December 9, 2003

July 14, 2010

Antelope County Board of Equalization

Neligh, Nebraska

The Antelope County Board of Supervisor’s convened as a County Board of Equalization on Wednesday July 14, 2010 at 9:00 AM in the County Supervisor’s room, Antelope County Courthouse Annex, Neligh, Nebraska. Meeting called to order by Chairman Kerkman with the following board members responding to roll call: Brandt, Schwager, Erb, Henery and Kerkman. Schindler appeared later. Bolling absent. Antelope County Assessor Gene Schaaf was also present. Chairman Kerkman stated that the open meeting laws are posted on the east wall of the Supervisor’s room with more copies available at the County Clerk’s office.

Notice of the meeting was given in advance thereof by publication in the four county newspapers, legal newspapers printed and in general circulation in Antelope County, Nebraska as shown by proof of publication filed in the County Clerk’s office. Agenda for said meeting was sent to all members of the County Board of Supervisor’s.

Antelope County Assessor Gene Schaaf entered into the record on the part of the county the 2010 Report and Opinions from Property Assessment Division; Antelope County’s “what if” program; Antelope County’s GIS information, Antelope County’s TerraScan information and Antelope County’s sales file.

The following are the names of the persons who filed a property valuation protest, the parcel number and the action of the County Board of Equalization.

Edward and Elinor Richart Elinor Richart was present for the protest.

Parcel number 436901

Protest The increase in value nearly doubled in one year. This is unreasonable.

County Assessor’s recommendation Lowered land value to 18,970 due to land use change.

Total land value 18,970.

Michael J. Richart Michael J. Richart was present for the protest.

Parcel number 141900

Protest This property was bought on a tax sale for $350.00. It is half covered by trees. It tripled in value?

County Assessor’s recommendation Tax sale in 1999 just bought this parcel and adjoining parcel for 18,000 from parents 4-29-2010, land vacant lot sales for Oakdale attached. No change due to land valued according to market.

County Board action Protest reviewed with county assessor and protestor. No evidence submitted by protestor to support why parcel should be lowered. Motion by Schwager, seconded by Erb to accept the county assessor’s recommendation of no change due to land is valued according to market. Those voting aye: Erb, Henery and Kerkman. Nays: Schwager and Brandt. Schindler and Bolling absent. Motion died due to lack of majority of board. Motion by Henery, seconded by Schwager to lower the land value to 1800.00 – no reason stated. Those voting aye: Schwager, Brandt, Henery, Erb and Kerkman. Nays none. Schindler and Bolling absent. Motion carried. Total land value 1800.00

Edward and Elinor Richart Elinor Richart present for protest.

Parcel number 123200

Protest The land value increased almost 40% in one year.

County Assessor’s recommendation No change due to land valued according to market.

County Board action Protest reviewed with county assessor and protestor. No evidence submitted by protestor to support why parcel should be lowered. Motion by Schwager, seconded by Henery to accept the county assessor’s recommendation of no change due to land valued according to market. Those voting aye: Brandt, Schwager, Henery, Erb and Kerkman. Nays none. Schindler and Bolling absent. Motion carried. Land value 1000., building value 1255.; total land and building value 2255.

Edward H. and Elinor J. Richart Elinor Richart present for protest.

Parcel number 136500

Protest We paid 35,000.00 for this property 5 years ago. It is a modular home. It has not doubled in value!

County Assessor’s recommendation This was purchased at a foreclosure for ½ of current market value, 18 months before they purchased for 35,000 it was purchased for 71,196 and placed over a poured concrete basement.

County Board action Protest reviewed with county assessor and protestor. No evidence was submitted by protestor to support why parcel should be lowered. Motion by Schwager, seconded by Brandt to lower the building value to 45,865 due to condition. Those voting aye: Schwager, Erb, Henery, Brandt and Kerkman. Nays none. Schindler and Bolling absent. Motion carried. Land value 2730, building value 45,865; total land and building value 48,595.

