Ventura County appeals board continues dozens of property appeals to Aug. 4, sets data deadlines

The Ventura County Assessment Appeals Board No. 2 on April 28 continued the bulk of contested property tax appeals scheduled for the session, setting most for a consolidated hearing on Aug. 4, 2025, and repeatedly requiring that remaining evidence be submitted to the assessor at least 30 days before the new hearing date.

The board moved dozens of calendar items — commercial portfolios, chains of retail properties and multiple single‑family and multi‑parcel appeals — into the August calendar to allow the assessor time to review newly provided materials and to allow applicants to supply outstanding documentation. In several cases the board approved applicants’ requests to attend the August status hearing remotely; in most others in‑person attendance will be required if the case is not resolved before that date.

The moves affect properties owned by, among others, Westlake Portfolio LLC; Vons Companies Inc.; Albertsons LLC; North Shore Healthcare LLC; SHM Anacapa Isle LLC and SHM Ventura Isle LLC; and several individual residential appeals. The board also approved a number of amendment requests from agents and accepted stipulation agreements that remove cases from the calendar.

Board members said the goal was to clear a backlog of cases while giving the assessor’s office sufficient time to complete reviews. “I’m looking for a motion to continue to 08/04/2025 with data due to the assessor 30 days prior to the hearing date,” Chair Lunetta said repeatedly as the board processed grouped continuance requests.

What the continuances mean: most continuances were granted with the same condition — applicants must deliver outstanding data to the assessor no later than 30 days before Aug. 4, 2025. Where the assessor stated it already had the material or where the assessor specifically requested no data proviso, the board recorded that exception on the record. Several items (including one request tied to a pending court appeal about water rights) were continued to earlier dates that the assessor identified as adequate for management review (for example, June 2 for one matter involving water‑rights litigation).

Votes at a glance - Agenda review (items 69–70 etc.): motion to approve the agenda review; motion carried. - Items 8–10 (Westlake Portfolio LLC, applications 22‑10829 through 22‑10831): continued to 08/04/2025; data due to assessor 30 days prior; motion carried. - Items 61–66 (SHM Anacapa Isle LLC / SHM Ventura Isle LLC, applications 2211575–2211580): continued to 08/04/2025; 30‑day data proviso; motion carried. - Items 11–54 (Albertsons LLC and affiliated properties): continued to 08/04/2025 for a status hearing; applicant approved to attend remotely; 30‑day data proviso; motion carried. - Items 55–57 (North Shore Healthcare LLC): continued to 08/04/2025; 30‑day data proviso; motion carried. - Items 58–60 (O. Lakes LLC): assessor‑requested continuance to 08/04/2025; assessor said no data proviso required; motion carried. - Items 67–68 (1 Baxter Way, LP): continued to 08/04/2025 with 30‑day data proviso; applicant signed two‑year waiver to permit continuance; motion carried. - Item 71 (Petrie A. Williams): applicant present and placed under oath, agreed to sign a two‑year waiver; continued to 08/04/2025 with data due 30 days prior; motion carried. - Items 72–73 (Telegraph Road Ventura LLC / JLL representative): continued to 08/04/2025; applicant agreed to send two‑year waiver; motion carried. - Items 74–79 (T.O. Boulevard Partners LLC and related appeals): board approved applicant’s amendment requests; because the amendments triggered a 45‑day notice requirement, the board continued the matter to 08/04/2025 and required a 30‑day data proviso; motion carried. - Item 84 (application 2410179, Pari Safavi / Berkshire Hathaway representative): assessor requested a continuance for management review; board continued to 06/02/2025, no data proviso requested by assessor; motion carried. - Item 89 (application 2410317, Julia Wade trustee): assessor advised change of ownership/valuation options and recommended against proceeding with a change‑of‑ownership claim that could raise tax base; applicant asked for time to seek counsel and the board continued the case to 08/04/2025; motion carried. - Item 90 (Village at Moore Park): continued to 08/04/2025 with a 30‑day data proviso; motion carried. - Item 93: board approved removal from the agenda after a post‑agenda withdrawal was submitted; motion carried. - Item 94 (Simeon Zarbian): board vacated a prior denial for lack of appearance, received explanation from the co‑trustee and continued the matter to 10/20/2025 with a 30‑day data proviso; motion carried. - Item 95 (Ronlin LLC): board approved an amendment to add additional parcel numbers and continued to 08/04/2025 with a 30‑day data proviso; motion carried. - Target and Kohl’s (status hearing): assessor and applicant exchanged detailed requests; board continued status to 08/04/2025 with a 30‑day data proviso to allow document exchange and any field inspections; motion carried. - Stipulation agreements submitted in advance were approved by the board; motion carried.

Board procedure and next steps The board repeatedly reminded applicants that many continuances were conditioned on receiving requested documentation in the specific format the assessor requires (for example, signed tax returns rather than unsigned, fillable PDFs). The assessor’s office told the board it prefers evidence provided by applicants first but can pursue records from third parties (for example, Franchise Tax Board or court dockets) if an applicant cannot provide them; the office cautioned that those third‑party requests can take months to fulfill.

The clerk’s office instructed applicants to send written requests (for example, consolidation or amendment requests) to aabclerk@ventura.org so staff can confirm eligibility before the board acts. Several agents were told their previously filed emails should be re‑sent if there had been multiple threads to ensure staff capture the request.

Why it matters Continuances with 30‑day data provisos are intended to reduce contested hearings by encouraging stipulations and settlement before a contested presentation; they also concentrate contested matters on a single later date to allow the assessor to complete management reviews. For property owners and their representatives, the outcome affects whether cases will be resolved administratively (by stipulation) or require full hearings that can result in changes to taxable value.

Looking ahead The board’s next major calendar for these consolidated matters is Aug. 4, 2025, with some cases set for earlier dates at the assessor’s request. Applicants who expect to settle with the assessor were told to submit stipulations as soon as they are ready so the board can list those agreements without waiting for the August hearing.

Ending note Board members repeatedly encouraged applicants to cooperate with assessor requests for specific document formats and to use the clerk’s email for consolidation or amendment requests to ensure timely processing.