AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The case involves a dispute over the 2014 property tax valuation of a commercial office building owned by 2727 San Pedro LLC, located in Albuquerque, New Mexico. The Bernalillo County Assessor initially valued the property at $1,113,300. The owner protested this valuation, suggesting a correct value of $753,690 and advocating for the income method of valuation. After recalculations, the Assessor adjusted the property's value to $900,200. The core of the dispute centered on the Assessor's application of the income method, specifically the use of a forty-five percent limitation on operating expenses, which the owner contested (paras 3-6).

Procedural History

• Bernalillo County Valuation Protests Board: Valued the property at $900,200, the amount proposed by the Assessor.
• District Court of Bernalillo County: Affirmed the Protests Board's valuation.

Parties' Submissions

• Petitioner-Appellant (2727 San Pedro LLC): Argued that the Assessor's application of the income method of valuation should have utilized the appellant's actual operating expenses rather than a forty-five percent limitation on expenses. The appellant supported its proposed valuation with evidence including Annual Property Operating Data reports and testimony from a local real estate agent (paras 5-6).
• Respondent-Appellee (Bernalillo County Assessor): Defended the valuation by stating that the forty-five percent limitation on operating expenses was based on market research and was applied consistently across similar assessments. The Assessor argued that the appellant's actual expenses, which were significantly higher, were not reflective of market standards (para 7).

Legal Issues

• Whether the Assessor's application of a forty-five percent limitation on operating expenses in the income method of valuation constitutes a generally accepted appraisal technique (para 2).
• Whether the District Court's affirmation of the Protests Board's decision was arbitrary due to a lack of substantial evidence supporting the Assessor's valuation technique as a generally accepted appraisal method (para 12).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals vacated the Protests Board’s valuation and remanded to the Protests Board for additional proceedings consistent with the opinion (para 29).

Reasons

• The Court of Appeals, per Judge Wechsler, found that the testimony and evidence presented did not support the conclusion that the Assessor’s valuation, specifically the application of a forty-five percent limitation on operating expenses, resulted from the application of generally accepted appraisal techniques. The court highlighted the lack of specific market research data to justify the forty-five percent cap for the subject property and noted a previous decision by the Protests Board that contradicted the current valuation approach. The court also pointed out that the Assessor did not offer expert testimony disputing the use of actual expenses as a generally accepted appraisal technique. Consequently, the court determined that the Assessor's method did not meet the statutory requirement of utilizing generally accepted appraisal techniques and vacated the valuation for further proceedings (paras 21-28).