James Meis No one appeared on behalf of protest.

Parcel number 192600

Protest House was built in 1999 – valuation was increased in 2008. Nothing has been altered since then. Our home was built in 1999 and was valuated at $91,475. A detached pole building was already in place with no foundation or insulation. We increased the size of that building in 2008 and the valuation increased to $106,225. We have not change the house in any way, i.e. still has unfinished basement, yet you increased the valuation an additional $23,755 this year. We are asking that you lower that figure back to the $106,225 as that is a reasonable figure. The records show that you have been assessing our house at regular intervals as was seen fit. This raise does not reflect any changes to warrant the increase. The house next to us recently sold for $25,000. Help us weather this down economy by lowering our valuation back to $106,225. Thank you.

County Assessor’s recommendation Inspected 6-16-10, lowered value to 115,435 – changed detached garage to pole building.

County Board action Protest reviewed with county assessor. Motion by Henery, seconded by Schwager to accept the county assessor’s recommendation to lower the building value to 115,435 due to changed from detached garage to pole building. Those voting aye: Henery, Brandt, Schwager, Erb and Kerkman. Nays none. Schindler and Bolling absent. Motion carried.

Total building value 115,435.

Andy D. and Loretta J. Frey Andy Frey appeared for protest.

Parcel number 349601

Protest There is no irrigation well on this land. Is currently irrigated from another well source. If the farm were sold as is would not bring as much as a farm with a well. Farm also has 34.35 acres of waste ground/trees not used for anything.

County Assessor’s recommendation No change due to land use update.

Michael J. and Lois A. Korth Michael J. Korth appeared for protest.

Parcel number 356500

Protest 1^st of all there is no irrigation well on this land. Is irrigated from another farm. If this land re-sold, would have to sell as dryland. Also, the 5 non farm acres of this farm are actually worth less, now than original purchase amount.

County Assessor’s recommendation Lower land value to 194,525 due to land use change.

Michael J. and Lois A. Korth Michael J. Korth appeared for protest.

Parcel number 356400

Protest There is no irrigation on this land, is irrigated from another farm. If it were to be resold would sell as dry land. Also farm is extremely rough and rolling. No comparison to comps. that were used.

County Assessor’s recommendation No change due to land use update.

Patsy L. Taber No one appeared on behalf of protest.

Parcel number 361500

Protest Morton building is only usable building on property. House is no longer livable due to mold infestation. Other building has not been used for 20 years. Enclosed is an estimate of cost of new same sized building. Depreciation schedule with building highlighted also enclosed.

County Assessor’s recommendation Adjusted building value to 38,995, sent board notice 6-4-10. Lowered due to condition of buildings.

County Board action Protest reviewed with county assessor. Motion by Henery, seconded by Brandt to accept the county assessor’s recommendation to lower the building value to 38,995 due to condition – no change in land value. Those voting aye: Brandt, Schwager, Erb, Henery and Kerkman. Nays none. Schindler and Bolling absent. Motion carried. Total building value 38,995, land value 163,245; total land and building value 202,240.

Allen F. Haines No one appeared on behalf of protest.

Parcel Number 465900

Protest No improvement on house since 1981 only fix roof on pole building after wind damage.

County Assessor’s recommendation Inspected 7-7, changed quality, corrected measurements on basement – sent notice to owner. House lowered 56,005.

County Board action Protest reviewed with county assessor. Motion by Schwager, seconded by Brandt to accept the county assessor’s recommendation to lower the house value due to basement square footage wrong, changed quality after inspection; house value 56,005, no change to land value. Those voting aye: Schwager, Schindler, Erb, Henery, Brandt and Kerkman. Nays none. Bolling absent. Motion carried. Total land value 22,155, building value 56,005; total land and building value 78,160.

Dana Sheridan Dana Sheridan appeared for protest.

