Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Multifamily Assessment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Antioch senior apartments: county and owner debate appraisals and vacancy treatment
Summary
Appellant and county gave different unit-per-unit valuations and differed on vacancy and personal property deductions; county cited multiple appraisals and trip data indicating higher per-unit values and lower cap rates.
An appeal over the Antioch senior apartments focused on per-unit valuation, vacancy assumptions and reliance on appraisals the county says support a higher valuation than the owner’s submission.
Why it matters: Differences in per-unit values and cap-rate assumptions change assessed values across multifamily portfolios, affecting tax bills and market comparisons for similar properties.
At the hearing the property’s representative asked the board to accept a valuation based on a loaded cap rate of 7.53 and a 2% personal property deduction, producing a requested value of roughly $11,000,009. The representative acknowledged they had not included vacancy in the computer calculation and said the property’s actual occupancy was approximately 94.78 percent (five vacant units reported).
Mike Jacoby, identified in the transcript as Clay County assessment staff, told the panel the county had appraisals for comparable class A-minus and B-plus apartments and cited a 2019 appraisal for the subject property at $13,500,000 (appraised Oct. 30, 2019) and an average appraised per-unit figure of about $152,900 among recent appraisals. Jacoby said the county’s appraisals and trip data support a higher valuation and that the county usually uses a 1% personal property deduction rather than 2%.
Discussion: County staff objected that the appellant’s potential gross income (PGI) and the deductions for vacancy and ‘loss to lease’ were underreported in the materials submitted at the hearing and noted the appellant’s analysis was the first the county had seen at the meeting, limiting time for review. County staff recommended a no-change position locally and said the record suggested the owner should pursue the issue at the State Tax Commission if they wished to press differences tied to appraisals.
Decision and next steps: The county asked that the appellant present appraisals and rent-roll details for full review; the transcript records county staff urging a State Tax Commission hearing rather than altering the local assessment without time to examine the newly submitted material. No formal local vote to change valuation appears in the transcript.
Context and limits: The county cited several market appraisals and trip data spanning 2016–2023; the transcript shows disagreement about vacancy and the proper personal property deduction. This article describes only the recorded statements and figures given at the hearing.
