Thank you.
call whenever you let me just turn
volume up on this one second here.
See,
>> the icon
turn.
» Just one second. Sorry.
Sound. Okay.
You want me to come to order? Would you
like to go to order?
>> Would you possibly?
>> Okay. So, it's 9:31 on August 24th.
We'll call the meeting to order
and I'll start with the roll call.
Hearing Officer Cohen
>> present.
>> Okay. And that concludes the roll call.
Okay. Will everybody please stand for
the pledge of allegiance?
» Yes. We'll just
>> and begin
to flag United States of America and to
the republic for which it stands. One
nation under God, indivisible with
liberty and justice for all. Will the
audience please remain standing?
I'll now place you under oath. Please
raise your right hand. When I complete
reading the oath, please state, I do.
You do solemnly affirm that the
testimony you're about to give in the
matter now pending before this board
will be the truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth.
>> Thank you.
That takes us to item number five,
agenda review.
The clerk of the board recommends
approval of the agenda reviews by the
assessment of by the hearing officer.
The agenda review consists of the
following agenda items. Item number 10,
application number 231155.
Francisco and Margaret Swain irrevocable
trust denied due to lack of appearance.
Item number 21, application number
2410484.
Applicant N92714
LLC, denied due to lack of appearance.
Item number 24, application number
2411067.
Applicant Matthew Freeland, removed from
the agenda due to the submission of a
withdrawal. Item number 25, application
number 2411079.
Applicant Lucas Sellers Wine denied due
to lack of appearance.
Item number 26, application number
25100005.
Applicant Ohigh Valley Medp Spa denied
due to lack of appearance. Item number
28, application number 25100018.
Applicant, the Derek M. Olsen Living
Trust, denied due to lack of appearance.
Item number 29, application number
25100019,
continue to October 26, 2026, pending
receipt of an original stipulation.
Item number 31, application number
2510237.
Applicant Aurora Sendas continue to
October 26, 2026, pending receipt of an
original stipulation.
Item number 35, application number
251041.
Applicant Maria J. Martinez denied due
to lack of appearance. Items number
items 36 and 37. Applications 2510437
and 2510439.
Applicant Frederick Ward L. To tell
Trust continue to October 26, 2026.
Penny receipt of original stipulations.
Item number 39, application number
2510470.
Applicant Kenhai continue to October 26,
2026 pending receipt of original
stipulations.
Item number 40, application number
2510471.
Applicant Alona Ferlin
removed from the agenda due to the
submission of withdrawal.
Item number 41, application number
2510477.
Applicant Roger Stone, continue to
October 26, 2026. Penny receipt of
original stipulations.
Item number 42, application number
2510482.
Applicant Masad M. Afar, continue to
October 26, 2026, pending receipt of an
original stipulation.
Item number 43, application number
2510494.
Applicant Anish B. Shestra, denied due
to lack of appearance.
Item number 44, application number
2510589.
Applicant Frederick Silvers, denied due
to lack of appearance.
Item number 49, application number
2511779.
Applicant Charlene Toledto continue to
October 26, 2026 pending receipt of an
original stipulation.
Item number 50, application number
2511816,
applicant Bolt Chiropractic, continue to
October 26, 2026, pending receipt of an
original stipulation.
And item number 51, application number
2511837.
Applicant Linda Santianis, continue to
October 26, 2026 penny receipt of
original stipulation.
» The agenda is so approved.
>> Okay.
Sorry, I'm having issues.
Okay. Item number six, public comments.
Is anybody in attendance that does not
have an item on the agenda?
Okay. There are no requests to speak.
Okay. Item number seven, hearing officer
comments.
>> No hearing officer comments.
>> Okay. No comments. That takes us to um
the first item on our agenda. Would you
like to read it out or would you like me
to take us through the agenda?
>> Would you read it for us, please?
>> Okay. First item, item number eight,
application number 2310594,
Martin Family Investments LLC, and we
have David Misco here in person.
Misco,
>> morning.
>> Good morning.
>> Let's hold it over. I'm still waiting
for all the refunds. I know resolution
came from you folks in April, but we're
still not [clears throat] getting the
checks real fast.
Okay.
>> The assessor is good with that.
Actually, our notes are there. He's
waiting for the refund to withdraw his
book deal basically.
>> Okay. And so you'd like a a continuence
until that has occurred.
>> Okay.
>> How how long do these refunds usually
take?
>> Has the assessor any idea?
>> I don't want to have idea for the the a
has some issues there. I don't know. You
might contact the auditor's office.
>> Okay. I got I got one in May and one in June. Haven't seen one since.
So, our options for continuance are
October 26, 2026, which is 63. And this goes for everyone requesting a
continuence today. Um, we have October
26, 2026, 63 days from now. Um, I'm
assuming there's no data, but if you
need to provide data, it would be due by
September 26, 2026, or February 22nd,
2027, which is 183 days from now. Data
would be due January 23rd, 2027. Sorry,
that's my typo.
And uh you have a waiver on file so you
can continue to whichever date you'd
like.
>> Let's do the February.
>> February done there.
>> Okay. Any um questions about that
continuence date or issues from theor?
>> Our the assessor has done everything
need to get done at our end
check.
>> Okay, good. That was February 87.
>> February 22nd 2027.
>> Okay. Uh and so this matter is continued
to February 22nd, 2027. Thank you.
>> Thank you.
» And then just to confirm the assessor,
there's no data providing nothing.
» [clears throat]
>> And that takes us to item number nine,
application number 2311125.
Applicant David R. Williams.
Do we have Mr. Williams in attendance?
Okay. I did speak with the applicant
last week. Um he was hopeful that a stip
was going to be signed. Um but he
understood that if it wasn't um he he
was okay with the deny due to lack of
appearance and so
>> right
>> the recommended action would be to deny
application number 2311125
for lack of appearance
>> and that application is denied for lack
of appearance.
That takes us to items 11 through 13.
Applications 2311849
through 2311851.
Applicant Dean Delorenzo.
We have a Dean Delorenzo here.
Okay. Um, I did speak with the applicant
last week and he confirmed that his um
that his appeal has been resolved. Um,
and he wanted to continue for refund
processing, but as he did not attend.
Uh, we would recommend denying the
applications due to lack of appearance.
Uh, the issues been resolved. He'll get
refunds regardless. Um, I think he just
wanted to keep them open as a formality.
>> Can the same as other children. The um
we did everything on the assessor side
or just wait for the auditor read button
to check.
>> Okay. Was it a stipulation?
>> Uh
I probably was. I do not know top of my
head.
>> All right. Uh so this application is
denied for lack of appearance.
And that takes us to item number 14.
Application number 2311886.
Applicant Sunil Raj Po Pro
and we have Sil here in person.
>> Yeah. Good morning. Um and at this time
we continue to authorize those lies
office and uh Mr. Jeffrey and uh today I
would sincerely request continuence.
>> You're requesting a continuance.
>> Yes. And um I had a little difficulty
hearing you. Could you tell me the
reason you're requesting the
continuence, please?
>> Sure. As I uh mentioned uh we've been
working very closely with uh M Jeffrey
who's our assessor
>> and there have been a lot of information
additional information over the the
course of last three or four weeks we
have sent out information for the
assessor's office to consider. So I
would imagine it would take a limited
time for them to suitably incorporate
that and uh we can then proceed with the
process.
>> Okay, I see. Uh to the assessor could
>> the applicant is correct. Um we're still
working from this. Jeffree is still
working with him and going through the
process. So hopefully we don't have to
hear but um
>> Okay.
>> Going through the process.
>> Um okay, very fine. Um would you prefer
the February uh the October the 26 2026
date or the February 22 2027 date? Let
me ask the assessor what they think
first and I'll come back to you.
>> Um either or would be f actually either
or would be fine. I would actually say
the February 22nd um 2027 would be
actually the best for the assessor. Just
as Jeff um asked some plans coming up.
So I was wondering if they could push
out where possible.
>> All right. Thank you. Uh would the
February 22nd, 2027 date work for you
for to continue this matter?
>> Well, I would effort to you know
whatever works for the office. It's been
pending for you know some time now and
the information uh in the data request.
So hoping there's not too much the
additional data request but at this time
we would prefer October but I was happy
to sort of refer to the assessor's
office you know not an issue.
>> Did she give you any any estimate of how
much time it would take for her to get
back with you?
>> No uh we didn't have conversation to
that effect. We're still trying to sort
of you know absorb the information and I
would imagine that we receiving this
hearing and busy so we didn't get to
connect uh but as I said obviously it's
been pending for some time so you know
prefer October but then I would refer to the assess office happy to
support the February timeline as well
>> I see it's a 2023 appeal application
um do you think it would be reasonable
for October 26 in this case
>> okay thank Thank you. So this matter is
continued to October 26, 2026.
>> Thank you.
>> Okay. And you are available on that
date?
>> Yes.
>> Okay. Perfect. And you have a waiver on
file. So you are all set. Any additional
data would be um turned into by
September 26th.
>> Thanks.
That takes us to
item number 15, application number
2311946.
Applicant Thompson Family Trust.
Do we have anyone checked in for
Thompson Family Trust?
No.
Okay. So, looks like no one has checked
in for this item. Um, I did speak with
the applicant last week and confirmed uh
Rita would be intendance in attendance
for a continuence request, but it looks
like um it'll be a denied due to lack of
appearance.
>> Yes, this this shall be denied for lack
of appearance.
And that takes us to item number 16,
application number 2311957,
Reed Trust, dated March 7th, 2023.
We have
>> Brandon, John, Senator on behalf of my
client Patty Joe Reed. We spoke with the
assessor's office and agreed to
continue, but that's okay.
>> Okay. And for what reason though?
>> Still working with my client on trying
to figure out a resolution. Just not quite an error on figuring out
a resolution to the
>> Okay.
>> Sorry.
>> I see this is a 2023 case. Uh to the
assessor, could you brief me on where
you are on this?
>> Um my notes don't show that right now.
Um my notes say attorney will continue.
Um
actually Jose Angel can you come up and
speak to that?
>> Yes with the assessor's office. Um so we
did our review but we don't see
uh how to resolve the issue. Um so the
attorney has to decide if they want to
present
resolution.
>> So that's what I'm working with my
client on. We're trying to work on
figuring out what we want to do, whether
we want to submit more information or
how to resolve it.
>> Okay.
>> Just not there yet.
>> Okay. So, I'm understanding the assessor
that there's no recommended reduction
that you the assessor would be
supporting the role value. Correct.
Okay. How much time do you feel you
would need to speak with your client and
>> probably the February date would be best
if it's enough time for preparing?
>> Okay. Okay. Uh, what type of property is
this?
>> It's a single family residence or home.
>> Uhhuh.
>> Yeah.
>> Do you need till February to prepare
appraisal for single family residents?
>> Maybe
it's a change in ownership issue. Yeah.
>> Oh, it's a change in ownership issue.
Okay. Rather than a valuation issue.
>> Correct.
>> Oh, I see. I see. Okay. Okay. Um, all
right. This matter is then continued.
Does the assessor by the way have any
objection to or or any thoughts about
continuing to the February 2027 date?
>> No, we do not.
>> All right. Okay. So, this matter then is
continued to February 22nd, 2027.
>> And then I just want to confirm is there
a data provisal on that?
>> Um three I have a 30-day provisal
hearing. Do you have any objections to
providing any data to the assessor's
office at least 30 days prior to
>> just in case?
>> No objection.
>> Is that data requested by the assessor?
Is that is that how that works?
>> It's a change ownership. So, it's a
little different to recording deeds and
that aspect of it, but we do like a
30-day previsor if we do need something
different from the applicant. Would that
be triggered by a request from the
assessor or is that just a blanket
request where you're asking the
applicant to send
any information that he may feel is
pertinent?
>> A blanket within 30 days. If Jose is
still going through the files and trying
to well, he did go through the files,
but anything else he could provide us,
the applicant can provide us for his
case may help us out.
>> Is there any information that you need
at this point?
>> Um, from our review, it does on the
plan. We just need to know if they're
going to withdraw or they're going to
>> Okay. Thank you.
>> And we don't see a resolution
data received everyone the situation.
>> All right. Thank you.
>> So if it helps the data proviso is if
they provide additional data, it needs
to be 30 days prior to give Jose and Joe
enough time. Um I don't think they're
asking for anything at this point, but
if they do, just 30 days prior. If
there's data that you'd like the
assessor to review that you would be
presenting that you feel is pertinent
then um the uh order is going to be
asking you to present that to the
assessor no later than 30 days prior to
the hearing which is going to be
February 22nd 2027 and that is so
ordered.
make it. We'll be fine.
» And you have a waiver, correct?
>> Yes. Yes. That application has a
two-year waiver on file. So, you're all
set.
>> Thank you.
very much. I appreciate it.
>> Thank you.
>> That takes us to item number 17,
application number 2410265.
applicant Christine Chia uh Fang.
Do we have anyone here for that item?
Okay. Looks like we spoke with uh the
applicant last week and she indicated
she'd be submitting a withdrawal, but we
did not receive that withdrawal. Uh the
recommendation would be to deny due to
lack of appearance.
>> Okay. It's ordered that this is denied
due to lack of appearance.
That takes us to item number 18,
application number 2410392,
applicant Charles Elliott. Do we have
anyone checked in for Charles Elliott?
Okay. Uh, my notes indicate that we
spoke with the applicant last week and
he indicates he sold the vessel and will
no longer pursue the appeal. Um, I did
send over those withdrawal instructions,
but we did not receive a withdrawal. So,
the recommendation would be to deny due
to lack of appearance.
>> It is ordered that this is application
is denied due to lack of appearance.
» Okay. Items 19 and 20 can be handled
simultaneously. These are applications
2410399
and 251171.
Applicant Vidal Valencia. Uh we we were
expecting this application these
applications to move forward today. Uh
the applicant called our office this
morning and indicates that he will not
be pursuing the matter and is fine with
a denial due to lack of appearance.
>> Okay. Then it is ordered that the two
applications shall be denied due to lack
of appearance.
That takes us to applicate to item
number 22, application number 2410492.
Applicant William Huninger and we have
Mr. Huninger here in person.
>> Thank you.
>> Good morning.
>> Just for investigate continuence. I've
been working with my the assessor's
office um and he asp.
» All right. And um if this is going to be
approved for continuence, would you
prefer October the 26 26 or February 22
27?
>> Whatever this means.
>> Okay. Let me check with them and see how
they're feeling. Um
could you brief me on this please?
This is an aircraft actually.
[clears throat]
Um, we got late data on 8526.
So, we need some time to process it.
That's the pro what we're doing right
now.
>> Uhhuh.
>> Um, a continuous be for the assessor for
20 26 2026.
>> Okay. Is there any other information
that you need?
>> I always like 30 advisor just in case
there's some information that we come up
with that we may need or the applicant
has some more data want to give to us.
>> Okay. So, the provisor, the 30-day
provisal would be if the assessor
requests information from you, they
would uh or would like to have it um
what will be ordered that it will be
turned in to the assessor no later than
30 days prior to the continued hearing
which um is October the 26, 2026. Would
that work for you?
>> Yes.
>> Okay.
>> And there's a waiver on file.
>> Mr. Ninger just provided a waiver, so we
are all set.
>> Okay. So, it is ordered that this
application shall be continued to
October 26, 2026 with a 30-day uh
proviso and with waiverss on file.
>> Thank you.
>> We're set. Thank you.
» Okay. And so that takes us to item
number 23, application number 2410576.
Applicant AM2
fly Susan Ying here in person.
>> Good morning.
>> Morning. Uh I've made three copies here.
>> Okay. Are you prepared to go forward
with hearing today?
>> Yes, I am.
>> Okay, good. You know what we're going to
do? Uh, let us finish this this agenda
first and then you'll be the first one
up for hearing.
>> Oh, okay. Sure.
>> Okay. Not not yet. Not quite yet.
>> Yeah. So, you can just hang on to those.