Parcel number 45200

Protest You have chosen to assess an increase in our taxes. “Comparable sales” does not apply in our case because we are not attempting to compete in the sales market. We want to live in peace, in our own home for the rest of our life. We are aging and disabled. And if anything, our home can be compared with all the buildings in this economy that are sitting empty and unsold – unable to be sold for the value and investment set on them. You want additional tax money for the existence of a small cement slab which existed before we bought the house. Because it looks good, you want to charge extra for a wooden porch which replaced a rotten wood porch. The railing was added for safety (our safety). We are unable to paint and also, have siding for better heating/cooling efficiency. A house this old depreciates. Also, we have 2 bedrooms not 3. Further a porch and a slab is not living space. We got no cost of living increase from SS yet EVERYTING ELSE HAS INCREASED.

County Assessor’s recommendation Parcel increased $1715.00, should have been larger increase based on corrections. Leave at 39,710 for 2010 – no change due to valued according to market.

County Board action Protest reviewed with assessor and protestor. No evidence submitted by protestor to support why parcel should be lowered. Motion by Schwager, seconded by Schindler to accept the county assessor’s recommendation of no change due to valued according to market. Those voting aye: Schindler, Erb, Henery, Brandt, Schwager and Kerkman. Nays none. Bolling absent. Motion carried. Land value 2255, building value 37,455; total land and building value 39,710.

Joan S. Brown Joan S. Brown appeared for protest.

Parcel number 24900

Protest Attached are Assessor Reports and photographs of properties I think are comparable to ours which include: a. 902 S Street, Neligh, NE consisting of lots 5-6 Bock 80, Neligh City b. 806 T Street, Neligh, NE consisting of all lots 3-15 exc RR Block 96, Neligh City c. 85062 509^th Avenue, Clearwater, NE consisting of Contois Subdivision E1/2SE1/4 1-25-8 E 50’ lot 8 W 75’ lot 9. 1. I have filed Homestead Exemption Applications for the years 2008 and 2009 which were denied because we earn too much money. We are on Social Security and the VA informed us we are one step above the poverty level. 2. I have never heard of such an outrageous increase in assessed values in all the years I have owned and sold property and I am 73 years old. 3. My husband and I both have health problems but do not qualify for any additional funds. Therefore, this increase is indeed a hardship. 4. Our garage, according to the Assessor’s Office is listed as a 3-car garage. Our garage is not a three car garage. It has only two double doors and a walk through door. It measures 672 square feet and you couldn’t possibly get three cars in it. Garages in this area listed as three-car have 910 feet and 1014 feet. 5. Our home has been for sale since March, 2010, and only shown four (4) times, indicating that the economy is down and real estate is not moving. 6. What were the assessments based on? No one came to my home and surveyed the inside of the residence or the garage. 7. If we had not had our home for sale at this time, we would have to list it for sale because we cannot afford to live here. 8. I hope the County will take all protests into consideration due to the fact that a lot of senior citizens live in this vicinity and I am sure are in the same situation as we are. The newspaper may be right; the City may turn into a ghost town after all. The citizens who reside here will not be able to afford to purchase anything.

County Assessor’s recommendation No change due to valued according to market.

County Board action Protest reviewed with county assessor and protestor. Assessor reports and photographs of properties the protestor felt were comparable to her property were presented. Motion by Erb, seconded by Schindler to accept the county assessor’s recommendation of no change due to valued according to market. Those voting aye: Erb, Henery, Brandt, Schindler and Kerkman. Nays: Schwager. Bolling absent. Motion carried. Land value 1480, building value 73,805; total land and building value 75,285.

Klabenes Land & Cattle LLC No one appeared on behalf of protest.

Parcel number 593300

Protest This is dryland – very hilly and we’re farming this to try and make a living – getting hard to do with taxes always going up.

County Assessor’s recommendation No change due to land use update.

County Board action Protest reviewed with county assessor. No evidence submitted by protestor to support why parcel should be lowered. Motion by Henery, seconded by Erb to accept the county assessor’s recommendation of no change due to land use update. Those voting aye: Erb, Henery, Brandt, Schwager, Schindler and Kerkman. Nays none. Bolling absent. Motion carried. Total land value 145,265.

