Ms. Tate also attempted to
compare the subject property’s assessment to the assessment of a home located
at 513 N. Kettner Drive. To effectively use any kind of comparison approach to
value a property, one must show that the properties at issue are truly
comparable. … Although Ms. Tate testified that the subject home and the
neighboring home at 513 N. Kettner are roughly the same age and have similar
wood siding and older windows, she did little else to compare the two
properties. And she did nothing to address how any relevant differences between
the properties affected their relative values. Thus, the neighboring property’s
assessment has no probative value.
Finally, Ms. Tate claimed that
the subject property was assessed too high in light of the home’s deteriorated
condition. While that deterioration might affect the property’s value, the
Tates offered no probative evidence to quantify that effect or to otherwise
show how the deterioration supports any particular value range for the
property. Ms. Tate’s testimony about the subject home’s condition therefore
does not suffice to make a prima facie case for reducing the subject property’s
assessment."
