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 between 2727 San Pedro LLC (Taxpayer) and the Bernalillo County Assessor (the Assessor) over the valuation of Taxpayer's commercial property for the 2015 tax year. The Assessor valued the property using the income method of appraisal, which Taxpayer contested, arguing that the actual income produced from the property did not justify the Assessor's valuation. This dispute followed a similar objection by Taxpayer to the 2014 valuation of the same property (paras 2-3).

Procedural History

• 2727 San Pedro LLC v. Bernalillo Cty. Assessor, 2017-NMCA-008, ¶ 1, 389 P.3d 287: The Court vacated the district court’s decision and remanded the matter to the Board for additional proceedings due to the Assessor's failure to prove her method of valuation utilized a generally accepted appraisal technique for the 2014 tax year valuation (para 2).

Parties' Submissions

• Taxpayer: Argued that the district court erroneously concluded it had not overcome the presumption that the Assessor’s valuation was correct. Contended that the Assessor failed to use a generally accepted appraisal technique in valuing the property, and as such, the Assessor’s valuation was not supported by substantial evidence (para 1).
• Assessor: Maintained that the valuation was correct and supported by evidence, arguing that the Board’s finding should remain undisturbed. The Assessor used market-based values and actual average rent collected from the property to arrive at the valuation (paras 12-13).

Legal Issues

• Whether the Taxpayer overcame the presumption of correctness of the Assessor’s valuation.
• Whether the Assessor’s valuation of the property utilized a generally accepted appraisal technique and was supported by substantial evidence (para 5).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals reversed the district court's decision and remanded the matter back to the Board for further proceedings (para 1).

Reasons

• Per JULIE J. VARGAS, J. (J. MILES HANISEE, J., and KRISTINA BOGARDUS, J., concurring):
  The Court found that the Taxpayer successfully overcame the presumption of correctness of the Assessor’s valuation by presenting evidence that disputed the factual correctness of the valuation. The Court agreed with the Taxpayer that the Assessor’s valuation was not supported by substantial evidence because the Assessor failed to demonstrate that the expense rate used was appropriate for the property type. The Court concluded that the Assessor did not use generally accepted appraisal techniques in valuing the property, as there was insufficient evidence to show that the properties used to calculate the expense rate were comparable to the Taxpayer’s property or that adjustments were made for any lack of similarity. The Court emphasized that the Assessor's reliance on information from five unidentified properties to calculate the expense rate did not meet the standards of generally accepted appraisal techniques due to the lack of evidence regarding the comparability of these properties to the Taxpayer's property (paras 10-24).