Klabenes Land & Cattle LLC No one appeared on behalf of protest.

Parcel number 592700

Protest We’re trying to make a living farming this is farm ground.

County Assessor’s recommendation No change due to land use update.

County Board action Protest reviewed with county assessor. Motion by Erb, seconded by Henery to accept the county assessor’s recommendation of no change due to land use update. Those voting aye: Henery, Schwager, Schindler, Erb and Kerkman. Nays: Brandt. Bolling absent. Motion carried. Total land value 464,070, improvement/building value 20,825; total land and building value 484,895.

Irven F. Wagner No on appeared on behalf of protest. This letter is in response to your letter of July 1, 2010, which showed 11:05 a.m. on July 14 as the time and date for a possible appearance by me before the Antelope County Board of Equalization regarding my protest of assessed valuations on two parcels of farm land. I am unable to appear at that time and want the two protest forms (#422) to be my official statement to the Board of Equalization.

Parcel number 436800

Protest Farm land value has not increased 108% from 2009 to 2010.

County Assessor’s recommendation I have been made aware that you are considering filing a protest for your 2010 assessed values. In 2009, I made an error and lowered the dry land in your area, Market Area 3, too much. If you will look back at the 2008 values, compared to 2009, there was a significant decrease in value. The increase in your 2010 values simply brings the value back to a correct level of assessment. No change due to land use update.

County Board action Protest reviewed with county assessor. Motion by Schwager, seconded by Henery to accept the county assessor’s recommendation of no change due to land use update. Those voting aye: Brandt, Schwager, Schindler, Erb, Henery and Kerkman. Nays none. Bolling absent. Motion carried. Total land value 60,785.

Parcel number 437100

Protest Farm land value has not increased 95% from 2009 to 2010.

County Board action Protest reviewed with county assessor. Motion by Erb, seconded by Schwager to accept the county assessor’s recommendation of no change due to land use update. Those voting aye: Schwager, Schindler, Erb, Henery, Brandt and Kerkman. Nays none. Bolling absent. Motion carried. Total land value 71,305.

Robert and Nancy Thiele Robert and Nancy Thiele were present for protest.

Parcel number 540300

Protest We have two hog sheds that have not been used for over 16 years. The increase was too high compared with our neighbors land, theirs is much lower.

County Assessor’s recommendation No value on hog sheds. Lowered land value due to land use change 367,020; no change to buildings 57,075.

County Board action Protest reviewed with county assessor and protestor. No evidence submitted by protestor to support why parcel should be lowered. Motion by Erb, seconded by Schwager to accept the county assessor’s recommendation to lower the land value due to land use change, no change to building value. Those voting aye: Schindler, Erb, Henery, Brandt, Schwager and Kerkman. Nays none. Bolling absent. Motion carried. Total land value 367,020; total building value 57,075; total land and building value 424,095.

Kenneth and Marie Krohn Kenneth Krohn appeared for protest.

Parcel number 83000

Protest Valuation is not supported by market value. Valuation is not equitable. Comparables are suspect.

County Assessor’s recommendation Contacted Mr. Krohn, offered to inspect home he declined – adamantly! No change due to valued according to market.

County Board action Protest reviewed with assessor and protestor. No evidence submitted by protestor to support why parcel should be lowered. Motion by Schwager, seconded by Erb to accept the county assessor’s recommendation of no change due to valued according to market. Those voting aye: Erb, Henery, Brandt, Schwager, Schindler and Kerkman. Nays none. Bolling absent. Motion carried. Total land value 4670, building value 182,735; total land and building value 187,405.

Lester Anson Les Anson appeared for protest.

Parcel number 520400

Protest This is 40 acres not 42.22 acres. I paid for 40. In past years it was 40 acres the FSA office has 38.5 acres.

County Assessor’s recommendation No change due to GIS land update.

