Portland assessment board denies Peaks Island tax appeal

[2:06] Eric Larson: Let's see, on Monday, September 28th and 26th, you need to go to the assessment review. [Ted: I] guess we'll do roll call before I forget to do that. Okay. [2:30] Unidentified clerk/board member: I'll call the role of Eric Larson, chair. Yes. President Louis Lowry, president. Julian Sheridan, president. Here I [2:43] Eric Larson: can often forget that, so I'm the chair of Eric Larson. You can refer to me as Eric if you want. Okay, chair, you seem to be a literary minded person. When I hear chair, I think of the Samuel Johnson quote where he said of some personage that he filled the chair, and so it was not meant as a compliment. So I don't, I don't really guess here's the chair. Have a seat. Right. So the three of us are members of the board. Are we, Julia, are you gonna sit with us today, or are you just [3:19] Michael Goldman: I'm not voting and not participating. [3:23] Eric Larson: Okay, she's just kind of sitting in. Okay. [3:26] Unidentified board member: I can speak a little bit to that, Mr. Chex, that came up in the email conversation. Your rule is a while an alternate to sit physically with the board and certainly participate in the public hearing. It says that the alternate will not participate in deliberations. How I interpret that would be fairly narrow, so that board member I think could certainly be part of the discussion with the board during operations but shouldn't be making any motions, seconding motions, just factual findings and things like that. [3:59] Eric Larson: We'll be back to you so we don't have to worry about whatever having her seated as a member. Okay, and so next to the three of us who are the members of the board and the alternate who is sit in, we have the attorney who's the attorney who represents the board. So the three of us are just four of us are volunteers. He's out, he works for a law firm in Bangor, and because the city has their own attorney, we need someone else who's not conflicted by representing people, and then Annie, who I've met, and then the assessor was Michael Goldman, who's the attorney on the board of the Assessor's Office. [4:51] Michael Goldman: I have to make sure I know him. Michael Goldman. Yeah. I'll let you know. [4:55] Eric Larson: And a member of the public or no? [4:57] Unidentified board member: I don't know. He works for the Assessor's Office. [4:59] Eric Larson: Oh, okay. Is he going to be a witness? [5:01] Speaker F (unidentified): No, he's new in our office. Oh, I see. So he's new. We're welcome. [5:06] Ted: All right. And I'm Ted. As far as that large. [5:13] Eric Larson: Let's see, so the first item on our agenda, we did the roll call, correct? Is we'll review and it says just approved for a few minutes for our last meeting, which is September 20th, 2026. Does anyone have any observations about that? You weren't present, but you're allowed to actually go on improving them, but we have a the two of us with the majority, whatever you do and [5:44] Unidentified board member: if the motion to approve the [5:45] Unidentified clerk/board member: minutes is presented, I will second that motion. Move by Lou Lowry, seconded by Chair Larson. Lou Lowry yes, Chair Larson yes, Jamie Lorraine yes, pass 3-0. [6:00] Eric Larson: And then the only item left arm in the agenda is the appeal of the assessment of 5.2 Island Avenue, and the owner of your call Ted, and is it Pay Call or I Call Time? Yeah, I'm going to say hey you is the owner. Pardon? Oh yeah, to the hey you, no we won't do that, okay. And the president representing that appeal is the owner, so just quickly to review, because you've never done this before and we've done it a few times, but I have to remind myself, the sort of overview is because you have the burden of proof in this proceeding, you get to go first and present your case, and your argument really is, I guess I'll say, I say argument, ideally you present sort of the evidence that you want to review mixed in with some argument. The city and board members can then question you about that. And then when that's done, the city gets to present their view of the case. And you and we can question the city through the attorney. And there's a chance if you want to do some rebuttal to that. And then and then we conclude with all in closing arguments, so again when you're presenting evidence, the idea is you're focusing on the evidence, and then you'll have a chance at the end summarize it, and the city has to do the same thing, and then we kind of close it down, and oh and I guess sort of the last part of it is we usually get our attorney to kind of summarize the legal, the legal standards that apply, and then the board begins its deliberations and teaches a position. So that's it. And the only thing I like to do, I guess, before we get going too far, I've learned from practice, is it's useful to make sure we're all kind of looking at the same evidence or whatever that's been submitted already, and okay, you know, see if people are trying to want to try and introduce something else, so what we have in front of us is your original application, which is a three-page document, kind of a form that the city has, and then two pages written, and that as far as I know is what we have from You and then we, and then we have a 16-page response from the city, which again kind of begins with a summary and then a timeline and then photographs and other evidence, and then another 20-page document from the city which is a list of their exhibits. How many exhibits are there? I think eight exhibits, eight, yeah, total of eight exhibits on 20 days. So it's, and so that's what we're aware of right now, that's what we had a chance to review. Okay, I see you with some pictures there. I don't know if there's anything additional. [9:43] Ted: Over here, I couldn't find my old pictures, I'd given some to Jim Merrill, but I, it, my grievance is about the parking facility behind me that houses fuel trucks and Jim Merrill, I wrote my, because I didn't know what I was really doing and I'm nervous, yeah, I thought I lost my glasses three minutes ago, on my head, okay, so it doesn't show this audio that's total [10:26] Eric