Um, you're checked in. We're moving
forward with the hearing today. So,
we'll get the continuences out of the
way and then um the assessor, are you
confirming you're prepared to present?
>> Assess our mic and um Kristen will be
ready to present. Yes.
>> Okay. Okay.
» Okay. And that takes us to
item number 27, application number
251006.
Applicant Kayn Glazer. And we have
Kaylin here in person.
>> Yes.
>> Good morning. Could you brief me on what
we're going to be doing today?
>> I think I'm asking for a continuence
because we're resubmitting everything.
>> Okay.
>> So, just a little background on this
one. Um there are two marks in the
assessor's office that they've been
working with
>> and so they believe they provided all
their data
>> to the assessor's office but
>> not to Mark Stove
>> in the appeals department. So just a
little
>> they told you that?
>> Yes. Yeah. Yeah. We had a little
[laughter]
>> Yeah.
>> You just discovered that did you how
long ago?
>> On on Thursday when I called say I
gotten a call saying submit everything
like I submitted everything to Mark.
And it was the wrong part. Oh,
>> okay. So, Mark didn't forward it over.
>> No, usually our departments or
residential or um property transfer
division works the everything up front
and then they file appeal. We get the
data from applicants. So, fresh eyes
look at the appeal. We could not get
skewed by what our departments did.
>> Okay. But Mark didn't forward.
>> Mark didn't forward it. No. And we
usually don't get forwarded um
information unless he did it recently.
>> I see. All right. Okay. Um so then um
forgive me if you've already said when
did you for forward the information over
to the assessment appeals mark?
>> Uh
just approximately we'll be fine.
the uh the the the mark that is supposed
to review your material from appeals.
Was that just recently?
>> No, was it just recently? It was
>> she she's asking about this this note.
[laughter]
» Sorry, I forwarded all the emails that I
sent to
>> When did you send it to this Mark?
>> Just this past Thursday.
>> Oh, you said so. Okay. Okay. Thank you.
I forgot you said that. I'm sorry. And
which date would you like to continue to
the
>> Okay. And then um Mark, is there any
more information that you have you had a
chance to review?
>> Okay.
>> So I imagine your procedure will be
review and let the applicant know if you
need more.
>> Yeah.
>> And then how much time before the
hearing would you like to see that
information? Uh
>> 30 days should it shouldn't take uh too
much documentation to prove your
>> Okay. Thank you.
There you go.
>> Okay.
Um, all right. And then there is a
waiver on file.
>> Uh, this So, if you're okay signing a
waiver, we have a a paper there for the
application. Um, and that's for the
continuence request.
>> And you're all right with signing that
waiver and turning that in to the clerk?
>> Yes. Is there any reason I shouldn't be?
>> It's up to you. You don't have to sign
it. Um, we have deadlines to get your
appeal resolved. And so if you sign a
waiver, it just kind of gives you more
flexibility with working with Mark. Um
it's up to you,
>> but you can if you sign it. By the way,
uh we have two years to hear your case
in from from filing. So um I don't think we normally ask for
them from 25 cases, do we?
>> Um we have been because it's
>> been an issue um
>> Okay.
>> lately. Okay. But I didn't mess up.
>> No.
>> Okay, good. So, um, yeah. So, it there's
just basically
the appeals board has two years from the
date of filing of your application to
render a decision. Okay? And if they
miss that, um, then
the value that you put on your
application goes on the roll until the
case can be heard. Now, um so that
waiver, um is waving your right to have
your application heard within the 2-year
deadline.
>> Okay.
>> And if you sign that, you do have a um
the option to um resend that waiver in
writing.
>> Okay.
>> And are the instructions on the waiver
by chance?
>> Uh yes, I believe so. I believe it it
explains um
>> they can be revoked at any time.
>> Yeah. And so
>> so you'll get a copy of that if you
decide to sign that. Are you all right
with signing that?
>> But if she doesn't sign it,
>> um then they just terminate the case.
>> No. No. Um if she doesn't sign it, um
basically we make sure to get your case
heard before that two years is expired.
>> So her original application was in
[clears throat] 2023.
When was that application filed? What
was the date?
>> So, that's a separate um that that
application wasn't accepted. It was
filed outside of the
>> Okay. filing peri. So, this is this is a
2025 application for a change in
ownership.
>> So, we're we're we're going by the 2025
application. The 2023
is not on the agenda here. We're talking
about this 2025.
And that was filed when?
>> Um July 2nd, 2025.
Okay. Do you want to do you want to
speak with each other and then we'll
come back to you. You can decide.
>> Is all right.
>> Yes.
>> If she has data for us, can is those
copies? Can we can you hand them to Mark
now? So we don't have to mail them in or
email them or
>> documentation. That'd be great if you
or or give Jose.
>> Do you have your You're keeping your
original, right?
>> They're all just copies.
So we don't have
>> Okay. All right. So then um let's see
here. Um then um
we're talking about continuing till
for this. What do you think? October.
Yeah,
>> I think you said so.
>> It should be.
>> Okay. Thank you. Um how uh would October
the 26, 2026 work for you for this
hearing to be continued to? Okay. So
it's so it's ordered that this uh
hearing shall be continued to October
26, 2026
um with the data proviso of 30 days
prior to hearing no later than and
that's with signed waiver which the
applicant has consented to. That's so
ordered. Thank you.
>> You're all set.
Okay, that takes us to item number.
>> Somebody has a question.
>> I just wanted to ask, are you a judge?
>> No, I'm an attorney. I'm an attorney.
>> Know who? Everyone.
>> Yeah, I'm not uh employed by the
assessor's office, by the way. I'm
independent
here to provide unbiased opinions.
Okay.
» Okay. Thank you. And then sorry, can we
get your name for the record?
>> Glazer.
» E L I N.
>> E L L E N
G L A C E R. I'm
supposed to
» Okay, thank you. You're all set. As soon
as we get that waiver, you can.
Okay, that takes us to item number 30.
Application number 2510179.
Applicant Ashan uh Gai and Shaham Fatmi.
Do we have anyone checked in for this
item?
Okay. My notes indicate that we spoke
with the applicant last week and they
were going to submit a withdrawal. Um,
but we're fine with deny due to lack of
appearance. If they did not get that
withdrawing, the recommendation would be
to deny the lack of appearance.
>> It is so ordered.
That takes us to item number 32,
application number 2510346.
Applicant Kai Chiron.
We have Kai here in person.
» Okay. Uh, do you want to give us an
update on your appeal?
>> Yeah. When I find the paper for the
appeal, I submitted on the paper. If not
understanding, I think I spoke to you
and he told me to call Mark and he said
he didn't receive the copy of the paper.
So, I'm here to submit it again, I
guess, and hopefully resolve it.
>> Okay, let me ask the assessor. Let me
get their thoughts on this
>> um to the assessor. Can you brief me on
this, please? The notes my notes
basically say that he submitted with his
application the information the clerk of
the board
>> does not for that to us because of the
application. Oh.
>> So we never got it. Um and we still
haven't received the data. So today he
was to give us the data and we can
proceed from here.
>> Okay.
>> Do continuence.
>> All right. All right. Uh and and you
have information for a copy for the
assessor today. All right. Um and um
then uh would you would you need um
proviso uh after you re for after you
review the information if you should
need more?
>> Yes, there's always yes 30 proviso would
be great.
>> Okay.
>> Any of the hearing dates those two
dates.
>> Okay. And which date do you prefer?
>> I prefer not to come again because I
posted border to Arizona. So for that
matter it seems like commute. Oh,
>> who renders the whole process worthless?
I rather
>> provide the information whatever they
decide they decide and don't want to
come here.
>> Is it a base year appeal?
>> It's actually from the assessor's
office. I'm handling our appeal for you,
sir. Um, it's not a base year appeal.
It's you sold the vote just after lean
day. So, it's that sale information we
would need to try and evaluate whether
or not we should revise our lean date
assessment. [clears throat]
>> Oh, I see.
>> We just don't have to date again for the
sale price.
>> All right. All right. Would you be the
person accepting the information? Okay.
>> Okay. Um,
>> thank you.
>> All right, then. Um,
make sure
>> in case you decide and change your mind
and decide.
>> No, let me just ask you this way. Okay.
because I have I have to have one of two
dates in case you were to decide to
change your mind. Would you uh want to
come up?
>> It would be February.
>> February. Okay.
So, this matter is then continued
to February 22nd, 2027
uh with a 30-day proviso. And this is
the waiver waivers.
>> Um so, we don't have a waiver on file.
It sounds like he's not going to proceed
if the
>> Do you want to get him to sign a waiver
if he will do so?
>> Are you willing to sign a waiver for the
two years?
>> Since it was since last year, it gives
you another year. So, I see no point.
>> Okay. So, he's refusing to sign the
waiver. Um, we have
>> with no waiver on file. So, ordered
continued. Okay. Thank you.
>> Okay. Thank you.
And that takes us to item number 33,
application number 2510361.
Applicant Rajie Yata. And we have uh
Rajie here in person. Um our office did
not receive a confirmation of attendance
on this application. Um the applicant
indicates that he did email us one. We
searched our records and were unable to
locate a confirmation of attendance.
>> Um so we would
>> recommend having a conversation with the
assessor's office and requesting a
continuence of this matter.
>> Okay.
>> Um
>> let let me
>> possible we have we are very prepared
for it.
>> Are you prepared to move forward today
if the assessor is? Well, let me just
check with the assessor. Okay. Just a
minute please to the assessor. Are you
prepared to move forward?
>> We are not prepared to go forward with
this case. Um
>> because
>> we weren't he wasn't no confirmation of
parents
>> because they're not prepared.
>> Click on my notes here too. I believe we
still need some data from him. I believe
>> yes. So the no confirmation of
attendance requires a reschedule. Um and
the assessor is waved from submitting a
presentation um due to the no
confirmation of attendance. Again, the
applicant indicates he sent us one. We
searched our email. We searched our
online portal. We didn't get a
confirmation of attendance. Um, so you
can certainly provide that data to the
assessor today, request a continuance.
Hopefully there's no need to come back
um if they review it and and agree. Um,
but yeah, you would be required to
request a continuence today since we
didn't receive a confirmation of
attendance.
>> And then the confir where did you send
the confirmation last time to the
applicant? How how did you how did you
provide the conf confirmation that you
sent?
>> Emile.
>> Emailed.
>> Yeah.
>> Okay. Um, may I make a suggestion? Sure.
>> Uh, when when you make a confirmation
for this continued hearing, may I
suggest you give them a telephone call
to make sure that they've received it?
So, Okay.
>> Okay. Good. Um, and then do you have a
waiver?
>> We do not have a waiver. Would you be
willing to sign the two-year waiver for
the continuence request similar to the
previous
>> Okay. Um, and um I'm sorry. Did which
date uh did we prefer?
>> Either one's fine.
>> Either one. Okay. And which date do you
prefer to come back? October 26, 2026.
>> Yes.
>> Okay. Good. And the assessor may be
requesting additional information.
>> I found my notes on here. Actually, we
have not received any data from the
applicant. So, we definitely would need
some data if they have today. Um.
>> Okay. And
>> you've requested data, have you?
>> Yes. My notes from Miss Jeff is still
waiting for documentation by applicant.
So, we still haven't received any
documentation from
>> Okay.
>> So, it looks like it just was handed to
Jose.
>> Jose has it now. So, that's great.
>> Oh, good. Okay. Excellent. Okay. So this
matter is continued to October 26, 2026
with the um applicant consenting to sign
a written waiver today and there shall
be a 30-day proviso if the assessor
needs more information um that you shall
be submitting it no later than 30 days
before October 26, 2026.
And that is so ordered. Thank you.
>> Then if you don't mind waiting around a
few minutes, my colleague's going to
bring down more waiverss. We we ran out
of the the paper.
That takes us to item number 34,
application number 2510394.
Applicant Eric Garcia.
We have Eric Garcia here in person.
>> Good morning.
>> Hi.
Um question to see if they can reassess
the uh the stipulation
to reflect a little closer to actual
cost of repairs that are going to be
required.
>> Oh, is this is that stipulation um
signed by all of the parties or just the
assessor? What what what's the status of
the signatures on that?
>> There is Okay.
>> So, it hasn't been signed. the it sounds
like the assessor's office has offered a
stipulation and he hasn't signed it and
so he wants more time to
>> um for our discussion he wants more time
to see if they can
>> you don't quite agree with the you feel
the stipulated value is not correct
>> correct okay um have you discussed it
with the assessor yet
>> not actually feels like it kind of was
in standby since the first time we
showed up
>> okay
>> yeah okay
>> I guess I'll do that now
>> okay And um let me check with the
assistant and I'll come back with you on
a date.
>> Okay. Could you brief me on this?
>> Um right, Miss Jeff um Dr. applicant
>> gave him the stipulation and still
waiting to hear back or heard anything
back since the stipulation got offered.
Um so we're still waiting. So we didn't
know if he was agree with the
stipulation or not.
>> I guess he does not. Okay.
>> Um we going to continue if possible we
could work with them and go from there.
>> Okay. Uh how much time does the assessor
need? Uh would you prefer the October
26th date?
>> That'd be that'd be fine for the
>> assessment. Either date is fine.
>> Okay, great. Um okay. And then um
>> and then same thing, we have the we have
the um the two waiver right there. It
sounds like it's a quick continuence. Um
but
>> Okay, perfect. Thank you.
>> And you agreed to sign that?
>> Correct.
>> Okay, thank you. Okay. So, this it's
going to be ordered that this matter
shall be continued to October 26, 2026
uh with the 30-day proviso
and uh with the applicant stating that
he will be signing the wa written waiver
today. So, or that's that's the order.
>> Okay.
Thank you. And then I'll take the
waiver.
Okay.
is from the explanation just
okay that takes us to
sorry item number
38 application number 251 10461
applicant Farzad Moajani.
Do we have Farzad here? Okay.
>> Thank you for the opportunity for
considering my case. Uh I'm here to
request for a I've been um communicating
with Mark Stober from the cessor's
office and he was wondering if you could
consider continuous to allow more time
for the communication.
>> Okay.
Um, have you provided information to to
the assessor?
>> Yes, I have provided information
to the access.
>> Okay. And then let me check with the
assessor. Could you brief me on this?
>> Uh, we received information on the 13th
of this month. So, we still need time to
go through it and make sure our
evaluation what we do valuation or
change ownership.
>> Okay.
value.
>> It's it's value for a date of change of
ownership.
>> Is that right? Or is it a decline?
>> Uh I believe it's a data change.
» And Mr. Mahadani, are you also the
waiver? Are you okay sending the um the
waiver for the continuence request?
Would it be possible for me to get
myself familiar with the VA request
after reading it and then um submit a
paper later at a later time?
>> Um
yeah, so um it it pretty much just
allows the county more flexibility while
you guys are gathering data. Um the
expectation would be that you move
forward today, but since the data is
just recently being provided, the
county's going to need more time to
review the the data. Um
but yeah, we we can't force you to sign
the waiver.
>> Okay. If you decide to sign it, then um
you take uh electronic.
>> Yes, we we also take electronic. Um so
it's you're not signing the waiver
today.
I would like to read through the if
possible and and if the opportunity to
sign it electronically is there would be
fantastic.
>> Okay. But just to confirm not today.
>> Yeah.
>> It's fine.
>> Yes.
>> It's decline in value.
>> Okay. Thank you. Okay. Thanks. All
right. Um then um
then October the 26 the assessor said
that would be all right. Is that all
right with you? October.
>> Forgive me if you've already said so.
forgive me if you've already said
October 26, if I'm asking you to repeat
anything. Um, okay. Uh, so then, um, it
is ordered that this, uh, application
shall be continued to October 26, 2026
for good cause with a 30-day proviso, no
waiver on file.
Just a quick question, but would that
allow me time to the assessor office to
look into the application? It just
confirms.
>> Why don't we let you ask the assessor uh
if I can make it to February? If after
they answer you decide you want to move
it to February,
>> it should be it shouldn't be a problem
at all. Um it's up to you what you like
to do all that, but it shouldn't be a
problem. It's just it.