County Board action Protest reviewed with assessor and protestor. Motion by Schindler, seconded by Henery to accept the county assessor’s recommendation of no change due to GIS land update; total acres 42.22. Those voting aye: Schindler, Erb, Henery and Kerkman. Nays: Schwager and Brandt. Bolling absent. Motion carried.

Anson Farms Inc. Les Anson appeared for protest.

Parcel number 617600

Protest This is 160 acres not 161.30 acres. In past years it was 160 acres FSA office say 158.19 acres.

County Assessor’s recommendation No change due to GIS land update.

County Board action Protest reviewed with county assessor and protestor. Motion by Schindler, seconded by Henery to accept the county assessor’s recommendation of no change due to GIS land update – total acres 161.30. Those voting aye: Erb, Henery, Brandt, Schindler and Kerkman. Nays: Schwager. Bolling absent. Motion carried.

Lester Anson Les Anson appeared on behalf of protest.

Parcel number 523100

Protest This is 160 acres not 161.08. I paid for 160 acres there are trees and a sand hill on west end. See map.

County Assessor’s recommendation No change due to GIS land update.

County Board action Protest reviewed with county assessor and protestor. Motion by Schindler, seconded by Brandt to accept the county assessor’s recommendation of no change due to GIS land update. Those voting aye: Erb, Henery, Brandt, Schindler and Kerkman. Nays: Schwager. Bolling absent. Motion carried. Total acres 161.08.

Lester Anson Les Anson appeared for protest.

Parcel number 522900

Protest This is 80 acres not 82.04. FSA office says 76.57 acres. It has always been 80 acres. I paid for 80 acres. FSA map attached.

County Assessor’s recommendation No change due to GIS land update.

County Board action Protest reviewed with county assessor and protestor. Motion by Brandt, seconded by Schindler to accept the county assessor’s recommendation of no change due to GIS land update. Those voting aye: Henery, Brandt, Schindler, Erb and Kerkman. Nays: Schwager. Bolling absent. Motion carried. Total acres 82.04.

Lester Anson Les Anson appeared for protest.

Parcel number 520300

Protest This is 80 acres not 82.74. FSA office has 76.73 acres. Always was 80 acres. I paid for 80 acres not 82.74. Map attached.

County Assessor’s recommendation No change due to GIS update.

County Board action Protest reviewed with county assessor and protestor. Motion by Henery, seconded by Schindler to accept the county assessor’s recommendation of no change due to GIS land update. Those voting aye: Brandt, Schindler, Erb, Henery and Kerkman. Nays: Schwager. Bolling absent. Motion carried. Total acres 82.74.

Larry A. Settje No one appeared on behalf of protest.

Parcel number 300800

Protest Attachment for 2010 valuation protest on Antelope County farm SW1/4 2-23-5, property identification number 000300800. We are protesting the 2010 valuation on this farm because it represents and extremely large increase of 31.4 percent over last years value. This increase is also significantly larger than two other farms which we own in Nebraska (in Madison County, adjacent to Antelope County). One of these farms in only eight miles from the Antelope County farm. The Nebraska Valuation Process requires that real property be valued uniformly and proportionately. When graphing valuations for the three farms over several years, it does not appear that this is being done for the Antelope County farm for 2010. Graph #1 illustrates the relative valuations for the three farms from 2006 thru 2010. All three farms have center pivot irrigation systems. The Madison County farms are NW1/4 6-23-3, and NE1/4 15-21-1. It can clearly be seen that the Madison County farms plot a somewhat uniform upward valuation over this span of years, while the Antelope County plot is somewhat erratic. It looks like the Antelope County valuations for 2007 and 2008 were lower than they should have been, and the 2009 valuation (29.54 percent increase) brought it back in line with where it should be in relation to the Madison County farms. The 2010 Antelope County farm valuation jumps over the two Madison County farm valuations, and appears to be excessively high. Graph #2 uses the same data as graph #1 to illustrate the percentage increase/decrease in valuations for the span of 2007 thru 2010. The Antelope County farm increase of 29.54 percent in 2009 followed by an increase of 31.4 percent in 2010 again appears excessive. The increases of 2009 and 2010 when taken together represent a total increase of 70.2 percent over a two year period, which definitely does not represent what farm land values have done in the past two years. Graph #3 takes the valuation values of the three farms from 2006 thru 2010 and converts them to the fair market (actual) value per acre. This was done by dividing the valuation value of each farm by the number of crop acres for each farm, and then dividing that number by the Agricultural Land percentage (72% for Antelope County, and 71% for Madison County) for each farm. This again illustrates that the 2010 Antelope County farm actual value per acre is excessively high.