Larson: yeah, that's all right, okay, so are there other things that you think you're going to want to [10:44] Ted: submit to people because otherwise I just did, I had my friend Helen come over yesterday and take some more pictures of the parking lot and it's proximity to my house and I, she looked up this morning, this is a really foggy picture, but it shows the before and after they've moved in, okay, [11:03] Unidentified board member: and it's, it's just a horrible situation living next to fuel trucks. Well before we, okay, get to the [11:10] Eric Larson: presentation, I just, does it, does the city object to the introduction of these, do you think, [11:16] Ted: if you want to take a look at, show them to the city. Well the picture of them and I also wrote up my thing because I'm a visual person more than auditory, so I'm going to read this, it's easy and I'm scared about reading, so okay, I keep reading these anyway, trying to do the options as I can [11:33] Unidentified board member: to clear it, but you're [11:39] Ted: like a school teacher, I'm ready for the test, pop quiz. [11:54] Eric Larson: Thank you, want to come on over there, that might be easier, like that's easier rather than you having to scoop out the pictures, he'll come over and have a look. [12:08] Ted: This is, this is before, I mean I've been out there since January 6th and it was, it was owned, it's a known business, it was just in case you had another [12:32] Speaker F (unidentified): with the three of us, yeah, we're going to lie down. [12:36] Ted: I don't need them, so this is the house here and this was the yard, now this is the house and this is my backyard, I'm actually closer to the trucks than my neighbor who owns the truck and this is the driveway coming in which of, what's the fence where my property starts. [12:59] Eric Larson: Gotcha. The only reason we're looking at these now is because they come in late. [13:04] Ted: I know. I'm so sorry. [13:05] Eric Larson: No, it's all right. We won't object to them, so you can explain them to the board. [13:10] Ted: Okay. Thank you so much. Okay. Of course. In a similar breath. All right. Okay, so I'll read what I said. [13:18] Eric Larson: So we have to formally sort of say that I was going to say my inclination was to let them admit them unless there was something totally presidential. And because the city is not objecting, we're not going to really get too much of an issue. So that said, so there's, I don't know, we have a picture of them. Do I need to count them, or I have 15? Okay, so 15 pictures, and we'll, we'll, we'll just say that we're going to accept them. When you get to your argument, that's okay. When you start to reference that, we can look at, okay. [13:56] Ted: I mean, I moved out to the island because it was so beautiful and pastoral. Never would I have imagined my next door to diesel fuel and noise deepening and all that just changed the whole, I realized it changed the value when I went to the rail just to put it on the market. Good afternoon, members of the board. Thank you for the opportunity to speak before the board. I'm requesting a reduction in my property assessed value because its immediate proximity to the Peace Island fuel truck lot has substantially diminished its market value. When the new assessments were issued, I was preparing for surgery on a broken ankle and did not receive my mail until after the deadline for responding to the assessing company. I've owned this historic home since January 6, 1981, and over the years I learned the skills needed to repair and preserve it. I was drawn to the island's natural setting, especially being an artist, especially Trefeven Landing. I never expected my property and neighborhood to be affected by daily diesel fumes, the warning beeps of trucks backing alongside my yard, you know, day and night, waking me up, and vehicles parked directly behind my rear porches. What was once a pleasant natural view has become an eyesore and a continuing source of disruption. On December 12, 2019, a fire damaged my house and the city subsequently declared it condemned. At the time, I was recovering from a case of cancer, a severe case, and was overwhelmed by the disaster. I believe the work performed by SurfPro, which was sent by my insurance company, caused additional damage to the house and my health. The resulting stress led me to be hospitalized for ulcerative colitis. Sick cookie. Feeling physically and emotionally depleted, I put the house on the market in April of 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic. pandemic. Following the fire, the principal step required to remove the house from condensed status was repairing the hole in the floor through which Chris Thompson fell while fighting the fire with Les Smith, the officer who assisted him. It was the two guys, I can't believe what they did. On their own, they put this fire out, and Chris unfortunately fell through the hole. I told him if I was his mother, I'd kill him because he'd just put himself in great danger. Without their efforts, the house might have burned to the ground, and I remained [Speaker F (unidentified): deeply] grateful for their service at December 9th. The floor has since been repaired to meet the applicable code requirements. I visited the assessor's office as advised and later spoke with Jim Merrill. I appreciated very much, very much, Mr. Merrill's careful inspection and fair consideration of the property's condition. He acknowledged the property's poor condition and extensive repairs needed, including new windows, replacement of erotic wood. A lot of the wiring and a lot of the plumbing had been ripped out, which still hasn't been put back in place. And the windows, they had big windows in the back, and they were all, like, broken down. They had a heat mirror in them, so you can't see through them. The only windows I replaced so far are the ones that the firemen had broken through to lift all the smoke up. Consequently, the city did reduce the tax bill after that, which I totally appreciated. When preparing to put the house on the market, I sought estimates from the two prominent real estate companies, Ford Island Realty and Harborview Realty. They