing to sign the

[1:08:16] waiver. Um, we have

[1:08:17] >> with no waiver on file. So, ordered

[1:08:20] continued. Okay. Thank you.

[1:08:23] >> Okay. Thank you.

[1:08:37] And that takes us to item number 33,

[1:08:41] application number 2510361.

[1:08:44] Applicant Rajie Yata. And we have uh

[1:08:47] Rajie here in person. Um our office did

[1:08:50] not receive a confirmation of attendance

[1:08:52] on this application. Um the applicant

[1:08:54] indicates that he did email us one. We

[1:08:57] searched our records and were unable to

[1:08:58] locate a confirmation of attendance.

[1:09:00] >> Um so we would

[1:09:02] >> recommend having a conversation with the

[1:09:04] assessor's office and requesting a

[1:09:06] continuence of this matter.

[1:09:08] >> Okay.

[1:09:08] >> Um

[1:09:10] >> let let me

[1:09:11] >> possible we have we are very prepared

[1:09:14] for it.

[1:09:17] >> Are you prepared to move forward today

[1:09:19] if the assessor is? Well, let me just

[1:09:21] check with the assessor. Okay. Just a

[1:09:24] minute please to the assessor. Are you

[1:09:26] prepared to move forward?

[1:09:27] >> We are not prepared to go forward with

[1:09:29] this case. Um

[1:09:30] >> because

[1:09:31] >> we weren't he wasn't no confirmation of

[1:09:33] parents

[1:09:33] >> because they're not prepared.

[1:09:34] >> Click on my notes here too. I believe we

[1:09:36] still need some data from him. I believe

[1:09:38] >> yes. So the no confirmation of

[1:09:40] attendance requires a reschedule. Um and

[1:09:43] the assessor is waved from submitting a

[1:09:45] presentation um due to the no

[1:09:46] confirmation of attendance. Again, the

[1:09:48] applicant indicates he sent us one. We

[1:09:50] searched our email. We searched our

[1:09:51] online portal. We didn't get a

[1:09:52] confirmation of attendance. Um, so you

[1:09:54] can certainly provide that data to the

[1:09:56] assessor today, request a continuance.

[1:09:59] Hopefully there's no need to come back

[1:10:01] um if they review it and and agree. Um,

[1:10:04] but yeah, you would be required to

[1:10:06] request a continuence today since we

[1:10:07] didn't receive a confirmation of

[1:10:09] attendance.

[1:10:10] >> And then the confir where did you send

[1:10:12] the confirmation last time to the

[1:10:14] applicant? How how did you how did you

[1:10:17] provide the conf confirmation that you

[1:10:19] sent?

[1:10:20] >> Emile.

[1:10:20] >> Emailed.

[1:10:21] >> Yeah.

[1:10:22] >> Okay. Um, may I make a suggestion? Sure.

[1:10:26] >> Uh, when when you make a confirmation

[1:10:30] for this continued hearing, may I

[1:10:33] suggest you give them a telephone call

[1:10:34] to make sure that they've received it?

[1:10:36] So, Okay.

[1:10:38] >> Okay. Good. Um, and then do you have a

[1:10:41] waiver?

[1:10:41] >> We do not have a waiver. Would you be

[1:10:43] willing to sign the two-year waiver for

[1:10:45] the continuence request similar to the

[1:10:47] previous

[1:10:50] >> Okay. Um, and um I'm sorry. Did which

[1:10:55] date uh did we prefer?

[1:10:58] >> Either one's fine.

[1:10:59] >> Either one. Okay. And which date do you

[1:11:01] prefer to come back? October 26, 2026.

[1:11:05] >> Yes.

[1:11:06] >> Okay. Good. And the assessor may be

[1:11:10] requesting additional information.

[1:11:12] >> I found my notes on here. Actually, we

[1:11:13] have not received any data from the

[1:11:15] applicant. So, we definitely would need

[1:11:16] some data if they have today. Um.

[1:11:18] >> Okay. And

[1:11:20] >> you've requested data, have you?

[1:11:21] >> Yes. My notes from Miss Jeff is still

[1:11:24] waiting for documentation by applicant.

[1:11:25] So, we still haven't received any

[1:11:26] documentation from

[1:11:27] >> Okay.

[1:11:28] >> So, it looks like it just was handed to

[1:11:30] Jose.

[1:11:30] >> Jose has it now. So, that's great.

[1:11:32] >> Oh, good. Okay. Excellent. Okay. So this

[1:11:35] matter is continued to October 26, 2026

[1:11:39] with the um applicant consenting to sign

[1:11:43] a written waiver today and there shall

[1:11:46] be a 30-day proviso if the assessor

[1:11:49] needs more information um that you shall

[1:11:52] be submitting it no later than 30 days

[1:11:54] before October 26, 2026.

[1:11:57] And that is so ordered. Thank you.

[1:12:00] >> Then if you don't mind waiting around a

[1:12:01] few minutes, my colleague's going to

[1:12:02] bring down more waiverss. We we ran out

[1:12:04] of the the paper.

[1:12:14] That takes us to item number 34,

[1:12:16] application number 2510394.

[1:12:19] Applicant Eric Garcia.

[1:12:23] We have Eric Garcia here in person.

[1:12:26] >> Good morning.

[1:12:26] >> Hi.

[1:12:27] Um question to see if they can reassess

[1:12:30] the uh the stipulation

[1:12:32] to reflect a little closer to actual

[1:12:35] cost of repairs that are going to be

[1:12:36] required.

[1:12:37] >> Oh, is this is that stipulation um

[1:12:40] signed by all of the parties or just the

[1:12:43] assessor? What what what's the status of

[1:12:46] the signatures on that?

[1:12:47] >> There is Okay.

[1:12:50] >> So, it hasn't been signed. the it sounds

[1:12:51] like the assessor's office has offered a

[1:12:53] stipulation and he hasn't signed it and

[1:12:55] so he wants more time to

[1:12:57] >> um for our discussion he wants more time

[1:12:59] to see if they can

[1:13:01] >> you don't quite agree with the you feel

[1:13:03] the stipulated value is not correct

[1:13:06] >> correct okay um have you discussed it

[1:13:09] with the assessor yet

[1:13:10] >> not actually feels like it kind of was

[1:13:13] in standby since the first time we

[1:13:15] showed up

[1:13:16] >> okay

[1:13:16] >> yeah okay

[1:13:17] >> I guess I'll do that now

[1:13:19] >> okay And um let me check with the

[1:13:22] assistant and I'll come back with you on

[1:13:24] a date.

[1:13:25] >> Okay. Could you brief me on this?

[1:13:27] >> Um right, Miss Jeff um Dr. applicant

[1:13:32] >> gave him the stipulation and still

[1:13:33] waiting to hear back or heard anything

[1:13:34] back since the stipulation got offered.

[1:13:36] Um so we're still waiting. So we didn't

[1:13:38] know if he was agree with the

[1:13:39] stipulation or not.

[1:13:40] >> I guess he does not. Okay.

[1:13:42] >> Um we going to continue if possible we

[1:13:44] could work with them and go from there.

[1:13:46] >> Okay. Uh how much time does the assessor

[1:13:48] need? Uh would you prefer the October

[1:13:51] 26th date?

[1:13:52] >> That'd be that'd be fine for the

[1:13:53] >> assessment. Either date is fine.

[1:13:57] >> Okay, great. Um okay. And then um

[1:14:00] >> and then same thing, we have the we have

[1:14:02] the um the two waiver right there. It

[1:14:04] sounds like it's a quick continuence. Um

[1:14:07] but

[1:14:08] >> Okay, perfect. Thank you.

[1:14:09] >> And you agreed to sign that?

[1:14:11] >> Correct.

[1:14:12] >> Okay, thank you. Okay. So, this it's

[1:14:15] going to be ordered that this matter

[1:14:16] shall be continued to October 26, 2026

[1:14:21] uh with the 30-day proviso

[1:14:24] and uh with the applicant stating that

[1:14:27] he will be signing the wa written waiver

[1:14:29] today. So, or that's that's the order.

[1:14:32] >> Okay.

[1:14:35] Thank you. And then I'll take the

[1:14:37] waiver.

[1:14:41] Okay.

[1:14:46] is from the explanation just

[1:14:59] okay that takes us to

[1:15:04] sorry item number

[1:15:09] 38 application number 251 10461

[1:15:14] applicant Farzad Moajani.

[1:15:17] Do we have Farzad here? Okay.

[1:15:20] >> Thank you for the opportunity for

[1:15:21] considering my case. Uh I'm here to

[1:15:24] request for a I've been um communicating

[1:15:28] with Mark Stober from the cessor's

[1:15:32] office and he was wondering if you could

[1:15:34] consider continuous to allow more time

[1:15:37] for the communication.

[1:15:39] >> Okay.

[1:15:41] Um, have you provided information to to

[1:15:45] the assessor?

[1:15:46] >> Yes, I have provided information

[1:15:50] to the access.

[1:15:52] >> Okay. And then let me check with the

[1:15:53] assessor. Could you brief me on this?

[1:15:56] >> Uh, we received information on the 13th

[1:15:58] of this month. So, we still need time to

[1:16:00] go through it and make sure our

[1:16:03] evaluation what we do valuation or

[1:16:05] change ownership.

[1:16:06] >> Okay.

[1:16:10] value.

[1:16:11] >> It's it's value for a date of change of

[1:16:14] ownership.

[1:16:15] >> Is that right? Or is it a decline?

[1:16:18] >> Uh I believe it's a data change.

[1:16:29] » And Mr. Mahadani, are you also the

[1:16:31] waiver? Are you okay sending the um the

[1:16:34] waiver for the continuence request?

[1:16:36] Would it be possible for me to get

[1:16:38] myself familiar with the VA request

[1:16:40] after reading it and then um submit a

[1:16:44] paper later at a later time?

[1:16:48] >> Um

[1:16:49] yeah, so um it it pretty much just

[1:16:53] allows the county more flexibility while

[1:16:56] you guys are gathering data. Um the

[1:16:59] expectation would be that you move

[1:17:01] forward today, but since the data is

[1:17:03] just recently being provided, the

[1:17:05] county's going to need more time to

[1:17:06] review the the data. Um

[1:17:10] but yeah, we we can't force you to sign

[1:17:13] the waiver.

[1:17:15] >> Okay. If you decide to sign it, then um

[1:17:18] you take uh electronic.

[1:17:20] >> Yes, we we also take electronic. Um so

[1:17:22] it's you're not signing the waiver

[1:17:24] today.

[1:17:25] I would like to read through the if

[1:17:27] possible and and if the opportunity to

[1:17:31] sign it electronically is there would be

[1:17:33] fantastic.

[1:17:33] >> Okay. But just to confirm not today.

[1:17:35] >> Yeah.

[1:17:37] >> It's fine.

[1:17:38] >> Yes.

[1:17:38] >> It's decline in value.

[1:17:39] >> Okay. Thank you. Okay. Thanks. All

[1:17:41] right. Um then um

[1:17:46] then October the 26 the assessor said

[1:17:48] that would be all right. Is that all

[1:17:49] right with you? October.

[1:17:52] >> Forgive me if you've already said so.

[1:17:54] forgive me if you've already said

[1:17:57] October 26, if I'm asking you to repeat

[1:17:59] anything. Um, okay. Uh, so then, um, it

[1:18:03] is ordered that this, uh, application

[1:18:06] shall be continued to October 26, 2026

[1:18:09] for good cause with a 30-day proviso, no

[1:18:13] waiver on file.

[1:18:18] Just a quick question, but would that

[1:18:20] allow me time to the assessor office to

[1:18:22] look into the application? It just

[1:18:24] confirms.

[1:18:26] >> Why don't we let you ask the assessor uh

[1:18:28] if I can make it to February? If after

[1:18:31] they answer you decide you want to move

[1:18:33] it to February,

[1:18:35] >> it should be it shouldn't be a problem

[1:18:36] at all. Um it's up to you what you like

[1:18:38] to do all that, but it shouldn't be a

[1:18:39] problem. It's just it.

[1:18:42] >> Thank you. Appreciate it. So, October

[1:18:45] 26th, everybody's all good. Okay.

[1:18:48] >> Okay.

[1:18:48] >> We're all set.

[1:18:50] Okay.

[1:18:51] >> Thank you. If you'd like, you can pick

[1:18:53] up a waiver and give it some thought. If

[1:18:55] you decide to sign it, you can turn it

[1:18:58] in electronically.

[1:19:00] Okay. Thank you.

[1:19:02] >> That takes us to item number 45,

[1:19:05] application number 2510653.

[1:19:09] Applicant Christy Aldo.

[1:19:13] Do we have anyone checked in for

[1:19:14] Christie Aldra?

[1:19:22] » So, my notes indicate that we were

[1:19:24] unable to contact the

[1:19:27] Sorry,

[1:19:29] >> they have an agent.

[1:19:30] >> Yeah.

[1:19:34] Oh, okay. Sorry. Attorney uh Gerald, we

[1:19:36] spoke with his office last week and the

[1:19:39] he's okay with the denial due to lack of

[1:19:40] appearance.

[1:19:41] >> Okay.

[1:19:43] It is so ordered that this matter is

[1:19:45] denied for due to lack of appearance.

[1:19:49] Okay,

[1:19:49] >> set that takes us to item number 46,

[1:19:53] application number 2510884,

[1:19:57] Casey Living Trust.

[1:19:58] >> That's me.

[1:20:01] >> Hi,

[1:20:01] >> good morning.

[1:20:02] >> I'm just asking for a continuence

[1:20:04] because due to an unforeseen medical

[1:20:06] condition, I got my paperwork in just a

[1:20:08] couple days late.

[1:20:09] >> Okay. So, I'm not sure how much time

[1:20:10] he'll need and he might need more

[1:20:11] paperwork. So, I don't know how much

[1:20:14] time.

[1:20:15] >> Okay. Why don't I check back with check

[1:20:17] with the assessor and then I come back

[1:20:18] with you and we'll discuss it right now.

[1:20:21] Let me ask them first. Could you brief

[1:20:23] me on this?

[1:20:23] >> Is this a change of ownership? Um

[1:20:26] >> a value or

[1:20:29] legal?

[1:20:32] >> It's change ownership on its receive

[1:20:34] date.

[1:20:36] Um

[1:20:37] >> is it a value or It's a change

[1:20:39] ownership. So it's it's not a value.

[1:20:40] It's a change ownership. I believe

[1:20:41] >> a legal issue.

[1:20:42] >> Yeah. This is a B this is a B1 issue.

[1:20:44] >> Okay. Thank you.

[1:20:46] Uh and I'm sorry when you say um

[1:20:49] >> uh this is Angel. Um so this is a change

[1:20:52] in ownership case. U but it's happy to

[1:20:55] deal with two dates June 21st 2023 and

[1:20:58] September 24th 2024. So it looks like

[1:21:01] we're going to be needing a lot of data.

[1:21:04] >> Okay. So I would probably recommend the

[1:21:06] conference

[1:21:08] >> and then you know how to get reach me.

[1:21:11] >> Yes, we'll be working. Looks like we're

[1:21:13] going to need more time.

[1:21:14] >> Thank you so much.

[1:21:15] >> And thank you for getting

[1:21:17] >> I apologize.

[1:21:19] >> Okay. So I will take the February date,

[1:21:21] please.

[1:21:22] >> Okay. And we have a waiver on file, so

[1:21:24] there's no need to um

[1:21:26] >> Okay. This this application is continued

[1:21:30] to February 22nd, 2027

[1:21:33] for good cause. And is there a proviso?

[1:21:37] Um yes, the 38 provisor will be

[1:21:42] >> um they they if they ask for additional

[1:21:44] data, the assessor after reviewing what

[1:21:47] you've given them, they may ask for

[1:21:49] additional clarification or data and

[1:21:52] they're requesting that that be provided

[1:21:54] to them no later than 30 days prior to

[1:21:57] the February 27 hearing.

[1:22:00] >> Yeah. Hopefully. I mean, it was it was

[1:22:01] literally just me at getting the

[1:22:03] paperwork organized. Unfortunately, my

[1:22:05] kidneys failed and I ended up in the

[1:22:07] hospital and they wouldn't let me out of

[1:22:09] the hospital to send the paperwork in

[1:22:10] and that's sort of what happened.

[1:22:12] >> Okay.

[1:22:12] >> And I apologize. There was nothing I can

[1:22:14] do.

[1:22:14] >> Well, that's what we have these

[1:22:15] continuences for.

[1:22:16] >> So, thank you very much for

[1:22:17] understanding.

[1:22:18] >> All right. So, then I'm going to add to

[1:22:20] that order that there shall be a 30-day

[1:22:22] provisal.

[1:22:23] >> Okay.

[1:22:27] You're all set. Thank you.

[1:22:28] >> Thank you so much.

[1:22:30] >> Thank you.

[1:22:34] Okay. And that takes us to item number

[1:22:37] 47, application number 2511202.

[1:22:41] Applicant Valerie A. Pulich. Um, this

[1:22:45] applicant called our office this morning

[1:22:46] and let us know she would not be

[1:22:48] attending today's hearing. So, that's a

[1:22:50] denied due lack of appearance.

[1:22:52] >> Did she understand that it would be

[1:22:53] denied?

[1:22:54] >> Yes, I also spoke with her last week. Um

[1:22:56] and it it was like uh she was debating if

[1:23:02] she was going to pursue the appeal

[1:23:03] anyways.

[1:23:04] >> Okay.

[1:23:04] >> Um but she called us this morning and confirmed that um

[1:23:07] >> Okay.

[1:23:08] >> It would be a denial due to lack of

[1:23:09] appearance.

[1:23:09] >> Okay. It is ordered. This this

[1:23:11] application is denied due to lack of

[1:23:12] appearance.

[1:23:13] >> Did the assessor want to comment on

[1:23:14] that?

[1:23:15] >> No, we have no comment on that.

[1:23:18] >> Okay.

[1:23:24] And last item on the agenda, application

[1:23:26] number 2511770.

[1:23:30] Applicant Kenny Chi Tada. And we have uh

[1:23:32] Kenny Chi here in person.

[1:23:34] >> Good morning. Thank you for being here

[1:23:36] today.

[1:23:39] >> All right. Let me check with the

[1:23:40] assessor.

[1:23:42] >> Assessor is ready for presentation

[1:23:44] today, too.

[1:23:45] >> Okay. Very fine. So you'll be the second

[1:23:47] case that we're hearing today.

[1:23:49] >> Hearing officer Cohen. Um, so we

[1:23:51] actually had an amendment first and so

[1:23:54] typically

[1:23:55] >> for this application.

[1:23:57] >> Oh.

[1:23:58] >> Um, and so typically an amendment

[1:24:00] requires a 45day reschedule. Um, the

[1:24:03] assessor's office and if you can confirm

[1:24:05] on record is is waving that 45day

[1:24:08] >> um reschedule. Okay. And let me see. So

[1:24:14] my name indicate that we are

[1:24:27] and is this a

[1:24:30] yes.

[1:24:37] Okay. Just to confirm, um, you're

[1:24:39] amending the dates in your application

[1:24:42] from July 16, 2025 to

[1:24:47] >> the date of transfer.

[1:24:48] >> Oh, not not to change. Uh, yes. So, to

[1:24:50] remove July 16, 2025 and amend it to

[1:24:54] June 8th, 2023. Is that correct?

[1:24:57] >> Okay. And that's for both um the no

[1:25:00] change in ownership and the valuation.

[1:25:01] So, boxes B1 and B2.

[1:25:04] >> Okay.

[1:25:05] So that um before we decide on that

[1:25:09] amendment, are we going to do that now

[1:25:11] or when it's called?

[1:25:12] >> Uh now. So well, it's called now and

[1:25:14] then so we'll go get into our hearings,

[1:25:16] but first we need the amendment. The

[1:25:17] assessor waves there 45 days. Okay.

[1:25:19] >> And then we'll we'll decide which Yeah.

[1:25:23] >> Would you stand up again and explain to

[1:25:25] me the reason why you're requesting the

[1:25:27] date the uh application be changed?

[1:25:30] >> Of course. Um the process has been a

[1:25:33] little confusing for me. So initially I

[1:25:37] was working with assessor.

[1:25:38] >> Well, if you could just I'm so sorry for

[1:25:40] interrupting. Um just tell me why you

[1:25:43] want to amend to change the dates of

[1:25:46] value. Why?

[1:25:48] >> So the I've already been working with

[1:25:51] the censor's office presented.

[1:25:54] are grounded around the date that I was

[1:25:58] already

[1:25:59] I had a qualifying for on the day of transfer.

[1:26:04] >> Okay. So, you're you're saying the date

[1:26:06] of transfer is different that was on the

[1:26:08] application. Is that what you're saying?

[1:26:10] Okay. And would you mind repeating what

[1:26:12] was the date on the application that you

[1:26:14] put?