County Assessor’s recommendation No change due to land update.

County Board action Protest reviewed with assessor. No evidence submitted by protestor to support why parcel should be lowered. Motion by Schwager, seconded by Henery to accept the county assessor’s recommendation of no change due to land use update. Those voting aye: Schwager, Schindler, Erb, Henery, Brandt and Kerkman. Nays none. Bolling absent. Motion carried. Total land value 385,425.

Barbara Gittleman Barbara Gittleman appeared for protest.

Parcel number 265900

Protest The property was purchased at an over inflated price. Re: 614 Colorado Street, Clearwater, Nebraska. First, I must confess my ignorance in the purchasing of my first house, located at 614 Colorado Street, Clearwater, Nebraska. Much has been learned since it’s acquisition. My rush to relocate, my unfamiliarity with the availability or lack of resources, the depressed economy, particularly in the realm of real estate, has proved my naivety. Due to the unavailability of a housing inspectors inspection prior to the purchase of the house, problems relating to the electrical and structural condition of the house were no realized until after the purchase. This is not the fault of the realtor, but my own fault. Since the purchase of the property I have learned contractors are willing to do housing inspections. Such is not the case in the area I moved from, where licensed house inspectors abounded and a pre-purchase house inspection was a part of purchasing property. The exterior foundation of the house has blow outs, cracks and separations from the structure. Empty, the house revealed buckling flooring originating from the center weight bearing wall. Although there seems to be equal and universal settling of the exterior foundation at the outside perimeter of the house, the interior foundation’s settling is most likely due to lack of proper support underneath. It should also be mentioned the foundation has no ventilation and the “crawl space” at the return gratings is some six to eight inches from the flooring. There is a lack of return duct work which also compromises the flooring. When the foundation of a house is compromised, ergo, the house is compromised. I have purchased a house with a compromised foundation. The cement floor in the laundry/utility room which is the lowest part of the house (two steps down and at ground level) is continually wet and growing mold. In finding out why, it was discovered the foundation supporting the wall between the kitchen and the laundry/utility room (which is weight bearing) is either missing or consisting of loose clay bricks in varying states of disintegration. In attempting to have the walls painted, removal of wall printed paneling revealed walls not only cracked, but walls crumbling from disrepair and water leakages. A few leakages could be seen to have come from the roof. (The union of the soffit and exterior of the house is cracked and rotting with a separation of the gutters from the soffit in some places.) However, most of the leakages were traced to rotted window sills that had been puttied instead of repaired in the past. Also discovered in painting the walls were the absence of proper electrical boxes and/or wiring. The detached garage is in need of foundation repair and overhead door replacements. The roof leaks and the interior walls and ceiling have never been completed. A view of the surrounding properties reveal a vacant house abutting the rear of the property. I have been told the house has been vacant for years and is condemned. The house directly across the street from my property is the same approximate age and similar in size but has a basement. It has been for sale almost three that I know of, and has had the price reduced again to $32,500.00. As of this date there are still no buyers. The house at the end of my street is the same approximate age and similar in size but lacking a basement. This house was purchased for much less ($12,000.00) in the same year. To date, the house has not been occupied as repairs and painting of the walls are slowly done. Sadly, even after the painting and routine maintenance is caught up, the house will not be worth the price for which it was purchased. At best, the property would only be worth its original assessment or slightly more. I respectfully ask your understanding of the overpayment in the purchase price and seek a reevaluation of the value of the house.

