Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Commercial Property Valuations topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Bannock County upholds assessment on Pocatello office building after owner argues income approach warrants lower value

5322910 · July 7, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Owner of a Pocatello office building argued the property’s income potential supports a lower assessed value; the Bannock County Board of Equalization voted to uphold the assessor’s valuation based on the county's cost approach.

At a Bannock County Board of Equalization hearing on Monday in June, the board voted to uphold the assessor’s valuation for a Pocatello commercial building (ParcelRPRPSVS000200) after the owner, Braden Driscoll of Driscoll Investments LLC, presented an income-based appeal.

Driscoll told commissioners he bought the building in February 2017 and said rental income declined when a prior tenant left and the building sat vacant for about nine months. He told the board that a current rent of about $5,000 per month (roughly $19.70 per square foot) and market trends for office income led him to believe a market value nearer $560,000 was more realistic.

The Bannock County assessor’s office replied that its valuation relied primarily on the cost approach — calculating replacement cost minus depreciation — and that, while the appellant’s income figures showed some downward pressure, the assessor’s office found the current income and rates at the upper end of observed local office-space market rates and therefore recommended upholding the value.

Commissioners said they had little comparable income evidence from the appellant and that the parcel’s prior assessed values had lagged market increases through 2019 and then “caught up” over the last two years. After deliberation a motion to uphold the assessor’s value passed; the board recorded the decision and said the appellant will receive a letter with appeal instructions (district court or state board of appeals).

What was on the record: Driscoll said he believed a sale price or assessed value closer to $560,000 would reflect income potential; the assessor explained the office used cost and depreciation methods and saw no basis in the provided income information to change the assessment.

Next steps: The appellant was advised of formal appeal options and will receive a written decision.