>> Thank you. Appreciate it. So, October
26th, everybody's all good. Okay.
>> Okay.
>> We're all set.
Okay.
>> Thank you. If you'd like, you can pick
up a waiver and give it some thought. If
you decide to sign it, you can turn it
in electronically.
Okay. Thank you.
>> That takes us to item number 45,
application number 2510653.
Applicant Christy Aldo.
Do we have anyone checked in for
Christie Aldra?
» So, my notes indicate that we were
unable to contact the
Sorry,
>> they have an agent.
>> Yeah.
Oh, okay. Sorry. Attorney uh Gerald, we
spoke with his office last week and the
he's okay with the denial due to lack of
appearance.
>> Okay.
It is so ordered that this matter is
denied for due to lack of appearance.
Okay,
>> set that takes us to item number 46,
application number 2510884,
Casey Living Trust.
>> That's me.
>> Hi,
>> good morning.
>> I'm just asking for a continuence
because due to an unforeseen medical
condition, I got my paperwork in just a
couple days late.
>> Okay. So, I'm not sure how much time
he'll need and he might need more
paperwork. So, I don't know how much
time.
>> Okay. Why don't I check back with check
with the assessor and then I come back
with you and we'll discuss it right now.
Let me ask them first. Could you brief
me on this?
>> Is this a change of ownership? Um
>> a value or
legal?
>> It's change ownership on its receive
date.
Um
>> is it a value or It's a change
ownership. So it's it's not a value.
It's a change ownership. I believe
>> a legal issue.
>> Yeah. This is a B this is a B1 issue.
>> Okay. Thank you.
Uh and I'm sorry when you say um
>> uh this is Angel. Um so this is a change
in ownership case. U but it's happy to
deal with two dates June 21st 2023 and
September 24th 2024. So it looks like
we're going to be needing a lot of data.
>> Okay. So I would probably recommend the
conference
>> and then you know how to get reach me.
>> Yes, we'll be working. Looks like we're
going to need more time.
>> Thank you so much.
>> And thank you for getting
>> I apologize.
>> Okay. So I will take the February date,
please.
>> Okay. And we have a waiver on file, so
there's no need to um
>> Okay. This this application is continued
to February 22nd, 2027
for good cause. And is there a proviso?
Um yes, the 38 provisor will be
>> um they they if they ask for additional
data, the assessor after reviewing what
you've given them, they may ask for
additional clarification or data and
they're requesting that that be provided
to them no later than 30 days prior to
the February 27 hearing.
>> Yeah. Hopefully. I mean, it was it was
literally just me at getting the
paperwork organized. Unfortunately, my
kidneys failed and I ended up in the
hospital and they wouldn't let me out of
the hospital to send the paperwork in
and that's sort of what happened.
>> Okay.
>> And I apologize. There was nothing I can
do.
>> Well, that's what we have these
continuences for.
>> So, thank you very much for
understanding.
>> All right. So, then I'm going to add to
that order that there shall be a 30-day
provisal.
>> Okay.
You're all set. Thank you.
>> Thank you so much.
>> Thank you.
Okay. And that takes us to item number
47, application number 2511202.
Applicant Valerie A. Pulich. Um, this
applicant called our office this morning
and let us know she would not be
attending today's hearing. So, that's a
denied due lack of appearance.
>> Did she understand that it would be
denied?
>> Yes, I also spoke with her last week. Um
and it it was like uh she was debating if
she was going to pursue the appeal
anyways.
>> Okay.
>> Um but she called us this morning and confirmed that um
>> Okay.
>> It would be a denial due to lack of
appearance.
>> Okay. It is ordered. This this
application is denied due to lack of
appearance.
>> Did the assessor want to comment on
that?
>> No, we have no comment on that.
>> Okay.
And last item on the agenda, application
number 2511770.
Applicant Kenny Chi Tada. And we have uh
Kenny Chi here in person.
>> Good morning. Thank you for being here
today.
>> All right. Let me check with the
assessor.
>> Assessor is ready for presentation
today, too.
>> Okay. Very fine. So you'll be the second
case that we're hearing today.
>> Hearing officer Cohen. Um, so we
actually had an amendment first and so
typically
>> for this application.
>> Oh.
>> Um, and so typically an amendment
requires a 45day reschedule. Um, the
assessor's office and if you can confirm
on record is is waving that 45day
>> um reschedule. Okay. And let me see. So
my name indicate that we are
and is this a
yes.
Okay. Just to confirm, um, you're
amending the dates in your application
from July 16, 2025 to
>> the date of transfer.
>> Oh, not not to change. Uh, yes. So, to
remove July 16, 2025 and amend it to
June 8th, 2023. Is that correct?
>> Okay. And that's for both um the no
change in ownership and the valuation.
So, boxes B1 and B2.
>> Okay.
So that um before we decide on that
amendment, are we going to do that now
or when it's called?
>> Uh now. So well, it's called now and
then so we'll go get into our hearings,
but first we need the amendment. The
assessor waves there 45 days. Okay.
>> And then we'll we'll decide which Yeah.
>> Would you stand up again and explain to
me the reason why you're requesting the
date the uh application be changed?
>> Of course. Um the process has been a
little confusing for me. So initially I
was working with assessor.
>> Well, if you could just I'm so sorry for
interrupting. Um just tell me why you
want to amend to change the dates of
value. Why?
>> So the I've already been working with
the censor's office presented.
are grounded around the date that I was
already
I had a qualifying for on the day of transfer.
>> Okay. So, you're you're saying the date
of transfer is different that was on the
application. Is that what you're saying?
Okay. And would you mind repeating what
was the date on the application that you
put?
>> It was in 202
>> somewhere around 2025. and and you feel
that the uh date should correctly be
what again please
>> the date of transfer
>> which was
>> which is June the 8th 2000
>> June the 8th 2023
>> yes
>> now this application um was this filed
timely for June 8th 2023
>> so this was filed timely for the July
16th, 2025 change in ownership. Um,
however,
the date they're requesting an amendment
to is still within the four-year. Um,
>> it's within the four years and it would
be would it be prospective relief then?
So this would be um
it would be prospective
as of the the new supplemental that was
issued for
um for July 16, 2025.
>> Oh, okay. Um so
just he didn't file did he he didn't
file on the supplemental for the June
8th, 2023 event.
>> Correct.
>> Did not file. did not file and it filed
during a July 16th, 2025 event,
but the June 8th date is still within
the four years.
>> Okay, thank you. Okay, let me check with
the assessor before I make a ruling on
this amend request for amendment. Okay,
>> to the assessor,
» um
is correct. Um we're okay with the
amendment. tell them we're ready to go
forward. It's a basically a Prop 19 and
a primary residence um hearing.
>> Mhm. [clears throat]
>> And we're ready to go forward with it
and not prolong the hearing basically.
>> Okay.
>> Process.
>> And you're willing to wave the 45 days?
>> Yes.
>> Uh okay. All right. Um then um this
application uh the order is is that the
application shall be amended and the
date of value shall be June 8th, 2023.
>> Okay. And I'll just restate for the
record to approve the amendment in
section six to add the change in
ownership date of June 8th, 2023 to
boxes B1 and B2 and remove the change in
ownership date of July 16th, 2025.
>> Perfect. So ordered.
» Okay. And then just a housekeeping item.
Are we for the hearing today? Are we
going just on the change in ownership?
Oh, sorry. I'm talking to are we um
going just on the change in ownership
today and the valuation pending the
decision on the change in ownership or
are we hearing both?
>> Well, it depends on if the assist is
also ready. Right.
>> Right. Yeah.
>> Will you be ready for both?
>> Um yes, we're ready for both.
>> Okay. And um does the
>> Absolutely.
>> Joe Phillips with the assessor's office.
uh we would request we bifrocate the
issues. So we deal with the legal issues
surrounding the change in ownership and
then the second part would be the
valuation pending the results of the um
legal issues around.
>> Okay, Mr. Phillips in spite of the fact
that your office would be ready to go
forward on the uh valuation depending on
the decision.
>> We would not be ready today on the
valuation.
>> I must
okay fine. Thank you Mr. Phillips. Mr.
Tro, are you okay with that? That
today's discussion is just the legal
portion of the change in ownership.
Okay.
>> Okay. And then um
>> so we can bifurcate that now so we don't
forget later.
>> Right. So the amendment's been approved
and now we're going to bifurcate
uh the hearing on the valuation.
[snorts]
>> And for the valuation we have two dates
available. We have uh October 26, 2026
uh or February 22nd, 2027.
>> October 26.
>> And then well, it depends on how the
assessor is feeling about that as well.
>> We'd be the assessor would be okay with
that. Yes.
>> Okay. And you'll have to get uh I don't
know if you have information as of
October I mean June 8th, 2023
from the applicant.
>> Yeah, I don't know regarding valuation
stuff.
>> Okay. Okay.
>> That we be probably requesting in that
regard for
>> Okay. And you need how many days to re
in advance of the hearing?
>> 30 days.
All right. Okay. Um
so that um it is ordered that this the
uh valuation portion of this application
uh shall be continued to October 26,
2026 with a date of value of June 8th,
2023
uh with a 30-day proviso. Any questions
about the proviso
portion of this?
>> Okay. And that shall be so ordered.
>> Okay,
we're all set. Would you like to go
straight into the case or do you want to
take a 10-minute recess?
>> Yeah, let me just check with all the
parties and see does does anybody would
anyone like a break uh before we get
started on the hearings? I'm asking the
parties and the assessor
and you.
>> I'm I'm good to go.
>> Okay.
>> Quick question. 49. Is that removed?
>> 49 was added to a gender review. We had
a a stipulation to sign.
>> Okay. To the applicant, would you like
to take this short break before we start
your hearing?
>> I'm actually okay.
>> You're okay.
>> Okay. [laughter]
>> I can I can ask that gentleman when
we're done with your hearing if he wants
a break. What about the assessor? Would
you like a break before we get started?
>> You want a break or I'm moving? Very
well. Okay. Mike will be okay.
>> Okay. Very fine.
>> Okay. And um the clerk will tell you
when to give up give your exhibits over.
You can just wait just a moment more
please to the applicant.
>> Um maybe maybe 10 minutes is a good idea
so we can set up the t we're going to
the tables.
>> Okay.
>> Maybe 10 minutes is good.
>> Okay. We're going to resume and what
time is it?
>> Uh it's 10:32. We can say
» 10:42. Uh, we're going to start your
hearing at 10:45.
>> Okay.
It's 10:45. We're back on the record. We
have application number 2410576.
Applicant AM to fly. Moving forward, uh
this is a
2024
uh January 1 decline in value
application. And so just a little bit of
procedural um this is a evaluation. So
you have the burden of proof, you'll go
first. Um the assessor will have an
opportunity to ask questions about your
presentation.
Um if the burden of production has been
met, then the assessor will provide
their presentation. You'll have an
opportunity to ask questions on their
presentation. Then we'll go to closing
remarks. And then you have the right to
close the hearing since you have the the
burden of proof.
>> Okay.
>> Any questions about the procedure?
>> Uh no, it's clear as well.
>> All right. Thank you very much.
>> Okay. So, I've provided a copy of the
application and the applicants exhibits
uh 1 through 12.
The first PowerPoint is uh exhibit 12
and then she has them labeled after.
>> Okay. Um before we start, I'd like to
just ask the assessor to introduce the
case for us by giving me the value on
the role as of the date of this
application.
Um and um
the physical characteristics of the
property just the physical
characteristics
>> and um your what your opinion of value
will be what you'll be testifying to
today and then I'll come to you.
>> All right. The enrolled value for this
aircraft, excuse me, Michael Gillinger
for the assessor's office. The enrolled
value for this aircraft for the 2024 tax
year is $457,800.
This is a diamond DA40 aircraft. Uh it
was purchased overseas and flown into
the United States and improved and made
um subject to the FAA's restrictions
here and requirements here. Received an
FAA flight certification airworthiness
certificate. Um and all of those
improvements occurred before the lean
date 2024. Our opinion of value has not
changed. Uh the processor supports an
opinion of value of $457,800
based on the R&T code 5362 which states
we must assess the value at market
value.
>> Okay. Thank you.
>> Um now do you agree with the physical
characteristics of the aircraft that
he's described just the physical
characteristics?
>> Uh couple of things. One is that the
assessed value is based on the US value.
>> Okay. And aside from the assessed value
though, uh just the physical
characteristics of the aircraft,
um I want to make sure that we're on the
same page as to what is a diamond
aircraft in Austria.
>> Uhhuh.
>> And it was a 2016 aircraft.
>> Okay. 2016. And that's what you have,
correct?
>> Yes, that's correct.
>> Yeah. and it didn't have some of the
requirements that flying in the US would
require as well as some of the
mechanical aspect that's not very good but I have to
>> you'll get into that into your case and
chief. Okay. And uh what value will you
be testifying to today? What's your
opinion of value?
>> Um the the actual value that I bought it
for which is 350,000
>> in two 2023. Yes.
Okay.
Then um
>> so I have a introduction file as well
that I Yes. I plan to go through answer
a lot.
>> I would like you to ask ask you to go
ahead and present your case and chief
now.
>> Okay. Thank you. Your honor, should I
>> No, it's not necessary.
>> All right. Thank you. Um well uh first
of all I I have this print out and uh
the first page shows this uh diamond
from the desert and uh it's a diamond
aircraft built in Austria. It's called
diamond star some and I have it
registered at 787 Yankee uh because I
used to work at Boeing. I have 40 years
in the aerospace industry. 20 years 20
of those 40 years are with Boeing. And
this particular aircraft was also the
first one that is general aviation
aircraft that has been electrified. So
I'm currently in electric uh in
electrifying business. I have a app to
fly is to electrify these uh gas burning
uh power plants. And so uh I bought the
airplane fully intend to move into a
sustainable aircraft. Um anyway, so it's
from the desert because uh at the time I
was looking up in the US uh market as
well and uh so we can move on to the
first chart where uh it's the value
chart.
Yeah, you can open that. Uh the value um
I believe is global market and it is
global market because when I was in
Boeing we sell airplanes everywhere in
the world you fly everywhere you see
going airplanes and of course uh this
airplane is from Austria as you can see
in Camaro there's quite a few of them as
well but not as many as out in the world
out in Europe because this was
relatively late comparing to sessuts and
pipers and so on that are in the United
States. Um and as we all know the market
economy is such that you know it's a
supply demand. So in the US there's not
as many as in in Europe obviously and
that pricing in the US is way higher
than pricing in Europe. And in Middle
East
speaking of Middle East this was
actually purchased not in Europe but in
Doha Qar. So at least I paid for this
airplane unlike our president who just
got one for free. So the pricing over in
the Middle East is also very different.
Um while in the US this is done by a
distributor and uh at the time I didn't
get this from the United States because
this was right after COVID and if I had
got you I called this guy several times
and they were saying after COVID there
was a delay in the distribution of the
new airplanes and so on and also in the
used airplane there's the market is
dwindling that was right after the coke.
So, uh, the price of the used airplane
will be almost like a new one. And I
didn't want to spend all that money and
buying a used airplane while still
paying almost the same as a new
airplane. So, I decided using my
aerospace background because I have a
network around the world. So, I t I
checked the data myself and found this
airplane from Qatar.
And so, uh, today the assessed value for
the 2627 bill is $410,200.
And my appeal now is for current value
of less than 350,000.
Why? Because uh there's even appre
depreciation since 2023. So that would
get it down to 297,000
today. So if we move on to the next
chart,
>> so we're looking at a data value as of
January the 1st, 2024.
>> Yeah, that will be a little closer to
350K because I have flown the airplane.