County Assessor’s recommendation After inspection of house, left value as is, purchased for $43,000 in 2008, walls have since been repaired, ceilings, painting, carpet torn out, etc. which would indicate increased market value since purchase.

County Board action Protest reviewed with assessor and protestor. Ms. Gittleman submitted letters from three different contractors addressing the condition of this home; presented several pictures of the exterior and interior of the home. Also, presented several homes she felt were comparable and homes that were in the neighborhood that had the asking price reduced due to lack of selling. Motion by Schwager, seconded by Erb to accept the county assessor’s recommendation of no change due to valued according to purchase price. Those voting aye: Erb, Henery, Brandt, Schwager, Schindler and Kerkman. Nays none. Bolling absent. Motion carried. Total land value 2325, building value 37,925; total land and building value 40,250.

Rodney L. and Raylene K. VanSlyke Rodney VanSlyke appeared for protest.

Parcel number 693700

Protest Due to the recent flood of June, 2010 approximately 30 acres of our property located on the north side of the Elkhorn River has been turned into complete wasteland. The entire 30 acres is covered with sugar sand that is any where from 2 to 4 feet depth. I have enclosed a picture of this damage for your review. I am not aware of how the land value of $150,260 was arrived at but it computes to approximately $936 per acre for our entire 160.46 acres. In our opinion this damaged 30 acres is now wasteland and should be valued at no more than $100 per acre. This value of $100 per acre results in a decrease in land valuation of $25,080 ($936-$100=$836 times 30 acres). If you have any questions or comments I can be reached at 402-750-5619. It is a tragedy what this flood has done to property owners in the Antelope and surrounding counties. Thank you for your consideration of this matter.

County Assessor’s recommendation Spoke to Raylene and phone, she said all acres used as rec. No change due to land update. The flooding will be reviewed and adjustments made on next years valuation if applicable.

County Board action Protest reviewed with assessor and protestor. No eveidence submitted by protestor to support why parcel should be lowered. Motion by Schwager, seconded by Brandt to accept the county assessor’s recommendation of no change due to land use update. Those voting aye: Schindler, Erb, Henery, Brandt, Schwager and Kerkman. Nays none. Bolling absent. Motion carried. Land value 150,260, building value 35,690; total land and building value 185,950.

J. Lorraine Huffman R. E. Trust Charles E. Huffman appeared for protest.

Parcel number 183100

Protest This property has not undergone substantial improvement for over 25 years. Market conditions do not warrant any increased valuation.

County Assessor’s recommendation No change due to house valued according to market.

County Board action Protest reviewed with assessor and protestor. No evidence submitted by protestor to support why parcel should be lowered. Motion by Henery, seconded by Brandt to accept the county assessor’s recommendation of no change due to valued according to market. Those voting aye: Henery, Brandt, Schwager, Schindler, Erb and Kerkman. Nays none. Bolling absent. Motion carried. Total land and building value 84,425.

Frederic and Debra Thiele No one appeared on behalf of protest.

Parcel number 590800

Protest The valuation on my house and land went up $49,965.00 and increase 53%. Neighbors went up $3000 t $13,000 which is 7% to 10%. Considering the location, I feel you have over valued it $25,000.00.

County Assessor’s recommendation No change due to land update.

County Board action Protest reviewed with assessor and protestor. No evidence submitted by protestor to support why parcel should be lowered. Motion by Schwager, seconded by Henery to accept the county assessor’s recommendation of no change due to land use update. Those voting aye: Brandt, Schwager, Schindler, Erb, Henery and Kerkman. Nays none. Bolling absent. Motion carried. Land value 10,710, building value 133,295; total land and building value 144,005.

Mark E. Smith Mark Smith appeared for protest.

Parcel number 449400

Protest Land is waste land, sand, trees, severe drainage problems.

