Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Contested Parcels topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board upholds assessor valuations on several larger contested parcels, citing missing taxpayer evidence
Summary
For several larger contested parcels — including four Lincoln buildings, an older downtown hotel and two car washes — the board favored assessor adjustments over taxpayer reductions, noting missing or outdated owner documentation and absence of income data in valuations.
During the May 15 special session, board members singled out several larger contested parcels for deeper discussion and then set fair market values after weighing assessor analyses and taxpayer submissions.
Lincoln buildings (BOE 121–122): The assessor revised a prior figure downward to $1,780,000 after adjusting vacancy assumptions (the assessor changed the vacancy rate to 40%). Board members said the assessor’s updated vacancy assumption and market evidence supported the reduced figure and voted to set value at $1,780,000.
Former Tiffany hotel (BOE 127): The assessor had earlier lowered its valuation from about $12.1 million to $10.5 million; members cited outdated backup documents (some reports dated to 2020), ongoing litigation and building maintenance issues (HVAC, elevator repairs) as reasons to accept the assessor’s $10,500,000 valuation. A motion to set that figure passed.
Car washes (BOE 128): The assessor valued two car washes at roughly $2,056,480; the property owner proposed a lower figure near $1,096,074. Board members emphasized that valuations for car washes hinge on car‑count and income data, which the owner did not provide; citing the lack of income documentation, the board adopted the assessor’s higher figure for the parcels and approved the motion.
Other contested parcels: The board also addressed BOE 129, where the assessor’s $2,326,349 figure prevailed over an owner proposal of $1,425,000 amid discussion about prior sales and depreciation claims. In each case members noted where taxpayer provided evidence was dated or incomplete; when documentation was current and complete, members indicated they would weigh that information in future appeals.
Next steps: The board closed the session after voting on the remaining items and asked the assessor’s office to update records and publish the adopted values. Taxpayers retain appeal rights under the standard administrative process.