I went to see the airplane in 2023
>> and the whole purchasing uh the whole
acquisition took from the January of
2023 to uh May June because I had to fly
it back across the Atlantic. Uh and so I
have the uh attachments uh or the
exhibits. One is the application file
actually this file and number two is a
purchase agreement. These are in your
>> They're in the the uh Yeah, the one
that's under this one. Exactly. So,
number one, number two, and then the
closing document because uh when you pay
so much money, you usually go through
the title company, ESO company. So, I
went through this uh esro company that's
called air uh aerospace reports and
that's based in Oklahoma. I believe it's
a pretty common company because I sold
my previous airplane also using that
company. And uh before you buy an
airplane, I'm an aerospace nerd.
[laughter] So before you buy an
airplane, you have to thoroughly check
out the airplane and everything. So I
actually made uh a couple trips to Doha
before I bought it. And uh I managed to
basically determine on that the day
before uh Valentine's Day. So I call
this my Valentine in 2017.
>> What page are you pointing to there?
>> Uh that's the next page.
>> That's the next page. Okay.
>> Yeah. So that's the airplane. You can
see on the airplane the number there it
still shows A7 A I believe.
>> Uhhuh.
>> So that's that belongs to the original
owner
>> and he's the first and only owner.
>> Uhhuh.
>> Um so the title of the airplane was
transferred after that date. Uh and then
also I received all the lock works to
check out the airplane and I presented
that as part of the uh evidence as well.
Um but due to the fact that that it's
going to be you know the a lot of books
are three books this thick so I just
presented the picture of book if you
need anything that I can present but
then every year I have to go through the
service here so they have electronic
copies of everything. Mhm. Um, so the
next page if you flip over is this
actual signage of the previous owner.
Um, because the airplane was actually uh
registered in Qatar just like Trump's
airplane was originally there
registered. So you have to change the
whole registration as well as
certification because in order to fly in
Qatar is instead of FAA or YASA is the
CAA the Qatar uh Qatari CAA that has to
raise tax to certify that because unlike
the car if you don't have the safety
certification from the safety agencies
you cannot even fly it's illegal to fly
and uh and another thing is that because
I do have to fly this airplane all the
way back he gave me because he owns this
flying club. So, he gave me uh one of
those ID cards so I can go through all
the securityities and everything uh
without any issue in the Middle East. Um
so, back in 2025, I submitted uh this
appeal support letter that's now in the
exhibit number six. And in this letter,
I uh
>> What page are you? What page is it?
>> Uh this this page here. That's the next
page.
>> Uhhuh.
>> Yeah. So in 2025 I submitted this in the
system which is appeal support letter
that outlines these four things. One is
the global market based on supply and
demand and so the cost I mean the
pricing over in other parts of the world
could be considerably lower or even free
in the case for Trump. And then the
second thing is that after I had the
airplane, I bought the airplane with
350,000.
I had to insure it to in order to fly
across that that big ocean, right? And I
wouldn't insure it for more than what
it's worth, the value that I have paid,
right? So when I insure that, it was
based on 350,000. I have that as a uh
attachment here. Uh so that's attachment
number eight or uh exhibit number eight
in that other package. Okay.
>> Um, and also that insurance is very
high. It's like $22,000
just to fly across the ocean. And that
is in comparison to flying in the US.
The uh premium will be something like
around a couple thousand dollars for me,
for my age and for my experience. So, uh
you got to be care
what you ensure you know not more and
not less, right? Mhm.
>> Um and then the third item is the fact
that the airplane because uh in the
United States the airplanes are only
required to have ADSB that's automatic
broadcast system for whereabout you are
using the GPS. So you're only uh
supposed to have that since 2000 the
year 2020
and uh this airplane was made in 2016.
So it didn't have that. Uh but you know
uh you can file for special uh special
flight permit in order to get it back
because you know if I were to put it
over there then that would be another
cost and I have to get it certified and
all that. So it doesn't have that. And
also the turbocharger has uh some issue.
It has a leak. I know that it did but
it's not going to break or anything. And
uh so all those things I could have them
fixed uh either at the Austrian uh
factory that where it came from on my
way back or when I flew it all the way
back to the United States. So that's
item number three. And number four and
the most important part is that it's not
certified by FAA. It was certified by
the CAA of uh Qatar. And um so on the
bottom of this page, it specifies
several things that are mentioned there.
um from the support letter which was uh
in the exhibit number six, ABSB system
which I later on put in while I arrived
in the United States uh which was uh
13,600 and turbocharger that has to be
replaced um it was $12,000
uh dollars and then the in insurance
because the insurance I included that
crossing Atlantic insurance as well as
flying in the US and Canada. Um so the
last part is the certification by an FAA
uh they they call it D designated uh uh
aviation representative or aerospace
representative and so that's in
attachment nine for exhibit number nine
uh for the uh D and the D cost quite a
bit because I had to fly him over to Qar
to do the initial one and then
afterwards I had to fly him over to
California. So, uh, all those added up
to be $18,000.
>> Was that in the category of insurance?
>> No, it's in the last category of
certification by an FAA individual.
>> Okay. I'm sorry.
>> FAND individuals have to be the
specified. I mean, they have to be
recognized and certified by the FAA. So,
they have to have their expertise
recognized by the FAA. Not just anybody
can do that. Initially I had to do
research to is to see if I could get a
FAA designated certain in Europe to do
it and in the end it's just not
worthwhile. I mean you know it's the
cost everything balance out. So so it's
uh uh designated by the FAA.
>> Um
>> so that was attachment. In the next page
you will see that uh arrow is what
pilots
know that you know when you fly the
airplane the arrow are the five senses
of memory for what you need in the
airplane. Airworthiness registration
radio station license operating manual
and weight and balance. So the operating
manual weight and balance is part of the
airplane uh system. So that I won't
mention because it comes when I bought
airplane they give me that but the
airworthiness is what uh that's required
and if I'm going to fly the airplane
around halfway around the world I need
to have airworthiness that's enough to take me all around the world because
uh with the Qatari uh registration it's
kind of difficult but with the US that's
why I had to fly this guy over there
because to get a US registration and
certification then uh it's recognized
around the world because US capital
afterward is the leader of aerospace
still.
>> Uh registration uh so I just mentioned
as well. So I needed to get the
registration from the United States that
starts with N number uh N uh 787 Sierra
Yankees. Sierra Yankees are my initial.
Um and 787 because I used to work on the
Dreamliner in the Boeing company. Um so
all these things are unique. And then
the next page shows you the fact that I
actually hand carry the the numbers end
numbers over there. So the airplane has
changed from the A7 T8 to N7 CR Yankee
uh until the next page if you see that and of course the insurance
is shown in attachment states.
And another one that um I don't know how
many here, maybe Michael knows, is uh
what's needed for the radio station
license. And in the US, we no longer
need to do that. Uh that's uh authorized
by FCC, but uh in the rest of the world,
most of the rest of the world, you still
need that. So I had to apply for that as
well. Uh the FCC, that's a different
thing. So overall um you can see that
[clears throat] I well I actually took
this flight and so this is uh the next
page is a actual flight path all the way
from Qatar um to crossing the Atlantic.
But that first part the green the green
line was my original plan namely I was
going to go through the Austria uh
factory
>> but then the weather did not cooperate.
So in the end I wound up going to Egypt
and Greece and Italy and and so on you
know went all the way around. Um so the
airplane uh actually was safe in order
to go around and also I had a temporary
certification namely it's safe to go
around but then it's not a permanent one
that will require much detailed uh uh
other uh certification tasks and so I
plan to have that done in California
once it's here and uh so overall the
trip summary I have provided also all
the uh receipts all the loss files
of the flight from Doha to Oxford.
That's like the first half uh first one
third. And so that was uh because I have
a network of a lot of people that I know
from around the world. So in Oxford, we
were able to rent a hanger there to park
the airplane for uh about almost a
month. Uh at first I didn't know I was
going to be there for almost a month but
uh because the weather uh across the
Iceland and Greenland you know uh this
was May time frame. Imagine I got the
airplane in uh Valentine's Day in
February and then March and so this is
already in May. Uh the the icing
condition is still down to the ground.
So you want to wait until it's at least
not icing you know up to a few thousand
feet above the ground. And so uh waited
there for a bit and then flew from
Oxford to uh Montreal, Canada. Uh that's
St. Cubber uh that that CYU
airport and then from Montreal to uh
Camaro. So altogether almost 10,000
nautical miles and uh 75 hours of total
flight time for that little airport.
So then this last one is just a picture
when I was in Oxford. Uh had that
picture taken.
But uh really I think the main thing is
in the value of this airplane. Uh and I
do not argue that if we try to look up
the value of a used airplane first of
all they have to be available and
secondly if it's also a monopoly. By the
way this monopoly is a lifestyle or
whatever. Just about everybody I call
from controller, from trader plane,
whatever, it always wind up to to this
guy. It's really a monopoly,
>> the seller
>> uh distributor.
>> Oh,
>> yeah. And uh so so in the US you will if
you look up or whatever you will get
that value. However, if you go around
the world, you can get much better deal.
And so the market is really a supply
demand. However, when you bring in, you
do have to, you know, you have your cost
of shipment, you have your cost of
registration, you have your cost of all
that, but that's not a sale value.
That's value that you have to put in the
airplane. I mean, a airplane owner has
to spend on maintenance, m on all kinds
of things, right? But that's just part
of flying. That's not part of the sale
of the airplane.
So the value what I I really uh think it
should be less than 350K
of the 350K back in 2023. So now it will
be much less than that. I mean 15%
depreciation or whatever it's like 290
something.
>> So what what do you think the value is
as of the date of value? January the 1st
2024.
>> Uh 350. Okay.
>> 350.
>> Yeah.
>> That's our data value.
>> Yeah. That's already if you believe of
depreciation a little bit for one year
it should be less than that
>> because I got it in February March of uh
2023.
>> Yeah.
>> Okay. Um is there any other evidence
you'd like to present for your case and
chief?
>> Um well the airplane is just down in
that airport. If anybody wants to take a
look and all the paperwork and
everything I'm happy to
show. Oh, I've got lots of pictures,
lots of rubies, and even the maintenance
because the maintenance is done by uh
Long Beach uh diamond facility.
>> Okay.
I think we'll give the assessor
opportunity to ask you questions now.
>> Sure.
>> All right. Okay. To the assessor, thank
you.
>> You have cross examination.
>> I do have a few questions. Um you said
that your opinion of value is 350,000.
Um is that because that's the sale price
of the aircraft that you paid the sheet
of guitar? Well, so the value of
something is uh interesting. Yes, that's
the value because at the time because in
fact when I the airplane uh was found by
a colleague, he noticed that airplane
was not being flown uh at that airport.
And so he asked and found out that
airplane belongs to a sheep. He used
that airplane to learn how to fly. And
then I said, "Oh, well, he's not flying.
Maybe he wants to sell it." So anyhow,
they went to ask the the sheep uh if he
wants to sell it. The next thing the
sheep came back to me and says, "How
much does she want to pay for it?"
>> So that's the value I paid.
>> I see that from the uh aerospace reports
showing your escrow account. Yeah,
>> you paid 350,000 to the sheet, but you
paid 356,000 in total for the aircraft.
So your value is not what you paid out.
It's only what the cash seller received.
That's your opinion of value. Yeah,
because the 10K was for my friend who
helped with all that.
>> So even on costs that are on the same
page as part of your escro closing
statement.
>> Yeah.
>> You paying 356,000. That's not the value
according to you.
>> It's only the amount that goes to a
seller.
>> Exactly.
>> Okay. That's not what California state
law applies, but I appreciate you
answering that. Um, as you purchased
this aircraft in Qatar, you said it's
not legal to fly in the US in the
condition you purchased it in. Correct.
>> Correct.
>> Thank you. Um, you mentioned the aero
components. Uh those components add
value to a purchased aircraft, don't
they? If you were to get airworthiness
certificates, if you were to get
registration in the United States, if
you were to get the other components,
adding those components does add value
to the aircraft or not.
>> No, the value of the aircraft is just
the value of this is is the the glasses
are the value of glasses. But what's it
worth to you? Maybe at least last it's
not worth but you know
>> we're going to come back to that issue
of worth. I appreciate you raising that.
Thank you.
>> Uh the radio license that you mentioned
you said it's not needed in the US.
>> No.
>> So how would that be relevant to our
valuation process today?
>> Uh well you paid for radio
>> license. That one was really not so not
so important because I I just included
because I had a whole arrow in there.
Yeah. So, you have a lot of costs that
you you spent uh certainly to get the
aircraft purchased and get it here and
to get it legal in the United States.
There's no doubt about that. There was a
lot of costs involved.
Um you'd mentioned that you did submit
all of the receipts from the ferry
flights and I just want to go on the
record and say that there were some that
we did not receive, but you had
estimated in your email that it was
about 40,000 in total for the ferry
flight
>> portion. Does that sound accurate?
>> Yeah, I'm happy to submit those. I mean,
>> that's fine. They aren't really
necessary because we are not using a
cost method in our evaluation.
>> Right. But that's just showing that but
that's not the value of the airplane.
The value of
>> Yeah. You had also mentioned that um you
had difficulty in purchasing because
there's a monopoly uh for the
distributor and that that also applied
to used planes. Is that correct?
>> Used diamond.
>> Okay. So now that you own a diamond
aircraft, are you able to sell your
aircraft?
>> Uh I don't want to sell it.
>> That's not the question. Well,
>> would you be able to sell it if you
wanted to or would you have to get it to
this distributor so that he could sell
it for you?
>> That's a very interesting question
because as soon as I own this airplane,
guess what? I'm receiving emails all the
time from this guy.
>> He wants to buy it, I bet.
>> Yeah. Well, he always asks, he says,
"Oh, would you be ready to sell this? I
can find you some, you know, I I bet the
other diamond owners also get the same
thing."
>> Yeah. Because in the end, I was like on
firstname basis with this guy.
[laughter] Are you able to sell the
aircraft yourself though or do you have
to sell it to him so he can sell it
later?
>> I can sell it myself.
>> So when you were buying aircraft, there
were probably other diamond owners that
could sell the aircraft directly. You
found most results going back to this
one individual. You said
>> uh I found every number I call every
time because at the time there was not
that many. There was 19 uh 2023 and 22
we had just come out of COVID.
>> Uh and so I every honest to god everyone
that I called it was the same thing. you
know, they somehow it just transferred
to this other guy. Even when I call the
diamond uh the diamond manufacturer over
in Austria u because I know the chief
sales, Miss W. So, she says, "Oh, I
could get you this and that, but you've
got to call this guy in the US. Call
this guy in Canada." And I said, "Oh, I bet you I know who that is." So, they
really try to monopolize by getting the
distributors. But you're not required to
sell it to anybody other than whoever
you want to finally sell the aircraft to
when you decide to sell.
>> You're not required to sell it to them.
>> It's a free country. I can sell it
anyway I want.
>> Okay. Thank you.
>> Mouth or something.
>> The answer I was looking for.
>> But because it was a rare thing, you
know, at the time I think there was only
like less than less than a handful you
could count on the internet.
>> One last question I have. Wouldn't if
you were to decide to to sell this
aircraft here, would you sell it for the
same price you bought it for in Doha?
>> No.
>> Like it won't be it won't be worth that
much.
>> It wouldn't be worth that much. It'd be
worth less than 350,000.
>> Yeah. I'm I'm going to put on a lot of
hours on it, first of all. Yeah. And I
may not want to sell it here. I may sell
it to somebody in another country, but
uh I don't want to sell it.
>> Would it have as much value in Dohas
with all the equipment that's on it
that's not needed?
>> No, they don't need it there.
>> Right. Right?
>> They don't need the equipment that
you've added to it.
>> Right?
>> Okay.
>> So, you know, buy and sell is totally a
supply and demand thing. You know, you
have a whole curve like that. And in the
US, you happen to have more uh, you
know, demand than supply at the time
that I was five or even now possibly. I
don't know.
>> Thank you. I have no further questions.
>> Okay. Um,
so how did you determine the price that
you offered for it?
