Hernando County magistrate hears a slate of Spring Hill property-value appeals; decisions to follow

Hernando County Special Magistrate Colleen Millett convened a telephonic hearing on Dec. 19, 2025, to consider a docket of property-value petitions from Spring Hill homeowners, hearing presentations and rebuttals from the property appraiser’s office and petitioner Patrick Rodriguez.

The hearing covered multiple parcels (including 12205 Ronald Street, 6238 Dorset Road, 6104 Kenlock Avenue, 9241 Sanborn Street, 2449 Allegro Avenue and 10485 Lightwood Street). For each petition the property appraiser’s office presented a packet with sales-comparison data and recommended just values; petitioners offered alternative sales analyses and opinions of value. The magistrate repeatedly told parties she would weigh the record and issue written recommendations within the next couple of weeks.

On 12205 Ronald Street, the appraiser’s packet listed a 2025 just value of $261,949 and an assessed/taxable value of $237,629; petitioner Patrick Rodriguez presented a sales-grid opinion of value at $243,000. The appraiser’s office rebutted that top comparables had condition issues (a flip) and that one comparable was a repaired sinkhole, which it argued reduced their relevance. “We have demonstrated that we have the preponderance of evidence that the subject’s value represents just value,” a representative of the property appraiser’s office said during its presentation.

At 6238 Dorset Road the appraiser listed a just/assessed/taxable value of $331,788; the petitioner offered an analysis using six comparables and an opinion near $305,000. The appraiser’s office again noted that several comparables used by the petitioner were repaired sinkholes or had effective-year or size differences that required adjustment.

For 9241 Sanborn Street the petitioner amended his initial opinion and said he would place greater weight on two nearer, more similar sales, revising an earlier figure to an asserted opinion of $340,000. The appraiser’s office supplied several factual corrections in its rebuttal — including corrected improved-size and effective-year listings for several comparables — and reiterated concerns about using repaired sinkhole properties as direct comparables.

On 10485 Lightwood Street the petitioner emphasized the subject’s recent sale — April 2024 for $200,000 — and relied on that sale as the strongest market indicator; he then amended his opinion of value to the sale’s adjusted figure of $172,177. The appraiser’s office pointed out discrepancies in the petitioner's improvement-size reporting and noted one comparable sold twice in 2024 to investors, which the office said raised condition/marketability questions for that sale.

Throughout the hearing the magistrate administered the oath to witnesses, received appraiser and petitioner packets into evidence, heard oral presentations and rebuttals, and confirmed that all parties consented to a telephone hearing. When calling the property appraiser's office to state names for the record, the record lists the names Brandon Jimenez and Doug Mack; the transcript does not clearly link every rebuttal line to those individual names, so this article attributes those remarks to "the property appraiser’s office representative" where the record does not identify which named staff spoke.

No formal decision or vote was announced at the hearing. Colleen Millett said she will consider the evidence presented on the record and issue a recommendation in the next couple of weeks, concluding the docket for Dec. 19, 2025.