[1:26:15] >> It was in 202

[1:26:17] >> somewhere around 2025. and and you feel

[1:26:20] that the uh date should correctly be

[1:26:24] what again please

[1:26:26] >> the date of transfer

[1:26:27] >> which was

[1:26:28] >> which is June the 8th 2000

[1:26:31] >> June the 8th 2023

[1:26:34] >> yes

[1:26:36] >> now this application um was this filed

[1:26:41] timely for June 8th 2023

[1:26:45] >> so this was filed timely for the July

[1:26:50] 16th, 2025 change in ownership. Um,

[1:26:55] however,

[1:26:56] the date they're requesting an amendment

[1:26:59] to is still within the four-year. Um,

[1:27:02] >> it's within the four years and it would

[1:27:04] be would it be prospective relief then?

[1:27:07] So this would be um

[1:27:12] it would be prospective

[1:27:14] as of the the new supplemental that was

[1:27:17] issued for

[1:27:20] um for July 16, 2025.

[1:27:23] >> Oh, okay. Um so

[1:27:27] just he didn't file did he he didn't

[1:27:30] file on the supplemental for the June

[1:27:32] 8th, 2023 event.

[1:27:34] >> Correct.

[1:27:34] >> Did not file. did not file and it filed

[1:27:37] during a July 16th, 2025 event,

[1:27:42] but the June 8th date is still within

[1:27:44] the four years.

[1:27:46] >> Okay, thank you. Okay, let me check with

[1:27:49] the assessor before I make a ruling on

[1:27:51] this amend request for amendment. Okay,

[1:27:55] >> to the assessor,

[1:27:59] » um

[1:28:01] is correct. Um we're okay with the

[1:28:03] amendment. tell them we're ready to go

[1:28:04] forward. It's a basically a Prop 19 and

[1:28:06] a primary residence um hearing.

[1:28:10] >> Mhm. [clears throat]

[1:28:10] >> And we're ready to go forward with it

[1:28:12] and not prolong the hearing basically.

[1:28:14] >> Okay.

[1:28:15] >> Process.

[1:28:16] >> And you're willing to wave the 45 days?

[1:28:19] >> Yes.

[1:28:20] >> Uh okay. All right. Um then um this

[1:28:24] application uh the order is is that the

[1:28:26] application shall be amended and the

[1:28:29] date of value shall be June 8th, 2023.

[1:28:33] >> Okay. And I'll just restate for the

[1:28:34] record to approve the amendment in

[1:28:36] section six to add the change in

[1:28:38] ownership date of June 8th, 2023 to

[1:28:41] boxes B1 and B2 and remove the change in

[1:28:44] ownership date of July 16th, 2025.

[1:28:47] >> Perfect. So ordered.

[1:28:53] » Okay. And then just a housekeeping item.

[1:28:56] Are we for the hearing today? Are we

[1:28:58] going just on the change in ownership?

[1:29:00] Oh, sorry. I'm talking to are we um

[1:29:03] going just on the change in ownership

[1:29:04] today and the valuation pending the

[1:29:07] decision on the change in ownership or

[1:29:09] are we hearing both?

[1:29:10] >> Well, it depends on if the assist is

[1:29:12] also ready. Right.

[1:29:14] >> Right. Yeah.

[1:29:16] >> Will you be ready for both?

[1:29:19] >> Um yes, we're ready for both.

[1:29:21] >> Okay. And um does the

[1:29:23] >> Absolutely.

[1:29:24] >> Joe Phillips with the assessor's office.

[1:29:28] uh we would request we bifrocate the

[1:29:30] issues. So we deal with the legal issues

[1:29:33] surrounding the change in ownership and

[1:29:35] then the second part would be the

[1:29:37] valuation pending the results of the um

[1:29:40] legal issues around.

[1:29:42] >> Okay, Mr. Phillips in spite of the fact

[1:29:44] that your office would be ready to go

[1:29:45] forward on the uh valuation depending on

[1:29:48] the decision.

[1:29:50] >> We would not be ready today on the

[1:29:51] valuation.

[1:29:52] >> I must

[1:29:55] okay fine. Thank you Mr. Phillips. Mr.

[1:29:57] Tro, are you okay with that? That

[1:29:59] today's discussion is just the legal

[1:30:02] portion of the change in ownership.

[1:30:04] Okay.

[1:30:05] >> Okay. And then um

[1:30:06] >> so we can bifurcate that now so we don't

[1:30:08] forget later.

[1:30:10] >> Right. So the amendment's been approved

[1:30:12] and now we're going to bifurcate

[1:30:14] uh the hearing on the valuation.

[1:30:18] [snorts]

[1:30:20] >> And for the valuation we have two dates

[1:30:22] available. We have uh October 26, 2026

[1:30:27] uh or February 22nd, 2027.

[1:30:30] >> October 26.

[1:30:32] >> And then well, it depends on how the

[1:30:33] assessor is feeling about that as well.

[1:30:37] >> We'd be the assessor would be okay with

[1:30:39] that. Yes.

[1:30:39] >> Okay. And you'll have to get uh I don't

[1:30:43] know if you have information as of

[1:30:44] October I mean June 8th, 2023

[1:30:48] from the applicant.

[1:30:50] >> Yeah, I don't know regarding valuation

[1:30:51] stuff.

[1:30:52] >> Okay. Okay.

[1:30:53] >> That we be probably requesting in that

[1:30:56] regard for

[1:30:56] >> Okay. And you need how many days to re

[1:30:59] in advance of the hearing?

[1:31:01] >> 30 days.

[1:31:01] All right. Okay. Um

[1:31:06] so that um it is ordered that this the

[1:31:10] uh valuation portion of this application

[1:31:14] uh shall be continued to October 26,

[1:31:18] 2026 with a date of value of June 8th,

[1:31:21] 2023

[1:31:23] uh with a 30-day proviso. Any questions

[1:31:27] about the proviso

[1:31:30] portion of this?

[1:31:31] >> Okay. And that shall be so ordered.

[1:31:35] >> Okay,

[1:31:37] we're all set. Would you like to go

[1:31:40] straight into the case or do you want to

[1:31:41] take a 10-minute recess?

[1:31:42] >> Yeah, let me just check with all the

[1:31:43] parties and see does does anybody would

[1:31:45] anyone like a break uh before we get

[1:31:48] started on the hearings? I'm asking the

[1:31:50] parties and the assessor

[1:31:52] and you.

[1:31:54] >> I'm I'm good to go.

[1:31:55] >> Okay.

[1:31:55] >> Quick question. 49. Is that removed?

[1:32:00] >> 49 was added to a gender review. We had

[1:32:02] a a stipulation to sign.

[1:32:06] >> Okay. To the applicant, would you like

[1:32:08] to take this short break before we start

[1:32:09] your hearing?

[1:32:11] >> I'm actually okay.

[1:32:13] >> You're okay.

[1:32:15] >> Okay. [laughter]

[1:32:17] >> I can I can ask that gentleman when

[1:32:18] we're done with your hearing if he wants

[1:32:20] a break. What about the assessor? Would

[1:32:22] you like a break before we get started?

[1:32:24] >> You want a break or I'm moving? Very

[1:32:26] well. Okay. Mike will be okay.

[1:32:27] >> Okay. Very fine.

[1:32:29] >> Okay. And um the clerk will tell you

[1:32:33] when to give up give your exhibits over.

[1:32:36] You can just wait just a moment more

[1:32:37] please to the applicant.

[1:32:40] >> Um maybe maybe 10 minutes is a good idea

[1:32:43] so we can set up the t we're going to

[1:32:45] the tables.

[1:32:46] >> Okay.

[1:32:46] >> Maybe 10 minutes is good.

[1:32:47] >> Okay. We're going to resume and what

[1:32:49] time is it?

[1:32:50] >> Uh it's 10:32. We can say

[1:32:56] » 10:42. Uh, we're going to start your

[1:32:58] hearing at 10:45.

[1:33:00] >> Okay.

[1:46:06] It's 10:45. We're back on the record. We

[1:46:09] have application number 2410576.

[1:46:13] Applicant AM to fly. Moving forward, uh

[1:46:18] this is a

[1:46:20] 2024

[1:46:22] uh January 1 decline in value

[1:46:25] application. And so just a little bit of

[1:46:28] procedural um this is a evaluation. So

[1:46:32] you have the burden of proof, you'll go

[1:46:34] first. Um the assessor will have an

[1:46:37] opportunity to ask questions about your

[1:46:39] presentation.

[1:46:40] Um if the burden of production has been

[1:46:43] met, then the assessor will provide

[1:46:45] their presentation. You'll have an

[1:46:47] opportunity to ask questions on their

[1:46:48] presentation. Then we'll go to closing

[1:46:52] remarks. And then you have the right to

[1:46:54] close the hearing since you have the the

[1:46:55] burden of proof.

[1:46:57] >> Okay.

[1:46:58] >> Any questions about the procedure?

[1:46:59] >> Uh no, it's clear as well.

[1:47:02] >> All right. Thank you very much.

[1:47:03] >> Okay. So, I've provided a copy of the

[1:47:05] application and the applicants exhibits

[1:47:08] uh 1 through 12.

[1:47:11] The first PowerPoint is uh exhibit 12

[1:47:14] and then she has them labeled after.

[1:47:16] >> Okay. Um before we start, I'd like to

[1:47:19] just ask the assessor to introduce the

[1:47:22] case for us by giving me the value on

[1:47:25] the role as of the date of this

[1:47:28] application.

[1:47:30] Um and um

[1:47:34] the physical characteristics of the

[1:47:36] property just the physical

[1:47:37] characteristics

[1:47:39] >> and um your what your opinion of value

[1:47:43] will be what you'll be testifying to

[1:47:45] today and then I'll come to you.

[1:47:48] >> All right. The enrolled value for this

[1:47:49] aircraft, excuse me, Michael Gillinger

[1:47:51] for the assessor's office. The enrolled

[1:47:53] value for this aircraft for the 2024 tax

[1:47:55] year is $457,800.

[1:47:58] This is a diamond DA40 aircraft. Uh it

[1:48:03] was purchased overseas and flown into

[1:48:05] the United States and improved and made

[1:48:07] um subject to the FAA's restrictions

[1:48:10] here and requirements here. Received an

[1:48:12] FAA flight certification airworthiness

[1:48:15] certificate. Um and all of those

[1:48:17] improvements occurred before the lean

[1:48:18] date 2024. Our opinion of value has not

[1:48:21] changed. Uh the processor supports an

[1:48:23] opinion of value of $457,800

[1:48:27] based on the R&T code 5362 which states

[1:48:30] we must assess the value at market

[1:48:32] value.

[1:48:32] >> Okay. Thank you.

[1:48:34] >> Um now do you agree with the physical

[1:48:37] characteristics of the aircraft that

[1:48:40] he's described just the physical

[1:48:43] characteristics?

[1:48:44] >> Uh couple of things. One is that the

[1:48:47] assessed value is based on the US value.

[1:48:50] >> Okay. And aside from the assessed value

[1:48:53] though, uh just the physical

[1:48:55] characteristics of the aircraft,

[1:48:58] um I want to make sure that we're on the

[1:49:01] same page as to what is a diamond

[1:49:03] aircraft in Austria.

[1:49:05] >> Uhhuh.

[1:49:05] >> And it was a 2016 aircraft.

[1:49:08] >> Okay. 2016. And that's what you have,

[1:49:10] correct?

[1:49:11] >> Yes, that's correct.

[1:49:12] >> Yeah. and it didn't have some of the

[1:49:13] requirements that flying in the US would

[1:49:15] require as well as some of the

[1:49:18] mechanical aspect that's not very good but I have to

[1:49:24] >> you'll get into that into your case and

[1:49:25] chief. Okay. And uh what value will you

[1:49:28] be testifying to today? What's your

[1:49:30] opinion of value?

[1:49:31] >> Um the the actual value that I bought it

[1:49:34] for which is 350,000

[1:49:38] >> in two 2023. Yes.

[1:49:43] Okay.

[1:49:49] Then um

[1:49:51] >> so I have a introduction file as well

[1:49:54] that I Yes. I plan to go through answer

[1:49:56] a lot.

[1:49:57] >> I would like you to ask ask you to go

[1:49:58] ahead and present your case and chief

[1:50:00] now.

[1:50:00] >> Okay. Thank you. Your honor, should I

[1:50:03] >> No, it's not necessary.

[1:50:04] >> All right. Thank you. Um well uh first

[1:50:07] of all I I have this print out and uh

[1:50:10] the first page shows this uh diamond

[1:50:12] from the desert and uh it's a diamond

[1:50:16] aircraft built in Austria. It's called

[1:50:19] diamond star some and I have it

[1:50:21] registered at 787 Yankee uh because I

[1:50:24] used to work at Boeing. I have 40 years

[1:50:27] in the aerospace industry. 20 years 20

[1:50:29] of those 40 years are with Boeing. And

[1:50:32] this particular aircraft was also the

[1:50:35] first one that is general aviation

[1:50:37] aircraft that has been electrified. So

[1:50:40] I'm currently in electric uh in

[1:50:43] electrifying business. I have a app to

[1:50:45] fly is to electrify these uh gas burning

[1:50:49] uh power plants. And so uh I bought the

[1:50:52] airplane fully intend to move into a

[1:50:55] sustainable aircraft. Um anyway, so it's

[1:50:58] from the desert because uh at the time I

[1:51:01] was looking up in the US uh market as

[1:51:03] well and uh so we can move on to the

[1:51:08] first chart where uh it's the value

[1:51:11] chart.

[1:51:13] Yeah, you can open that. Uh the value um

[1:51:17] I believe is global market and it is

[1:51:20] global market because when I was in

[1:51:21] Boeing we sell airplanes everywhere in

[1:51:23] the world you fly everywhere you see

[1:51:25] going airplanes and of course uh this

[1:51:27] airplane is from Austria as you can see

[1:51:30] in Camaro there's quite a few of them as

[1:51:32] well but not as many as out in the world

[1:51:35] out in Europe because this was

[1:51:38] relatively late comparing to sessuts and

[1:51:40] pipers and so on that are in the United

[1:51:42] States. Um and as we all know the market

[1:51:46] economy is such that you know it's a

[1:51:47] supply demand. So in the US there's not

[1:51:50] as many as in in Europe obviously and

[1:51:55] that pricing in the US is way higher

[1:51:58] than pricing in Europe. And in Middle

[1:52:00] East

[1:52:02] speaking of Middle East this was

[1:52:04] actually purchased not in Europe but in

[1:52:06] Doha Qar. So at least I paid for this

[1:52:09] airplane unlike our president who just

[1:52:11] got one for free. So the pricing over in

[1:52:14] the Middle East is also very different.

[1:52:17] Um while in the US this is done by a

[1:52:19] distributor and uh at the time I didn't

[1:52:22] get this from the United States because

[1:52:24] this was right after COVID and if I had

[1:52:27] got you I called this guy several times

[1:52:29] and they were saying after COVID there

[1:52:31] was a delay in the distribution of the

[1:52:33] new airplanes and so on and also in the

[1:52:36] used airplane there's the market is

[1:52:39] dwindling that was right after the coke.

[1:52:42] So, uh, the price of the used airplane

[1:52:44] will be almost like a new one. And I

[1:52:46] didn't want to spend all that money and

[1:52:48] buying a used airplane while still

[1:52:49] paying almost the same as a new

[1:52:51] airplane. So, I decided using my

[1:52:53] aerospace background because I have a

[1:52:55] network around the world. So, I t I

[1:52:58] checked the data myself and found this

[1:53:00] airplane from Qatar.

[1:53:03] And so, uh, today the assessed value for

[1:53:05] the 2627 bill is $410,200.

[1:53:09] And my appeal now is for current value

[1:53:12] of less than 350,000.

[1:53:15] Why? Because uh there's even appre

[1:53:17] depreciation since 2023. So that would

[1:53:19] get it down to 297,000

[1:53:22] today. So if we move on to the next

[1:53:25] chart,

[1:53:25] >> so we're looking at a data value as of

[1:53:29] January the 1st, 2024.

[1:53:32] >> Yeah, that will be a little closer to

[1:53:34] 350K because I have flown the airplane.

[1:53:36] I went to see the airplane in 2023

[1:53:40] >> and the whole purchasing uh the whole

[1:53:42] acquisition took from the January of

[1:53:44] 2023 to uh May June because I had to fly

[1:53:49] it back across the Atlantic. Uh and so I

[1:53:54] have the uh attachments uh or the

[1:53:56] exhibits. One is the application file

[1:53:59] actually this file and number two is a

[1:54:02] purchase agreement. These are in your

[1:54:04] >> They're in the the uh Yeah, the one

[1:54:06] that's under this one. Exactly. So,

[1:54:08] number one, number two, and then the

[1:54:10] closing document because uh when you pay

[1:54:12] so much money, you usually go through

[1:54:14] the title company, ESO company. So, I

[1:54:17] went through this uh esro company that's

[1:54:19] called air uh aerospace reports and

[1:54:22] that's based in Oklahoma. I believe it's

[1:54:24] a pretty common company because I sold

[1:54:26] my previous airplane also using that

[1:54:28] company. And uh before you buy an

[1:54:31] airplane, I'm an aerospace nerd.

[1:54:33] [laughter] So before you buy an

[1:54:34] airplane, you have to thoroughly check

[1:54:36] out the airplane and everything. So I

[1:54:37] actually made uh a couple trips to Doha

[1:54:40] before I bought it. And uh I managed to

[1:54:43] basically determine on that the day

[1:54:45] before uh Valentine's Day. So I call

[1:54:48] this my Valentine in 2017.

[1:54:50] >> What page are you pointing to there?

[1:54:52] >> Uh that's the next page.

[1:54:53] >> That's the next page. Okay.

[1:54:54] >> Yeah. So that's the airplane. You can

[1:54:56] see on the airplane the number there it

[1:54:57] still shows A7 A I believe.

[1:55:02] >> Uhhuh.

[1:55:02] >> So that's that belongs to the original

[1:55:04] owner

[1:55:05] >> and he's the first and only owner.

[1:55:07] >> Uhhuh.

[1:55:08] >> Um so the title of the airplane was

[1:55:10] transferred after that date. Uh and then

[1:55:14] also I received all the lock works to

[1:55:16] check out the airplane and I presented

[1:55:18] that as part of the uh evidence as well.

[1:55:21] Um but due to the fact that that it's

[1:55:23] going to be you know the a lot of books

[1:55:25] are three books this thick so I just

[1:55:27] presented the picture of book if you

[1:55:30] need anything that I can present but

[1:55:32] then every year I have to go through the

[1:55:34] service here so they have electronic

[1:55:35] copies of everything. Mhm. Um, so the

[1:55:39] next page if you flip over is this

[1:55:41] actual signage of the previous owner.

[1:55:45] Um, because the airplane was actually uh

[1:55:47] registered in Qatar just like Trump's

[1:55:50] airplane was originally there

[1:55:52] registered. So you have to change the

[1:55:54] whole registration as well as

[1:55:56] certification because in order to fly in

[1:55:59] Qatar is instead of FAA or YASA is the

[1:56:03] CAA the Qatar uh Qatari CAA that has to

[1:56:07] raise tax to certify that because unlike

[1:56:10] the car if you don't have the safety

[1:56:12] certification from the safety agencies

[1:56:15] you cannot even fly it's illegal to fly

[1:56:18] and uh and another thing is that because

[1:56:20] I do have to fly this airplane all the

[1:56:22] way back he gave me because he owns this

[1:56:24] flying club. So, he gave me uh one of

[1:56:26] those ID cards so I can go through all

[1:56:28] the securityities and everything uh

[1:56:30] without any issue in the Middle East. Um

[1:56:33] so, back in 2025, I submitted uh this

[1:56:37] appeal support letter that's now in the

[1:56:40] exhibit number six. And in this letter,

[1:56:43] I uh

[1:56:45] >> What page are you? What page is it?

[1:56:47] >> Uh this this page here. That's the next

[1:56:50] page.

[1:56:50] >> Uhhuh.

[1:56:51] >> Yeah. So in 2025 I submitted this in the

[1:56:55] system which is appeal support letter

[1:56:57] that outlines these four things. One is

[1:57:00] the global market based on supply and

[1:57:03] demand and so the cost I mean the

[1:57:05] pricing over in other parts of the world

[1:57:07] could be considerably lower or even free

[1:57:10] in the case for Trump. And then the

[1:57:13] second thing is that after I had the

[1:57:15] airplane, I bought the airplane with

[1:57:17] 350,000.

[1:57:18] I had to insure it to in order to fly

[1:57:20] across that that big ocean, right? And I

[1:57:23] wouldn't insure it for more than what

[1:57:26] it's worth, the value that I have paid,

[1:57:29] right? So when I insure that, it was

[1:57:31] based on 350,000. I have that as a uh

[1:57:34] attachment here. Uh so that's attachment

[1:57:38] number eight or uh exhibit number eight

[1:57:40] in that other package. Okay.