>> Um, well the at the time the brand new
meal was uh 600 and something and they
wanted to have the the distributor they
wanted to have 600 something namely a
difference of like uh you know maybe 10
20,000. I said I don't want to buy used
airplane that's almost the same as a
brand new airplane. Well, I'm trying to
use the sales car analogy, but of
course, it's not a, you know, a used
car. And uh so I so I that's why I tried
and tried to find it myself. I looked
up, you know, in Canada and uh Mexico,
there's not that many in Mexico. So I uh
was able to access the database and find
a lot of overseas.
>> Uhhuh.
And even though even though the uh the
overseas uh the the Taiwan was not even
on the map because I found that because
of my friend who happened to be working
at the time for for another sheep
>> in the airport. So then on your list of
um sales that you used um how did you
determine that the one that is the
subject of this appeal that's closest to
I'm sure you had a variety of sale
prices, right?
>> Yeah. How did you
>> It's not only the pricing, it's what you
have on the airplane, right?
>> So this particular airplane has a wing
left. You can see it's the Oh, it's
hidden here, but it's Oh, maybe this
one. You can see it's got the winglet
>> and uh it's very efficient. There's
only, you know, for a regular cruise,
it's only 5 gallon per hour.
>> Imagine that. Five gallon per hour.
>> So, the ones that you were looking at,
were they advertising these different
components? No idea because I know
>> you had to call and ask when you were
comparing determining this price.
>> Did you make some calls to find out what
the other
>> I made some calls? But I know these
airplanes. This is a very particular
airplane. Not only that it's got
winglets. It's very efficient long wing
>> and it also has a FedEx that's a full
authority something you know fully
automated you know. So it's like flying
a jet. Uh-huh.
>> Uh so it's uh you don't have to use the
fuel air mixture ratio and things like
that to fly. And so once when I flew to
uh Las Vegas,
>> I taxi side by side with another jet.
The jet went in and refill also from LA
refill for like you know few hundred
dollars. I refill for you know less than
100. It was only like 12 gallons.
>> Okay. Okay. Um All right. Um, I'm going
to um make a ruling right now that you
have met your burden of production on
this case. And so now the assessor, it's
your opportunity to present your case
and chief.
>> Thank you.
» Maybe second.
So we have exhibits A through D.
We'll mostly be working with the exhibit
A as the narrative. Exhibit B is
provided for legal references from your
review if you need them. Exhibit C and D
will be used to use source documents on
occasion, but mainly exhibit A is what
we'll be using.
>> Okay. Thank you.
» Would you proceed please?
>> Yes.
Aircraft assessments are made at fair
market value on the lean date, not cash
purchase price. The applicant's opinion
of value is limited to only the cash
sale price received by the seller of the
aircraft. Generally, this value is used
when calculating a onetime sales tax or
use tax. R&T code sections 5362 states
simply the assessor of the county in
which the aircraft is habidually
situated shall assess the aircraft at
its market value. R&T code section 1110
defines market value as an armslength
transaction and reads in part full cash
value or fair market value means the
amount of cash or its equivalent that
property would bring if exposed for sale
in the open market under conditions in
which neither buyer nor seller could
take advantage of the exigencies of the other. and both the
buyer and seller have knowledge of all
of the uses and purposes to which the
property is adapted and for which it is
capable of being used and of the
enforceable restrictions upon those uses
and purposes.
R&T code section 5364 further directs
the board of equalization to establish
standards and select a commercially
available guide to be used by county
assessors in the assessment of aircraft
at market value. The BOE issued letters
to assessor or known as LTA's number
97-303
in January of 1997 selecting the
aircraft bluebook price guide as the
primary guide for valuing general
aircraft in California. This LTA also
directed county assessors to discount
the listed retail value by 10% to
provide reasonable estimates of fair
market value for aircraft in truly
average condition on the lean date.
The assessor received a timely filed um
aircraft property statement 2024 lean
date. If you would open up exhibit D to
page two.
» Did you say D?
>> D. It's behind scene. There's only a
couple pages.
>> Oh,
» page two is the first page of the
aircraft property statement filed for
2024. The filing reported that the
aircraft was in average condition as you
can see by the circled area there. Had
no damage history and reported no
avionics had been added. One interesting
note as I was viewing this account, if
you look at the damage history circle
and go up about an inch, the reported
purchase price on this form was 250,000.
That may have just been a typo, but uh
it's not the value that we used to value
this account either because we're not
using sale price as the basis for our
valuation.
On the next page, the filing also
reported the airframe hours as of the
lean date 1124.
This APS filing information was used to
generate an appraisal value from the
aircraft bluebook price guide tool. If
you turn the page one more time on
exhibit D to page four, you'll see an
example of the result of that aircraft
blue book valuation price.
You'll notice in the top box that there
is a reduction of 10% as requested by
the state board of equalization. You'll
also notice that there are airframe
hours and engine hour adjustments based
on the number provided in the property
statement. And that finally sales tax is
an element of value that is added to the
market valuation uh conclusion that's
received using this price guide tool.
Moving to page five of the narrative.
The 2024 appraisal also includes the
sales tax component as required by California law. Property tax
rule 10 establishes that sales and use
tax are included in full economic costs.
There is no indication from evidence
provided by the applicant that sales or
use tax was paid on the purchase of the
aircraft. It is likely that the aircraft
met the requirements of the sales and
use tax law to be exempt from that tax
leaving. BOE annotation 1000.005
from September of 2021 addresses that
circumstance. Quoting from the document,
thus even though the sp the board's
sales and use tax division may have
granted an exemption from sales or use
tax on the sale or purchase of the
aircraft pursuant to the pro provisions
of the sales and use tax law which the
board administers for property tax
assessment purposes. If the sales or use
tax is applicable to similar consumers
using the aircraft at a similar trade
level, sales and use tax is included in
the assessment even when not paid at the
time of purchase.
The assessor also considered a cost
approach to value. The applicant
provided documentation during the appeal
of several expenses she incurred in
transporting her plane to Camaro after
purchase. The assessor examined these
costs to determine if an estimate of
value could be determined to use the
cost approach to value. The assessor
followed the guidance of case law which
states the cost of any asset includes
purchase price, sales tax, brokerage
commissions, duties, transportation, and
all costs of placing an asset in a
condition for use.
As case law indicates, all costs of
transporting and proving the aircraft
are considered necessary to quote place
the asset in a condition for use at the
location the applicant plan to keep the
aircraft.
Using the invoices provided by the
applicant, which if you'd like to refer
to them are in exhibit C, pages 3
through 19. Many of them are provided in
the applicants presentation. The
assessor reached an incomplete cost
valuation total that was within 1.5% of
the standard market value approach. The
analysis was incomplete due to several
costs that were not reported such as the
fuel used and the ferry pilot wages for
the three pilots listed on the insurance
coverage for the ferry trip. The
incomplete cost information rendered the
result unreliable. If all costs had been
reported, the cost approach value result
would likely have exceeded the standard
market value approach conclusion. on the
722 email that is in packet C uh
provided by the applicant. She estimated
those costs at $40,000.
If you turn the page from the appraisal
in exhibit D, that is the cost approach
worksheet that was prepared.
Excuse me. the uh incomplete cost
approach without all of the receipts
that were incurred um that the
assessments office is aware of but did
not receive information for had the
result at a $7,000 difference or 1.5% of
value. If 40,000 or so more document
documented expenses were included
obviously the cost approach would be
much higher than market approach. Um
going to page six of our narrative
guidelines from the BOE is clear on the
preferred method of aircraft valuation.
This is also taken from the annotation
1.00.005.
While the cost and income approaches are
part of the appraisal process and each
may contribute to the value conclusion,
the market approach to value is by far
the most reliable in the valuation of
general aircraft. The market approach
involves an analysis of sales listings,
offerings, opinions, and published
market guides of comparable aircraft or
of the subject aircraft. Such data give
an indication of what people in general
are willing to pay for a particular
model of aircraft at a certain time. The
cost approach is used mostly with new
aircraft that have list prices but no
history of sales. The appraiser assumes
that the cost and value are the same in
the circumstance. Cost should be
understood to include the cash selling
price, sales tax, and any delivery
charges.
Even if all the costs were known, the
cost approach would still not be the
most accurate measure of market value
for an aircraft model that has 10 years
of sales history. When the subject
assessment was made,
the aircraft configuration when
purchased in Qatar was not legal to be
used in flight in the United States. The
aircraft was modified and improved to be
certified by the FAA for use within the
United States. The changes made to the
aircraft, all prior to lean date 1124,
brought the aircraft up to the standard
of the average aircraft listed in the
aircraft bluebook price guide. The
aircraft was valued as part of the North
American market for general aviation
because of its current location and
equipment configuration.
The assessor followed California state
law and procedures specifically
established by the board of equalization
for the value of general aircraft when
determining the 2024 assessment of the
subject aircraft.
That's the case and chief.
>> Okay.
Um, have you had a chance to look at
this material prior to the hearing?
>> No.
>> Do you want some time to take a look at
it before you start your
crossexamination? You may have questions
for the assessor.
>> Yeah. Um, I just really have one thing.
I mean, it is a market approach and
market is not only the blue book of
California or the blue book of United
States. The market is global.
>> Okay. Then but do you have a question
specific? Uh this is a chance for asking
questions. It's called cross
examination.
>> The cost approach I you know I didn't
include all the fuel and pilots uh
receipts but I have all those itemized I
could share. Um anyway I I don't quite
understand when you say that there's the
well three questions actually. you first
it's a cost approach in the end your
conclusion did not base on the cost
correct
>> that's correct
>> it's not a reliable approach
>> yeah it's I I would say that too because
uh you know what cost to me and you know
you could even mention that uh
registration numbers and all those costs
should I didn't
um but you mentioned this use tax uh
that I did get an exemption because as
long as you go out of the states for
business which I did and you justified
that and they review it. So uh that was
exempt.
>> That's fine. My statement was that it's
included whether or not it's paid at the
time of purchase or not. [clears throat]
>> No, it was afterwards I got this thing
from California.
>> Correct. My statement was that it's
included in an assessment valuation
whether it's paid at the time of sale or
not.
>> Right. [clears throat]
And another one that um question has to
do with the market bush. So what exactly
of the market uh comps say did you use
this is not like a real estate comps you
know you you
>> no the comps are the make and model of
the aircraft
>> right
>> so if you look at the valuation page on
page four
they start from average retail value for
a 2016 DA40G aircraft in average
condition
>> right
>> you stated that yours was in average
condition on the property mentioned the
uh five sty or aircraft loop book is mostly US
>> I believe it is but I'm not familiar
with their methodology
>> I have seen maybe one or two that snuck
up from Europe because you know they know that in Europe in US they may
get some sales from something but the
thing is that mostly uh around the world
you would have other available that's
not listed in this uh textbook in the
I don't value aircraft around the world.
I value them here in Camaro or in
Ventura County. And so I use the tool
that's prescribed by the state of
California to do so.
>> That's that's no problem. But the thing
is that this airplane is not from
Camaro. It's
>> it's in Camaro now though.
>> It's in Camaro now, but it was purchased
in talk.
>> Yes. And purchase price is not the basis
of valuation either. But it's
>> because that's using the cost method. If
you're using the purchase price
>> is a large part of it
because later on if I can sell it
overseas, you know, so it's a supply the
market is a supply and demand. It's not
just one point in the world. There are
many points
>> and if you sell it around the world,
they have to pay to transport it back.
What you said in this statement was
>> the most expensive part of the added
cost that you had was
>> well I'm willing to pay. I understand
not every buyer is
>> question.
» Did you have any other questions?
>> No.
>> Okay. Um let me ask the assessor a
couple of questions.
>> Certainly.
>> Now um the blue book does that have um
sale prices?
>> It tracks sales over the course of the
um year making model. So there's 10
years of sale history from 2016 to 2026
for this model of aircraft.
>> Okay. And so um
then if it if it's 10 years of history,
how how do you do you use a weighted
average to get to your data value? How
explain to me how you do that?
>> Aircraft Loopex methodology is basically
looking at all of the available data of
sales in the marketplace for each
>> 10 modelan.
uh they update their estimate of retail
value per quarter. So four times a year
they're making adjustments based on
whatever new information they've
received about that aircraft making
model.
>> Okay.
>> Um they're valuing all years of that
aircraft as it goes along. So they have
a different valuation would be assigned
to a 2016 plane versus 2025 plane
because they start from different year
manufacturer. So do you have for example
just one column where the the state has
um condensed the data into a single
value as of a year of model.
>> It's in the column.
>> It's an online tool that you're
basically selecting the year
manufacturer the manufacturer diamond
and then you select the aircraft model.
So you're selecting that model by
manufacturer by year
>> and then you get a value
>> and then you get a starting point value
of 430,000 which you then adjust.
>> The board of equalization requires a 10%
reduction off the top.
>> Then we make adjustments based on the
airframe and the engine usage hours.
Each of those elements are contribute
greatly to value.
>> Aircraft use very little. It means it's
still very valuable. If you use your
aircraft with a lot more than average,
it's worth less obviously than average
aircraft. So then the data that the
state board gets the starting value from
is that
United States data or
>> I believe it's the US market.
>> US market.
>> That's where most of the people in this
market are shopping.
>> Uhhuh.
>> And we're tasked with providing market
value for the average consumer in this
market.
>> [clears throat]
>> Some people choose to go around buying a
less expensive model somewhere else
around the world and adding that value
adding those costs in as they get it
here and get it legal.
>> But very few consumers do so as you
heard the orals that were gone through
to make that happen.
>> There's a lot of costs that are involved
that aren't direct costs that are
needed.
>> Uhhuh.
>> Um she spont uh the aircraft is as you
see is 457,000 is what our estimated
value is. uh she purchased for 350,000
and then spent 130,000 more getting it
here and getting it in condition so that
it could be flown legally in the United
States.
>> Mh.
>> Those things are fairly comparable.
>> You could have spent that same amount of
money buying the aircraft as is in this
country and it'd be able to fly here.
>> So that's why most people don't go to
that expense because fing back as you
heard was $20,000 in insurance alone.
It's a very costly proposition to fly an
aircraft back into the United States and
then make it legal to fly here.
>> Uhhuh. Uhhuh. Well, you cannot evaluate
everything by money. That experience of
flying through Middle East, through
Europe and back from Canada all the way
here. That was invaluable. I have
learned so much. And for me, I'm going
to electrify that airplane. I got to
know every single bit of that airplane.
>> Let me ask the assistant another
question.
Um so then you know there was a
statement made by the applicant that um
I believe she was saying that these um
this particular model
um is not
uh and I'm kind of paraphrasing here I
could be wrong but is not readily
available in the United States that
there's a broker that handles them
overseas.
there are manufacturing plants overseas
for this aircraft.
>> Um,
>> so my question is this, if if that's the
case, I mean assuming that what she
stated is true, just for sake of
discussion, then how would the um state
blue book, you said that you believed it
was United States sale prices for over
the last 10 years.
>> That is my understanding. So
that's where I'm wondering if if the
applicant is saying that there are not
many sales
that take place of this model in the
United States
then how if the blue book is using
United States
prices only I think you assume that
>> I do assume that based on the
information I've received so far
>> where they're getting their data from
then.
>> Well, I think that um I would have a
disagreement with the premise to begin
with because the statement that I heard
was that there were very few that were
available that were not through the
distributor that had monopoly on the
environment.
>> Very true.
>> Not that though, not that no aircraft
were sold of that description, just that
they were limited in their sales channel
to one individual.
>> Okay.
>> Is what I heard.
>> Do you know how many sales
um comprise the data for the state board
in your blue book? In this case for this
>> I just want to make one distinction. The
state board of equalization has selected
a private commercial entity aircraft
blue book as their price got to use. The
state of boardization used to do all
this work themselves. Okay.
>> And found that it was ownorous and to
costly and all of those things. So they
outsourced it in mid 90s.
>> I see.
>> To a commercially available price guide.
>> Okay.
>> There are many aircraft that are common
in this United States that are not
listed in the price guide because
there's not enough data.