were the two main realtors on the island that determined the property's market value. value. The two companies estimated the property values at $325,000 and $350,000. I know this is back in 2020 and the property value has gone up. But both companies explained that the property's location directly beside the fuel truck operation reduced its value by approximately half. Although I was surprised and distressed by this conclusion, it was consistent with my experience living next door to the site. I because of that, I couldn't make any comparisons because no one's in the same predicament I am on the island. I'm the close neighbor. Everyone else is further away, so they don't have the same problems that I do, smelling fuel, listening And the beeping and knowing that the trucks, you know, they feel dangerous, and that's a complete eyesore for the beauty. It was all wildflowers when I first moved there, with a wetland where there was cattails and red-winged blackbirds. So it has changed. I know it's business zone, but as I read on, you'll understand. The realtors estimates were consistent with my experience when I attempted to sell the house. I received little interest and concluded that I might not be able to afford another home on Peaks Island. So at that point, I just took it off the market. I wasn't sure what to do, and I didn't know about my health, whether I was going to make it or not. But I tried to hang in there. When Keegan, hivers of Peaks Island fuel, received permission to build a parking lot behind my house, the approved use was off-street parking for cars. Oil trucks, so there was a, there was an attorney that was handling the neighborhood to help stop this from happening, and he found legal reasons that if it was below 1230 gallons he could be afforded off-street parking, and if it was more it was fuel, a fuel storage facility. So when the city asked whether more than 300 gallons would be present on the property, he responded no, I'm in the business of selling fuel, not storing it, which didn't make any sense, and it, I knew he wasn't speaking his truth, but I just felt sad. I understand that off-street parking was permitted only if less than 1230 gallons of fuel was present. Mr. Iver now has six trucks on the property, including two that carry propane, which is a lot more dangerous. I was told that was to have an explosive attitude. [21:44] Eric Larson: It would take up a quarter of a mile. [21:48] Ted: I was told that each truck holds 6,000 gallons of fuel. In my view, the volume is more consistent with a fuel storage facility than with off-street parking, which was then approved. These trucks are parked only yards from my house. The truck lot sits above an underground spring that drains into a stream on the opposite side of the property and then flows directly into the ocean. OSHA identified this as an environmental unsuitable use of the site. At the time when this was being challenged, the neighborhood residents were all coming together to find another possible solution. The neighborhood residents asked that the vehicles not be parked there, and three other alternative sites in the island's interior were proposed as a safer and less disruptive option. Option. Keith Ivers of Peaks Island Fuel declined to consider those alternatives, which was sad. Mr. Ivers told me that the shoreline's native flora and fauna were protected within 200 feet of the shoreline. The weekend after Christmas, he cut everything down. No one was around, and we knew he could probably get away with it. The area behind the parking parameter on the ocean side was then excavated and stabilized with crushed rock, creating more space for an additional truck and a large boat. So, you know, he's taken will at hand, and he just keeps making it worse. On the other, and on another occasion, a visiting neighbor expressed concern about a gas burner being used to burn off a fuel leak while propane tanks were, he then moved his propane because it is too dangerous, in front of his house, and those were in his front yard for over two weeks. I contacted at the time the Environmental Protection Agency, and they directed me to call the city. They didn't come out, they weren't interested, they weren't even willing to check on it. And I thought that's kind of a dangerous thing, especially living on an underground spring. Spring. I then contacted the city but received no response. Even the city didn't show any interest in finding out more of what was going on. I left my house and I struggled to hold on to it despite these circumstances because my property directly abuts the fuel business parking lot. I experienced it would affect more immediately than other nearby property he owns. My health also has been forced since the use of the lane behind my phone has changed. This is what has brought me here today. I feel strongly the immediate proximity of my house to the fuel truck lot, the continuing disruption from the naval neighboring operation, and the opinions of two real estate companies. I think that's the most precedent strength that I have is that these two big companies, well, not big, but big on the island, both said that my property has been reduced by half. So, I mean, I would never buy the property next door to a fuel truck, and I know when I tried to sell it, no one seemed that interested because I don't think most people want to live near the fumes and the eyesore, maybe not by a fuel truck. So I know it has totally depreciated what I once loved, and that was the natural aspects of being on Pete's Island. No one moves out there. I live next to a fuel truck. It's horrible. I respectfully ask the board to reduce my property assessed value to reflect the ongoing disturbance caused by the neighborhood fuel truck operation and resulting loss in market value, especially of my residents. I hope the board will recognize the substantial burden these circumstances have placed on and on my home I've owned for 46 years. Thank you for your time and consideration. Something else I was just going to mention. Yeah, it has been a hardship. And, you know, if the property is seriously reduced that much, I was going to try to get an appraiser to come out. I thought it would be a