County Assessor’s recommendation Lowered land value to 59,980 due to land use change; no change to building value. Total land and building value 110,090.

County Board action Protest reviewed with assessor and protestor. Mr. Smith presented several pictures showing the flooding of his shop when it rains. It is not just rain water; it is also the run off from the feedlot. Motion by Schwager, seconded by Brandt to accept the county assessor’s recommendation and lower the land value to 59,980 due to land use change and to also lower the building value to 47,270 due to condition of building. Those voting aye: Schwager, Erb, Henery, Brandt and Kerkman. Nays none. Schindler abstained due to business conflict. Bolling absent. Motion carried. Land value 59,980, building value 47,270; total land and building value 107,250.

Mark E. Smith Mark Smith appeared for protest

Parcel number 18200

Protest Removed carport, porch with roof, no heat or air on main level. Basement 0% finish red brick foundation poor no vinyl siding 3 bedroom 2 bathroom not 10 fixtures.

County Assessor’s recommendation Lowered house value due to quality of construction – no change on land value.

County Board action Protest reviewed with county assessor and protestor. No evidence submitted by protestor to support why parcel should be lowered. Motion by Erb seconded by Henery to accept the county assessor’s recommendation to lower the house value due to quality of construction. Those voting aye: Erb, Henery, Brandt, Schwager and Kerkman. Nays none. Schindler abstained due to business conflict. Bolling absent. Motion carried. Land value 2100, building value 75,455; total land and building value 77,555.

Douglas and Judy Forbes No one appeared on behalf of the protest.

Parcel number 495900

Protest Too much of an increase for the improvements that were made. We are writing to protest the 2010 valuation of our farm. The improvements we made consisted of the installation of two short irrigation systems and the underground pipe installed from these to the existing well. The approximate cost of this installation was $20,000. We are aware that the higher valuation is due to an increase in the market area sales, but feel that an increase of $112,285 is rather high. We are also assuming that the majority of the area land sales do not reflect property such as ours that includes railroad tracks and power poles. This valuation change will result in a real estate tax increase of $1500, which is a rather significant increase for the type of property this is.

County Assessor’s recommendation Lowered land value due to land use change 250,245, no change to building value 2595.

County Board action Protest reviewed with county assessor. Motion by Schwager, seconded by Brandt to accept the county assessor’s recommendation and lower the land value due to land use change. Those voting aye: Henery, Brandt, Schwager, Schindler, Erb and Kerkman. Nays none. Bolling absent. Motion carried. Land value 250,245, building value 2595; total land and building value 252,840.

Thiele Revocable Trust John J. Thiele appeared for protest.

Parcel number 661400

Protest Will only pasture 50 cows and calves, lot of slough grass and water holes.

County Assessor’s recommendation No change due to land update.

County Board action Protest reviewed with county assessor and protestor. No evidence submitted by protestor to support why parcel should be lowered. Motion by Henery, seconded by Brandt to accept the county assessor’s recommendation of no change due to land update. Those voting aye: Brandt, Schwager, Schindler, Erb, Henery and Kerkman. Nays none. Bolling absent. Motion carried. Total land value 213,260.

Gary L. Mosel No one appeared on behalf of protest.

Parcel number 348800

Protest Over assessed for type of dryland farm.

County Assessor’s recommendation No change due to land update.

County Board action Protest reviewed with county assessor. No evidence submitted by protestor to support why parcel should be lowered. Motion by Erb, seconded by Schindler to accept the county assessor’s recommendation of no change due to land update. Those voting aye: Schwager, Schindler, Erb, Henery, Brandt and Kerkman. Nays none. Bolling absent. Motion carried. Total land value 98,845.

Motion by Henery, seconded by Schindler to adjourn as a Board of Equalization. Those voting aye: Henery, Brandt, Schwager, Schindler, Erb and Kerkman. Nays none. Bolling absent. Motion carried.

Meeting adjourned at 3:47 P.M.

ANTELOPE COUNTY BOARD OF EQUALIZATION