Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Assessment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Marshall County hearing proceeds on two Plymouth property-assessment appeals after petitioner does not appear
Summary
At an Nov. 18 administrative hearing in Marshall County, assessor’s staff presented income-based valuations for two rental properties in Plymouth after petitioner Karen Cox (D and K Cox LLC) failed to appear; the board proceeded with testimony and recorded no final decision in the transcript.
Marshall County held an administrative hearing on Nov. 18, 2025, to review two property-assessment appeals for Plymouth addresses after the petitioner, Karen Cox of D and K Cox LLC, did not appear.
Phil Ohlinger, identified in the record as a member of the Marshall County hearing board, opened the session and confirmed that the proceedings were being recorded and conducted pursuant to IC 6-1.1. The two appeals under review were appeal 50019250500023 for 422 North Center Street and appeal 50019250500026 for 115 West Jefferson Street; the assessment year under appeal was 2025.
The petitioner was absent. The board stated that Cox had been sent notice for a 1:15 p.m. hearing, had not requested a reschedule by 1:30 p.m., and the notice was not returned as undeliverable. "We will move forward with this hearing in the absence of the petitioner," the board stated.
Peter Paul Edlery, identified on the record as representing the Marshall County assessor’s office, gave testimony for both appeals. For 115 West Jefferson, a duplex, Edlery said the county’s 2025 assessed value is $133,200 while the petitioner listed $107,400 as the requested value. The assessor’s office told the board it used three valuation approaches and selected the income approach as the lowest at $133,200; the comparison approach was described as near $200,000 and the record contains an unclear figure described as the "cost" approach.
On the appeal for 422 North Center, a single-family dwelling across the street from the hearing location, the assessor reported a 2025 assessment of $113,600 and said the petitioner sought $82,200. Edlery described the house as an older, historic home in "less than average" condition that is currently occupied as a rental with the same tenant for several years. The assessor said, based on rents and the office’s approaches, the $113,600 figure reflects the income approach being the lowest-of-three result; the record also includes a reference to "about 160,000" as a comparative bank/home value figure.
Board member Angie Snyder asked no follow-up questions that appear in the transcript. County staff said they had previous contact with Cox in prior years and had emailed her this year; they did not report holding an informal hearing for these specific appeals this year. The transcript ends with the board indicating the proceedings would be concluded; no adjudicated decision or vote on either appeal is recorded in the provided record.
Because the transcript contains some numerical and transcription ambiguities (notably an unclear "cost" figure discussed for the 115 West Jefferson valuation), the record does not provide a complete, unambiguous set of alternative valuation numbers from the petitioner. Any final rulings or written decisions should be sought from the Marshall County office that issued the hearing notice.