[1:57:42] >> Um, and also that insurance is very

[1:57:44] high. It's like $22,000

[1:57:48] just to fly across the ocean. And that

[1:57:50] is in comparison to flying in the US.

[1:57:54] The uh premium will be something like

[1:57:56] around a couple thousand dollars for me,

[1:57:57] for my age and for my experience. So, uh

[1:58:01] you got to be care

[1:58:03] what you ensure you know not more and

[1:58:06] not less, right? Mhm.

[1:58:07] >> Um and then the third item is the fact

[1:58:10] that the airplane because uh in the

[1:58:12] United States the airplanes are only

[1:58:14] required to have ADSB that's automatic

[1:58:17] broadcast system for whereabout you are

[1:58:19] using the GPS. So you're only uh

[1:58:21] supposed to have that since 2000 the

[1:58:24] year 2020

[1:58:26] and uh this airplane was made in 2016.

[1:58:30] So it didn't have that. Uh but you know

[1:58:33] uh you can file for special uh special

[1:58:36] flight permit in order to get it back

[1:58:38] because you know if I were to put it

[1:58:40] over there then that would be another

[1:58:42] cost and I have to get it certified and

[1:58:43] all that. So it doesn't have that. And

[1:58:46] also the turbocharger has uh some issue.

[1:58:49] It has a leak. I know that it did but

[1:58:51] it's not going to break or anything. And

[1:58:54] uh so all those things I could have them

[1:58:56] fixed uh either at the Austrian uh

[1:59:00] factory that where it came from on my

[1:59:02] way back or when I flew it all the way

[1:59:05] back to the United States. So that's

[1:59:07] item number three. And number four and

[1:59:10] the most important part is that it's not

[1:59:12] certified by FAA. It was certified by

[1:59:14] the CAA of uh Qatar. And um so on the

[1:59:19] bottom of this page, it specifies

[1:59:21] several things that are mentioned there.

[1:59:24] um from the support letter which was uh

[1:59:26] in the exhibit number six, ABSB system

[1:59:29] which I later on put in while I arrived

[1:59:31] in the United States uh which was uh

[1:59:34] 13,600 and turbocharger that has to be

[1:59:37] replaced um it was $12,000

[1:59:40] uh dollars and then the in insurance

[1:59:43] because the insurance I included that

[1:59:45] crossing Atlantic insurance as well as

[1:59:46] flying in the US and Canada. Um so the

[1:59:50] last part is the certification by an FAA

[1:59:53] uh they they call it D designated uh uh

[1:59:57] aviation representative or aerospace

[1:59:59] representative and so that's in

[2:00:02] attachment nine for exhibit number nine

[2:00:05] uh for the uh D and the D cost quite a

[2:00:08] bit because I had to fly him over to Qar

[2:00:12] to do the initial one and then

[2:00:14] afterwards I had to fly him over to

[2:00:16] California. So, uh, all those added up

[2:00:19] to be $18,000.

[2:00:22] >> Was that in the category of insurance?

[2:00:25] >> No, it's in the last category of

[2:00:27] certification by an FAA individual.

[2:00:30] >> Okay. I'm sorry.

[2:00:30] >> FAND individuals have to be the

[2:00:33] specified. I mean, they have to be

[2:00:34] recognized and certified by the FAA. So,

[2:00:37] they have to have their expertise

[2:00:39] recognized by the FAA. Not just anybody

[2:00:41] can do that. Initially I had to do

[2:00:44] research to is to see if I could get a

[2:00:46] FAA designated certain in Europe to do

[2:00:48] it and in the end it's just not

[2:00:50] worthwhile. I mean you know it's the

[2:00:53] cost everything balance out. So so it's

[2:00:56] uh uh designated by the FAA.

[2:00:58] >> Um

[2:00:59] >> so that was attachment. In the next page

[2:01:04] you will see that uh arrow is what

[2:01:07] pilots

[2:01:08] know that you know when you fly the

[2:01:10] airplane the arrow are the five senses

[2:01:13] of memory for what you need in the

[2:01:15] airplane. Airworthiness registration

[2:01:19] radio station license operating manual

[2:01:22] and weight and balance. So the operating

[2:01:24] manual weight and balance is part of the

[2:01:26] airplane uh system. So that I won't

[2:01:29] mention because it comes when I bought

[2:01:31] airplane they give me that but the

[2:01:33] airworthiness is what uh that's required

[2:01:36] and if I'm going to fly the airplane

[2:01:38] around halfway around the world I need

[2:01:40] to have airworthiness that's enough to take me all around the world because

[2:01:44] uh with the Qatari uh registration it's

[2:01:47] kind of difficult but with the US that's

[2:01:49] why I had to fly this guy over there

[2:01:51] because to get a US registration and

[2:01:53] certification then uh it's recognized

[2:01:56] around the world because US capital

[2:01:58] afterward is the leader of aerospace

[2:02:00] still.

[2:02:01] >> Uh registration uh so I just mentioned

[2:02:03] as well. So I needed to get the

[2:02:05] registration from the United States that

[2:02:07] starts with N number uh N uh 787 Sierra

[2:02:11] Yankees. Sierra Yankees are my initial.

[2:02:14] Um and 787 because I used to work on the

[2:02:17] Dreamliner in the Boeing company. Um so

[2:02:20] all these things are unique. And then

[2:02:22] the next page shows you the fact that I

[2:02:24] actually hand carry the the numbers end

[2:02:27] numbers over there. So the airplane has

[2:02:29] changed from the A7 T8 to N7 CR Yankee

[2:02:34] uh until the next page if you see that and of course the insurance

[2:02:38] is shown in attachment states.

[2:02:41] And another one that um I don't know how

[2:02:43] many here, maybe Michael knows, is uh

[2:02:46] what's needed for the radio station

[2:02:48] license. And in the US, we no longer

[2:02:50] need to do that. Uh that's uh authorized

[2:02:53] by FCC, but uh in the rest of the world,

[2:02:57] most of the rest of the world, you still

[2:02:59] need that. So I had to apply for that as

[2:03:01] well. Uh the FCC, that's a different

[2:03:04] thing. So overall um you can see that

[2:03:09] [clears throat] I well I actually took

[2:03:11] this flight and so this is uh the next

[2:03:14] page is a actual flight path all the way

[2:03:17] from Qatar um to crossing the Atlantic.

[2:03:22] But that first part the green the green

[2:03:24] line was my original plan namely I was

[2:03:27] going to go through the Austria uh

[2:03:29] factory

[2:03:30] >> but then the weather did not cooperate.

[2:03:33] So in the end I wound up going to Egypt

[2:03:36] and Greece and Italy and and so on you

[2:03:39] know went all the way around. Um so the

[2:03:43] airplane uh actually was safe in order

[2:03:46] to go around and also I had a temporary

[2:03:49] certification namely it's safe to go

[2:03:51] around but then it's not a permanent one

[2:03:53] that will require much detailed uh uh

[2:03:57] other uh certification tasks and so I

[2:04:00] plan to have that done in California

[2:04:02] once it's here and uh so overall the

[2:04:05] trip summary I have provided also all

[2:04:08] the uh receipts all the loss files

[2:04:12] of the flight from Doha to Oxford.

[2:04:15] That's like the first half uh first one

[2:04:17] third. And so that was uh because I have

[2:04:22] a network of a lot of people that I know

[2:04:24] from around the world. So in Oxford, we

[2:04:27] were able to rent a hanger there to park

[2:04:29] the airplane for uh about almost a

[2:04:31] month. Uh at first I didn't know I was

[2:04:33] going to be there for almost a month but

[2:04:35] uh because the weather uh across the

[2:04:38] Iceland and Greenland you know uh this

[2:04:41] was May time frame. Imagine I got the

[2:04:43] airplane in uh Valentine's Day in

[2:04:46] February and then March and so this is

[2:04:48] already in May. Uh the the icing

[2:04:51] condition is still down to the ground.

[2:04:52] So you want to wait until it's at least

[2:04:55] not icing you know up to a few thousand

[2:04:57] feet above the ground. And so uh waited

[2:05:00] there for a bit and then flew from

[2:05:02] Oxford to uh Montreal, Canada. Uh that's

[2:05:06] St. Cubber uh that that CYU

[2:05:10] airport and then from Montreal to uh

[2:05:13] Camaro. So altogether almost 10,000

[2:05:16] nautical miles and uh 75 hours of total

[2:05:19] flight time for that little airport.

[2:05:23] So then this last one is just a picture

[2:05:26] when I was in Oxford. Uh had that

[2:05:28] picture taken.

[2:05:30] But uh really I think the main thing is

[2:05:32] in the value of this airplane. Uh and I

[2:05:35] do not argue that if we try to look up

[2:05:38] the value of a used airplane first of

[2:05:41] all they have to be available and

[2:05:42] secondly if it's also a monopoly. By the

[2:05:45] way this monopoly is a lifestyle or

[2:05:47] whatever. Just about everybody I call

[2:05:50] from controller, from trader plane,

[2:05:51] whatever, it always wind up to to this

[2:05:54] guy. It's really a monopoly,

[2:05:56] >> the seller

[2:05:58] >> uh distributor.

[2:05:59] >> Oh,

[2:06:00] >> yeah. And uh so so in the US you will if

[2:06:06] you look up or whatever you will get

[2:06:07] that value. However, if you go around

[2:06:09] the world, you can get much better deal.

[2:06:12] And so the market is really a supply

[2:06:13] demand. However, when you bring in, you

[2:06:16] do have to, you know, you have your cost

[2:06:18] of shipment, you have your cost of

[2:06:20] registration, you have your cost of all

[2:06:21] that, but that's not a sale value.

[2:06:23] That's value that you have to put in the

[2:06:25] airplane. I mean, a airplane owner has

[2:06:27] to spend on maintenance, m on all kinds

[2:06:31] of things, right? But that's just part

[2:06:33] of flying. That's not part of the sale

[2:06:35] of the airplane.

[2:06:37] So the value what I I really uh think it

[2:06:41] should be less than 350K

[2:06:43] of the 350K back in 2023. So now it will

[2:06:46] be much less than that. I mean 15%

[2:06:49] depreciation or whatever it's like 290

[2:06:52] something.

[2:06:52] >> So what what do you think the value is

[2:06:55] as of the date of value? January the 1st

[2:06:58] 2024.

[2:06:59] >> Uh 350. Okay.

[2:07:01] >> 350.

[2:07:01] >> Yeah.

[2:07:02] >> That's our data value.

[2:07:03] >> Yeah. That's already if you believe of

[2:07:06] depreciation a little bit for one year

[2:07:08] it should be less than that

[2:07:12] >> because I got it in February March of uh

[2:07:14] 2023.

[2:07:16] >> Yeah.

[2:07:16] >> Okay. Um is there any other evidence

[2:07:19] you'd like to present for your case and

[2:07:21] chief?

[2:07:22] >> Um well the airplane is just down in

[2:07:26] that airport. If anybody wants to take a

[2:07:28] look and all the paperwork and

[2:07:29] everything I'm happy to

[2:07:32] show. Oh, I've got lots of pictures,

[2:07:34] lots of rubies, and even the maintenance

[2:07:37] because the maintenance is done by uh

[2:07:39] Long Beach uh diamond facility.

[2:07:41] >> Okay.

[2:07:42] I think we'll give the assessor

[2:07:44] opportunity to ask you questions now.

[2:07:46] >> Sure.

[2:07:46] >> All right. Okay. To the assessor, thank

[2:07:48] you.

[2:07:49] >> You have cross examination.

[2:07:50] >> I do have a few questions. Um you said

[2:07:52] that your opinion of value is 350,000.

[2:07:55] Um is that because that's the sale price

[2:07:57] of the aircraft that you paid the sheet

[2:07:59] of guitar? Well, so the value of

[2:08:03] something is uh interesting. Yes, that's

[2:08:07] the value because at the time because in

[2:08:10] fact when I the airplane uh was found by

[2:08:15] a colleague, he noticed that airplane

[2:08:17] was not being flown uh at that airport.

[2:08:20] And so he asked and found out that

[2:08:22] airplane belongs to a sheep. He used

[2:08:24] that airplane to learn how to fly. And

[2:08:26] then I said, "Oh, well, he's not flying.

[2:08:28] Maybe he wants to sell it." So anyhow,

[2:08:30] they went to ask the the sheep uh if he

[2:08:34] wants to sell it. The next thing the

[2:08:35] sheep came back to me and says, "How

[2:08:37] much does she want to pay for it?"

[2:08:40] >> So that's the value I paid.

[2:08:42] >> I see that from the uh aerospace reports

[2:08:44] showing your escrow account. Yeah,

[2:08:46] >> you paid 350,000 to the sheet, but you

[2:08:48] paid 356,000 in total for the aircraft.

[2:08:51] So your value is not what you paid out.

[2:08:53] It's only what the cash seller received.

[2:08:55] That's your opinion of value. Yeah,

[2:08:57] because the 10K was for my friend who

[2:08:59] helped with all that.

[2:09:00] >> So even on costs that are on the same

[2:09:02] page as part of your escro closing

[2:09:04] statement.

[2:09:05] >> Yeah.

[2:09:05] >> You paying 356,000. That's not the value

[2:09:08] according to you.

[2:09:09] >> It's only the amount that goes to a

[2:09:10] seller.

[2:09:11] >> Exactly.

[2:09:12] >> Okay. That's not what California state

[2:09:14] law applies, but I appreciate you

[2:09:15] answering that. Um, as you purchased

[2:09:17] this aircraft in Qatar, you said it's

[2:09:18] not legal to fly in the US in the

[2:09:20] condition you purchased it in. Correct.

[2:09:22] >> Correct.

[2:09:22] >> Thank you. Um, you mentioned the aero

[2:09:25] components. Uh those components add

[2:09:26] value to a purchased aircraft, don't

[2:09:29] they? If you were to get airworthiness

[2:09:31] certificates, if you were to get

[2:09:34] registration in the United States, if

[2:09:35] you were to get the other components,

[2:09:36] adding those components does add value

[2:09:38] to the aircraft or not.

[2:09:39] >> No, the value of the aircraft is just

[2:09:43] the value of this is is the the glasses

[2:09:47] are the value of glasses. But what's it

[2:09:50] worth to you? Maybe at least last it's

[2:09:52] not worth but you know

[2:09:54] >> we're going to come back to that issue

[2:09:55] of worth. I appreciate you raising that.

[2:09:57] Thank you.

[2:09:58] >> Uh the radio license that you mentioned

[2:10:00] you said it's not needed in the US.

[2:10:02] >> No.

[2:10:02] >> So how would that be relevant to our

[2:10:04] valuation process today?

[2:10:06] >> Uh well you paid for radio

[2:10:08] >> license. That one was really not so not

[2:10:11] so important because I I just included

[2:10:14] because I had a whole arrow in there.

[2:10:16] Yeah. So, you have a lot of costs that

[2:10:17] you you spent uh certainly to get the

[2:10:19] aircraft purchased and get it here and

[2:10:22] to get it legal in the United States.

[2:10:23] There's no doubt about that. There was a

[2:10:24] lot of costs involved.

[2:10:26] Um you'd mentioned that you did submit

[2:10:28] all of the receipts from the ferry

[2:10:29] flights and I just want to go on the

[2:10:30] record and say that there were some that

[2:10:32] we did not receive, but you had

[2:10:33] estimated in your email that it was

[2:10:34] about 40,000 in total for the ferry

[2:10:36] flight

[2:10:38] >> portion. Does that sound accurate?

[2:10:39] >> Yeah, I'm happy to submit those. I mean,

[2:10:42] >> that's fine. They aren't really

[2:10:43] necessary because we are not using a

[2:10:44] cost method in our evaluation.

[2:10:45] >> Right. But that's just showing that but

[2:10:47] that's not the value of the airplane.

[2:10:49] The value of

[2:10:51] >> Yeah. You had also mentioned that um you

[2:10:54] had difficulty in purchasing because

[2:10:55] there's a monopoly uh for the

[2:10:57] distributor and that that also applied

[2:10:59] to used planes. Is that correct?

[2:11:01] >> Used diamond.

[2:11:02] >> Okay. So now that you own a diamond

[2:11:04] aircraft, are you able to sell your

[2:11:05] aircraft?

[2:11:06] >> Uh I don't want to sell it.

[2:11:07] >> That's not the question. Well,

[2:11:09] >> would you be able to sell it if you

[2:11:10] wanted to or would you have to get it to

[2:11:12] this distributor so that he could sell

[2:11:13] it for you?

[2:11:14] >> That's a very interesting question

[2:11:15] because as soon as I own this airplane,

[2:11:17] guess what? I'm receiving emails all the

[2:11:19] time from this guy.

[2:11:20] >> He wants to buy it, I bet.

[2:11:21] >> Yeah. Well, he always asks, he says,

[2:11:23] "Oh, would you be ready to sell this? I

[2:11:25] can find you some, you know, I I bet the

[2:11:28] other diamond owners also get the same

[2:11:30] thing."

[2:11:30] >> Yeah. Because in the end, I was like on

[2:11:32] firstname basis with this guy.

[2:11:34] [laughter] Are you able to sell the

[2:11:35] aircraft yourself though or do you have

[2:11:36] to sell it to him so he can sell it

[2:11:38] later?

[2:11:38] >> I can sell it myself.

[2:11:39] >> So when you were buying aircraft, there

[2:11:40] were probably other diamond owners that

[2:11:42] could sell the aircraft directly. You

[2:11:44] found most results going back to this

[2:11:46] one individual. You said

[2:11:47] >> uh I found every number I call every

[2:11:49] time because at the time there was not

[2:11:51] that many. There was 19 uh 2023 and 22

[2:11:55] we had just come out of COVID.

[2:11:57] >> Uh and so I every honest to god everyone

[2:12:00] that I called it was the same thing. you

[2:12:03] know, they somehow it just transferred

[2:12:05] to this other guy. Even when I call the

[2:12:07] diamond uh the diamond manufacturer over

[2:12:10] in Austria u because I know the chief

[2:12:13] sales, Miss W. So, she says, "Oh, I

[2:12:17] could get you this and that, but you've

[2:12:18] got to call this guy in the US. Call

[2:12:20] this guy in Canada." And I said, "Oh, I bet you I know who that is." So, they

[2:12:26] really try to monopolize by getting the

[2:12:28] distributors. But you're not required to

[2:12:30] sell it to anybody other than whoever

[2:12:32] you want to finally sell the aircraft to

[2:12:34] when you decide to sell.

[2:12:36] >> You're not required to sell it to them.

[2:12:37] >> It's a free country. I can sell it

[2:12:38] anyway I want.

[2:12:39] >> Okay. Thank you.

[2:12:40] >> Mouth or something.

[2:12:40] >> The answer I was looking for.

[2:12:42] >> But because it was a rare thing, you

[2:12:44] know, at the time I think there was only

[2:12:46] like less than less than a handful you

[2:12:50] could count on the internet.

[2:12:52] >> One last question I have. Wouldn't if

[2:12:53] you were to decide to to sell this

[2:12:55] aircraft here, would you sell it for the

[2:12:57] same price you bought it for in Doha?

[2:13:00] >> No.

[2:13:01] >> Like it won't be it won't be worth that

[2:13:02] much.

[2:13:03] >> It wouldn't be worth that much. It'd be

[2:13:04] worth less than 350,000.

[2:13:06] >> Yeah. I'm I'm going to put on a lot of

[2:13:08] hours on it, first of all. Yeah. And I

[2:13:12] may not want to sell it here. I may sell

[2:13:13] it to somebody in another country, but

[2:13:16] uh I don't want to sell it.

[2:13:17] >> Would it have as much value in Dohas

[2:13:19] with all the equipment that's on it

[2:13:20] that's not needed?

[2:13:21] >> No, they don't need it there.

[2:13:22] >> Right. Right?

[2:13:22] >> They don't need the equipment that

[2:13:24] you've added to it.

[2:13:24] >> Right?

[2:13:25] >> Okay.

[2:13:26] >> So, you know, buy and sell is totally a

[2:13:28] supply and demand thing. You know, you

[2:13:30] have a whole curve like that. And in the

[2:13:32] US, you happen to have more uh, you

[2:13:35] know, demand than supply at the time

[2:13:38] that I was five or even now possibly. I

[2:13:40] don't know.

[2:13:42] >> Thank you. I have no further questions.

[2:13:44] >> Okay. Um,

[2:13:47] so how did you determine the price that

[2:13:49] you offered for it?