couple of hundred dollars, but someone told me it's a thousand bucks and I really didn't have the money to institute hiring an appraiser to come out to make that validation. So, you know, I believe that those realtors, the funny thing was they were within $25,000 of each other, which, you know, I was shocked that they were so low, but when they both came in at the same close price, I figured that was affirmative of the fact that it has disrupted the whole value of my property. I'm on a very small lot, 60 by 90, and I have a fairly big-sized house. It was originally built as a stable for the Trebevin Homestead, but it's most famous historically on the island as Weber's Old Store. It was a meeting place where people went to go buy their groceries and figure out what they were going to do for the rest of the day. So it's got a lot of memory for a lot of people. I still have people like my age coming to the island going knocking on my door saying I used to come here as a little kid and buy penny candy, so you know I keep trying to preserve the energy of the building. I've made it open, I've taught, I've taught through the building, I've opened it for other people to teach, and it's originally my goal was to buy the property behind me and I approached Keith because I had a friend Joe that wanted to buy the property and sell me the original backyard. And Keith said, well, Daniel and I want to buy the property. Can you talk to your friend Joe into buying something else? And I said, well, he's been here since he was a kid, and I've known his family, and I've done artwork for them. I'll try to help him out. And I talked to Joe, and Keith said, I'll sell you the backyard. But I didn't put it in writing because I always think people's word is an honest approach to dealing with life, because that's how I do it. And then the next thing I knew, a neighbor came over and said, do you know what's going on in the backyard? And I said, no. And it just shocked me. I felt betrayed. And my plan was I built these incredible desks that architecturally would have served to create musical events and children's theater, and I was going to use the backyard. You know, I mean, that's probably not poignant, but this is my struggle. To see it. I told Keith that you can buy the property, but don't put it in the fuel truck. It's not fair to the land. It's not fair to the neighborhood. But, you know, he's got a mind of his own and he does what he did and so be it. Because of that, it has totally reduced my value and the peace and harmony I once had there. Because of that, I assuredly believe that it has reduced my property said according to the realtors it's a shame because it's a beautiful piece of the shoreline and it really is it wasn't anymore but I can't afford at this age in my life to be doing things other than sharing what I've got and I invite people in I just had another gathering I just went to a the barack of church had a fair so I told a couple of people I'm going to invite all the people that worked on the fair because I love to Share and I love to feed people and it's just not the same with having all this talk behind my house so that's that's how I look at it I'll answer any questions if anyone has anything they want to ask no question if you [30:05] Eric Larson: Want to just kind of talk us through the pictures that we've got here do just if you want to stop you we can also just look at them and probably get a good sense but if there's anything since [30:13] Ted: You went into trouble this was the this unfortunately just picked up the pictures it's funny so let me see so [30:25] Unidentified board member: Can I ask in this college one which what is your house [30:30] Ted: Oh, this is all so here's the edge of my house, and this is looking a few yards, you know, a few yards away. It's his parking. This is a fence a few yards towards the water, towards the water. He's on the water side, which is even more dangerous. So you can, so there's trucks here. These are his trucks. [30:50] Eric Larson: Right, correct, and this is my house. This is your house. Do you want to come over and look at this? [30:54] Unidentified board member: While we're, no, this is, this is your lot essentially. This is my life here, yeah. [31:02] Ted: And the trucks come back in here and they beat day and night because they back up. I even asked him, I said, it's your parking lot, can't you take the deep enough, and they did for a week, and then [31:12] Unidentified board member: they go back to the okay. I heard that. I'm just trying to visualize them. Yeah, I think you've got [31:16] Ted: and the water is down here, the ocean's down here, so this is true heaven is a little yard club, so your view of the water, yes, this is it. Now I'm letting all these, what it is a sumac, and the sumac's growing up, which is kind of creating an insulation, okay, because I don't to look at those. This is really going on. [31:40] Unidentified board member: Go [Eric Larson: ahead, maybe] I should ask this the assessor. Okay, we can wait till then. I don't know, I'm not asking. Do you know if he applied for permits and so forth to do this, install this bit of business? Yes, it went before planning. [32:11] Ted: They asked him, which is a ridiculous question, will you have more than 300 gallons? [32:16] Unidentified board member: Because the tank actually built 275. I'm asking a question whether the site, whether it's permanent. That's our idea. And in particular, if it went through a planning board process, [32:26] Ted: did you try to participate in that? I did. I did. I was one of the guys that was trying to find alternative sites so it would be more conducive to the environment and to the island. So I spent three months. And this is after he had told me, you know, he would. [32:43] Unidentified board member: The reason I'm asking, I'm asking it was it sounds to me like there was a permitted use he received permits he was supposed to have [32:51] Ted: it was needed yeah to do the yeah but what he did what they permitted it for and what he did are two different things that no one's ever contested because people want to keep peace and harmony on the island so what he has I believe is illegal because