>> Uhhuh. But this
>> when there is enough data, they're
listed in the price guide.
>> Oh.
>> So to me as an appraiser, when I see
this is in the price guide, I feel
confident that there's enough data
behind it to say tell me that that's a
good average retail number. I don't need
to go do my own research, see what
listings are available,
>> try and come up with a number
>> that I could use as a baseline for its
market value.
>> Okay. So you you relied on that and um
am I'm correct in assuming then that you
didn't um or the information may not
have been available as to how many sales
they relied on to give you the bottom
line number.
>> That's correct. I never see the
underlying data information about how
many data points they put together to do
that.
>> Okay. Okay. All right. Um now let's see
here. We've had cross-examination. It's
an opportunity for you if you have any
um other
evidence you'd like to submit
as rebuttal evidence to what the
assessor has presented. Is there any
other evidence that would be to rebut
anything that the assessor has
presented?
>> Um
if I was if I was aware of this whole
process, I would have taken all those
calls. I mean taking down notes on the
calls that I tried back in January,
February of 2023
just all those calls regarding the when
I was trying to buy from through the
individual or wherever that really in
the United States I couldn't find I mean
very few available and whatever the
calls I made all goes to this monopoly
uh and so I would have liked to use the
data to rebut this one Because if you
get the uh from that broker that
outsource a commercial available thing,
it probably is based on you know three
or four or or even less of sales that
they have and just average those. That's
you know once again it's a supply and
demand kind of thing. So I was being you
know one of the few you know that's
trying to get that.
>> Did you say that um I'm sorry just step
back for a second. Did you say that? Did
you say that it pro the blue book was
probably based on three or four sales
that they may have had?
>> It was probably the sampling is probably
I I don't know exactly how many because
I didn't take that data. I just went
right away to my network to find the one
that I found.
>> Uhhuh. Okay.
>> But in the US, I really could not get
one that was satisfi satisfiable that
would do the work that I like.
>> What do you mean by that? do the work
you like.
>> Well, first of all, I like to have a uh
airplane that that's efficient and I
like to have, you know, with all the
specs I'm looking for. I like you're
buying a new car, you buying a used car,
you want to have certain requirements
that, you know, that satisfy what you
need to do.
>> Yes.
>> Yeah.
>> Okay. So, um then did what about the
specs that she's mentioning?
Uh the efficiency.
>> So, yeah. So, for example, I wanted to
buy a used airplane that's not abused by
a flying school and you know in flying
school they fly all the time and you
know the students come down and bang the
airplane really badly
>> and uh probably higher hours and
everything. So, I want to h have one
that's probably not so high and also not
from a flight school. So, that reduc it
down to few. And then also in the
>> there were a few a few of them in the
United States.
>> Yeah. also in the US. Uh
>> what were the asking prices on the few?
>> Uh probably higher.
>> Yeah, I don't remember the exact price
because uh Oh, yeah. I remember the the
>> the field that I asked for that's belong
to private individual rather than flight
school.
>> Uh is is uh basically uh almost the same
as brand new. This guy wanted to to get
almost the same as brand new price,
>> which was
>> 600 and something.
>> 600. Yeah, that was one one of them.
>> More than 600. More than one because I
made the calls for almost like a month
to try to find some. I couldn't.
>> Okay.
>> Because if you have to pay almost like
brand new ones. This was back in 2023.
>> And brand new ones are just coming up.
Originally, I wanted to buy a brand new
one,
>> but because of COVID, they had
manufacturing delays and everything.
They say, "Well, you got to wait for at
least another year or more than a year."
I don't want that. Uh because I already
have this finger open camera and
everything. I still have my whole
airplane.
>> Okay. So, there were some of them that
you checked in on that were advertised
for sale here in the United States
before before you made your decision to
buy overseas.
>> Uh this was not one particular airplane
because I was just talking to this guy
because I always got patched to him. So
I asked him I said suppose I want to
this because at first I was talking to
him about the new airplane and I said I
don't want any new airplane I want uh
older one if new one
>> the broker
>> well that monopoly guy
>> and so I said well I'll just uh get a
used airplane
>> and he says well you're going to pay for
probably almost like a new airplane if
that's the case because
>> you know you you have a range between
the flying school used airplanes and
private individual used planes and so
obviously He handles the whole spectrum.
>> Uhhuh. Okay. All right. Um then uh did
you have any um does that conclude any
rebuttal you would have for the
assessor?
>> Uh
well yeah the rebuttal I want to have is
still it's a global market.
>> Uhhuh.
>> And so we shouldn't just look at a US
sales. I mean if I did that I would have
just be happy with a US airplane but
this is a Austrian airplane that was in
Qatar
>> and uh if it's just in Austria it would
have been okay too I didn't have to re
reertify
registration is one thing certify is
another thing because FAA and YASA they
have handshake so whatever that's
certified by FAA or YASA they recognize
each other
>> okay
>> so but this is already taken off the
YASA one and moved into Qatar with a CIA
certification.
>> All right. Um, does the assessor have
any rebuttal evidence they want to
present?
>> Um, rebuttal evidence, no, but there are
some statements that were just made that
I would like to follow up on if that's
possible.
>> Well, rebuttal evidence can be oral
evidence. So, you can do that.
>> Thank you. Um, you had stated that you
didn't want to buy a aircraft that had
been to a flight school, been used as a
flight from a flight school. Correct.
>> Right. That was not Well, I didn't want
to because uh usually the flight school
ones have really been abused.
>> Sure.
>> Yeah.
And then you stated that those
that are sold by flight schools are at
retail value still. They haven't lost
any value.
>> I didn't. You said they were still at uh
you're saying at 650,000. said that uh I
want a low number of hours and most of
the flight school ones they probably
after abuse they being you know
thousands of hours or something.
>> Sure. And then you quoted a price of
around 650,000 for those models. So my
question would be how can it be damaged
in the eyes of most consumers and not be
worth as much and still worth as much as
when it was brand new?
>> Uh because that was not what he quoted.
He did not quote the flying school
flight schoolwise because I said I
didn't want the flight school. And what
information do you have about the flames
you get quote?
>> Well, I said that the well, first of
all, he did not quote one specific
airplane. I that's the data I wish I had
that I could I have, you know, I could
directly go to you with that. But I just
remember that in order to buy one of
those, which a it was really rare and b,
you know, if it's only got a couple
hundred or 300 hours like when I
purchased mine, they would have been,
you know, almost like the brand new one
>> and I didn't want to do that. That was
the main thing. I said, for a brand new
airplane, I either get from the factory
or pay for 650. Why would I, you know,
pay for 650 and get one that's used?
>> Because that's what the market says to
work.
It's that monopoly guy says what's
worth. But I know the market overseas is
not worth that much
>> for an aircraft that's not in that same
condition. That's correct.
>> Not in the same condition. Right.
>> Right. But I
>> All those things that you added to it,
all of those components that you're
>> a process though. Certification is a
process.
>> Okay. Okay. Um
>> and there's a cost to that process.
There's a cost to repairing.
>> Yeah. Well, you'll have an opportunity
for put that information in your closing
remarks. Um then um if there's no other
evidence, rebuttal evidence, uh no other
questions on the rebuttal evidence has
been been uh presented. It's time for
closing arguments and you had the burden
of proof. So would you present your
closing argument?
>> Would you present your closing arguments
first? Thank you.
>> Certainly.
California state constitution is very
clear that general aviation aircraft
should be assessed at fair market value
as of the lean date. Lean date in
question is 2024. All of the
improvements, all of the certification
costs that are expensive and are um
lengthy process to occur have all taken
place by that lean date. So that
aircraft is now equivalent to the
average aircraft that's in the
California market. And that's the
aircraft that was valued by the
assessor's office. You should note that
our assessment initially was done that
we've showed was done March 18th, 2024.
We were not aware that this aircraft had
been purchased out of state, out of the
country, not aware that it had been
upgraded. There was no mention of these
improvements that were made in the
property statement that was filed by
Miss Yang for 2024. Just that the
aircraft was in average condition, had
no damage history, and had a low number
of hours. Those are the data elements
that we use in our standard process as
described by the board of equalization
to conduct our job the way that every
assessor in California counties is
supposed to do. The aircraft was in our
jurisdiction. We valued it as if it was
in this market. We valued it as if it
was standard based on the guys price
line guides. We don't ever know how many
data points are involved in those
processes that receive the data to it.
We just know that the board of
equalization has approved that
commercial guide and it has so done so
for over 26 years to be the source the
authoritative source for us to use our standard fair market value process.
There is a secondary guideline of excuse
me price book called VREF that we are
supposed to use if the aircraft is not
located in the price guide. There are
many that are not located in aircraft
blue price guide because there's not
enough data collected to be able to say
what fair market value is. In those
cases, we either have to use VREF or we
have to use alternate methods to try and
come up with fair market valuations.
That was not necessary in this case,
even before we knew all of these
extraneous costs have been involved
because they're not important to the
fair valuation that we received on the
lean day 2024.
That is our conclusion that our opinion
is valid as issued.
>> Okay. Thank you.
>> Thank you.
>> And then may I have your closing
remarks, please?
>> Sure.
um fair market values uh which involves
the word market means a global market as
airplanes are sold around the world is
not just the US
and uh also market is based on supply
demand and so the US demand us supply at
the time was one case while in Qatar or
in Europe is another case so therefore
that market price in US and overseas are
different and I took advantage of that.
Sure, I took advantage of that. So, I
was able to get a market value that was
much lower and I shouldn't be penalized
for that. I went all the way around the
world to find that price. And uh you
mentioned the um uh improvement that's
uh that's added to the airplane and that
improvement part of that was process.
Certification is a process. It's it
doesn't have to have have to do with
market. It's a process to let people you
pay people to come and say okay this
airplane is safe so therefore you are
allowed to fly
right it's not part of the price of the
or or the market price so it shouldn't
be counted as a fair market value for
certification process now the other part
for example the uh ADSB the ADSB is only
special in the US I flew all the way
around the world they didn't require
ADSB basically ADSB is just not a GPS
that you add to the airplane. The
airplane already had two GPS's in the
airplane, right? So why do I need to add
all that value? Why does that value have
to be added to the market? Once again,
going back to the market, it's a global
market unless I'm coming here to sell
that airplane, then I would definitely
add that because that's an improvement
for this market. But for the other
market, it didn't require the ADSB. Only
the US from 2020 was requiring that.
That's the improvement part. So um so
overall I think the fair market value
ought to be 350 subtracting off the 15
for today you know with some
depreciation but of the lean date or of
uh 2024 January is slightly less than
350 even
but you have to tell me what market is
for the fair market price.
>> Does that conclude your closing
arguments?
>> Yes. Okay. Okay. I want to thank both
parties. I'm going to take this matter
under submission. You'll get my decision
in writing. Thank you both.
>> Thank you.
straight.
So these are still perfect because
that's really
Thank you.
» Just make sure parties.
>> Yeah, if everybody's okay with it.
>> Okay. So, we're going to take a 5m
minute recess
and we will come back after 11:55.
Yeah,
>> right here.
Okay, we're back on the record. I've
passed out a copy of the application
2511770
applicant Benichi Prada.
And it looks like this is a
an appeal for a supplemental assessment
issued January 20th, 2026.
Um, and we've gone through and amended
the application. And so the
assessor, do you want to give us a an
overview on the burden?
>> Um, yes. The burden would be on us. This
a scape assessment under property tax
321. uh you would bear the initial
burden of establishing the validity of
the assessment including demonstrating a
change of ownership occurred and that
the property was uh subject to
reassessment.
>> The this is a sorry just to clarify this
is a supplemental.
>> Uh yeah, so this would be a prospective
uh Prop 19 exclusion moving forwards
from 2025.
>> Okay. I just want to make sure because
originally it was filed for an escape
assessment but it was corrected to a
supplement for January
issued January 20th 2026.
>> Yeah, it wouldn't be qualified to be
accepted but it would just be a base
year.
>> Yes. So based on Yeah, based on the So
are we saying the supp as of the
supplemental on for the July 16, 2025
date
>> 2023
>> for 2025. Yes. So it's prospective base,
but there was a supplemental that they
filed timely on.
>> Okay. But we are address we're
addressing the June 8, 2023 correct
change in ownership event. Okay.
Um,
>> so it's assessor's assessor's burden.
>> Yeah, we believe it is the assessor's
burden.
» Okay. So, um, procedurally, Ceser will
go first. You'll have an opportunity to
ask questions of their appeal or their
presentation.
>> Um, then you'll do your presentation.
they'll have the opportunity to ask
questions of your presentation and then
we'll go into your closing and since
they have the burden they they'll close
the hearing. Okay.
>> I'm just going to backtrack uh just to
make sure I'm tracking with everyone on
the burden of proof. Um so then um is
the assessor rebutting a deed
presumption?
>> We are not. Um so the
basically um the appeal hinges on
proposition 19 parentto child exclusion
and whether the ex exclusion applies. So
>> both parties are not in disagreement
with the deeds. Uh we're just if uh
we're determining if an exclusion
applies or not to the transfer. So there
was a denial of the
>> we denied based on the facts we have.
Yeah.
>> Okay. Okay. Fine. Yes. So then um the
assessor shall have the burden of proof.
Um okay. Um
well now um to the assessor if you would
um before you introduce your case
uh would you you've already talked about
it but just concisely brief us on the
facts that we're looking at today the
data value um
and um
and we'll get the rest of in in your
case the enrolled value the value you'
be testifying to that will be in your
introduction and then we can get into
your case.
>> So the valuation portion was bifurcated.
Um okay so we were just going to talk
about the change in ownership.
>> Oh I see. Yeah you're right. Thank you.
>> Okay.
>> And so I passed out uh the assessors
exhibits A through D.
>> Okay. Good.
>> So quick just a real quick overview.
what we're looking at today. Um, so the
June 8th, 2023 date, that is the subject
of this appeal. Uh, that is due to the
passing of a parent and according to the
trust, two children inherited that the
property upon the passing of a parent.
Um, we treated that as a 100% change in
ownership. Uh later we did get a
proposition 19 application for parent to
child exclusion. Uh the main reason we
denied it is because proposition 19 has
a rule that says you have it has to
become your primary residence within one
year based on the documentation which
we'll go over. Um we found that it was
not inhabited as the primary residence
within a year and we felt we had to deny
the application
>> of both both children.
>> Correct.
>> Or either
>> u it would just be one the one that
eventually took
full ownership of the property. Uh he
that is the other date that was on the
application originally July 16th 2025
which is no longer the subject of the
appeal but that's when EA took 50%
ownership from his sibling.
>> Okay. And was that an event on appra
reappraising event?
>> Yes, we treated that as 50% reappraisal.
>> Okay. All right.
>> One point of clarification. We
originally treated it as a 100% change
in ownership event, but after this
appeal was filed, we noticed that error
and we corrected it to 50%. For that
>> July 16th, 2015.
>> I see. Okay. Okay. Um, then did you have
any questions about the procedure before
we have the assessor present his case
and chief? I think I have a a generally
good idea of how this is supposed to go.
>> Okay. Okay. Fine. The only thing that
wasn't mentioned um in the explanation
of the procedure is if you feel or if
the other if the assessor feels that uh
the opposite party is presenting
evidence that is not admissible
then you can interrupt and object and I
would make a ruling on your objection.
That would be the only time when we
interrupt each other. Okay.
>> All right. Let's get into the assessor's
case and cheats, please.
>> Uh March Sober, I'll be presenting for
the assessor's office. Uh we have
exhibit A, which is primarily what I'll
be reading from today. Exhibit B is
going to go over supporting docs uh
documents I've either provided or were
provided by the applicant. Um C and D
are beads and the full Google uh context
for uh annotations I'll be referencing
throughout exhibit A.
>> Before you start,
>> let me make sure. Okay. So is is this is
AB are all the exhibits under this one
clip?
>> Yes.
>> Oh, okay.
>> Yes. Uh if you notice down at the bottom
it it'll have the numbering for the
pages also include the exhibit.