[2:13:52] >> Um, well the at the time the brand new

[2:13:55] meal was uh 600 and something and they

[2:13:59] wanted to have the the distributor they

[2:14:02] wanted to have 600 something namely a

[2:14:04] difference of like uh you know maybe 10

[2:14:07] 20,000. I said I don't want to buy used

[2:14:10] airplane that's almost the same as a

[2:14:12] brand new airplane. Well, I'm trying to

[2:14:15] use the sales car analogy, but of

[2:14:17] course, it's not a, you know, a used

[2:14:19] car. And uh so I so I that's why I tried

[2:14:23] and tried to find it myself. I looked

[2:14:26] up, you know, in Canada and uh Mexico,

[2:14:29] there's not that many in Mexico. So I uh

[2:14:32] was able to access the database and find

[2:14:34] a lot of overseas.

[2:14:36] >> Uhhuh.

[2:14:37] And even though even though the uh the

[2:14:39] overseas uh the the Taiwan was not even

[2:14:42] on the map because I found that because

[2:14:45] of my friend who happened to be working

[2:14:47] at the time for for another sheep

[2:14:50] >> in the airport. So then on your list of

[2:14:54] um sales that you used um how did you

[2:14:59] determine that the one that is the

[2:15:02] subject of this appeal that's closest to

[2:15:06] I'm sure you had a variety of sale

[2:15:08] prices, right?

[2:15:09] >> Yeah. How did you

[2:15:10] >> It's not only the pricing, it's what you

[2:15:12] have on the airplane, right?

[2:15:14] >> So this particular airplane has a wing

[2:15:16] left. You can see it's the Oh, it's

[2:15:19] hidden here, but it's Oh, maybe this

[2:15:21] one. You can see it's got the winglet

[2:15:24] >> and uh it's very efficient. There's

[2:15:27] only, you know, for a regular cruise,

[2:15:29] it's only 5 gallon per hour.

[2:15:31] >> Imagine that. Five gallon per hour.

[2:15:33] >> So, the ones that you were looking at,

[2:15:35] were they advertising these different

[2:15:37] components? No idea because I know

[2:15:40] >> you had to call and ask when you were

[2:15:42] comparing determining this price.

[2:15:45] >> Did you make some calls to find out what

[2:15:47] the other

[2:15:48] >> I made some calls? But I know these

[2:15:49] airplanes. This is a very particular

[2:15:51] airplane. Not only that it's got

[2:15:53] winglets. It's very efficient long wing

[2:15:55] >> and it also has a FedEx that's a full

[2:15:59] authority something you know fully

[2:16:00] automated you know. So it's like flying

[2:16:02] a jet. Uh-huh.

[2:16:04] >> Uh so it's uh you don't have to use the

[2:16:07] fuel air mixture ratio and things like

[2:16:10] that to fly. And so once when I flew to

[2:16:13] uh Las Vegas,

[2:16:15] >> I taxi side by side with another jet.

[2:16:18] The jet went in and refill also from LA

[2:16:21] refill for like you know few hundred

[2:16:23] dollars. I refill for you know less than

[2:16:26] 100. It was only like 12 gallons.

[2:16:28] >> Okay. Okay. Um All right. Um, I'm going

[2:16:34] to um make a ruling right now that you

[2:16:37] have met your burden of production on

[2:16:40] this case. And so now the assessor, it's

[2:16:42] your opportunity to present your case

[2:16:44] and chief.

[2:16:45] >> Thank you.

[2:16:53] » Maybe second.

[2:16:56] So we have exhibits A through D.

[2:17:09] We'll mostly be working with the exhibit

[2:17:11] A as the narrative. Exhibit B is

[2:17:13] provided for legal references from your

[2:17:15] review if you need them. Exhibit C and D

[2:17:18] will be used to use source documents on

[2:17:20] occasion, but mainly exhibit A is what

[2:17:22] we'll be using.

[2:17:23] >> Okay. Thank you.

[2:17:28] » Would you proceed please?

[2:17:29] >> Yes.

[2:17:31] Aircraft assessments are made at fair

[2:17:33] market value on the lean date, not cash

[2:17:35] purchase price. The applicant's opinion

[2:17:37] of value is limited to only the cash

[2:17:39] sale price received by the seller of the

[2:17:40] aircraft. Generally, this value is used

[2:17:43] when calculating a onetime sales tax or

[2:17:45] use tax. R&T code sections 5362 states

[2:17:50] simply the assessor of the county in

[2:17:51] which the aircraft is habidually

[2:17:52] situated shall assess the aircraft at

[2:17:54] its market value. R&T code section 1110

[2:17:58] defines market value as an armslength

[2:18:00] transaction and reads in part full cash

[2:18:02] value or fair market value means the

[2:18:04] amount of cash or its equivalent that

[2:18:06] property would bring if exposed for sale

[2:18:08] in the open market under conditions in

[2:18:09] which neither buyer nor seller could

[2:18:11] take advantage of the exigencies of the other. and both the

[2:18:15] buyer and seller have knowledge of all

[2:18:17] of the uses and purposes to which the

[2:18:18] property is adapted and for which it is

[2:18:20] capable of being used and of the

[2:18:22] enforceable restrictions upon those uses

[2:18:24] and purposes.

[2:18:27] R&T code section 5364 further directs

[2:18:30] the board of equalization to establish

[2:18:32] standards and select a commercially

[2:18:33] available guide to be used by county

[2:18:35] assessors in the assessment of aircraft

[2:18:37] at market value. The BOE issued letters

[2:18:40] to assessor or known as LTA's number

[2:18:43] 97-303

[2:18:45] in January of 1997 selecting the

[2:18:47] aircraft bluebook price guide as the

[2:18:49] primary guide for valuing general

[2:18:51] aircraft in California. This LTA also

[2:18:54] directed county assessors to discount

[2:18:55] the listed retail value by 10% to

[2:18:58] provide reasonable estimates of fair

[2:19:00] market value for aircraft in truly

[2:19:02] average condition on the lean date.

[2:19:04] The assessor received a timely filed um

[2:19:07] aircraft property statement 2024 lean

[2:19:09] date. If you would open up exhibit D to

[2:19:12] page two.

[2:19:20] » Did you say D?

[2:19:21] >> D. It's behind scene. There's only a

[2:19:22] couple pages.

[2:19:23] >> Oh,

[2:19:28] » page two is the first page of the

[2:19:29] aircraft property statement filed for

[2:19:31] 2024. The filing reported that the

[2:19:33] aircraft was in average condition as you

[2:19:35] can see by the circled area there. Had

[2:19:37] no damage history and reported no

[2:19:39] avionics had been added. One interesting

[2:19:41] note as I was viewing this account, if

[2:19:43] you look at the damage history circle

[2:19:44] and go up about an inch, the reported

[2:19:46] purchase price on this form was 250,000.

[2:19:49] That may have just been a typo, but uh

[2:19:51] it's not the value that we used to value

[2:19:53] this account either because we're not

[2:19:55] using sale price as the basis for our

[2:19:57] valuation.

[2:19:59] On the next page, the filing also

[2:20:00] reported the airframe hours as of the

[2:20:02] lean date 1124.

[2:20:06] This APS filing information was used to

[2:20:08] generate an appraisal value from the

[2:20:10] aircraft bluebook price guide tool. If

[2:20:12] you turn the page one more time on

[2:20:13] exhibit D to page four, you'll see an

[2:20:15] example of the result of that aircraft

[2:20:18] blue book valuation price.

[2:20:21] You'll notice in the top box that there

[2:20:22] is a reduction of 10% as requested by

[2:20:25] the state board of equalization. You'll

[2:20:27] also notice that there are airframe

[2:20:29] hours and engine hour adjustments based

[2:20:30] on the number provided in the property

[2:20:32] statement. And that finally sales tax is

[2:20:34] an element of value that is added to the

[2:20:36] market valuation uh conclusion that's

[2:20:38] received using this price guide tool.

[2:20:44] Moving to page five of the narrative.

[2:20:48] The 2024 appraisal also includes the

[2:20:49] sales tax component as required by California law. Property tax

[2:20:54] rule 10 establishes that sales and use

[2:20:56] tax are included in full economic costs.

[2:20:58] There is no indication from evidence

[2:21:00] provided by the applicant that sales or

[2:21:02] use tax was paid on the purchase of the

[2:21:04] aircraft. It is likely that the aircraft

[2:21:06] met the requirements of the sales and

[2:21:08] use tax law to be exempt from that tax

[2:21:10] leaving. BOE annotation 1000.005

[2:21:15] from September of 2021 addresses that

[2:21:17] circumstance. Quoting from the document,

[2:21:20] thus even though the sp the board's

[2:21:22] sales and use tax division may have

[2:21:24] granted an exemption from sales or use

[2:21:26] tax on the sale or purchase of the

[2:21:27] aircraft pursuant to the pro provisions

[2:21:29] of the sales and use tax law which the

[2:21:31] board administers for property tax

[2:21:34] assessment purposes. If the sales or use

[2:21:36] tax is applicable to similar consumers

[2:21:38] using the aircraft at a similar trade

[2:21:39] level, sales and use tax is included in

[2:21:42] the assessment even when not paid at the

[2:21:43] time of purchase.

[2:21:47] The assessor also considered a cost

[2:21:49] approach to value. The applicant

[2:21:52] provided documentation during the appeal

[2:21:53] of several expenses she incurred in

[2:21:55] transporting her plane to Camaro after

[2:21:56] purchase. The assessor examined these

[2:21:58] costs to determine if an estimate of

[2:22:00] value could be determined to use the

[2:22:02] cost approach to value. The assessor

[2:22:04] followed the guidance of case law which

[2:22:06] states the cost of any asset includes

[2:22:08] purchase price, sales tax, brokerage

[2:22:10] commissions, duties, transportation, and

[2:22:12] all costs of placing an asset in a

[2:22:14] condition for use.

[2:22:16] As case law indicates, all costs of

[2:22:18] transporting and proving the aircraft

[2:22:19] are considered necessary to quote place

[2:22:22] the asset in a condition for use at the

[2:22:24] location the applicant plan to keep the

[2:22:25] aircraft.

[2:22:28] Using the invoices provided by the

[2:22:30] applicant, which if you'd like to refer

[2:22:31] to them are in exhibit C, pages 3

[2:22:33] through 19. Many of them are provided in

[2:22:35] the applicants presentation. The

[2:22:39] assessor reached an incomplete cost

[2:22:40] valuation total that was within 1.5% of

[2:22:43] the standard market value approach. The

[2:22:46] analysis was incomplete due to several

[2:22:47] costs that were not reported such as the

[2:22:49] fuel used and the ferry pilot wages for

[2:22:51] the three pilots listed on the insurance

[2:22:53] coverage for the ferry trip. The

[2:22:55] incomplete cost information rendered the

[2:22:56] result unreliable. If all costs had been

[2:22:59] reported, the cost approach value result

[2:23:01] would likely have exceeded the standard

[2:23:02] market value approach conclusion. on the

[2:23:05] 722 email that is in packet C uh

[2:23:07] provided by the applicant. She estimated

[2:23:09] those costs at $40,000.

[2:23:12] If you turn the page from the appraisal

[2:23:13] in exhibit D, that is the cost approach

[2:23:16] worksheet that was prepared.

[2:23:20] Excuse me. the uh incomplete cost

[2:23:22] approach without all of the receipts

[2:23:24] that were incurred um that the

[2:23:27] assessments office is aware of but did

[2:23:29] not receive information for had the

[2:23:31] result at a $7,000 difference or 1.5% of

[2:23:34] value. If 40,000 or so more document

[2:23:38] documented expenses were included

[2:23:39] obviously the cost approach would be

[2:23:40] much higher than market approach. Um

[2:23:44] going to page six of our narrative

[2:23:48] guidelines from the BOE is clear on the

[2:23:50] preferred method of aircraft valuation.

[2:23:53] This is also taken from the annotation

[2:23:55] 1.00.005.

[2:23:58] While the cost and income approaches are

[2:23:59] part of the appraisal process and each

[2:24:01] may contribute to the value conclusion,

[2:24:03] the market approach to value is by far

[2:24:05] the most reliable in the valuation of

[2:24:06] general aircraft. The market approach

[2:24:09] involves an analysis of sales listings,

[2:24:10] offerings, opinions, and published

[2:24:12] market guides of comparable aircraft or

[2:24:15] of the subject aircraft. Such data give

[2:24:17] an indication of what people in general

[2:24:19] are willing to pay for a particular

[2:24:20] model of aircraft at a certain time. The

[2:24:23] cost approach is used mostly with new

[2:24:24] aircraft that have list prices but no

[2:24:26] history of sales. The appraiser assumes

[2:24:28] that the cost and value are the same in

[2:24:29] the circumstance. Cost should be

[2:24:31] understood to include the cash selling

[2:24:33] price, sales tax, and any delivery

[2:24:35] charges.

[2:24:37] Even if all the costs were known, the

[2:24:38] cost approach would still not be the

[2:24:39] most accurate measure of market value

[2:24:41] for an aircraft model that has 10 years

[2:24:43] of sales history. When the subject

[2:24:44] assessment was made,

[2:24:48] the aircraft configuration when

[2:24:49] purchased in Qatar was not legal to be

[2:24:51] used in flight in the United States. The

[2:24:53] aircraft was modified and improved to be

[2:24:56] certified by the FAA for use within the

[2:24:57] United States. The changes made to the

[2:25:00] aircraft, all prior to lean date 1124,

[2:25:03] brought the aircraft up to the standard

[2:25:05] of the average aircraft listed in the

[2:25:06] aircraft bluebook price guide. The

[2:25:09] aircraft was valued as part of the North

[2:25:10] American market for general aviation

[2:25:12] because of its current location and

[2:25:14] equipment configuration.

[2:25:16] The assessor followed California state

[2:25:17] law and procedures specifically

[2:25:19] established by the board of equalization

[2:25:20] for the value of general aircraft when

[2:25:22] determining the 2024 assessment of the

[2:25:25] subject aircraft.

[2:25:27] That's the case and chief.

[2:25:29] >> Okay.

[2:25:30] Um, have you had a chance to look at

[2:25:33] this material prior to the hearing?

[2:25:35] >> No.

[2:25:35] >> Do you want some time to take a look at

[2:25:37] it before you start your

[2:25:39] crossexamination? You may have questions

[2:25:40] for the assessor.

[2:25:42] >> Yeah. Um, I just really have one thing.

[2:25:46] I mean, it is a market approach and

[2:25:48] market is not only the blue book of

[2:25:50] California or the blue book of United

[2:25:52] States. The market is global.

[2:25:54] >> Okay. Then but do you have a question

[2:25:57] specific? Uh this is a chance for asking

[2:26:00] questions. It's called cross

[2:26:02] examination.

[2:26:03] >> The cost approach I you know I didn't

[2:26:06] include all the fuel and pilots uh

[2:26:09] receipts but I have all those itemized I

[2:26:12] could share. Um anyway I I don't quite

[2:26:16] understand when you say that there's the

[2:26:19] well three questions actually. you first

[2:26:22] it's a cost approach in the end your

[2:26:25] conclusion did not base on the cost

[2:26:27] correct

[2:26:28] >> that's correct

[2:26:29] >> it's not a reliable approach

[2:26:30] >> yeah it's I I would say that too because

[2:26:33] uh you know what cost to me and you know

[2:26:35] you could even mention that uh

[2:26:38] registration numbers and all those costs

[2:26:40] should I didn't

[2:26:43] um but you mentioned this use tax uh

[2:26:46] that I did get an exemption because as

[2:26:49] long as you go out of the states for

[2:26:52] business which I did and you justified

[2:26:55] that and they review it. So uh that was

[2:26:58] exempt.

[2:26:59] >> That's fine. My statement was that it's

[2:27:00] included whether or not it's paid at the

[2:27:02] time of purchase or not. [clears throat]

[2:27:04] >> No, it was afterwards I got this thing

[2:27:07] from California.

[2:27:08] >> Correct. My statement was that it's

[2:27:09] included in an assessment valuation

[2:27:11] whether it's paid at the time of sale or

[2:27:12] not.

[2:27:13] >> Right. [clears throat]

[2:27:14] And another one that um question has to

[2:27:16] do with the market bush. So what exactly

[2:27:19] of the market uh comps say did you use

[2:27:24] this is not like a real estate comps you

[2:27:26] know you you

[2:27:27] >> no the comps are the make and model of

[2:27:30] the aircraft

[2:27:31] >> right

[2:27:32] >> so if you look at the valuation page on

[2:27:33] page four

[2:27:35] they start from average retail value for

[2:27:37] a 2016 DA40G aircraft in average

[2:27:42] condition

[2:27:44] >> right

[2:27:45] >> you stated that yours was in average

[2:27:46] condition on the property mentioned the

[2:27:49] uh five sty or aircraft loop book is mostly US

[2:27:55] >> I believe it is but I'm not familiar

[2:27:57] with their methodology

[2:27:58] >> I have seen maybe one or two that snuck

[2:28:00] up from Europe because you know they know that in Europe in US they may

[2:28:04] get some sales from something but the

[2:28:07] thing is that mostly uh around the world

[2:28:10] you would have other available that's

[2:28:13] not listed in this uh textbook in the

[2:28:16] I don't value aircraft around the world.

[2:28:18] I value them here in Camaro or in

[2:28:20] Ventura County. And so I use the tool

[2:28:22] that's prescribed by the state of

[2:28:23] California to do so.

[2:28:24] >> That's that's no problem. But the thing

[2:28:26] is that this airplane is not from

[2:28:27] Camaro. It's

[2:28:29] >> it's in Camaro now though.

[2:28:30] >> It's in Camaro now, but it was purchased

[2:28:33] in talk.

[2:28:34] >> Yes. And purchase price is not the basis

[2:28:36] of valuation either. But it's

[2:28:38] >> because that's using the cost method. If

[2:28:39] you're using the purchase price

[2:28:41] >> is a large part of it

[2:28:44] because later on if I can sell it

[2:28:46] overseas, you know, so it's a supply the

[2:28:50] market is a supply and demand. It's not

[2:28:52] just one point in the world. There are

[2:28:54] many points

[2:28:56] >> and if you sell it around the world,

[2:28:57] they have to pay to transport it back.

[2:28:58] What you said in this statement was

[2:29:00] >> the most expensive part of the added

[2:29:02] cost that you had was

[2:29:03] >> well I'm willing to pay. I understand

[2:29:07] not every buyer is

[2:29:08] >> question.

[2:29:13] » Did you have any other questions?

[2:29:15] >> No.

[2:29:16] >> Okay. Um let me ask the assessor a

[2:29:20] couple of questions.

[2:29:21] >> Certainly.

[2:29:22] >> Now um the blue book does that have um

[2:29:27] sale prices?

[2:29:29] >> It tracks sales over the course of the

[2:29:32] um year making model. So there's 10

[2:29:33] years of sale history from 2016 to 2026

[2:29:37] for this model of aircraft.

[2:29:39] >> Okay. And so um

[2:29:43] then if it if it's 10 years of history,

[2:29:45] how how do you do you use a weighted

[2:29:49] average to get to your data value? How

[2:29:52] explain to me how you do that?

[2:29:53] >> Aircraft Loopex methodology is basically

[2:29:55] looking at all of the available data of

[2:29:56] sales in the marketplace for each

[2:29:58] >> 10 modelan.

[2:30:00] uh they update their estimate of retail

[2:30:02] value per quarter. So four times a year

[2:30:04] they're making adjustments based on

[2:30:06] whatever new information they've

[2:30:07] received about that aircraft making

[2:30:09] model.

[2:30:09] >> Okay.

[2:30:10] >> Um they're valuing all years of that

[2:30:12] aircraft as it goes along. So they have

[2:30:13] a different valuation would be assigned

[2:30:15] to a 2016 plane versus 2025 plane

[2:30:18] because they start from different year

[2:30:20] manufacturer. So do you have for example

[2:30:23] just one column where the the state has

[2:30:27] um condensed the data into a single

[2:30:30] value as of a year of model.

[2:30:35] >> It's in the column.

[2:30:37] >> It's an online tool that you're

[2:30:38] basically selecting the year

[2:30:39] manufacturer the manufacturer diamond

[2:30:42] and then you select the aircraft model.

[2:30:44] So you're selecting that model by

[2:30:45] manufacturer by year

[2:30:47] >> and then you get a value

[2:30:48] >> and then you get a starting point value

[2:30:50] of 430,000 which you then adjust.

[2:30:52] >> The board of equalization requires a 10%

[2:30:54] reduction off the top.

[2:30:56] >> Then we make adjustments based on the

[2:30:57] airframe and the engine usage hours.

[2:31:00] Each of those elements are contribute

[2:31:01] greatly to value.

[2:31:02] >> Aircraft use very little. It means it's

[2:31:04] still very valuable. If you use your

[2:31:06] aircraft with a lot more than average,

[2:31:07] it's worth less obviously than average

[2:31:09] aircraft. So then the data that the

[2:31:11] state board gets the starting value from

[2:31:16] is that

[2:31:18] United States data or

[2:31:20] >> I believe it's the US market.