he's got more than 1230 gallons. He will station me and what he was allowed was if you look up in the city records off street parking. So [33:19] Unidentified board member: we went way beyond the call of duty. That's not we don't have the permit from the showing us. Well, I understand here Asserting, but we don't have their evidence. [33:29] Eric Larson: You know the question about you, and so you don't have to stay. [33:36] Ted: I went to them. I had all of it, and I saved it. But with the fire, I wound up putting everything in boxes and putting it in storage. I spent a couple of weeks looking for the box, couldn't find it. So I went to the two realtors to see if they still had records of that. [Unidentified board member: And they didn't.] So I don't have those records. But I'll swear on the stack of Bibles. [34:00] Eric Larson: On my mom's grave, she was one of my best friends. When [34:06] Michael Goldman: was the realtor's assessments? [34:09] Ted: In April of 2020. [34:12] Michael Goldman: So it was after the fire? [34:14] Ted: It was after the fire. The fire happened December 12th of 2019. And like I said, I was coming out of cancer. I was worn down. [34:24] Michael Goldman: It sounds like we went through a tough time. We were just trying to figure out who you say that was on fire, so we could find the record. [34:30] Ted: I was wondering what was the order of what happened. [34:33] Michael Goldman: It sounds like the fire came first, then the assessments, [34:36] Ted: and then we yeah I honestly think I do have them and they're probably in storage in the restaurant to find them I mean I was so discombobulated I was weakened by my conditions I hired two guys to help me move stuff but I believe they're still on a shelf tucked away somewhere I mean if I could if I if this doesn't work this time if I'm allowed to do it next year or and I can find those records I'd be glad to prove to you what I'm saying is true but they are from 2020. They're from 2020 and I know the property's gone out plus I fixed the big hole in the floor but a lot of the wiring isn't reconnected a lot of plumbing isn't connected but Jim Merrill came out he saw the status of the house and he adjusted the amount from the appraisal which I totally favored you know I don't know what I just know he's an honest truthful man what my contention is that the that no one wants to live next to these fuel trucks and it's discouraging for me to have to suffer with that but I will suffer because I can't afford to buy another house and I put my whole life into this and it is it totally devalues the house do you want to come and visit me any time you want to welcome bring your toothbrush you can get the full effect honestly any other questions Bernie Steven no well I do have one question [36:06] Unidentified board member: I'm looking at your application I mean it doesn't have an amount listed after the [36:13] Ted: Other payment, I didn't know how to clarify. Yeah, I don't know how. I mean, the insurance of the realtor said 50. I think anything you can give me, it's going to be a help. I have no income right now. I was relying on the house. My, I had my, they told me my shoulders obliterated, so my flooring has been poked. But I was on Airbnb and I would rent out rooms and I had [Speaker F (unidentified): incredible people] and I make a perfect post. At the time, I didn't even know how to work a computer or a cell phone, nor did I want to find a technical challenge. I don't like it. But my friends ran the business and set me all up so that I can survive to pay the property tax. Fortunately, that worked. I mean, at the height of my career, I was making up to 33,000. I was thrilled. And now we cover property taxes and [37:06] Eric Larson: I can still eat some. Hallelujah. Thank you. Anyway, you guys have questions. I think a lot of the questions I have, well, I do have one other question for you. When you say the realtors told you it was that it should be reduced, that's when you were talking to them in 2020. That's where they put on, I put the house on the market at that price. And so that, okay, that's when you spoke with [37:35] Ted: the real estate. Yeah, they gave me, they did this whole evaluation, gave me the prices. I was in shock, but I was also my body and my whole life was in shock. So I put it on the market at that price. I had people coming through looking at it. Was one person that offered me almost that amount of money, but in the end I thought, I can't, if I give up this house, there's not another place on the island, and I feel rooted there. I mean, it's been my life. I've never lived anywhere as long as I have there, 46 years. So it was going to be problematic. Here I am an old guy now. Moving is not easy. I would make it happen, but I couldn't find other places because property keeps escalating. When I bought the place, it was 20,000 bucks, but it was a disaster. We've all got stories like that. I [38:20] Eric Larson: know. Yeah, and since then you haven't, you haven't spoken with a another realtor, you haven't gotten [38:29] Ted: an appraisal or something? Because I've been thinking about moving. The clubhouse next door wants to look at it in case they want to expand the clubhouse, which is a little yacht club, and they have sailing lessons for kids and all that. Because I'm, I'm part of that package, and they were disappointed that they didn't secure the property that he thought of purely because they [38:51] Eric Larson: could have used that. It would have been much less damaged. All right, it's just, it's just hard living. [38:58] Ted: Next to it, yeah. I mean, I had to go inside the house when I'm on the porch and I'm talking to a friend or a fake, you know, family member, and the diesel trucks are going and going and the fumes are coming in. You can't breathe, so we go inside, you know, at four o'clock in the morning when he has to do an emergency running, he has to back up the truck because I'm a light sleeper, unfortunately. I will show it's heavy. I've even used the earplugs and that doesn't work. You got b and just [39:24] Eric Larson: I want to shoot myself. You got a gun? I do. I don't have any more questions. Thanks. I'm trying to, I'm trying to