Turning to the case at hand the subject property’s record card
shows that the county or township assessor had assessed the property for only
$208,900 on March 1, 2007. The PTABOA, however, determined the property’s March
1, 2008, assessment at $604,100, an increase of well more than 5%. The Assessor
therefore had the burden of proving that the subject property’s March 1, 2008,
assessment was correct.
…
The Assessor did little to show the subject property’s market
value-in-use. She primarily relied on the sale prices of three nearby
properties that sold between 2005 and 2007. The Assessor’s witness, Ms.
Olinger, showed that the three properties were located near the subject
property. But she did not meaningfully compare the properties in terms of any other
characteristics that would tend to affect their relative market values-in-use See
Long v. Wayne Twp. Assessor, 821 N.E.2d 466, 471-72 (Ind. Tax Ct. 2005) (holding
that sales data lacked probative value where taxpayers failed to explain how
the characteristics of their property compared to the characteristics of
purportedly comparable properties or how any differences between the properties
affected their relative market values-in-use). Thus, the Assessor’s sales data
lacks probative value.
Ms. Olinger also ... pointed to the fact that the PTABOA
applied negative influence factors to the subject land to account for various
things that affect its value. But she offered nothing to show how the PTABOA
quantified those influence factors, much less to show that, once applied, those
factors brought the property’s assessment in line with its market value-in-use.
Because the Assessor did not offer probative evidence to
support the subject property’s assessment, she failed to meet her burden of
proof. Ordinarily, that would require that the property’s March 1, 2008
assessment be reduced to the previous year’s level of $208,900. But the Drivers
requested an assessment of $265,300 based on Mr. Schnepf’s appraisal. Under
those circumstances, the Board will not reduce the subject property’s
assessment below that amount.