[2:31:21] >> US market.

[2:31:23] >> That's where most of the people in this

[2:31:24] market are shopping.

[2:31:25] >> Uhhuh.

[2:31:26] >> And we're tasked with providing market

[2:31:28] value for the average consumer in this

[2:31:29] market.

[2:31:31] >> [clears throat]

[2:31:32] >> Some people choose to go around buying a

[2:31:34] less expensive model somewhere else

[2:31:36] around the world and adding that value

[2:31:37] adding those costs in as they get it

[2:31:39] here and get it legal.

[2:31:41] >> But very few consumers do so as you

[2:31:43] heard the orals that were gone through

[2:31:45] to make that happen.

[2:31:47] >> There's a lot of costs that are involved

[2:31:49] that aren't direct costs that are

[2:31:51] needed.

[2:31:52] >> Uhhuh.

[2:31:52] >> Um she spont uh the aircraft is as you

[2:31:55] see is 457,000 is what our estimated

[2:31:57] value is. uh she purchased for 350,000

[2:32:00] and then spent 130,000 more getting it

[2:32:02] here and getting it in condition so that

[2:32:03] it could be flown legally in the United

[2:32:05] States.

[2:32:05] >> Mh.

[2:32:06] >> Those things are fairly comparable.

[2:32:08] >> You could have spent that same amount of

[2:32:09] money buying the aircraft as is in this

[2:32:11] country and it'd be able to fly here.

[2:32:14] >> So that's why most people don't go to

[2:32:16] that expense because fing back as you

[2:32:18] heard was $20,000 in insurance alone.

[2:32:20] It's a very costly proposition to fly an

[2:32:22] aircraft back into the United States and

[2:32:24] then make it legal to fly here.

[2:32:25] >> Uhhuh. Uhhuh. Well, you cannot evaluate

[2:32:28] everything by money. That experience of

[2:32:31] flying through Middle East, through

[2:32:33] Europe and back from Canada all the way

[2:32:36] here. That was invaluable. I have

[2:32:38] learned so much. And for me, I'm going

[2:32:41] to electrify that airplane. I got to

[2:32:43] know every single bit of that airplane.

[2:32:45] >> Let me ask the assistant another

[2:32:47] question.

[2:32:48] Um so then you know there was a

[2:32:50] statement made by the applicant that um

[2:32:54] I believe she was saying that these um

[2:32:58] this particular model

[2:33:01] um is not

[2:33:04] uh and I'm kind of paraphrasing here I

[2:33:06] could be wrong but is not readily

[2:33:09] available in the United States that

[2:33:11] there's a broker that handles them

[2:33:13] overseas.

[2:33:15] there are manufacturing plants overseas

[2:33:18] for this aircraft.

[2:33:19] >> Um,

[2:33:20] >> so my question is this, if if that's the

[2:33:23] case, I mean assuming that what she

[2:33:25] stated is true, just for sake of

[2:33:28] discussion, then how would the um state

[2:33:32] blue book, you said that you believed it

[2:33:35] was United States sale prices for over

[2:33:38] the last 10 years.

[2:33:40] >> That is my understanding. So

[2:33:43] that's where I'm wondering if if the

[2:33:48] applicant is saying that there are not

[2:33:52] many sales

[2:33:54] that take place of this model in the

[2:33:56] United States

[2:33:58] then how if the blue book is using

[2:34:01] United States

[2:34:03] prices only I think you assume that

[2:34:07] >> I do assume that based on the

[2:34:08] information I've received so far

[2:34:10] >> where they're getting their data from

[2:34:11] then.

[2:34:12] >> Well, I think that um I would have a

[2:34:14] disagreement with the premise to begin

[2:34:15] with because the statement that I heard

[2:34:17] was that there were very few that were

[2:34:18] available that were not through the

[2:34:20] distributor that had monopoly on the

[2:34:22] environment.

[2:34:23] >> Very true.

[2:34:23] >> Not that though, not that no aircraft

[2:34:25] were sold of that description, just that

[2:34:27] they were limited in their sales channel

[2:34:29] to one individual.

[2:34:31] >> Okay.

[2:34:31] >> Is what I heard.

[2:34:32] >> Do you know how many sales

[2:34:35] um comprise the data for the state board

[2:34:38] in your blue book? In this case for this

[2:34:41] >> I just want to make one distinction. The

[2:34:42] state board of equalization has selected

[2:34:43] a private commercial entity aircraft

[2:34:46] blue book as their price got to use. The

[2:34:48] state of boardization used to do all

[2:34:50] this work themselves. Okay.

[2:34:51] >> And found that it was ownorous and to

[2:34:53] costly and all of those things. So they

[2:34:55] outsourced it in mid 90s.

[2:34:57] >> I see.

[2:34:57] >> To a commercially available price guide.

[2:35:00] >> Okay.

[2:35:00] >> There are many aircraft that are common

[2:35:02] in this United States that are not

[2:35:03] listed in the price guide because

[2:35:04] there's not enough data.

[2:35:05] >> Uhhuh. But this

[2:35:07] >> when there is enough data, they're

[2:35:08] listed in the price guide.

[2:35:09] >> Oh.

[2:35:10] >> So to me as an appraiser, when I see

[2:35:11] this is in the price guide, I feel

[2:35:13] confident that there's enough data

[2:35:14] behind it to say tell me that that's a

[2:35:16] good average retail number. I don't need

[2:35:18] to go do my own research, see what

[2:35:20] listings are available,

[2:35:21] >> try and come up with a number

[2:35:23] >> that I could use as a baseline for its

[2:35:24] market value.

[2:35:25] >> Okay. So you you relied on that and um

[2:35:29] am I'm correct in assuming then that you

[2:35:31] didn't um or the information may not

[2:35:35] have been available as to how many sales

[2:35:36] they relied on to give you the bottom

[2:35:39] line number.

[2:35:40] >> That's correct. I never see the

[2:35:41] underlying data information about how

[2:35:43] many data points they put together to do

[2:35:46] that.

[2:35:46] >> Okay. Okay. All right. Um now let's see

[2:35:51] here. We've had cross-examination. It's

[2:35:53] an opportunity for you if you have any

[2:35:57] um other

[2:36:00] evidence you'd like to submit

[2:36:03] as rebuttal evidence to what the

[2:36:06] assessor has presented. Is there any

[2:36:07] other evidence that would be to rebut

[2:36:10] anything that the assessor has

[2:36:12] presented?

[2:36:12] >> Um

[2:36:14] if I was if I was aware of this whole

[2:36:17] process, I would have taken all those

[2:36:20] calls. I mean taking down notes on the

[2:36:23] calls that I tried back in January,

[2:36:26] February of 2023

[2:36:28] just all those calls regarding the when

[2:36:32] I was trying to buy from through the

[2:36:33] individual or wherever that really in

[2:36:36] the United States I couldn't find I mean

[2:36:38] very few available and whatever the

[2:36:41] calls I made all goes to this monopoly

[2:36:44] uh and so I would have liked to use the

[2:36:47] data to rebut this one Because if you

[2:36:51] get the uh from that broker that

[2:36:53] outsource a commercial available thing,

[2:36:56] it probably is based on you know three

[2:36:59] or four or or even less of sales that

[2:37:02] they have and just average those. That's

[2:37:05] you know once again it's a supply and

[2:37:06] demand kind of thing. So I was being you

[2:37:09] know one of the few you know that's

[2:37:12] trying to get that.

[2:37:13] >> Did you say that um I'm sorry just step

[2:37:16] back for a second. Did you say that? Did

[2:37:19] you say that it pro the blue book was

[2:37:21] probably based on three or four sales

[2:37:24] that they may have had?

[2:37:25] >> It was probably the sampling is probably

[2:37:28] I I don't know exactly how many because

[2:37:30] I didn't take that data. I just went

[2:37:32] right away to my network to find the one

[2:37:34] that I found.

[2:37:35] >> Uhhuh. Okay.

[2:37:36] >> But in the US, I really could not get

[2:37:38] one that was satisfi satisfiable that

[2:37:41] would do the work that I like.

[2:37:44] >> What do you mean by that? do the work

[2:37:46] you like.

[2:37:47] >> Well, first of all, I like to have a uh

[2:37:49] airplane that that's efficient and I

[2:37:52] like to have, you know, with all the

[2:37:54] specs I'm looking for. I like you're

[2:37:55] buying a new car, you buying a used car,

[2:37:58] you want to have certain requirements

[2:37:59] that, you know, that satisfy what you

[2:38:02] need to do.

[2:38:02] >> Yes.

[2:38:03] >> Yeah.

[2:38:04] >> Okay. So, um then did what about the

[2:38:08] specs that she's mentioning?

[2:38:11] Uh the efficiency.

[2:38:12] >> So, yeah. So, for example, I wanted to

[2:38:14] buy a used airplane that's not abused by

[2:38:17] a flying school and you know in flying

[2:38:20] school they fly all the time and you

[2:38:21] know the students come down and bang the

[2:38:23] airplane really badly

[2:38:25] >> and uh probably higher hours and

[2:38:27] everything. So, I want to h have one

[2:38:29] that's probably not so high and also not

[2:38:32] from a flight school. So, that reduc it

[2:38:34] down to few. And then also in the

[2:38:38] >> there were a few a few of them in the

[2:38:39] United States.

[2:38:40] >> Yeah. also in the US. Uh

[2:38:42] >> what were the asking prices on the few?

[2:38:46] >> Uh probably higher.

[2:38:49] >> Yeah, I don't remember the exact price

[2:38:51] because uh Oh, yeah. I remember the the

[2:38:54] >> the field that I asked for that's belong

[2:38:56] to private individual rather than flight

[2:38:58] school.

[2:38:59] >> Uh is is uh basically uh almost the same

[2:39:03] as brand new. This guy wanted to to get

[2:39:06] almost the same as brand new price,

[2:39:08] >> which was

[2:39:09] >> 600 and something.

[2:39:10] >> 600. Yeah, that was one one of them.

[2:39:13] >> More than 600. More than one because I

[2:39:15] made the calls for almost like a month

[2:39:17] to try to find some. I couldn't.

[2:39:20] >> Okay.

[2:39:21] >> Because if you have to pay almost like

[2:39:23] brand new ones. This was back in 2023.

[2:39:26] >> And brand new ones are just coming up.

[2:39:28] Originally, I wanted to buy a brand new

[2:39:30] one,

[2:39:30] >> but because of COVID, they had

[2:39:32] manufacturing delays and everything.

[2:39:34] They say, "Well, you got to wait for at

[2:39:35] least another year or more than a year."

[2:39:38] I don't want that. Uh because I already

[2:39:40] have this finger open camera and

[2:39:42] everything. I still have my whole

[2:39:43] airplane.

[2:39:44] >> Okay. So, there were some of them that

[2:39:47] you checked in on that were advertised

[2:39:51] for sale here in the United States

[2:39:54] before before you made your decision to

[2:39:56] buy overseas.

[2:39:57] >> Uh this was not one particular airplane

[2:39:59] because I was just talking to this guy

[2:40:01] because I always got patched to him. So

[2:40:03] I asked him I said suppose I want to

[2:40:05] this because at first I was talking to

[2:40:06] him about the new airplane and I said I

[2:40:08] don't want any new airplane I want uh

[2:40:11] older one if new one

[2:40:12] >> the broker

[2:40:13] >> well that monopoly guy

[2:40:16] >> and so I said well I'll just uh get a

[2:40:18] used airplane

[2:40:19] >> and he says well you're going to pay for

[2:40:22] probably almost like a new airplane if

[2:40:24] that's the case because

[2:40:26] >> you know you you have a range between

[2:40:27] the flying school used airplanes and

[2:40:29] private individual used planes and so

[2:40:32] obviously He handles the whole spectrum.

[2:40:35] >> Uhhuh. Okay. All right. Um then uh did

[2:40:40] you have any um does that conclude any

[2:40:43] rebuttal you would have for the

[2:40:45] assessor?

[2:40:47] >> Uh

[2:40:49] well yeah the rebuttal I want to have is

[2:40:52] still it's a global market.

[2:40:54] >> Uhhuh.

[2:40:55] >> And so we shouldn't just look at a US

[2:40:57] sales. I mean if I did that I would have

[2:41:01] just be happy with a US airplane but

[2:41:03] this is a Austrian airplane that was in

[2:41:06] Qatar

[2:41:08] >> and uh if it's just in Austria it would

[2:41:11] have been okay too I didn't have to re

[2:41:13] reertify

[2:41:15] registration is one thing certify is

[2:41:17] another thing because FAA and YASA they

[2:41:20] have handshake so whatever that's

[2:41:22] certified by FAA or YASA they recognize

[2:41:25] each other

[2:41:25] >> okay

[2:41:26] >> so but this is already taken off the

[2:41:28] YASA one and moved into Qatar with a CIA

[2:41:32] certification.

[2:41:33] >> All right. Um, does the assessor have

[2:41:35] any rebuttal evidence they want to

[2:41:36] present?

[2:41:39] >> Um, rebuttal evidence, no, but there are

[2:41:41] some statements that were just made that

[2:41:43] I would like to follow up on if that's

[2:41:45] possible.

[2:41:46] >> Well, rebuttal evidence can be oral

[2:41:48] evidence. So, you can do that.

[2:41:50] >> Thank you. Um, you had stated that you

[2:41:52] didn't want to buy a aircraft that had

[2:41:54] been to a flight school, been used as a

[2:41:56] flight from a flight school. Correct.

[2:41:58] >> Right. That was not Well, I didn't want

[2:42:00] to because uh usually the flight school

[2:42:02] ones have really been abused.

[2:42:04] >> Sure.

[2:42:04] >> Yeah.

[2:42:05] And then you stated that those

[2:42:06] that are sold by flight schools are at

[2:42:08] retail value still. They haven't lost

[2:42:10] any value.

[2:42:11] >> I didn't. You said they were still at uh

[2:42:13] you're saying at 650,000. said that uh I

[2:42:16] want a low number of hours and most of

[2:42:19] the flight school ones they probably

[2:42:21] after abuse they being you know

[2:42:23] thousands of hours or something.

[2:42:24] >> Sure. And then you quoted a price of

[2:42:25] around 650,000 for those models. So my

[2:42:28] question would be how can it be damaged

[2:42:29] in the eyes of most consumers and not be

[2:42:31] worth as much and still worth as much as

[2:42:33] when it was brand new?

[2:42:35] >> Uh because that was not what he quoted.

[2:42:37] He did not quote the flying school

[2:42:39] flight schoolwise because I said I

[2:42:41] didn't want the flight school. And what

[2:42:43] information do you have about the flames

[2:42:44] you get quote?

[2:42:46] >> Well, I said that the well, first of

[2:42:48] all, he did not quote one specific

[2:42:50] airplane. I that's the data I wish I had

[2:42:53] that I could I have, you know, I could

[2:42:55] directly go to you with that. But I just

[2:42:57] remember that in order to buy one of

[2:42:59] those, which a it was really rare and b,

[2:43:03] you know, if it's only got a couple

[2:43:04] hundred or 300 hours like when I

[2:43:07] purchased mine, they would have been,

[2:43:09] you know, almost like the brand new one

[2:43:11] >> and I didn't want to do that. That was

[2:43:13] the main thing. I said, for a brand new

[2:43:15] airplane, I either get from the factory

[2:43:17] or pay for 650. Why would I, you know,

[2:43:20] pay for 650 and get one that's used?

[2:43:24] >> Because that's what the market says to

[2:43:26] work.

[2:43:27] It's that monopoly guy says what's

[2:43:29] worth. But I know the market overseas is

[2:43:32] not worth that much

[2:43:33] >> for an aircraft that's not in that same

[2:43:35] condition. That's correct.

[2:43:36] >> Not in the same condition. Right.

[2:43:37] >> Right. But I

[2:43:38] >> All those things that you added to it,

[2:43:40] all of those components that you're

[2:43:42] >> a process though. Certification is a

[2:43:43] process.

[2:43:44] >> Okay. Okay. Um

[2:43:45] >> and there's a cost to that process.

[2:43:47] There's a cost to repairing.

[2:43:48] >> Yeah. Well, you'll have an opportunity

[2:43:50] for put that information in your closing

[2:43:53] remarks. Um then um if there's no other

[2:43:58] evidence, rebuttal evidence, uh no other

[2:44:02] questions on the rebuttal evidence has

[2:44:04] been been uh presented. It's time for

[2:44:08] closing arguments and you had the burden

[2:44:11] of proof. So would you present your

[2:44:13] closing argument?

[2:44:16] >> Would you present your closing arguments

[2:44:17] first? Thank you.

[2:44:18] >> Certainly.

[2:44:21] California state constitution is very

[2:44:22] clear that general aviation aircraft

[2:44:24] should be assessed at fair market value

[2:44:26] as of the lean date. Lean date in

[2:44:28] question is 2024. All of the

[2:44:30] improvements, all of the certification

[2:44:33] costs that are expensive and are um

[2:44:36] lengthy process to occur have all taken

[2:44:38] place by that lean date. So that

[2:44:40] aircraft is now equivalent to the

[2:44:42] average aircraft that's in the

[2:44:43] California market. And that's the

[2:44:45] aircraft that was valued by the

[2:44:46] assessor's office. You should note that

[2:44:48] our assessment initially was done that

[2:44:50] we've showed was done March 18th, 2024.

[2:44:52] We were not aware that this aircraft had

[2:44:54] been purchased out of state, out of the

[2:44:56] country, not aware that it had been

[2:44:57] upgraded. There was no mention of these

[2:44:59] improvements that were made in the

[2:45:00] property statement that was filed by

[2:45:01] Miss Yang for 2024. Just that the

[2:45:04] aircraft was in average condition, had

[2:45:05] no damage history, and had a low number

[2:45:07] of hours. Those are the data elements

[2:45:09] that we use in our standard process as

[2:45:11] described by the board of equalization

[2:45:13] to conduct our job the way that every

[2:45:15] assessor in California counties is

[2:45:16] supposed to do. The aircraft was in our

[2:45:18] jurisdiction. We valued it as if it was

[2:45:20] in this market. We valued it as if it

[2:45:22] was standard based on the guys price

[2:45:24] line guides. We don't ever know how many

[2:45:26] data points are involved in those

[2:45:28] processes that receive the data to it.

[2:45:30] We just know that the board of

[2:45:31] equalization has approved that

[2:45:32] commercial guide and it has so done so

[2:45:34] for over 26 years to be the source the

[2:45:37] authoritative source for us to use our standard fair market value process.

[2:45:42] There is a secondary guideline of excuse

[2:45:44] me price book called VREF that we are

[2:45:46] supposed to use if the aircraft is not

[2:45:48] located in the price guide. There are

[2:45:50] many that are not located in aircraft

[2:45:51] blue price guide because there's not

[2:45:53] enough data collected to be able to say

[2:45:55] what fair market value is. In those

[2:45:57] cases, we either have to use VREF or we

[2:45:58] have to use alternate methods to try and

[2:46:00] come up with fair market valuations.

[2:46:01] That was not necessary in this case,

[2:46:03] even before we knew all of these

[2:46:04] extraneous costs have been involved

[2:46:06] because they're not important to the

[2:46:08] fair valuation that we received on the

[2:46:10] lean day 2024.

[2:46:13] That is our conclusion that our opinion

[2:46:15] is valid as issued.

[2:46:16] >> Okay. Thank you.

[2:46:17] >> Thank you.

[2:46:18] >> And then may I have your closing

[2:46:19] remarks, please?

[2:46:20] >> Sure.

[2:46:22] um fair market values uh which involves

[2:46:25] the word market means a global market as

[2:46:29] airplanes are sold around the world is

[2:46:31] not just the US

[2:46:33] and uh also market is based on supply

[2:46:37] demand and so the US demand us supply at

[2:46:41] the time was one case while in Qatar or

[2:46:45] in Europe is another case so therefore

[2:46:49] that market price in US and overseas are

[2:46:52] different and I took advantage of that.

[2:46:55] Sure, I took advantage of that. So, I

[2:46:57] was able to get a market value that was

[2:46:59] much lower and I shouldn't be penalized

[2:47:02] for that. I went all the way around the

[2:47:04] world to find that price. And uh you

[2:47:07] mentioned the um uh improvement that's

[2:47:11] uh that's added to the airplane and that

[2:47:14] improvement part of that was process.