de-stress, so I'm trying to do my part. Gotcha. That's all I got. Thank you. All right. [39:39] Ted: Thank you so much. Well, thank you for all these good comments and I really appreciate it. Any [39:47] Eric Larson: other questions for the applicant? Because we run a fairly relaxed process, if people do have questions for you later we can follow up, but for the moment anyway, I like you guys. I think you're all right, customer friendly. See the view? Ah, yeah, they haven't sold it very well in that regard, but okay. With that said, we're going to let the city present their response. You can just wait and, you know, if you want to note down any questions you have for them, you can [40:23] Ted: and ask them questions. I didn't bring a pen. Anyone have a Mr. Pen? I bet we still have a pen. We might be all done. [40:31] Unidentified clerk/board member: Yeah, we can do. [40:41] Eric Larson: Actually, before the city begins, [40:42] Unidentified board member: I realize, I don't know, [40:44] Ted: because I have a hard time remembering things. [40:48] Eric Larson: We didn't actually, usually we go through jurisdictions before people present things, but we will, I guess, make that finding after. [40:55] Ted: We can make it after. Okay. [40:57] Eric Larson: I feel like if there was a real jurisdictional issue someone would have raised it, so I trust the city. Right. Yeah, we don't have any. Okay, any arguments on that? Okay, I'm sorry, I have another question. Okay, I'm looking [41:12] Michael Goldman: at the residential property recognized in 2025 and it says general information, living units, too. [41:19] Ted: Is this a two family? It wasn't, but I had put, I lived in the basement and I had it set up as like a living space for myself. That's all been burned out and it's still in that state of decay with no wiring, no plumbing, but I remember when I talked to Jim Merrill he said, oh, you were listed as to the unit, and originally they were, when I bought the place there were two meters on it and I think they still might be there or the place for two meters is still there, but the basement is no go right now. I'd still love to put it in place, but again, I need the funds to do that. You have you [42:04] Michael Goldman: ever when you talked about airbnb before you do it where will people stay they were sitting in the [42:09] Ted: bedroom so i it was i welcomed people and i say i like them actually i put a bottle of wine a nice chocolate in my flyer with a welcome in make yourself at home I am a perfect host believe hostess with most and I make them feel so at home even before they get to keep silent I call them to give them all the affirmation how easy it's going to be for you to get to each Island I got to wear part what do you me so one time i crammed in like 30 kids students from harvard i had a couple approval from Silicon County, Will from London, we talked metaphysics in the kitchen till three in the morning. She called me to play it. I fell in love with this island, I fell in love with your house, and I fell in love with you. I'm a member of the Charles River Ensemble. And I'd like to bring as many members as would come to play. My whole purpose of the house was to bring together people to recognize one another. I had an honor body. I was almost dead at 27. They sent me to preach to give me my last rite. I wound up trying to clear my head and see if I could clear my body. My third eye opened up and I was shown the future. And that's terribly grim. And it said I couldn't change the course of time. The earth would change according to the schedule. The oneness I was feeling I needed to bring to the planet. So I bought the house because it's under a hip roof, pyramid-shaped roof, that points north, south, east, and west, governing all mankind. I recognize oneness beyond what we generally imagine, and I know I sound like a crazy person, but unfortunately this is the kind of stuff that happens to me in my life. So I built the place to bring people. So I had them playing Russian symphonies upstairs. And I was downstairs crying because every time we started playing, it was so beautiful. Then I went to go hear them play at Harvard in November. Then they crammed me in with all the kids for a party. They wanted me to stay overnight. I said, oh, no, I'll leave you guys together. But, you know, I've had an amazing life. I want to write a book about being the richest poor man of the poorest rich man. Instilling people that you don't need money to have a rich life. You really don't. And I'm captain of that horse. Anyway, I'd give you more details, but you'll really think I'm a nuthead. I don't mean to do this, but it's my heart, and it's my passion, and it's my life to spread love. I'm trying to do something in Nashville next, and I don't know how I'd do it. You know, $33,000 isn't much money. I mean, I felt rich, but I do what I can with what I've got, and I try to spread love as much as I can. [44:53] Eric Larson: And I'm sure we can actually do that soon. I would have heard that. [44:57] Ted: I wouldn't come in with chocolate, which I normally do, but I would like you to figure out before I did it, but I do that naturally with everybody, okay? [45:07] Unidentified board member: All right, thank you. That's all right. That's [45:15] Eric Larson: okay. It's all right. We're going to let the city go now with their responses, okay? Thank you. Yeah, and you'll be able to ask them questions when they're done. [45:26] Ted: On. