Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Valuation Standards topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board allows time for MAI appraisal after contentious mezzanine valuation dispute
Summary
After debate over how Forest River mezzanines are valued, the Elkhart County appeals board denied a short extension but later authorized time for the parties to jointly retain an MAI appraiser and return with written conclusions; the county offered to split appraisal costs.
The Elkhart County Property Tax Assessment Board of Appeals spent substantial time on appeals involving Forest River properties on March 17, focusing on how mezzanines are valued for tax assessment purposes. Petitioner representative David (Forest River’s tax representative) argued that current county practice overvalues mezzanines, contending the components should be treated differently for depreciation and possibly as personal property under federal classifications. He told the board he had gathered cost data and appraiser input suggesting current assessment pricing for mezzanines is too high.
County representatives said Indiana law requires review of the entire assessment, not just an isolated component, and that a reliable market analysis requires correct nonsubjective data (measurements, presence of septic, etc.) and, in some cases, field verification. The assessor’s office emphasized it will apply corrections uniformly and highlighted that data changes can permit corrections going back the statutory period when substantiated.
The petitioner asked for a 30‑day extension to meet with the county and develop supporting evidence; the board initially voted 3–1 to deny that short extension. After further discussion, the county offered to split the cost of a certified general (MAI) appraisal with Forest River and to agree on an appraiser acceptable to both parties. The board then approved a motion to allow additional time (the board discussed a 90‑day window) for the parties to engage an agreed-upon MAI appraiser, produce written briefs and either settle or return the appraisal results for the board’s review.
The county said it would uniformly apply any discovery that generated a change; the petitioner said an appraisal and further meetings could clarify whether mezzanines should be priced as separate line items or treated differently for depreciation. The board recorded that the parties should exchange agreed documentation and return with written conclusions; no final change to assessments was made at the hearing.
Next steps: parties may engage a jointly agreed MAI appraiser, split costs if they so agree, and submit written findings for the board’s consideration. The board will not rule on final market values until it receives and reviews the requested materials.
