Hernando County special magistrate hears three Suncoast Crossing property valuation appeals

Colleen Millet, special magistrate, presided by telephone over hearings on three property tax petitions for parcels at Suncoast Crossing in Brooksville on Nov. 21, 2025. Representatives from the Hernando County Property Appraiser's Office, including Daniel Scott (and Kimberly Hebert's name was read into the record), presented valuation reports; petitioner Russell Payne challenged those assessments and argued the parcels should be treated as a single economic unit.

Daniel Scott told the magistrate that for petition 25-391 the office’s just, assessed and taxable values were all set at $1,721,228 and summarized the packet of evidence, including zoning (PDPGC), aerials, comparable land sales and Marshall & Swift cost pages. ‘‘For petition 2025Dash391, the just assessed and taxable values are all the same at $1,721,228,’’ Scott said as he described the land and improvement measurements and the appraiser’s adjustments.

Petitioner Russell Payne said his client views the three sites as one economic unit and provided an income analysis for all three combined. Payne reported ‘‘total revenue for all 3 is $457,005.54’’ and said he applied a ‘‘low cap rate of 6 and a half’’ to reach a combined valuation of about $4,000,000 for the three parcels. Payne asked the magistrate to consider allocating prices across the three parcels on that basis.

Scott responded that the appraiser’s office had not received updated income statements for all parcels in time for the January 1, 2025 valuation, and that one tenant had not been in place long enough for the office to rely on an income approach for that parcel. He said one parcel was valued on a cost approach while another used older income data and the McDonald’s parcel was also cost-valued. Scott summarized method-specific results shown in the packets (examples include land-sales-based and cost-approach estimates that differ from the office’s stated assessed values).

For petition 25-392 (the north shops), Scott said the packet showed a just, assessed and taxable value of $1,110,316, and he described land sales that produced an unadjusted land figure of $5,037,540 and a post–15%-cost-of-sale land value shown in the packet as $4,281,909; a cost approach in the file produced a $3,302,847 estimate.

For petition 25-393 (the McDonald’s at 15050 Spring Hill Drive), Scott reported a just value of $2,321,207 and an assessed/taxable value of $1,884,318. He told the magistrate the appraisers used comparable-sale adjustments, arriving at a mean adjusted value of about $3,360,246 and, after a 15% cost-of-sale adjustment in the packet, $2,856,209. When Magistrate Millet asked about time adjustments, Scott said the appraisers applied a 3% per-year market increase in their grid.

Magistrate Millet said she would review the submitted materials and evaluate relevance and credibility before making a recommendation to the Value Adjustment Board within the next couple of weeks. No formal action or vote took place during the telephonic hearing; the magistrate closed the record for these petitions.

What happens next: The special magistrate will issue a recommendation to the Value Adjustment Board based on the record; the board will consider that recommendation in its process. The hearing record reflects competing valuation methods (income, cost and sales comparison) and a petitioner request to value three parcels as one economic unit, which the magistrate said she will weigh in her recommendation.