[2:47:17] Certification is a process. It's it

[2:47:20] doesn't have to have have to do with

[2:47:21] market. It's a process to let people you

[2:47:24] pay people to come and say okay this

[2:47:26] airplane is safe so therefore you are

[2:47:28] allowed to fly

[2:47:30] right it's not part of the price of the

[2:47:33] or or the market price so it shouldn't

[2:47:36] be counted as a fair market value for

[2:47:38] certification process now the other part

[2:47:41] for example the uh ADSB the ADSB is only

[2:47:45] special in the US I flew all the way

[2:47:48] around the world they didn't require

[2:47:49] ADSB basically ADSB is just not a GPS

[2:47:52] that you add to the airplane. The

[2:47:54] airplane already had two GPS's in the

[2:47:56] airplane, right? So why do I need to add

[2:48:00] all that value? Why does that value have

[2:48:02] to be added to the market? Once again,

[2:48:03] going back to the market, it's a global

[2:48:05] market unless I'm coming here to sell

[2:48:08] that airplane, then I would definitely

[2:48:10] add that because that's an improvement

[2:48:12] for this market. But for the other

[2:48:15] market, it didn't require the ADSB. Only

[2:48:17] the US from 2020 was requiring that.

[2:48:21] That's the improvement part. So um so

[2:48:25] overall I think the fair market value

[2:48:27] ought to be 350 subtracting off the 15

[2:48:30] for today you know with some

[2:48:32] depreciation but of the lean date or of

[2:48:34] uh 2024 January is slightly less than

[2:48:37] 350 even

[2:48:40] but you have to tell me what market is

[2:48:44] for the fair market price.

[2:48:47] >> Does that conclude your closing

[2:48:49] arguments?

[2:48:49] >> Yes. Okay. Okay. I want to thank both

[2:48:51] parties. I'm going to take this matter

[2:48:53] under submission. You'll get my decision

[2:48:55] in writing. Thank you both.

[2:48:56] >> Thank you.

[2:49:29] straight.

[2:49:38] So these are still perfect because

[2:49:42] that's really

[2:49:44] Thank you.

[2:49:54] » Just make sure parties.

[2:49:56] >> Yeah, if everybody's okay with it.

[2:50:00] >> Okay. So, we're going to take a 5m

[2:50:02] minute recess

[2:50:04] and we will come back after 11:55.

[2:50:17] Yeah,

[2:50:18] >> right here.

[2:56:40] Okay, we're back on the record. I've

[2:56:43] passed out a copy of the application

[2:56:47] 2511770

[2:56:50] applicant Benichi Prada.

[2:56:53] And it looks like this is a

[2:56:57] an appeal for a supplemental assessment

[2:56:59] issued January 20th, 2026.

[2:57:03] Um, and we've gone through and amended

[2:57:05] the application. And so the

[2:57:09] assessor, do you want to give us a an

[2:57:10] overview on the burden?

[2:57:14] >> Um, yes. The burden would be on us. This

[2:57:17] a scape assessment under property tax

[2:57:19] 321. uh you would bear the initial

[2:57:22] burden of establishing the validity of

[2:57:24] the assessment including demonstrating a

[2:57:26] change of ownership occurred and that

[2:57:27] the property was uh subject to

[2:57:29] reassessment.

[2:57:30] >> The this is a sorry just to clarify this

[2:57:34] is a supplemental.

[2:57:37] >> Uh yeah, so this would be a prospective

[2:57:40] uh Prop 19 exclusion moving forwards

[2:57:42] from 2025.

[2:57:44] >> Okay. I just want to make sure because

[2:57:46] originally it was filed for an escape

[2:57:47] assessment but it was corrected to a

[2:57:49] supplement for January

[2:57:52] issued January 20th 2026.

[2:57:56] >> Yeah, it wouldn't be qualified to be

[2:57:59] accepted but it would just be a base

[2:58:02] year.

[2:58:02] >> Yes. So based on Yeah, based on the So

[2:58:10] are we saying the supp as of the

[2:58:13] supplemental on for the July 16, 2025

[2:58:17] date

[2:58:18] >> 2023

[2:58:19] >> for 2025. Yes. So it's prospective base,

[2:58:22] but there was a supplemental that they

[2:58:24] filed timely on.

[2:58:25] >> Okay. But we are address we're

[2:58:27] addressing the June 8, 2023 correct

[2:58:30] change in ownership event. Okay.

[2:58:35] Um,

[2:58:35] >> so it's assessor's assessor's burden.

[2:58:37] >> Yeah, we believe it is the assessor's

[2:58:39] burden.

[2:58:46] » Okay. So, um, procedurally, Ceser will

[2:58:50] go first. You'll have an opportunity to

[2:58:52] ask questions of their appeal or their

[2:58:54] presentation.

[2:58:55] >> Um, then you'll do your presentation.

[2:58:59] they'll have the opportunity to ask

[2:59:00] questions of your presentation and then

[2:59:03] we'll go into your closing and since

[2:59:05] they have the burden they they'll close

[2:59:07] the hearing. Okay.

[2:59:08] >> I'm just going to backtrack uh just to

[2:59:10] make sure I'm tracking with everyone on

[2:59:12] the burden of proof. Um so then um is

[2:59:16] the assessor rebutting a deed

[2:59:18] presumption?

[2:59:21] >> We are not. Um so the

[2:59:27] basically um the appeal hinges on

[2:59:31] proposition 19 parentto child exclusion

[2:59:34] and whether the ex exclusion applies. So

[2:59:38] >> both parties are not in disagreement

[2:59:40] with the deeds. Uh we're just if uh

[2:59:44] we're determining if an exclusion

[2:59:46] applies or not to the transfer. So there

[2:59:49] was a denial of the

[2:59:50] >> we denied based on the facts we have.

[2:59:52] Yeah.

[2:59:52] >> Okay. Okay. Fine. Yes. So then um the

[2:59:56] assessor shall have the burden of proof.

[2:59:59] Um okay. Um

[3:00:03] well now um to the assessor if you would

[3:00:08] um before you introduce your case

[3:00:12] uh would you you've already talked about

[3:00:15] it but just concisely brief us on the

[3:00:18] facts that we're looking at today the

[3:00:22] data value um

[3:00:25] and um

[3:00:29] and we'll get the rest of in in your

[3:00:32] case the enrolled value the value you'

[3:00:35] be testifying to that will be in your

[3:00:37] introduction and then we can get into

[3:00:39] your case.

[3:00:39] >> So the valuation portion was bifurcated.

[3:00:42] Um okay so we were just going to talk

[3:00:45] about the change in ownership.

[3:00:46] >> Oh I see. Yeah you're right. Thank you.

[3:00:49] >> Okay.

[3:00:49] >> And so I passed out uh the assessors

[3:00:52] exhibits A through D.

[3:00:56] >> Okay. Good.

[3:00:57] >> So quick just a real quick overview.

[3:01:00] what we're looking at today. Um, so the

[3:01:03] June 8th, 2023 date, that is the subject

[3:01:06] of this appeal. Uh, that is due to the

[3:01:10] passing of a parent and according to the

[3:01:14] trust, two children inherited that the

[3:01:17] property upon the passing of a parent.

[3:01:20] Um, we treated that as a 100% change in

[3:01:24] ownership. Uh later we did get a

[3:01:27] proposition 19 application for parent to

[3:01:31] child exclusion. Uh the main reason we

[3:01:35] denied it is because proposition 19 has

[3:01:38] a rule that says you have it has to

[3:01:40] become your primary residence within one

[3:01:42] year based on the documentation which

[3:01:45] we'll go over. Um we found that it was

[3:01:48] not inhabited as the primary residence

[3:01:50] within a year and we felt we had to deny

[3:01:52] the application

[3:01:53] >> of both both children.

[3:01:55] >> Correct.

[3:01:56] >> Or either

[3:01:57] >> u it would just be one the one that

[3:02:00] eventually took

[3:02:02] full ownership of the property. Uh he

[3:02:04] that is the other date that was on the

[3:02:06] application originally July 16th 2025

[3:02:10] which is no longer the subject of the

[3:02:11] appeal but that's when EA took 50%

[3:02:13] ownership from his sibling.

[3:02:15] >> Okay. And was that an event on appra

[3:02:17] reappraising event?

[3:02:18] >> Yes, we treated that as 50% reappraisal.

[3:02:20] >> Okay. All right.

[3:02:23] >> One point of clarification. We

[3:02:25] originally treated it as a 100% change

[3:02:27] in ownership event, but after this

[3:02:29] appeal was filed, we noticed that error

[3:02:30] and we corrected it to 50%. For that

[3:02:34] >> July 16th, 2015.

[3:02:35] >> I see. Okay. Okay. Um, then did you have

[3:02:39] any questions about the procedure before

[3:02:41] we have the assessor present his case

[3:02:42] and chief? I think I have a a generally

[3:02:45] good idea of how this is supposed to go.

[3:02:48] >> Okay. Okay. Fine. The only thing that

[3:02:50] wasn't mentioned um in the explanation

[3:02:54] of the procedure is if you feel or if

[3:02:57] the other if the assessor feels that uh

[3:03:00] the opposite party is presenting

[3:03:02] evidence that is not admissible

[3:03:05] then you can interrupt and object and I

[3:03:07] would make a ruling on your objection.

[3:03:10] That would be the only time when we

[3:03:12] interrupt each other. Okay.

[3:03:15] >> All right. Let's get into the assessor's

[3:03:17] case and cheats, please.

[3:03:19] >> Uh March Sober, I'll be presenting for

[3:03:21] the assessor's office. Uh we have

[3:03:24] exhibit A, which is primarily what I'll

[3:03:26] be reading from today. Exhibit B is

[3:03:28] going to go over supporting docs uh

[3:03:30] documents I've either provided or were

[3:03:32] provided by the applicant. Um C and D

[3:03:37] are beads and the full Google uh context

[3:03:41] for uh annotations I'll be referencing

[3:03:44] throughout exhibit A.

[3:03:46] >> Before you start,

[3:03:48] >> let me make sure. Okay. So is is this is

[3:03:52] AB are all the exhibits under this one

[3:03:55] clip?

[3:03:56] >> Yes.

[3:03:56] >> Oh, okay.

[3:03:57] >> Yes. Uh if you notice down at the bottom

[3:04:00] it it'll have the numbering for the

[3:04:02] pages also include the exhibit.

[3:04:03] >> Got it. Okay. Thanks.

[3:04:05] >> Yeah.

[3:04:06] >> Okay. Please proceed.

[3:04:08] >> Dear board members, for your

[3:04:10] consideration, the assessor submits the

[3:04:11] following report on the determination of

[3:04:13] a change in ownership of the subject

[3:04:15] property. The assessor has completed

[3:04:17] this determination objectively and

[3:04:18] independently pursuant to all re

[3:04:21] California revenue and taxation code

[3:04:23] sections and California property tax

[3:04:25] rules. The assessor's representative is

[3:04:27] available for any questions regarding

[3:04:28] news reports information and analysis.

[3:04:30] Thank you for your service to venture.

[3:04:34] Um for this part I'm ask to page three

[3:04:38] the statement of facts. On June 22nd

[3:04:42] 1979 Kimo and Satoka Tada husband and

[3:04:44] wife acquired title to the subject

[3:04:47] property. A base year value was

[3:04:49] established as of that day pursuant to

[3:04:51] the applicable laws uh 60 and 4620001

[3:04:56] on February 8, 2008. The deed was

[3:04:59] transferred into a revocable trust. Uh

[3:05:02] this was not considered a change in

[3:05:04] ownership as the beneficiaries of the

[3:05:07] property did not change under the new

[3:05:08] trust.

[3:05:10] Um this at this time affidavit of death

[3:05:14] was also recorded for Kempo Turada. This

[3:05:16] was a spousal transfer of interest also

[3:05:19] not reassessed as Satoka Torado uh

[3:05:22] remained as the surviving spouse and uh

[3:05:26] qualified for an interspousal exclusion

[3:05:29] on June 8th 2023. Satoka Torata passed

[3:05:33] away and this was documented on a deed

[3:05:37] recorded July 18th 2023.

[3:05:41] The property then transferred in equal

[3:05:43] shares to Nichi Tata and Miho Turata

[3:05:47] effective on the June 8th 2023 date and

[3:05:52] was 100 uh% assessed at that time. Uh

[3:05:56] the trust became irrevocable which

[3:05:58] automatically conveys interest to the

[3:06:01] benefiting parties

[3:06:07] on July 16th 2025.

[3:06:11] uh deed was recorded with Kinichi Torata

[3:06:15] acquiring siblings interest in the

[3:06:17] property. This transfer was reviewed and

[3:06:19] it was decided that a 50% assessment was

[3:06:22] warranted as there is no exclusion uh

[3:06:25] for sibling to sibling trans transfers.

[3:06:29] Uh a supple supplemental notice from

[3:06:33] June 8th 2023 transfer was mailed on May

[3:06:35] 20th 2024.

[3:06:38] Uh I reference this because that uh

[3:06:40] establishes that this will be a

[3:06:42] prospective

[3:06:44] uh

[3:06:46] appeal as opposed to able to go back to

[3:06:48] the date and change in ownership.

[3:06:52] On July 29th, 2025, the assessor's

[3:06:55] office received Proposition 19 form uh

[3:06:58] stated the date the property was

[3:06:59] occupied was May 5th, 2025 as principal

[3:07:03] residence.

[3:07:05] On July 30th, 2025, the assessor's

[3:07:08] office received a homeowner's exemption

[3:07:10] form that stated the date the property

[3:07:12] was occupied as a principal residence

[3:07:13] was May 5th, 2025.

[3:07:15] >> And I'm sorry, the date the exemption

[3:07:18] that claim form was received

[3:07:20] >> was July 30th.

[3:07:21] >> 30th, 2025. Got it.

[3:07:27] » Also stated July 24th, 2026, I received

[3:07:32] an addendum from the applicant. appeal

[3:07:35] contains a picture of a 2025 income tax

[3:07:38] return which stated the property as his

[3:07:40] principal address in 2025.

[3:07:44] Um the addendum also included notice

[3:07:46] fromce that established a residency at

[3:07:49] the property effective July 14th6.

[3:07:53] Uh my analysis is the

[3:08:06] on the bottom of page four. I'll

[3:08:08] continue from there. On July 18th, 92.3,

[3:08:11] the death of the trustee was recorded

[3:08:13] with an effective date of June 8th,

[3:08:15] 2023. While the property remained titled

[3:08:18] in the name of the Turata trust, the

[3:08:19] exclusion provided under section 62D

[3:08:23] applies only so long as the trust is

[3:08:25] revokable and the trusters retain the

[3:08:28] present beneficial interest. Upon the

[3:08:30] death of the last surviving trust, that

[3:08:32] exclusion no longer applies. At that

[3:08:35] point, the beneficial interest in the

[3:08:37] property passes from the deedent to the

[3:08:39] trust beneficiaries.

[3:08:40] Accordingly, upon Satakaco Torata's

[3:08:43] death, the present beneficial interest

[3:08:45] in the property transferred from

[3:08:46] Satakaco Toata to the trust

[3:08:48] beneficiaries.

[3:08:50] This transfer constituted a change in

[3:08:52] ownership under section 60 because it

[3:08:55] represents a transfer of the beneficial

[3:08:57] use and enjoyment of the property. The

[3:08:59] assessor therefore correctly determined

[3:09:01] that a change in ownership occurred as

[3:09:03] of June 8th, 2023, establishing a new

[3:09:06] property base year.

[3:09:09] And then uh beginning month after

[3:09:12] February 16, 2021, change in ownership

[3:09:15] shall not include the transfer of real

[3:09:17] property which is the principal

[3:09:18] residence or the family farm of an

[3:09:20] eligible transfer in the case of

[3:09:22] transfers between parents and their

[3:09:24] children or between grandparents and

[3:09:26] their grandchildren meeting the

[3:09:27] following conditions. The principal

[3:09:29] residence or family farm of the transfer

[3:09:32] must become the principal residence or

[3:09:34] the family farm of at least one eligible

[3:09:36] transfer within one year of transfer.

[3:09:40] This rule states that the principal

[3:09:42] residence must be established within one

[3:09:44] year of the change in ownership, the

[3:09:47] June 8th, 2023.

[3:09:51] What constitutes a primary or principal

[3:09:53] residence is described with the board of

[3:09:56] equalizations annotations

[3:09:58] as a principal residence or principal

[3:10:01] place of residence is considered to be

[3:10:03] equivalent to doicile. that place where

[3:10:06] a person has his or true or his or her

[3:10:09] true fixed and permanent home and to

[3:10:11] which that individual has the intention

[3:10:13] of returning to whenever absent.

[3:10:16] Factors to consider when determining a

[3:10:18] person's principal residence or doicile

[3:10:20] in addition to where the owner of the

[3:10:22] property resided during that year

[3:10:23] include such indices as the filing of

[3:10:27] income tax returns in the state, the

[3:10:30] state of [clears throat] voter

[3:10:31] registration, the state of vehicle

[3:10:33] registration, the state of issuance of a

[3:10:36] driver's license. There is no time

[3:10:38] requirements under California property

[3:10:41] tax law in order to qualify a home as a

[3:10:44] principal place of residence. I.e. the

[3:10:46] six-month rule of having lived the

[3:10:48] majority of the time in that location as

[3:10:51] opposed to

[3:10:53] where you claim your actual residence.

[3:10:56] Whether a dwelling located in California

[3:10:58] is a person's principal place of

[3:10:59] residence is a question of fact. To

[3:11:01] qualify for the exemption, a dwelling

[3:11:03] must be the person's true fixed and

[3:11:05] permanent home and principal

[3:11:07] establishment to when he she whenever

[3:11:09] absent intends to return.

[3:11:12] In state presence, vehicle registration,

[3:11:14] voter registration, bank accounts, and

[3:11:16] state income filings are among the

[3:11:17] matters to be considered in determining

[3:11:19] residency, which for exemption purposes

[3:11:21] is equivalent to doicile.

[3:11:26] The documents received from applicants

[3:11:28] to did not make this property their

[3:11:30] primary residence until May 2025.

[3:11:33] No supporting documentation uh

[3:11:35] demonstrated a move in date within the

[3:11:37] timeline such as provided tax returns or

[3:11:40] not provided proof of voter

[3:11:42] registration, vehicle registration, or

[3:11:44] driver's license. By the laws stated

[3:11:47] above, the applicant would have needed

[3:11:48] to make the property their primary

[3:11:50] residence one year from the date of

[3:11:51] transfer, June 8th, [clears throat]

[3:11:53] 2023, which would have been June 8th,

[3:11:55] 2024.

[3:11:57] For the reasons set forth above, the

[3:11:59] evidence demonstrates that a change in

[3:12:00] ownership occurred on June 8th, 2023

[3:12:03] upon the death of Satoka Tora, resulting

[3:12:05] in the transfer of the present

[3:12:07] beneficial interest in the subject

[3:12:09] property to the trust beneficiaries.

[3:12:12] This constitutes a reassessible event.

[3:12:16] Per R&T code section 60 notwithstanding

[3:12:19] that legal title remained in the name of

[3:12:20] the trust. Further the applicant's claim

[3:12:23] for the parent child exclusion of

[3:12:25] Proposition 19 does not qualify for

[3:12:27] relief at the applicant did not

[3:12:29] establish the property as its primary

[3:12:31] residence within one year of the date of

[3:12:33] transfer as required by rule 462520.

[3:12:37] Accordingly, the assessor respectfully

[3:12:39] requests that the assessment appeals

[3:12:40] board uphold the assessor's

[3:12:42] determination that the June 8, 2023

[3:12:44] change in ownership constitutes a

[3:12:45] reassessible event under property uh

[3:12:50] under the applicable property tax law

[3:12:52] and sustain the resulting assessment as

[3:12:54] well as the denial of Proposition 19

[3:12:56] exclusion claim.

[3:12:59] In exhibit B, we do have the documents

[3:13:02] reference where we have the homeowners

[3:13:05] uh

[3:13:06] plan or tax uh tax exemption on uh about

[3:13:12] halfway down the page. It is number two,

[3:13:15] date you occupied this property as your

[3:13:17] principal residence was uh May 5th,

[3:13:22] 2025. This would be exhibit B, page two.

[3:13:32] And then on page three and also the

[3:13:36] reassessment claim for exclusion between

[3:13:39] parent and child of Proposition 19.

[3:13:44] It backs up that on page four also

[3:13:47] states a move in date of uh establishing

[3:13:50] a resident principal residence house of

[3:13:53] 5520.

[3:14:04] And then uh lastly, we do have uh the

[3:14:08] SCE

[3:14:11] um establishment notice for 202 July 15,

[3:14:16] 2026,

[3:14:18] page seven, and the 2024 and 2023

[3:14:23] California income tax returns page list

[3:14:27] the uh San Francisco property that the

[3:14:29] applicant also owns as the address.

[3:14:32] >> What page is that on?

[3:14:33] >> Sorry, that one is um Oh, that page is

[3:14:38] not numbered because I received them

[3:14:39] late. They're after seven, so they would

[3:14:41] be considered eight and nine.

[3:14:43] >> Oh, okay.

[3:14:44] >> Yeah. Sorry, I stayed put those

[3:14:45] together. Just see those a little late.