>> Got it. Okay. Thanks.
>> Yeah.
>> Okay. Please proceed.
>> Dear board members, for your
consideration, the assessor submits the
following report on the determination of
a change in ownership of the subject
property. The assessor has completed
this determination objectively and
independently pursuant to all re
California revenue and taxation code
sections and California property tax
rules. The assessor's representative is
available for any questions regarding
news reports information and analysis.
Thank you for your service to venture.
Um for this part I'm ask to page three
the statement of facts. On June 22nd
1979 Kimo and Satoka Tada husband and
wife acquired title to the subject
property. A base year value was
established as of that day pursuant to
the applicable laws uh 60 and 4620001
on February 8, 2008. The deed was
transferred into a revocable trust. Uh
this was not considered a change in
ownership as the beneficiaries of the
property did not change under the new
trust.
Um this at this time affidavit of death
was also recorded for Kempo Turada. This
was a spousal transfer of interest also
not reassessed as Satoka Torado uh
remained as the surviving spouse and uh
qualified for an interspousal exclusion
on June 8th 2023. Satoka Torata passed
away and this was documented on a deed
recorded July 18th 2023.
The property then transferred in equal
shares to Nichi Tata and Miho Turata
effective on the June 8th 2023 date and
was 100 uh% assessed at that time. Uh
the trust became irrevocable which
automatically conveys interest to the
benefiting parties
on July 16th 2025.
uh deed was recorded with Kinichi Torata
acquiring siblings interest in the
property. This transfer was reviewed and
it was decided that a 50% assessment was
warranted as there is no exclusion uh
for sibling to sibling trans transfers.
Uh a supple supplemental notice from
June 8th 2023 transfer was mailed on May
20th 2024.
Uh I reference this because that uh
establishes that this will be a
prospective
uh
appeal as opposed to able to go back to
the date and change in ownership.
On July 29th, 2025, the assessor's
office received Proposition 19 form uh
stated the date the property was
occupied was May 5th, 2025 as principal
residence.
On July 30th, 2025, the assessor's
office received a homeowner's exemption
form that stated the date the property
was occupied as a principal residence
was May 5th, 2025.
>> And I'm sorry, the date the exemption
that claim form was received
>> was July 30th.
>> 30th, 2025. Got it.
» Also stated July 24th, 2026, I received
an addendum from the applicant. appeal
contains a picture of a 2025 income tax
return which stated the property as his
principal address in 2025.
Um the addendum also included notice
fromce that established a residency at
the property effective July 14th6.
Uh my analysis is the
on the bottom of page four. I'll
continue from there. On July 18th, 92.3,
the death of the trustee was recorded
with an effective date of June 8th,
2023. While the property remained titled
in the name of the Turata trust, the
exclusion provided under section 62D
applies only so long as the trust is
revokable and the trusters retain the
present beneficial interest. Upon the
death of the last surviving trust, that
exclusion no longer applies. At that
point, the beneficial interest in the
property passes from the deedent to the
trust beneficiaries.
Accordingly, upon Satakaco Torata's
death, the present beneficial interest
in the property transferred from
Satakaco Toata to the trust
beneficiaries.
This transfer constituted a change in
ownership under section 60 because it
represents a transfer of the beneficial
use and enjoyment of the property. The
assessor therefore correctly determined
that a change in ownership occurred as
of June 8th, 2023, establishing a new
property base year.
And then uh beginning month after
February 16, 2021, change in ownership
shall not include the transfer of real
property which is the principal
residence or the family farm of an
eligible transfer in the case of
transfers between parents and their
children or between grandparents and
their grandchildren meeting the
following conditions. The principal
residence or family farm of the transfer
must become the principal residence or
the family farm of at least one eligible
transfer within one year of transfer.
This rule states that the principal
residence must be established within one
year of the change in ownership, the
June 8th, 2023.
What constitutes a primary or principal
residence is described with the board of
equalizations annotations
as a principal residence or principal
place of residence is considered to be
equivalent to doicile. that place where
a person has his or true or his or her
true fixed and permanent home and to
which that individual has the intention
of returning to whenever absent.
Factors to consider when determining a
person's principal residence or doicile
in addition to where the owner of the
property resided during that year
include such indices as the filing of
income tax returns in the state, the
state of [clears throat] voter
registration, the state of vehicle
registration, the state of issuance of a
driver's license. There is no time
requirements under California property
tax law in order to qualify a home as a
principal place of residence. I.e. the
six-month rule of having lived the
majority of the time in that location as
opposed to
where you claim your actual residence.
Whether a dwelling located in California
is a person's principal place of
residence is a question of fact. To
qualify for the exemption, a dwelling
must be the person's true fixed and
permanent home and principal
establishment to when he she whenever
absent intends to return.
In state presence, vehicle registration,
voter registration, bank accounts, and
state income filings are among the
matters to be considered in determining
residency, which for exemption purposes
is equivalent to doicile.
The documents received from applicants
to did not make this property their
primary residence until May 2025.
No supporting documentation uh
demonstrated a move in date within the
timeline such as provided tax returns or
not provided proof of voter
registration, vehicle registration, or
driver's license. By the laws stated
above, the applicant would have needed
to make the property their primary
residence one year from the date of
transfer, June 8th, [clears throat]
2023, which would have been June 8th,
2024.
For the reasons set forth above, the
evidence demonstrates that a change in
ownership occurred on June 8th, 2023
upon the death of Satoka Tora, resulting
in the transfer of the present
beneficial interest in the subject
property to the trust beneficiaries.
This constitutes a reassessible event.
Per R&T code section 60 notwithstanding
that legal title remained in the name of
the trust. Further the applicant's claim
for the parent child exclusion of
Proposition 19 does not qualify for
relief at the applicant did not
establish the property as its primary
residence within one year of the date of
transfer as required by rule 462520.
Accordingly, the assessor respectfully
requests that the assessment appeals
board uphold the assessor's
determination that the June 8, 2023
change in ownership constitutes a
reassessible event under property uh
under the applicable property tax law
and sustain the resulting assessment as
well as the denial of Proposition 19
exclusion claim.
In exhibit B, we do have the documents
reference where we have the homeowners
uh
plan or tax uh tax exemption on uh about
halfway down the page. It is number two,
date you occupied this property as your
principal residence was uh May 5th,
2025. This would be exhibit B, page two.
And then on page three and also the
reassessment claim for exclusion between
parent and child of Proposition 19.
It backs up that on page four also
states a move in date of uh establishing
a resident principal residence house of
5520.
And then uh lastly, we do have uh the
SCE
um establishment notice for 202 July 15,
2026,
page seven, and the 2024 and 2023
California income tax returns page list
the uh San Francisco property that the
applicant also owns as the address.
>> What page is that on?
>> Sorry, that one is um Oh, that page is
not numbered because I received them
late. They're after seven, so they would
be considered eight and nine.
>> Oh, okay.
>> Yeah. Sorry, I stayed put those
together. Just see those a little late.
And um
and uh
which page were you just referring to
where it states his residence on the tax
forms?
>> Yes, those should be just before it on
page two and three.
Oh, on the tax forms. Yes. Um yeah, that
would be uh after the the would be eight
and nine 20.4 tax return and three tax
return. Those would be the very
>> Did you read the statement that states
the
>> location? Yes.
>> From there.
>> Um
>> read read the address or whatever.
>> Yes. It says 325 Fair Street, San
Francisco, California. Um
>> is that the mailing address?
>> Yes. And it says principal residents
enter your county at the time of filing.
San Francisco.
>> Where is Oh, I see.
>> Yeah. It does not list the exact street
number, but list the
>> Okay.
» Same on the 2000
>> on the same on the uh
23. Yes, we did receive the 2025 tax
return that does list the uh Camaro
address. Um, however, that does just
kind of confirm the other documents
we've received that residency was
established in 2025.
>> Okay. And that's is that in the
exhibits, the 20
>> Yes, the 2025 should be before the SoCal
Edison. So, that's page six.
>> Okay.
>> Yeah, it does list Ventura County as the
principal residence.
>> Okay. Thank you. [clears throat] Uh, was
there any other evidence?
>> Uh, no. That would be at this time.
>> Okay. Uh, have you had a chance to
um look at this evidence enough for you
to cross-examine the assessor because I
can give you some time if you need to
take a look.
>> I'm familiar with some of the evidence
that's presented because we've been
having communication about it. So,
>> Okay.
Sorry for your loss by the way.
Thank you.
>> Um, would you like to cross-examine the
assessor now?
>> Yeah. Um, so I I guess one question is
there there
I think it's page five, right?
>> Of which exhibit?
>> Exhibit A, page five.
>> Mhm.
>> Exhibit A. So the four
um points being quote all about the tax
return
registration with the registration
driver's license.
Um
so
is it possible that there is someone
that can satisfy all these requirements
but not actually be physically resident
and still qualify
that home to be the primary resident?
You're saying if they provide all these
items and all these items show that it's
their primary residence,
>> right? The optics of
>> Yeah. the the optics of it based on the
law would make it look like that primary
estimates, right?
>> So I would read from I'm going to read
from annotation 505.0078,
which is the paragraph right below that
list. It says um whether a dwelling
located in California is a person's
principal place of residence is a
question of fact. Uh so based on the
BOE's guidelines, um it should be
factual and these are the documentations
they suggest we review to ensure that
it's a factual principal place of
residence.
>> But it could be possible even with all
this evidence that person's not
physically present at the home. Correct.
Um, not so for our purposes, we're going
to base any decision making on the
documents the DOE requires.
» I I think that's that's the only
question I have regarding
>> that's the only question you have. Okay.
Um, could you direct me to the
homeowners exclusion claim form? Where
is that? That that is that should be the
very sec the second page
>> of [clears throat] exhibit
>> of exhibit B
>> exhibit B page two.
>> Yes.
>> Okay.
>> That is
property tax exemption.
>> Okay. Let me just take a look at that
exhibit B page two.
>> I did have one.
>> That's fine. Just one second. Let me
look at this.
>> Okay. So this is the
exemption and it says when did you
acquire the property
and it says date you occupied the
property as your principal residence.
>> Yes,
» May 5th, 2025.
» Is that within one year?
Uh, no. That was June 8th, 2024.
>> That's right. You said that.
>> I [clears throat] I do I'm going to let
you ask your question and I have another
question for them. But let me have you
ask ask them first.
>> Thank you. Uh so we we might be asking
the same question but uh I guess to
[laughter] the assessor's office upon
receiving those forms given that date of
May the 5th 2025 is there any is there
any reasonable scenario that that date
would even be valid for submission for
that form
>> that so that the form signed under
penalty of perjury. So we do whatever's
filled out on the form carries a lot of
weight.
>> Understood.
>> And we are required to put a lot of
weight on it because it is signed under
penalty of perjury.
>> Sure.
>> Um if in your case an applicant
fills it out incorrectly
>> um for whatever reason put the wrong
date on there. Maybe they were confused.
I don't know. um we do allow them to
make a correction and the correction
would be through the documentation
listed in that in our presentation. So
essentially we're saying okay we rec we
recognize everyone makes mistakes. If
you can prove you've made a mistake then
we can make the correction.
>> Yes.
» Okay. Um let's see here.
I think that answered my question also.
Okay. Um then hearing no other
cross-examination questions, it's your
opportunity to present your case and
chief and um let me just ask you this
just before you get started. Are you
going to are you testifying
that um
do you believe that they should have
been the u change in ownership should
have been 100% excluded from
reassessment?
I'm challenging the the statement I'm
going to be presenting is that there was
a ministerial mechanical error on that
date that was presented on the forms and
I'm presenting evidence that I was
physically resident in the camera
>> and ultimately you believe that the
exclusion the parent child exclusion
should have been granted 100%. Is that
correct?
>> Okay, very fine. Um
it's
so
>> it is yeah it's a original appeal and
passing out the applicants exhibits. Um,
so it looks like they're labeled A
through D and
an addendum and one. So we'll we'll
identify them as exhibits 1 through
eight.
» Would you proceed please?
>> Thank you.
all again for your time. notes
very late so it can distort
uh the case I'm presenting is that the
there was the mechanical error that they
presented on the forms that were
submitted to the county and the evidence
that I'm presenting is around the fact
that I was physically present
at my mother's home up until the
transfer starting from June. And it may
seem con may seem convenient that I'm
saying that uh the timeline starts from
June uh 2022.
However, I can go into some history of
why that's your residence. So,
as as we all already understood, my
father passed away in 2007.
Uh after his passing, my my mother lived
in that home by herself and she felt
that it would be a great idea on
Memorial Day for his family to get
together because she was getting she had
just lost her father as well and um she
wanted another reason for the the family
to get together. So pretty much uh a
year or two after his passing, we
started having a annual uh Memorial Day
barbecue and it was only until co co was
the in 2020 was the one year that we had
to to skip it. Uh
I'm sure everybody understands why. It's
just the there was a lot of uncertainty
at the climb. So we that was the the one
year since his passing uh and she
started that barbecue band. We we did
not have that
um no more barbecue.
And then
come 2021 I mean everyone was happy to
be back together. She was absolutely
fine. And then skip forward one more
year to 2022
and it it was clear that there was
something off.
He just she would usually be excited
about helping out and
she just really wasn't herself. So I I
think myself um my my partner and my
sister, we all kind of questioned why
she wasn't uh acting the way that she
usually was. And she just said she was
feeling bad. And I started to work with
her to gain access to her medical
records to just understand what was
going on. And the more I read into it,
uh that the more I found out that she
just wasn't getting the the right health
or the care that she needed. So, uh it
became apparent that through discussions
with her practitioner, through her ho
that I needed to be an advocate for her
health. So, I I decided in June to to
come down and help be an advocate for
her. Uh so that is the reason for the June 2022 date. I I intentionally
made the decision to come down to to
help take care of my mother. Um
I think starting with exhibit A.
This is just uh
we skip a couple pages. Um sorry looks
like there's no page numbers on this.
Apologize. So if we go to the third
page, this is just all my flight records
from that date of um June 6th, 2022
pass the data transfer up until the time
I think it was current
submitted.
>> So you have your flight records
that's
» that's where it says arrival date,
return date.
>> Yeah, that's correct. Okay.
And that tells how many days you stayed.
>> That's cool.
>> So the raal date is when I was alive.
That's when you know he's in Burbank.
And the return date was back. And we
track the days that he's physically
present here. 292 days
a bit.
We continue forward with two pages.
These are just flight records around
20
June 2022 dates and some additional
evidence later on in the year.
to Los
and I think now instead of going to
exhibit B, I'm going to go to exhibit C,
which is
um I tried as the best as possible to
follow just the medical
that
um I was doing to to ensure my mom was
getting the right amount of care. And
one challenge that I had immediately
faced was the the fact that she was
locked into an HMO. I think if you
didn't know any better, you don't want
to necessarily spend too much on the
medical insurance and she went with the
she unfortunately went with the the
chief medical plan. And she didn't she got stuck with the HMO and her
general practitioner. Once I started
looking into her history over the
several years, um I I felt he was not
taking care of her. We should have sent
her to some specialist.
So before I came into the picture, it
was
I I can't say enough how disappointed I
was with the care that she was getting.
Uh anyway, excuse me. Uh
so moving on to uh attachments. These
are just records of
>> Do do you want to take a break before
you proceed?
>> I I thank you.
>> Okay.
>> Uh medical records have just uh taken
occur to different specialists.
Um, I I had to fight really hard. I I
got help through my family to to get her
in front of the oncologist when it
wasn't really even
part of her network. Uh, again, because
she was on the HMO and he agreed to see
her. We had an initial consultation to
go over her her labs, her vitals, and he had made some recommendations and
really it became clear to me that we
needed to get her out of the HMO
to get her quality care. So I would say
other than trying to get her to see
specialists through um through the
general practitioner of the HMO, part of
that toward the end of the year was
trying to figure out a way to get her
onto at least a PO plan to give her some
flexibility.