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. [45:32] Eric Larson: Just the record on Michael Goldman, corporation capital of the city and representing the assessor in this matter. I'm just going to, sorry. Oh, sorry to interrupt you. Just proceed. We also, you had your sort of own references. The city has their exhibits, you know, in electronic form. And if we want to, if they reference them, Andy is very adept at like bringing them up on the screen so that we can all look at them. So if they talk about something, should I open my screen? You don't have to worry [45:58] Ted: because she's going to put it right up. Oh, okay. That should be better. What's technology on my part, so [46:14] Eric Larson: now you can go ahead, but now we're all, we're all good. We all know where to look and who's going. All right, at least we just state your name, your title, with your name and your title. Okay. And can you just for the record, you know, the board already knows this, but will you just briefly describe your education, degrees, licenses, certifications, and how many years you've been working as an assessor? [46:47] Speaker F (unidentified): I had an associate's degree. I had a two-year certification in GIS from University of Southern Maine. I've been in municipal government for 28 years. I've been an assessor for 20 years. I'm a certified main assessor level 2 since 2017, I think. Okay, [47:13] Eric Larson: thank you. And for the property that the subject of this appeal, 522 Island Avenue on Peaks Island, the original assessment within the amount this is I'm referring to the property card that I believe is up here right now, assessors exhibit one. The original assessment was 812 200, the total amount, that's correct. Yes. And that and the appellant back in Mr. Hateful in February of 2026 requested an abatement in your office. This is assessors exhibit 3, that correct? Yes. And then there's been some reference to James Merrill with what's [48:10] Speaker F (unidentified): his position with your office? James is our senior residential appraiser [48:16] Eric Larson: or in the past 36 years. Okay. And in response to the request for abatement, Mr. Mail went out to the island to review the property in March of 2026, correct? Okay. And then as a result of that review and I'm looking at it at four and five, the property was reduced and how much [48:43] Speaker F (unidentified): was that reduced by? As it's reduced by one hundred sixty one thousand one hundred, which equates to a tax credit essentially or abatement of one thousand [48:57] Eric Larson: nine hundred twenty nine dollars. Okay. And so that reduction resulted in a total value for the property. Do you have that number handy? [49:18] Speaker F (unidentified): Yes, 651 000. Okay. So you've already [49:23] Eric Larson: reduced the property and as part of the abatement process from 812 000. So 651. Okay. Can you Can you briefly walk through the process, the assessor's response, there's a description of the mass appraisal process, and then the assessment approaches that the assessor's office takes. In this case, the sales approach supported by the COPS version. Can you just briefly sort of explain the process for assessing a property like 522, I don't know. that you don't have to read the whole thing you know it's already in there so [50:09] Speaker F (unidentified): The city uses a massive crazel approach using the cost approach supported by the market approach to value tire technologies conducted our re-evaluate for the year, the assessment year in debate today. Page 13 of my response goes deeply into residential value methodology and how depreciation tables are calibrated, taking into consideration style of the house, grade, size,, condition, there are several other major factors that are used to develop these pricing schedules. [51:07] Eric Larson: And can you explain, and this is described in Section 10 of the response, can you explain the how the valuation for the base lot value of the land and how the how the land value in [51:29] Speaker F (unidentified): This case was reviewed, or so a slot value starts with a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet. The appellant's property is much less than that, it's a 500 square feet, so that there's a defermental value approach that's used that takes into consideration size difference. In addition to that, there's a 35% discount put in place, recognizes the location on the island of the property to the westerly view, and he'd also consider some economic functionality which he was associated with the oil tank, oil trucks behind the house. When Jim went out, he added another 20% discount specifically for that purpose, which brings the deduction up to 55% influence factor. [52:42] Eric Larson: Deduction so the property, and I know that described in paragraph 10 of your response, property was originally subject to 35% in negative 35% influence factor based on location and amenities and things like that you consider when valuing land, and then after Jim's visit in connection with the proximity to the fuel company, he reduced the value by another 20 percent. That's correct. Okay, the to date, and I know this has already been testified to by Mr. Hateful, but you have not received outside of the. Evaluation that your office has done, you've not received any a broker's opinion of value or appraisal or any other information suggesting. [53:42] Speaker F (unidentified): A different value for the property. Not, and my original application we received from Mr. April, the estimate of fair market value was not filled out, so we don't know what it is. So that was in the. [54:03] Eric Larson: Application that you received, there wasn't a request for a particular value. No. Okay, and so other than, other than that six-year-old broker's opinions of value that were referenced in Mr. Hakel's application, the 350 000 or 325 000, you're not aware of any other opinions of value. [54:25] Speaker F (unidentified): Well, the only other, I don't know how much weight you can put on these as an opinion of value, but on oldhousecalling.com there was a listing from 2020. [54:38] Eric Larson: Advertising the house at 699. That was in 2020. Okay, 2021, and that's, those are the, where the pictures that are in exhibit three are from, that right? That's correct. Okay, so I guess the last question I have is, based on your experience as an assessor and the additional information that you've heard today, do you believe that your valuation of the property at 522 Island Avenue is the fair market value as of April 1, 25. Okay, thank you. We'll let you go first if you have a question, but again, questions, you'll have a chance to make an argument later. [55:50] Ted: The only thing I'd say is if there were no fuel trucks there, I'd pay whatever you wanted because then I'd have a real life. I don't have that same life. It's really an altered state of good living, and that's my