[3:14:48] And um

[3:14:57] and uh

[3:15:00] which page were you just referring to

[3:15:03] where it states his residence on the tax

[3:15:07] forms?

[3:15:08] >> Yes, those should be just before it on

[3:15:10] page two and three.

[3:15:13] Oh, on the tax forms. Yes. Um yeah, that

[3:15:16] would be uh after the the would be eight

[3:15:20] and nine 20.4 tax return and three tax

[3:15:24] return. Those would be the very

[3:15:26] >> Did you read the statement that states

[3:15:29] the

[3:15:30] >> location? Yes.

[3:15:31] >> From there.

[3:15:32] >> Um

[3:15:33] >> read read the address or whatever.

[3:15:36] >> Yes. It says 325 Fair Street, San

[3:15:38] Francisco, California. Um

[3:15:41] >> is that the mailing address?

[3:15:43] >> Yes. And it says principal residents

[3:15:45] enter your county at the time of filing.

[3:15:46] San Francisco.

[3:15:48] >> Where is Oh, I see.

[3:15:49] >> Yeah. It does not list the exact street

[3:15:52] number, but list the

[3:15:53] >> Okay.

[3:15:59] » Same on the 2000

[3:16:02] >> on the same on the uh

[3:16:05] 23. Yes, we did receive the 2025 tax

[3:16:09] return that does list the uh Camaro

[3:16:12] address. Um, however, that does just

[3:16:16] kind of confirm the other documents

[3:16:17] we've received that residency was

[3:16:19] established in 2025.

[3:16:20] >> Okay. And that's is that in the

[3:16:22] exhibits, the 20

[3:16:23] >> Yes, the 2025 should be before the SoCal

[3:16:28] Edison. So, that's page six.

[3:16:30] >> Okay.

[3:16:31] >> Yeah, it does list Ventura County as the

[3:16:33] principal residence.

[3:16:34] >> Okay. Thank you. [clears throat] Uh, was

[3:16:36] there any other evidence?

[3:16:37] >> Uh, no. That would be at this time.

[3:16:40] >> Okay. Uh, have you had a chance to

[3:16:44] um look at this evidence enough for you

[3:16:46] to cross-examine the assessor because I

[3:16:49] can give you some time if you need to

[3:16:50] take a look.

[3:16:51] >> I'm familiar with some of the evidence

[3:16:53] that's presented because we've been

[3:16:54] having communication about it. So,

[3:16:56] >> Okay.

[3:16:57] Sorry for your loss by the way.

[3:16:59] Thank you.

[3:16:59] >> Um, would you like to cross-examine the

[3:17:02] assessor now?

[3:17:03] >> Yeah. Um, so I I guess one question is

[3:17:09] there there

[3:17:15] I think it's page five, right?

[3:17:17] >> Of which exhibit?

[3:17:18] >> Exhibit A, page five.

[3:17:20] >> Mhm.

[3:17:20] >> Exhibit A. So the four

[3:17:24] um points being quote all about the tax

[3:17:27] return

[3:17:29] registration with the registration

[3:17:31] driver's license.

[3:17:33] Um

[3:17:34] so

[3:17:36] is it possible that there is someone

[3:17:39] that can satisfy all these requirements

[3:17:41] but not actually be physically resident

[3:17:44] and still qualify

[3:17:46] that home to be the primary resident?

[3:17:52] You're saying if they provide all these

[3:17:54] items and all these items show that it's

[3:17:57] their primary residence,

[3:17:58] >> right? The optics of

[3:18:00] >> Yeah. the the optics of it based on the

[3:18:03] law would make it look like that primary

[3:18:05] estimates, right?

[3:18:06] >> So I would read from I'm going to read

[3:18:08] from annotation 505.0078,

[3:18:11] which is the paragraph right below that

[3:18:14] list. It says um whether a dwelling

[3:18:16] located in California is a person's

[3:18:18] principal place of residence is a

[3:18:20] question of fact. Uh so based on the

[3:18:24] BOE's guidelines, um it should be

[3:18:28] factual and these are the documentations

[3:18:30] they suggest we review to ensure that

[3:18:33] it's a factual principal place of

[3:18:35] residence.

[3:18:36] >> But it could be possible even with all

[3:18:38] this evidence that person's not

[3:18:40] physically present at the home. Correct.

[3:18:43] Um, not so for our purposes, we're going

[3:18:46] to base any decision making on the

[3:18:49] documents the DOE requires.

[3:18:58] » I I think that's that's the only

[3:19:00] question I have regarding

[3:19:02] >> that's the only question you have. Okay.

[3:19:04] Um, could you direct me to the

[3:19:06] homeowners exclusion claim form? Where

[3:19:09] is that? That that is that should be the

[3:19:11] very sec the second page

[3:19:14] >> of [clears throat] exhibit

[3:19:15] >> of exhibit B

[3:19:18] >> exhibit B page two.

[3:19:20] >> Yes.

[3:19:20] >> Okay.

[3:19:20] >> That is

[3:19:22] property tax exemption.

[3:19:24] >> Okay. Let me just take a look at that

[3:19:30] exhibit B page two.

[3:19:33] >> I did have one.

[3:19:35] >> That's fine. Just one second. Let me

[3:19:36] look at this.

[3:19:38] >> Okay. So this is the

[3:19:40] exemption and it says when did you

[3:19:43] acquire the property

[3:19:45] and it says date you occupied the

[3:19:48] property as your principal residence.

[3:19:50] >> Yes,

[3:19:55] » May 5th, 2025.

[3:20:02] » Is that within one year?

[3:20:05] Uh, no. That was June 8th, 2024.

[3:20:08] >> That's right. You said that.

[3:20:10] >> I [clears throat] I do I'm going to let

[3:20:13] you ask your question and I have another

[3:20:14] question for them. But let me have you

[3:20:16] ask ask them first.

[3:20:17] >> Thank you. Uh so we we might be asking

[3:20:20] the same question but uh I guess to

[3:20:23] [laughter] the assessor's office upon

[3:20:24] receiving those forms given that date of

[3:20:27] May the 5th 2025 is there any is there

[3:20:31] any reasonable scenario that that date

[3:20:34] would even be valid for submission for

[3:20:36] that form

[3:20:38] >> that so that the form signed under

[3:20:41] penalty of perjury. So we do whatever's

[3:20:44] filled out on the form carries a lot of

[3:20:47] weight.

[3:20:48] >> Understood.

[3:20:48] >> And we are required to put a lot of

[3:20:51] weight on it because it is signed under

[3:20:52] penalty of perjury.

[3:20:53] >> Sure.

[3:20:54] >> Um if in your case an applicant

[3:20:58] fills it out incorrectly

[3:21:00] >> um for whatever reason put the wrong

[3:21:02] date on there. Maybe they were confused.

[3:21:04] I don't know. um we do allow them to

[3:21:07] make a correction and the correction

[3:21:09] would be through the documentation

[3:21:12] listed in that in our presentation. So

[3:21:17] essentially we're saying okay we rec we

[3:21:19] recognize everyone makes mistakes. If

[3:21:21] you can prove you've made a mistake then

[3:21:22] we can make the correction.

[3:21:25] >> Yes.

[3:21:29] » Okay. Um let's see here.

[3:21:34] I think that answered my question also.

[3:21:37] Okay. Um then hearing no other

[3:21:41] cross-examination questions, it's your

[3:21:43] opportunity to present your case and

[3:21:45] chief and um let me just ask you this

[3:21:48] just before you get started. Are you

[3:21:50] going to are you testifying

[3:21:53] that um

[3:21:55] do you believe that they should have

[3:21:57] been the u change in ownership should

[3:22:00] have been 100% excluded from

[3:22:02] reassessment?

[3:22:04] I'm challenging the the statement I'm

[3:22:08] going to be presenting is that there was

[3:22:10] a ministerial mechanical error on that

[3:22:13] date that was presented on the forms and

[3:22:16] I'm presenting evidence that I was

[3:22:18] physically resident in the camera

[3:22:21] >> and ultimately you believe that the

[3:22:23] exclusion the parent child exclusion

[3:22:25] should have been granted 100%. Is that

[3:22:27] correct?

[3:22:29] >> Okay, very fine. Um

[3:22:36] it's

[3:22:39] so

[3:22:40] >> it is yeah it's a original appeal and

[3:22:47] passing out the applicants exhibits. Um,

[3:22:51] so it looks like they're labeled A

[3:22:53] through D and

[3:22:56] an addendum and one. So we'll we'll

[3:22:58] identify them as exhibits 1 through

[3:23:00] eight.

[3:23:12] » Would you proceed please?

[3:23:14] >> Thank you.

[3:23:16] all again for your time. notes

[3:23:18] very late so it can distort

[3:23:22] uh the case I'm presenting is that the

[3:23:26] there was the mechanical error that they

[3:23:30] presented on the forms that were

[3:23:33] submitted to the county and the evidence

[3:23:36] that I'm presenting is around the fact

[3:23:39] that I was physically present

[3:23:43] at my mother's home up until the

[3:23:48] transfer starting from June. And it may

[3:23:52] seem con may seem convenient that I'm

[3:23:55] saying that uh the timeline starts from

[3:23:58] June uh 2022.

[3:24:02] However, I can go into some history of

[3:24:05] why that's your residence. So,

[3:24:09] as as we all already understood, my

[3:24:12] father passed away in 2007.

[3:24:16] Uh after his passing, my my mother lived

[3:24:20] in that home by herself and she felt

[3:24:24] that it would be a great idea on

[3:24:27] Memorial Day for his family to get

[3:24:29] together because she was getting she had

[3:24:32] just lost her father as well and um she

[3:24:36] wanted another reason for the the family

[3:24:38] to get together. So pretty much uh a

[3:24:41] year or two after his passing, we

[3:24:44] started having a annual uh Memorial Day

[3:24:46] barbecue and it was only until co co was

[3:24:52] the in 2020 was the one year that we had

[3:24:55] to to skip it. Uh

[3:24:58] I'm sure everybody understands why. It's

[3:25:00] just the there was a lot of uncertainty

[3:25:03] at the climb. So we that was the the one

[3:25:06] year since his passing uh and she

[3:25:08] started that barbecue band. We we did

[3:25:11] not have that

[3:25:13] um no more barbecue.

[3:25:16] And then

[3:25:18] come 2021 I mean everyone was happy to

[3:25:22] be back together. She was absolutely

[3:25:24] fine. And then skip forward one more

[3:25:26] year to 2022

[3:25:29] and it it was clear that there was

[3:25:31] something off.

[3:25:34] He just she would usually be excited

[3:25:36] about helping out and

[3:25:39] she just really wasn't herself. So I I

[3:25:42] think myself um my my partner and my

[3:25:47] sister, we all kind of questioned why

[3:25:49] she wasn't uh acting the way that she

[3:25:52] usually was. And she just said she was

[3:25:54] feeling bad. And I started to work with

[3:25:58] her to gain access to her medical

[3:26:00] records to just understand what was

[3:26:02] going on. And the more I read into it,

[3:26:06] uh that the more I found out that she

[3:26:08] just wasn't getting the the right health

[3:26:12] or the care that she needed. So, uh it

[3:26:16] became apparent that through discussions

[3:26:19] with her practitioner, through her ho

[3:26:21] that I needed to be an advocate for her

[3:26:25] health. So, I I decided in June to to

[3:26:28] come down and help be an advocate for

[3:26:30] her. Uh so that is the reason for the June 2022 date. I I intentionally

[3:26:36] made the decision to come down to to

[3:26:38] help take care of my mother. Um

[3:26:44] I think starting with exhibit A.

[3:26:47] This is just uh

[3:26:51] we skip a couple pages. Um sorry looks

[3:26:55] like there's no page numbers on this.

[3:26:58] Apologize. So if we go to the third

[3:27:00] page, this is just all my flight records

[3:27:02] from that date of um June 6th, 2022

[3:27:08] pass the data transfer up until the time

[3:27:12] I think it was current

[3:27:15] submitted.

[3:27:17] >> So you have your flight records

[3:27:20] that's

[3:27:23] » that's where it says arrival date,

[3:27:25] return date.

[3:27:26] >> Yeah, that's correct. Okay.

[3:27:30] And that tells how many days you stayed.

[3:27:33] >> That's cool.

[3:27:33] >> So the raal date is when I was alive.

[3:27:36] That's when you know he's in Burbank.

[3:27:38] And the return date was back. And we

[3:27:41] track the days that he's physically

[3:27:45] present here. 292 days

[3:27:50] a bit.

[3:27:57] We continue forward with two pages.

[3:28:00] These are just flight records around

[3:28:03] 20

[3:28:04] June 2022 dates and some additional

[3:28:08] evidence later on in the year.

[3:28:15] to Los

[3:28:19] and I think now instead of going to

[3:28:21] exhibit B, I'm going to go to exhibit C,

[3:28:27] which is

[3:28:29] um I tried as the best as possible to

[3:28:33] follow just the medical

[3:28:36] that

[3:28:38] um I was doing to to ensure my mom was

[3:28:41] getting the right amount of care. And

[3:28:44] one challenge that I had immediately

[3:28:46] faced was the the fact that she was

[3:28:49] locked into an HMO. I think if you

[3:28:53] didn't know any better, you don't want

[3:28:55] to necessarily spend too much on the

[3:28:56] medical insurance and she went with the

[3:28:59] she unfortunately went with the the

[3:29:00] chief medical plan. And she didn't she got stuck with the HMO and her

[3:29:05] general practitioner. Once I started

[3:29:07] looking into her history over the

[3:29:10] several years, um I I felt he was not

[3:29:13] taking care of her. We should have sent

[3:29:16] her to some specialist.

[3:29:22] So before I came into the picture, it

[3:29:25] was

[3:29:27] I I can't say enough how disappointed I

[3:29:31] was with the care that she was getting.

[3:29:34] Uh anyway, excuse me. Uh

[3:29:40] so moving on to uh attachments. These

[3:29:43] are just records of

[3:29:48] >> Do do you want to take a break before

[3:29:50] you proceed?

[3:29:51] >> I I thank you.

[3:29:53] >> Okay.

[3:29:56] >> Uh medical records have just uh taken

[3:29:59] occur to different specialists.

[3:30:02] Um, I I had to fight really hard. I I

[3:30:06] got help through my family to to get her

[3:30:10] in front of the oncologist when it

[3:30:11] wasn't really even

[3:30:14] part of her network. Uh, again, because

[3:30:16] she was on the HMO and he agreed to see

[3:30:19] her. We had an initial consultation to

[3:30:21] go over her her labs, her vitals, and he had made some recommendations and

[3:30:27] really it became clear to me that we

[3:30:30] needed to get her out of the HMO

[3:30:34] to get her quality care. So I would say

[3:30:38] other than trying to get her to see

[3:30:40] specialists through um through the

[3:30:44] general practitioner of the HMO, part of

[3:30:47] that toward the end of the year was

[3:30:49] trying to figure out a way to get her

[3:30:52] onto at least a PO plan to give her some

[3:30:54] flexibility.

[3:30:56] And um we ended up succeeding [laughter]

[3:30:59] toward the end of the year. Um I think

[3:31:02] in the the Novemberish time frame

[3:31:04] there's

[3:31:06] Yeah, there's we're skipping to

[3:31:09] attachments for again the politics of

[3:31:11] the pages on but um

[3:31:16] we've worked the USA angle because my

[3:31:19] father did serve time in the military.

[3:31:21] So we had a discussion with them and

[3:31:23] they approved getting her off to a PO

[3:31:26] plan that they would support and we were really optimistic.

[3:31:32] You know, I think you can focus in more

[3:31:35] on

[3:31:37] >> I think that

[3:31:39] uh one of the main issues is were you a

[3:31:42] resident of the property

[3:31:47] on the date of uh death or within one

[3:31:51] year. So if you can focus in on your

[3:31:54] evidence that would support you said

[3:31:56] there was some type of a clerical

[3:31:59] ministerial error

[3:32:00] >> in the data.

[3:32:01] >> Yeah. So, if you want to focus in on

[3:32:03] that,

[3:32:05] >> um, and also anything that you have that

[3:32:09] establishes

[3:32:10] your residency within that one year of

[3:32:14] when you lost her.

[3:32:16] >> Okay.

[3:32:16] >> So, so I guess this is a good time to

[3:32:18] ask my question. Um, is is that the only

[3:32:21] issue is the

[3:32:23] >> primary residence

[3:32:24] >> the primary residence within one year of

[3:32:26] the transfer date?

[3:32:28] >> That is Yeah, that is the only issue.

[3:32:30] >> Okay. And if there's nothing else that

[3:32:32] would be

[3:32:35] other than the the one year that would

[3:32:37] be considered in determining the

[3:32:39] eligibility for the reassessment.

[3:32:41] >> Yes, I believe that's it.

[3:32:45] >> Okay,

[3:32:49] » thank you for steering me straight.

[3:32:53] So I I guess going back to exhibit A

[3:32:55] then there there are looking at the

[3:33:00] lights

[3:33:01] history

[3:33:03] >> tracking up to the the date of transfer

[3:33:05] there there were 292 days they spent in

[3:33:09] the area. I mean,

[3:33:13] there's no way to to verify that I was

[3:33:16] at the house during that entire time,

[3:33:18] but there would be no reason for me to fly back to San Francisco. And I I

[3:33:25] think the medical evidence that I was

[3:33:27] maybe getting a bit too deep into. I

[3:33:30] wanted to use that to kind of overlay on

[3:33:32] the dates that I was here to provide

[3:33:35] evidence.

[3:33:36] Yes, I I was here transporting my

[3:33:38] mother. Right.

[3:33:40] >> Right.

[3:33:45] » Uh moving on to exhibit B. These are

[3:33:48] just a bunch of redacted

[3:33:51] bank statements, but what's been

[3:33:54] highlighted is just evidence that I was

[3:33:57] here paying to

[3:34:01] buy groceries gas station. Um, in

[3:34:05] addition to taking care of my mother, I

[3:34:07] take care of the house as well. So,

[3:34:08] there's some legal again. So this

[3:34:11] they're just pages of different periods

[3:34:13] of time during the period that I'm

[3:34:16] mentioning 2020 22 passing through

[3:34:22] transfer provide evidence that are

[3:34:26] physically exposed to

[3:34:39] and I guess that leads on to a tendon.

[3:34:43] So

[3:34:50] one thing I or a few things I wanted to

[3:34:52] kind of clarify based on the original

[3:34:54] field that was submitted

[3:34:57] is the optics of the the flight travel

[3:35:00] and I just wanted to reiterate that my

[3:35:04] flight here was

[3:35:07] because of this

[3:35:09] similar medical crisis with my mother. I

[3:35:13] intentionally chosen to be with her to

[3:35:15] help support her. Um, luckily my

[3:35:20] employment allowed opportunity to work

[3:35:22] remotely. We were very flexible with

[3:35:24] that to that uh allowed me to continue

[3:35:28] my work with them and then to support

[3:35:31] her uh the to commit as much time. They

[3:35:36] were very flexible with understanding

[3:35:38] the situation

[3:35:40] to take the time that I needed to make

[3:35:43] sure that she was seen her getting the care that she needed when she needed

[3:35:47] and see her special needs.

[3:35:50] Um,

[3:35:52] moving on to

[3:35:55] day one in the addendum. So

[3:35:59] the fact that the utilities to the camera,

[3:36:09] we've kept those in my mother's name. Um

[3:36:11] this one in particular, you see this was

[3:36:14] in the name my father and um she had

[3:36:17] just kept it in his name since he

[3:36:20] passed. Uh so I think from the utility

[3:36:24] standpoint

[3:36:28] maybe it's my own opinion

[3:36:31] know the convenience you were still

[3:36:32] paying a bit. So just to make sure things are are square,

[3:36:40] uh we've started making efforts now that

[3:36:45] the the administration of trust is

[3:36:48] mostly settled. Uh just making sure that

[3:36:51] all paperwork is lining up to to be in

[3:36:54] my name. So utilities

[3:36:57] are all or in the process of being

[3:36:59] transitional to my name as mentioned

[3:37:04] tax filings

[3:37:07] from 2025.

[3:37:09] they are in names

[3:37:13] and um I can also

[3:37:18] u

[3:37:20] change the driver's license address and

[3:37:25] to the cabinet address

[3:37:28] and then change the voter registration

[3:37:31] that that's still pending but that is

[3:37:34] all moving to

[3:37:37] moving

[3:37:40] forward to

[3:37:43] establish based on what we discussed or

[3:37:45] what was discussed as per law in the

[3:37:47] first document to why that the camera's

[3:37:50] residence is near.

[3:37:56] I believe that's all I have.

[3:37:58] >> All right. Okay. To the assessor, uh

[3:38:02] it's your opportunity for

[3:38:03] cross-examination. Would you proceed?

