Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout930965.tiff (Ge e J t eria BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS STATE OF COLORADO Docket Number 19655 ORDER T BENNY CHAVEZ, Petitioner, vs. WELD COUNTY BOARD OF EQUALIZATION, Respondent. THIS MATTER was heard by the Board of Assessment Appeals on March 22 , 1993 , Don A. Holmes and Harry Fuller presiding. Petitioner, Benny Chavez, appeared pro se. Respondent was represented by Thomas David, Esq. FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. Subject property is described as follows: PT NW4 24 1 68 - 146724000077 - LOCATED AT 2900 W.C.R. #11 - WELD COUNTY SCHEDULE NUMBER R0024988 2 . Petitioner is protesting the 1992 actual value of the subject property, a five acre tract of land classified as residential . 3 . Petitioner is requesting an agriculture classification on this parcel . 4 . Petitioner stated he had a few calves which he kept on this property on and off through 1989, 1990 and 1991. There was no water on the subject property until 1992 . 5. Petitioner stated he allowed a third party to keep horses on the property, but they were only on the pasture for a short period of time. 1450O5 A I ! t O 1 ' e '330,65 Tell101n2 ' en, /is 6. Petitioner indicated he was raised in the area and has owned this property for 15 to 20 years, since there were no water rights for this property he has other land leased in the area that he grazes his cattle. 7 . Petitioner contends that the subject property should be classified as agriculture for tax year 1992. 8 . Respondent's witness, Phyllis Newby, stated they had inspected the subject property in August 1990 and determined the property seemed to be idle, another inspection was made in 1991 and there still appeared to be no agriculture use. 9. Respondent' s witness stated the subject property was inspected again after the protest in 1992 , and found some pleasure horses on the property. The subject property had no water on the property for livestock until 1992 . 10. The witness stated they will continue to work with the Petitioner so the property will be eligible for agriculture in the future. 11. Respondent assigned an actual value of $15, 330. 00 to the residential land for the subject property for tax year 1992 . CONCLUSIONS: 1. Petitioner presented insufficient probative evidence or testimony to prove that the Weld County Assessor improperly valued the subject property, in accordance with the Board' s Rule 14 . 2 . Further, the Assessor properly used the applicable state statutes and the Division of Property Taxation manuals and guidelines in valuing the subject property for tax year 1992 . 3 . After careful consideration of evidence and testimony presented, the Board determined the value assigned by the Respondent was proper. The subject property was not used as agriculture land in 1990, 1991, and 1992 . The Petitioner is now working to qualify the land as agriculture in the future. ORDER: The petition is denied. APPEAL: Petitioner may petition the Court of Appeals for judicial review within 45 days from the date of this decision. 19655.AP3 2 If Respondent alleges procedural errors or errors of law by this Board, Respondent may petition the Court of Appeals for judicial review within 30 days from the date of this decision. DATED this 47(0 ---day of April, 1993 . BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS co m a rr J. 1 er ,, so O A. C.c.' At ,SSESStatr Don A. Holmes This decision was put on the record APR 1 6 1993 I hereby certify that this is a true d correct cop of e d isio of t e Board o ss ssme Appeals. es R. Shar 9655.AP3 3 Hello