And um we ended up succeeding [laughter]
toward the end of the year. Um I think
in the the Novemberish time frame
there's
Yeah, there's we're skipping to
attachments for again the politics of
the pages on but um
we've worked the USA angle because my
father did serve time in the military.
So we had a discussion with them and
they approved getting her off to a PO
plan that they would support and we were really optimistic.
You know, I think you can focus in more
on
>> I think that
uh one of the main issues is were you a
resident of the property
on the date of uh death or within one
year. So if you can focus in on your
evidence that would support you said
there was some type of a clerical
ministerial error
>> in the data.
>> Yeah. So, if you want to focus in on
that,
>> um, and also anything that you have that
establishes
your residency within that one year of
when you lost her.
>> Okay.
>> So, so I guess this is a good time to
ask my question. Um, is is that the only
issue is the
>> primary residence
>> the primary residence within one year of
the transfer date?
>> That is Yeah, that is the only issue.
>> Okay. And if there's nothing else that
would be
other than the the one year that would
be considered in determining the
eligibility for the reassessment.
>> Yes, I believe that's it.
>> Okay,
» thank you for steering me straight.
So I I guess going back to exhibit A
then there there are looking at the
lights
history
>> tracking up to the the date of transfer
there there were 292 days they spent in
the area. I mean,
there's no way to to verify that I was
at the house during that entire time,
but there would be no reason for me to fly back to San Francisco. And I I
think the medical evidence that I was
maybe getting a bit too deep into. I
wanted to use that to kind of overlay on
the dates that I was here to provide
evidence.
Yes, I I was here transporting my
mother. Right.
>> Right.
» Uh moving on to exhibit B. These are
just a bunch of redacted
bank statements, but what's been
highlighted is just evidence that I was
here paying to
buy groceries gas station. Um, in
addition to taking care of my mother, I
take care of the house as well. So,
there's some legal again. So this
they're just pages of different periods
of time during the period that I'm
mentioning 2020 22 passing through
transfer provide evidence that are
physically exposed to
and I guess that leads on to a tendon.
So
one thing I or a few things I wanted to
kind of clarify based on the original
field that was submitted
is the optics of the the flight travel
and I just wanted to reiterate that my
flight here was
because of this
similar medical crisis with my mother. I
intentionally chosen to be with her to
help support her. Um, luckily my
employment allowed opportunity to work
remotely. We were very flexible with
that to that uh allowed me to continue
my work with them and then to support
her uh the to commit as much time. They
were very flexible with understanding
the situation
to take the time that I needed to make
sure that she was seen her getting the care that she needed when she needed
and see her special needs.
Um,
moving on to
day one in the addendum. So
the fact that the utilities to the camera,
we've kept those in my mother's name. Um
this one in particular, you see this was
in the name my father and um she had
just kept it in his name since he
passed. Uh so I think from the utility
standpoint
maybe it's my own opinion
know the convenience you were still
paying a bit. So just to make sure things are are square,
uh we've started making efforts now that
the the administration of trust is
mostly settled. Uh just making sure that
all paperwork is lining up to to be in
my name. So utilities
are all or in the process of being
transitional to my name as mentioned
tax filings
from 2025.
they are in names
and um I can also
u
change the driver's license address and
to the cabinet address
and then change the voter registration
that that's still pending but that is
all moving to
moving
forward to
establish based on what we discussed or
what was discussed as per law in the
first document to why that the camera's
residence is near.
I believe that's all I have.
>> All right. Okay. To the assessor, uh
it's your opportunity for
cross-examination. Would you proceed?
>> Yes. Uh, a couple questions. So, on the homeowners exemption form, claim
form and the Proposition 19 parent to
child form that you filled out for us.
Uh, now, did you fill those out?
>> We were working with our trust attorney
at the time.
>> Okay. So, your trust attorney filled it
out.
>> We were working through them and they
have they submitted the paperwork on our
behalf.
>> Okay. [laughter]
Why do you know why the May 5th, 2025
date was entered as the move in date?
>> There was some discussion with the
attorney of that date and that was it
was decided to be the format back then.
>> Okay.
So
would I was just trying I don't know if
I quite got the answer. I was just
trying to get the clarification of what
was the error that caused that May 5th
date to be there.
>> I would say that
we
are
that date
was based on
wish I had a copy of it but there was a
uh
>> a copy. Oh, okay. There was a form that
I submitted with San Francisco County to
inform them that my address was
changing. And this was something that
came up that the attorney had
recommended that I update to change to
say that I'm no longer a San Francisco
resident as my primary. I remember
submitting that form and I believe the
date that that 5525 date was the date
that I submit that form. So from my my
point of view or from my understanding
that that was the date that I
>> Yeah, that that's the the background for
that genesis.
>> Okay. And I did have a question about
the 2023 and 2024 tax returns. If Camaro was your primary residence,
why did those reflect the San Francisco
was the primary resident like primary
county?
>> Sure. Uh I mean I was I was still
dealing with what had happened to my
mother.
There were things we need to take care
of the trust. I I would just frame that
as administrative lag. I the San
Francisco address. I'm the majority
owner, but my partner, she lives there.
That's her permanent home. So, it was a
safe address for me to use that I didn't
have to think about.
>> Okay. And I'm assuming you
So, prior to the move, you worked and
lived in San Francisco, right?
>> And
when did when did you notify work that
your primary residence had changed?
Uh because I'm a remote employee, I
don't necessarily have I I have not
updated that.
>> Oh, you still have an update. Oh, sorry.
Um
Oh, my last question is
I I was I was looking at your bank
statements here briefly. I was looking
at the dates that occurred after June
8th, 2023.
I noticed
there are some Camaro
locations, but it's also intermixed with
San Francisco
as well as various other locations in
Southern California. So, and I guess
this also ties to the bank, I'm sorry,
the uh flight records. Um why if your
primary residence had changed and your
and you're able to work remotely, right?
Um, why were you continuing to go back
to San [clears throat] Francisco for it
looks like roughly two years? You kept
habitually returning to San Francisco.
>> So, I would have to go back to San
Francisco for work engagements
periodically. Um,
I would also have to say that based on
my experience with my my mother, there's no reason that I would give up
in the
my physician, my dental health, my
optometrist, the care that I'm getting
up there to drink it down here. So, I
would go back to school as well.
>> Oh, okay. So you're returning for work
as as well as healthcare. Okay. Um I
don't further questions see questions.
» Yeah, that's all the questions we have.
>> Oh, okay. Um, so tell me this. Um,
on your attachment A1,
um, where you have your arrival date and
return dates,
um, and and one column says primary
evidence flight to back it up. Um, how
many days
cumulatively
um, were there between 6823
and
excuse me, June 8th, 2024
and May 5th, 2025.
Excuse me. Excuse me. I'm so sorry. How
many cumulative days were there between
when you lost your mother
on in 2023 to the one year
uh time frame after that June 8th of
2024? How many cumulative days were
there during that period of time?
I think just looking at the cumulative
dates here. All I'm doing is tracking
the the cumulative because it's a
aggregated column. I'm just taking
>> you have 649 there. But that starts
before you lost your mother.
>> It's 696 [laughter]
minus 292, right?
>> Okay. What do you get approximately?
That's 204 days.
>> 204 days you were staying
>> and a year is 365,
>> right? 204. Okay. Now, um so it was 204
cumulative
during that one-year period that you had
were there. Now, um after June 8th,
2024,
um
until you took ownership from your
uh sibling,
which was
71625.
>> Yes.
>> Did Did you live there then?
>> Yes.
continue to be resident in the Cumbria.
I need to take care of.
>> So,
um are you stating that your residency
began
um
for sake of discussion for this for this
purpose? Um
when you lost your mom within a year
when you lost your mother?
>> No, I'm I'm stating that I was already I
made the decision to to move there.
>> Yeah. a year before.
>> So it was actually you're saying before.
>> Yeah. So but you're saying also that
therefore within that one year you stay
you were there. Did you continue to uh
ha have that as your
uh primary place of residence thereafter
continuously or did it did it stop and
>> it's been
>> Oh it's been continuous.
>> Yes. as far as physical precedents.
Yeah, obviously not the the tax
property.
>> Okay. So
then
from
June 8th to 2024,
do you have from June 8th, 2024 until
the date you uh took ownership uh from your sibling your siblings
ownership portion?
Have you any idea how many cumulative
days you were there during that period?
>> I think we can use the same table to say
this is approximately 68 2024, right? So
that's
and then we're talking about July the
164
>> to July. Yeah.
So that was two two years almost 700
over 700
» days
>> and that is 191 days before you were
>> you you were there 191 days.
So during that second period there after
the one year you weren't there
for the greater portion of time you were
back in San Francisco. Is that right?
>> For what period are we talking about
right now?
>> Talking about after that one year after
you lost your mother
until you took ownership.
It sounds like the number of days that
you're stating it's 19. You said 191
days.
>> Uh 191 from 2025 to 2024.
>> Okay. So, but that period of time would
have over 700 days in it, right? Two
years.
>> Over two years.
>> We're we're looking at the difference
between
specific years, right? That the days.
>> Yeah.
>> Right.
>> Okay. So the number of days that
accumulated from
>> June 24th June 8th 2024
until when you took ownership
with from your siblings 50%.
>> Yes.
>> How many how many days in that not
cumulative from the beginning of your
chart but how many days during that
period
>> that was the roughly 191
>> 191. That's cool. But then that period
of time is over 700 days. Correct.
It's over two years
>> if we're talking about the start being
>> No, I'm talking about
uh after June 8th, 2024,
right? To the date you took ownership,
which was 2025. Excuse me. That was like
365 days, would you say? About
>> sure.
>> 24 365. So you you were there 191 days
uh during that period of time.
>> Correct.
>> Right. So that's a little bit um what
percentage would you say that is of the
per that period of time?
>> 23.
>> Twothirds of the time.
>> 2/3.
Okay.
I I don't have any other questions.
Um,
does does the assessor have any other
questions or any other
>> I just a quick follow up to the math you
were just speaking to is about
>> 52%.
>> Yes.
>> How did How did you mathematically do
that?
>> I did the 190.
>> You used 191.
>> Oh, 191. Uh, [clears throat] I did 190.
My apologies.
>> That's okay. That's close enough.
>> Um, so I just did that divided by 365.
Uh, and that comes Yeah, it still comes
out to about 52% of the year.
>> 52%.
Okay.
>> Okay. Thank you.
>> All right. Um, let's see here.
Just just a matter of clarification for
the assessor. Um then
if they file the homeowners exclusion
after one year
then am I correct um in your
understanding and I'm going to ask you
also that the rule allows the homeowners
exclusion to be um
available prospectively but is that
providing that they uh took residency
within the one year?
>> Yes, that is the requirement they have
to
>> Okay. Yeah. Okay. So, they have Okay,
got it. Okay. to add to add to that role
play. If based on the evidence the
hearing officer Cohen were to grant the
exclusion then according to prop 19 it
would be based on the date of filing
which is July 21st 2025. So
perspectively
the earliest prop 19 can be applied as
1125.
>> Okay
>> just for added clarification.
>> Okay. Okay. Well, let's see. Then it's
time for closing arguments
and the party that has the
uh burden of proof presents their
closing arguments last.
>> So, the assessor accept the burden. So,
>> Okay. So, it's time for your closing
arguments. So, it's time for you to
explain why your evidence
uh would outweigh the assessor's
evidence and make you entitled to the uh
parent child exclusion.
So in
I think in in retrospect
um we were trusting the trust attorney that
we were working with to be guiding us
and doing the right thing. So we had no
questions when those were submitted and
we were
really expecting that the prop 19 was we
were very shocked to find that it was
after it was rejected and the reason and
it was at that time the more I looked
into it I saw the need
that they just
that made any sense to even submit the
form.
Um
I feel that I
have provided evidence of my physical
presence at the Camaro home uh
throughout taking care of my mother
through natur taking care of the house.
Um, I understand that there are legal
uh
definitions
of what qualifies
and
I I guess I felt that there was
some flexibility in time to establish
those. That is the the reason for the
administrative lag. It was not made
apparent to me uh at the time when we
were having discussions with the trust
attorney about executing or working
toward Prop 19.
I would in retrospect think that those
would have come up. They did not.
So, I've done my best to to correct that
to make sure that at least at at this
point on paper that everything is square
with the county. Um but my primary
residence is I think that is
for land.
>> Okay. Assessor please.
» Um I feel like uh through this
presentation that I provided I
demonstrated that the California law
requires principal residency established
within a year of the change in
ownership. And it even provides us with
documents that we can accept to prove
this after the fact if we don't receive
a timely homeowners exemption. And just
due to none of those document, none of
the official documents being provided
and
uh documents where a legal professional
was consulted provided by the applicant
support this uh a move in date that is
too late to qualify for the exemption.
that that is what uh the assessor's
office has to use to establish uh
whether they qualify for a exclusion and
change of ownership and uh we can't
grant that with the documentation
[clears throat] provided.
>> I'll I'll add a little bit. Um I'll just
speak from the two annotations that we
that are in our presentation that deal
with principal residents. Um, I'll
reiterate it's a it states it's a
question of fact. It's a person's true
fixed permanent home and principal
establishment which he or she whenever
absent intends to return. Um, so
it also states the documents we've
already mentioned uh vehicle
registration, voter registration, bank
accounts, state income tax filings
um and driver's license.
uh in reviewing the flight
pattern that's not necessarily part of
the documentation, but um it does
contain both residences, San Francisco
and Camaro. We find that um not
definitive proof. He did habitually
returning to a San Francisco address. Uh
the bank accounts that we also found
were not definitive as well because you
do see both locations showing up. Camrio
and San Francisco are on the bank
accounts as well. So we did not find
that as definitive proof. The one thing
we saw that was definitive in our book
was the uh state income tax filings
where 23 and 24 both reported San
Francisco as the primary residence
county and then 25 is the first year we
see Ventur County show up. Also, the
typical
um the typical measures people take when
changing primary residences appear to
all have occurred at 2025 as far as
changing mailing addresses, notifying
your place of work, bank account, any
all those other normal items that people
update their
uh primary residence. Based on the
testimony today, it sounded like all
that began occurring in 2025 and is
still occurring today. So, based on the
totality of evidence, we didn't have
enough evidence to show primary
residence uh within one year of the
changing.
Thank you.
>> Okay, good. [clears throat]
And that's going to close this case and
um I can give you a decision now. Um it you know it was very both parties
presented uh very good cases and it is
not an easy decision but as the property
tax rules and the annotations state it's
a factual determination on I'm the
finder of fact here. Um and one thing I
do want to say is that um the
my understanding is is that
uh once the exclusion is granted if it
is granted based upon the uh residency
or the homeowner's exclusion
uh then if um if there's a change in
that where the child who received the
exclusion no longer is staying or living
at the family home as their principal
residence then at that time the
exclusion can be removed and should be
by law. So it has to be the uh physical
place of residence during the whole time
that the exclusion is granted. But as
far as granting the exclusion, um I
believe that the homeowners exclusion
should be granted.
Uh I mean the uh parent child exclusion
should be granted and that's based on
the physical president presence evidence
that's been u presented today by the
applicant.
um and and moreover more the number of
days that he was in the residence within
one year of the date of death of his
mother. Um so based upon my factf
finding and the preponderance of the
evidence the credibility of the
testifying applicant um just to
reiterate the exclusion shall be granted
the parent child exclusion.
» Thank you Cargus.
And so it's with that being said, um do
we still need a evaluation hearing for
the next one if if the
applicants 19 will be approved?
>> Yeah. So um
I don't believe evaluation hearing would
be necessary since we're granting it. it
would be 100% granted and therefore the
uh June 8th 2023 date would no longer
need a reassessment.
>> Okay. So we can cancel the the tovoid
having you come back in in uh October or
on the record cancel the the uh
bifurcated hearing for October 26 2026.
>> Okay.
And that's that's the end of the agenda.
>> That concludes the hearing. can journ at
any F101.
>> This hearing is now a journal
for free.