[3:38:05] >> Yes. Uh, a couple questions. So, on the homeowners exemption form, claim

[3:38:14] form and the Proposition 19 parent to

[3:38:16] child form that you filled out for us.

[3:38:19] Uh, now, did you fill those out?

[3:38:21] >> We were working with our trust attorney

[3:38:25] at the time.

[3:38:26] >> Okay. So, your trust attorney filled it

[3:38:28] out.

[3:38:28] >> We were working through them and they

[3:38:32] have they submitted the paperwork on our

[3:38:34] behalf.

[3:38:34] >> Okay. [laughter]

[3:38:36] Why do you know why the May 5th, 2025

[3:38:39] date was entered as the move in date?

[3:38:43] >> There was some discussion with the

[3:38:46] attorney of that date and that was it

[3:38:50] was decided to be the format back then.

[3:38:54] >> Okay.

[3:38:57] So

[3:38:58] would I was just trying I don't know if

[3:39:01] I quite got the answer. I was just

[3:39:03] trying to get the clarification of what

[3:39:06] was the error that caused that May 5th

[3:39:08] date to be there.

[3:39:11] >> I would say that

[3:39:16] we

[3:39:18] are

[3:39:21] that date

[3:39:22] was based on

[3:39:25] wish I had a copy of it but there was a

[3:39:29] uh

[3:39:29] >> a copy. Oh, okay. There was a form that

[3:39:33] I submitted with San Francisco County to

[3:39:37] inform them that my address was

[3:39:38] changing. And this was something that

[3:39:40] came up that the attorney had

[3:39:42] recommended that I update to change to

[3:39:45] say that I'm no longer a San Francisco

[3:39:47] resident as my primary. I remember

[3:39:50] submitting that form and I believe the

[3:39:53] date that that 5525 date was the date

[3:39:57] that I submit that form. So from my my

[3:40:00] point of view or from my understanding

[3:40:02] that that was the date that I

[3:40:08] >> Yeah, that that's the the background for

[3:40:11] that genesis.

[3:40:12] >> Okay. And I did have a question about

[3:40:15] the 2023 and 2024 tax returns. If Camaro was your primary residence,

[3:40:22] why did those reflect the San Francisco

[3:40:25] was the primary resident like primary

[3:40:28] county?

[3:40:28] >> Sure. Uh I mean I was I was still

[3:40:33] dealing with what had happened to my

[3:40:35] mother.

[3:40:36] There were things we need to take care

[3:40:38] of the trust. I I would just frame that

[3:40:40] as administrative lag. I the San

[3:40:44] Francisco address. I'm the majority

[3:40:47] owner, but my partner, she lives there.

[3:40:50] That's her permanent home. So, it was a

[3:40:53] safe address for me to use that I didn't

[3:40:54] have to think about.

[3:40:56] >> Okay. And I'm assuming you

[3:41:01] So, prior to the move, you worked and

[3:41:04] lived in San Francisco, right?

[3:41:06] >> And

[3:41:08] when did when did you notify work that

[3:41:11] your primary residence had changed?

[3:41:14] Uh because I'm a remote employee, I

[3:41:16] don't necessarily have I I have not

[3:41:19] updated that.

[3:41:20] >> Oh, you still have an update. Oh, sorry.

[3:41:23] Um

[3:41:26] Oh, my last question is

[3:41:31] I I was I was looking at your bank

[3:41:33] statements here briefly. I was looking

[3:41:35] at the dates that occurred after June

[3:41:38] 8th, 2023.

[3:41:40] I noticed

[3:41:42] there are some Camaro

[3:41:46] locations, but it's also intermixed with

[3:41:48] San Francisco

[3:41:50] as well as various other locations in

[3:41:54] Southern California. So, and I guess

[3:41:56] this also ties to the bank, I'm sorry,

[3:41:59] the uh flight records. Um why if your

[3:42:03] primary residence had changed and your

[3:42:05] and you're able to work remotely, right?

[3:42:07] Um, why were you continuing to go back

[3:42:11] to San [clears throat] Francisco for it

[3:42:13] looks like roughly two years? You kept

[3:42:16] habitually returning to San Francisco.

[3:42:19] >> So, I would have to go back to San

[3:42:20] Francisco for work engagements

[3:42:23] periodically. Um,

[3:42:27] I would also have to say that based on

[3:42:31] my experience with my my mother, there's no reason that I would give up

[3:42:38] in the

[3:42:40] my physician, my dental health, my

[3:42:44] optometrist, the care that I'm getting

[3:42:46] up there to drink it down here. So, I

[3:42:49] would go back to school as well.

[3:42:51] >> Oh, okay. So you're returning for work

[3:42:53] as as well as healthcare. Okay. Um I

[3:42:58] don't further questions see questions.

[3:43:18] » Yeah, that's all the questions we have.

[3:43:20] >> Oh, okay. Um, so tell me this. Um,

[3:43:26] on your attachment A1,

[3:43:29] um, where you have your arrival date and

[3:43:32] return dates,

[3:43:35] um, and and one column says primary

[3:43:38] evidence flight to back it up. Um, how

[3:43:41] many days

[3:43:43] cumulatively

[3:43:47] um, were there between 6823

[3:43:52] and

[3:43:54] excuse me, June 8th, 2024

[3:43:58] and May 5th, 2025.

[3:44:07] Excuse me. Excuse me. I'm so sorry. How

[3:44:09] many cumulative days were there between

[3:44:12] when you lost your mother

[3:44:15] on in 2023 to the one year

[3:44:19] uh time frame after that June 8th of

[3:44:23] 2024? How many cumulative days were

[3:44:27] there during that period of time?

[3:44:39] I think just looking at the cumulative

[3:44:40] dates here. All I'm doing is tracking

[3:44:42] the the cumulative because it's a

[3:44:45] aggregated column. I'm just taking

[3:44:49] >> you have 649 there. But that starts

[3:44:52] before you lost your mother.

[3:44:56] >> It's 696 [laughter]

[3:44:57] minus 292, right?

[3:45:00] >> Okay. What do you get approximately?

[3:45:02] That's 204 days.

[3:45:04] >> 204 days you were staying

[3:45:07] >> and a year is 365,

[3:45:10] >> right? 204. Okay. Now, um so it was 204

[3:45:17] cumulative

[3:45:20] during that one-year period that you had

[3:45:24] were there. Now, um after June 8th,

[3:45:29] 2024,

[3:45:33] um

[3:45:36] until you took ownership from your

[3:45:40] uh sibling,

[3:45:42] which was

[3:45:46] 71625.

[3:45:49] >> Yes.

[3:45:49] >> Did Did you live there then?

[3:45:51] >> Yes.

[3:45:52] continue to be resident in the Cumbria.

[3:45:56] I need to take care of.

[3:45:57] >> So,

[3:45:59] um are you stating that your residency

[3:46:01] began

[3:46:03] um

[3:46:05] for sake of discussion for this for this

[3:46:08] purpose? Um

[3:46:10] when you lost your mom within a year

[3:46:12] when you lost your mother?

[3:46:14] >> No, I'm I'm stating that I was already I

[3:46:18] made the decision to to move there.

[3:46:20] >> Yeah. a year before.

[3:46:22] >> So it was actually you're saying before.

[3:46:25] >> Yeah. So but you're saying also that

[3:46:28] therefore within that one year you stay

[3:46:31] you were there. Did you continue to uh

[3:46:34] ha have that as your

[3:46:38] uh primary place of residence thereafter

[3:46:43] continuously or did it did it stop and

[3:46:47] >> it's been

[3:46:48] >> Oh it's been continuous.

[3:46:49] >> Yes. as far as physical precedents.

[3:46:51] Yeah, obviously not the the tax

[3:46:53] property.

[3:46:55] >> Okay. So

[3:46:58] then

[3:47:05] from

[3:47:07] June 8th to 2024,

[3:47:12] do you have from June 8th, 2024 until

[3:47:14] the date you uh took ownership uh from your sibling your siblings

[3:47:22] ownership portion?

[3:47:24] Have you any idea how many cumulative

[3:47:26] days you were there during that period?

[3:47:29] >> I think we can use the same table to say

[3:47:33] this is approximately 68 2024, right? So

[3:47:37] that's

[3:47:39] and then we're talking about July the

[3:47:42] 164

[3:47:44] >> to July. Yeah.

[3:47:47] So that was two two years almost 700

[3:47:53] over 700

[3:47:57] » days

[3:47:58] >> and that is 191 days before you were

[3:48:01] >> you you were there 191 days.

[3:48:07] So during that second period there after

[3:48:10] the one year you weren't there

[3:48:16] for the greater portion of time you were

[3:48:18] back in San Francisco. Is that right?

[3:48:22] >> For what period are we talking about

[3:48:24] right now?

[3:48:25] >> Talking about after that one year after

[3:48:27] you lost your mother

[3:48:30] until you took ownership.

[3:48:34] It sounds like the number of days that

[3:48:36] you're stating it's 19. You said 191

[3:48:39] days.

[3:48:40] >> Uh 191 from 2025 to 2024.

[3:48:44] >> Okay. So, but that period of time would

[3:48:46] have over 700 days in it, right? Two

[3:48:49] years.

[3:48:50] >> Over two years.

[3:48:51] >> We're we're looking at the difference

[3:48:52] between

[3:48:55] specific years, right? That the days.

[3:48:58] >> Yeah.

[3:48:59] >> Right.

[3:49:00] >> Okay. So the number of days that

[3:49:03] accumulated from

[3:49:05] >> June 24th June 8th 2024

[3:49:09] until when you took ownership

[3:49:12] with from your siblings 50%.

[3:49:15] >> Yes.

[3:49:16] >> How many how many days in that not

[3:49:19] cumulative from the beginning of your

[3:49:21] chart but how many days during that

[3:49:23] period

[3:49:25] >> that was the roughly 191

[3:49:27] >> 191. That's cool. But then that period

[3:49:29] of time is over 700 days. Correct.

[3:49:33] It's over two years

[3:49:34] >> if we're talking about the start being

[3:49:36] >> No, I'm talking about

[3:49:39] uh after June 8th, 2024,

[3:49:42] right? To the date you took ownership,

[3:49:46] which was 2025. Excuse me. That was like

[3:49:50] 365 days, would you say? About

[3:49:53] >> sure.

[3:49:53] >> 24 365. So you you were there 191 days

[3:49:59] uh during that period of time.

[3:50:01] >> Correct.

[3:50:01] >> Right. So that's a little bit um what

[3:50:06] percentage would you say that is of the

[3:50:08] per that period of time?

[3:50:11] >> 23.

[3:50:12] >> Twothirds of the time.

[3:50:14] >> 2/3.

[3:50:16] Okay.

[3:50:19] I I don't have any other questions.

[3:50:21] Um,

[3:50:25] does does the assessor have any other

[3:50:28] questions or any other

[3:50:31] >> I just a quick follow up to the math you

[3:50:33] were just speaking to is about

[3:50:35] >> 52%.

[3:50:38] >> Yes.

[3:50:39] >> How did How did you mathematically do

[3:50:41] that?

[3:50:42] >> I did the 190.

[3:50:45] >> You used 191.

[3:50:46] >> Oh, 191. Uh, [clears throat] I did 190.

[3:50:49] My apologies.

[3:50:50] >> That's okay. That's close enough.

[3:50:51] >> Um, so I just did that divided by 365.

[3:50:55] Uh, and that comes Yeah, it still comes

[3:50:57] out to about 52% of the year.

[3:50:59] >> 52%.

[3:51:01] Okay.

[3:51:02] >> Okay. Thank you.

[3:51:05] >> All right. Um, let's see here.

[3:51:13] Just just a matter of clarification for

[3:51:16] the assessor. Um then

[3:51:22] if they file the homeowners exclusion

[3:51:27] after one year

[3:51:31] then am I correct um in your

[3:51:35] understanding and I'm going to ask you

[3:51:36] also that the rule allows the homeowners

[3:51:40] exclusion to be um

[3:51:46] available prospectively but is that

[3:51:48] providing that they uh took residency

[3:51:55] within the one year?

[3:51:56] >> Yes, that is the requirement they have

[3:51:58] to

[3:51:59] >> Okay. Yeah. Okay. So, they have Okay,

[3:52:02] got it. Okay. to add to add to that role

[3:52:05] play. If based on the evidence the

[3:52:08] hearing officer Cohen were to grant the

[3:52:11] exclusion then according to prop 19 it

[3:52:14] would be based on the date of filing

[3:52:17] which is July 21st 2025. So

[3:52:21] perspectively

[3:52:22] the earliest prop 19 can be applied as

[3:52:25] 1125.

[3:52:26] >> Okay

[3:52:28] >> just for added clarification.

[3:52:30] >> Okay. Okay. Well, let's see. Then it's

[3:52:33] time for closing arguments

[3:52:36] and the party that has the

[3:52:40] uh burden of proof presents their

[3:52:44] closing arguments last.

[3:52:46] >> So, the assessor accept the burden. So,

[3:52:48] >> Okay. So, it's time for your closing

[3:52:50] arguments. So, it's time for you to

[3:52:53] explain why your evidence

[3:52:56] uh would outweigh the assessor's

[3:52:59] evidence and make you entitled to the uh

[3:53:02] parent child exclusion.

[3:53:18] So in

[3:53:19] I think in in retrospect

[3:53:22] um we were trusting the trust attorney that

[3:53:28] we were working with to be guiding us

[3:53:30] and doing the right thing. So we had no

[3:53:33] questions when those were submitted and

[3:53:35] we were

[3:53:37] really expecting that the prop 19 was we

[3:53:42] were very shocked to find that it was

[3:53:46] after it was rejected and the reason and

[3:53:50] it was at that time the more I looked

[3:53:52] into it I saw the need

[3:53:56] that they just

[3:54:00] that made any sense to even submit the

[3:54:02] form.

[3:54:04] Um

[3:54:12] I feel that I

[3:54:16] have provided evidence of my physical

[3:54:18] presence at the Camaro home uh

[3:54:22] throughout taking care of my mother

[3:54:24] through natur taking care of the house.

[3:54:27] Um, I understand that there are legal

[3:54:34] uh

[3:54:36] definitions

[3:54:37] of what qualifies

[3:54:40] and

[3:54:44] I I guess I felt that there was

[3:54:50] some flexibility in time to establish

[3:54:52] those. That is the the reason for the

[3:54:55] administrative lag. It was not made

[3:54:58] apparent to me uh at the time when we

[3:55:01] were having discussions with the trust

[3:55:02] attorney about executing or working

[3:55:06] toward Prop 19.

[3:55:08] I would in retrospect think that those

[3:55:10] would have come up. They did not.

[3:55:16] So, I've done my best to to correct that

[3:55:19] to make sure that at least at at this

[3:55:21] point on paper that everything is square

[3:55:24] with the county. Um but my primary

[3:55:27] residence is I think that is

[3:55:31] for land.

[3:55:32] >> Okay. Assessor please.

[3:55:37] » Um I feel like uh through this

[3:55:40] presentation that I provided I

[3:55:43] demonstrated that the California law

[3:55:45] requires principal residency established

[3:55:48] within a year of the change in

[3:55:50] ownership. And it even provides us with

[3:55:54] documents that we can accept to prove

[3:55:56] this after the fact if we don't receive

[3:55:58] a timely homeowners exemption. And just

[3:56:01] due to none of those document, none of

[3:56:04] the official documents being provided

[3:56:06] and

[3:56:07] uh documents where a legal professional

[3:56:10] was consulted provided by the applicant

[3:56:13] support this uh a move in date that is

[3:56:16] too late to qualify for the exemption.

[3:56:18] that that is what uh the assessor's

[3:56:21] office has to use to establish uh

[3:56:24] whether they qualify for a exclusion and

[3:56:26] change of ownership and uh we can't

[3:56:29] grant that with the documentation

[3:56:30] [clears throat] provided.

[3:56:33] >> I'll I'll add a little bit. Um I'll just

[3:56:36] speak from the two annotations that we

[3:56:39] that are in our presentation that deal

[3:56:41] with principal residents. Um, I'll

[3:56:45] reiterate it's a it states it's a

[3:56:47] question of fact. It's a person's true

[3:56:49] fixed permanent home and principal

[3:56:52] establishment which he or she whenever

[3:56:54] absent intends to return. Um, so

[3:56:58] it also states the documents we've

[3:57:01] already mentioned uh vehicle

[3:57:03] registration, voter registration, bank

[3:57:05] accounts, state income tax filings

[3:57:08] um and driver's license.

[3:57:10] uh in reviewing the flight

[3:57:16] pattern that's not necessarily part of

[3:57:18] the documentation, but um it does

[3:57:20] contain both residences, San Francisco

[3:57:22] and Camaro. We find that um not

[3:57:25] definitive proof. He did habitually

[3:57:28] returning to a San Francisco address. Uh

[3:57:32] the bank accounts that we also found

[3:57:34] were not definitive as well because you

[3:57:35] do see both locations showing up. Camrio

[3:57:39] and San Francisco are on the bank

[3:57:41] accounts as well. So we did not find

[3:57:43] that as definitive proof. The one thing

[3:57:45] we saw that was definitive in our book

[3:57:48] was the uh state income tax filings

[3:57:51] where 23 and 24 both reported San

[3:57:54] Francisco as the primary residence

[3:57:56] county and then 25 is the first year we

[3:57:59] see Ventur County show up. Also, the

[3:58:02] typical

[3:58:05] um the typical measures people take when

[3:58:08] changing primary residences appear to

[3:58:10] all have occurred at 2025 as far as

[3:58:13] changing mailing addresses, notifying

[3:58:17] your place of work, bank account, any

[3:58:19] all those other normal items that people

[3:58:22] update their

[3:58:24] uh primary residence. Based on the

[3:58:26] testimony today, it sounded like all

[3:58:28] that began occurring in 2025 and is

[3:58:31] still occurring today. So, based on the

[3:58:34] totality of evidence, we didn't have

[3:58:36] enough evidence to show primary

[3:58:37] residence uh within one year of the

[3:58:40] changing.

[3:58:42] Thank you.

[3:58:43] >> Okay, good. [clears throat]

[3:58:45] And that's going to close this case and

[3:58:49] um I can give you a decision now. Um it you know it was very both parties

[3:58:57] presented uh very good cases and it is

[3:59:00] not an easy decision but as the property

[3:59:04] tax rules and the annotations state it's

[3:59:07] a factual determination on I'm the

[3:59:09] finder of fact here. Um and one thing I

[3:59:14] do want to say is that um the

[3:59:19] my understanding is is that

[3:59:22] uh once the exclusion is granted if it

[3:59:26] is granted based upon the uh residency

[3:59:31] or the homeowner's exclusion

[3:59:33] uh then if um if there's a change in

[3:59:37] that where the child who received the

[3:59:41] exclusion no longer is staying or living

[3:59:45] at the family home as their principal

[3:59:50] residence then at that time the

[3:59:52] exclusion can be removed and should be

[3:59:55] by law. So it has to be the uh physical

[3:59:59] place of residence during the whole time

[4:00:01] that the exclusion is granted. But as

[4:00:05] far as granting the exclusion, um I

[4:00:09] believe that the homeowners exclusion

[4:00:12] should be granted.

[4:00:14] Uh I mean the uh parent child exclusion

[4:00:17] should be granted and that's based on

[4:00:19] the physical president presence evidence

[4:00:22] that's been u presented today by the

[4:00:26] applicant.

[4:00:27] um and and moreover more the number of

[4:00:31] days that he was in the residence within

[4:00:37] one year of the date of death of his

[4:00:40] mother. Um so based upon my factf

[4:00:43] finding and the preponderance of the

[4:00:46] evidence the credibility of the

[4:00:49] testifying applicant um just to

[4:00:52] reiterate the exclusion shall be granted

[4:00:56] the parent child exclusion.

[4:01:02] » Thank you Cargus.

[4:01:04] And so it's with that being said, um do

[4:01:09] we still need a evaluation hearing for

[4:01:12] the next one if if the

[4:01:15] applicants 19 will be approved?

[4:01:17] >> Yeah. So um

[4:01:20] I don't believe evaluation hearing would

[4:01:22] be necessary since we're granting it. it

[4:01:24] would be 100% granted and therefore the

[4:01:29] uh June 8th 2023 date would no longer

[4:01:33] need a reassessment.

[4:01:34] >> Okay. So we can cancel the the tovoid

[4:01:38] having you come back in in uh October or

[4:01:42] on the record cancel the the uh

[4:01:45] bifurcated hearing for October 26 2026.

[4:01:49] >> Okay.

[4:01:51] And that's that's the end of the agenda.

[4:01:53] >> That concludes the hearing. can journ at

[4:01:54] any F101.

[4:01:56] >> This hearing is now a journal

[4:01:59] for free.

Assessment Appeals Hearing Officer Meeting - August 24, 2026

Transcript