Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Valuation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Assessor urges board to sustain $183 million enrollment for Camarillo greenhouse, citing Measure O premium
Summary
Ventura County Assessor testified that the passage of Measure O and market evidence of premiums for cannabis‑eligible greenhouses support sustaining the enrolled base‑year value (about $183.2 million) for the GH Camarillo property; the office presented two cost‑approach analyses and profit/obsolescence extraction.
The Ventura County Assessor’s Office presented valuation testimony on Dec. 15, 2025, urging the Assessment Appeals Board to sustain an enrolled base‑year value of approximately $183.2 million for the GH Camarillo greenhouse complex (GH Camarillo LLC/Glasshouse Brands).
Assessor witnesses described the 159.7‑acre property at 645 Luduna Road as one of the nation’s largest greenhouse complexes, with roughly 125 acres of greenhouse structures, on‑site power and water systems, packing and cold storage facilities. Ben Phelps, the assessor’s appraiser, explained that Measure O (approved by Ventura County voters on Nov. 3, 2020) created narrow eligibility for greenhouse cannabis cultivation and that eligible greenhouse land appears to trade at a premium because the supply of eligible sites is limited.
Because the subject property is large, specialized and became eligible for cannabis cultivation after Measure O, the office said typical sales‑comparison and income methods are unreliable; instead the assessor used two iterations of the cost approach: (1) a land‑extraction/cost approach that allocated measure‑O value to both land and improvements; and (2) a cross‑check iteration using nearby non‑eligible land with a profit/obsolescence adjustment to quantify market premium. The assessor reported reviewing company financial statements, investor call transcripts, tax returns and deed information to inform cash‑equivalency and total‑consideration analyses.
The assessor also presented comparables, a land‑extraction grid and a market‑derived profit analysis; the office applied a conservative profit adjustment (50%) in one iteration to capture the observed market premium for cannabis‑eligible greenhouses. After weighing both cost approaches and the available market evidence, the assessor concluded the enrolled base‑year value of about $183.2 million was supported and asked the board to sustain that enrollment.
The assessor’s conclusion was contested by the applicant’s appraiser and counsel during cross‑examination and in rebuttal. The board did not make a final valuation determination during the hearing; it set deadlines for written proposed findings and replies to be exchanged before the board issues a written decision.