complaint. [56:06] Eric Larson: Sorry, just to be clear. Questions, not arguments. You'll get a chance for the argument later. This is a time if you have a specific question, and you don't have to. I think you guys are great. Okay. [56:16] Ted: I appreciate your knowledge and appreciate who you are and how well you try to do the job that you're doing. I commend it. That's not a question. That's not a question either. Sorry. [56:26] Eric Larson: That's okay. You might come up with, I will give you a last chance to ask questions, but if board members have questions. I have a quick one for the assessor. What was the assessed value of the property in I guess let's say both 2020 and 2021. There's [56:55] Speaker F (unidentified): 275 800 I don't think it was the same house not I'd have to investigate that not the same meaning that was before what condition before the fire how it presented potentially and then in 2021 the value you $550,100. It looks like that was the result of the evaluation of the [57:44] Eric Larson: board members. [58:09] Unidentified board member: What evidence supports the 20% reduction in terms of the oil operation effect on us? [58:17] Speaker F (unidentified): Jim Narrow made that determination when he went out and looked physically looked at the property and interior and exterior obsolescence that'd be exterior obsolescence any external as in outside the house influence that might affect the value of your property no [59:06] Eric Larson: one has any further questions I guess we can we can go to arguments that people want to make so if you want to go first once again you're welcome to summarize, you don't have to it's just another opportunity if you want [59:29] Ted: I appreciate all the trouble the assessors have gone to and Jim Merrill especially, I think he's a wonderful man I wish he could have lived there for a week and then realized the difficulty of being by those fuel trucks. But that's my main concern is the fuel trucks. It really is for the property and lifestyle. It's hard to put it in percentage. But, you know, I was gun-fired when I got the... And I know the property's gone up in value. I fixed the hole in the floor. I'm hoping to get another fireman in the policeman's family. But, yeah. Thank you for your time. I don't know any other questions we'll [1:00:17] Eric Larson: Let the city summarize too. Yeah, I'll keep it brief. I think, and I, know that Attorney Writing will probably repeat what I'm saying now, but I think, you know, the standard in Maine requires that, the owner demonstrates that the property is substantially overvalued, and in order to demonstrate that, the owner has to present credible affirmative evidence of the just value of the property. And as the evidence has shown, we don't have, I mean, we do have Mr. Hakel's, you know, concerns about being close to the, you know, to the fuel business, the, I think the evidence shows that the assessor's office has already taken that into consideration and reduced the value of the property by 2010 as a result of that. The, but other than that, there's, there's no, credible evidence of the value of the property, and there isn't before the board any sort of credible evidence about the reduction in value that the fuel truck might have on the value of the property, other than the assessor's determination that it reduces the value by 20. And so I would just say that based on that, the appellant hasn't met their, burden of proving that the property was potentially overvalued, and as a result, the assessor's valuation should be. Let's see. I'm a little thrown off because we didn't do our jurisdictional findings, so I don't know. I'll ask Arts Council if you want to summarize the standard of... [1:02:26] Unidentified board member: Why don't I summarize the standard of review that you'll be applying. Then I suggest you open that for public comment if there is any, assuming there's not, closed the hearing at that point, and then you can address the jurisdictional elements as a part of your deliberations. So as Attorney Goldman summarized, but so that you hear it through my words as your attorney, I'll repeat the standard of review here. So in Maine, the assessor's assessment is presumed to be valid, and the burden is on the taxpayer to demonstrate and to overcome this presumption by showing that the assessment is manifestly wrong. Case law tells us there's three ways to show that an assessment is manifestly wrong. Either that the property was substantially overvalued and injustice would result from that overvaluation, that there was unjust discrimination,, or that the assessment was fraudulent, dishonest, or illegal. It's not enough to show that the assessor made a mistake or an error in judgment. The taxpayer must demonstrate affirmative evidence that the property was valued at more than its fair market value. So keep in mind, this is a de novo review. So you're viewing the evidence anew and don't give any undue or more special weight to the assessor's testimony, and if you determine that it has been manifestly wrong, you must then make an independent determination of the value. So with that, Mr. Child, turn it back over to you. Okay, do board members [1:04:27] Eric Larson: have any questions about the standard here before we close the hearing? Public comment? Okay, we will, and no one present from the public. Oh, you, if you have a specific question about the standard, that's, I would entertain it, but it has to be a pretty specific question. No, it was, well, I don't know. [1:04:52] Ted: I am not a great question. I understand that, you know, Jim did a job of reducing the 20%. I feel that the realtors who deal with the island would know better than Jim what the value is gonna change because they're living there and selling property. And I know Jim in his heart was doing the best he could at knowing what he knows. But I believe that the realtors probably know better because that's their work and that's their island and they know what is standard for selling a property. That's a lot, but I could, I loved you. [1:05:37] Eric Larson: Okay, but no members of the public other than your, I'm looking now at, sometimes this is a public meeting, so in theory there could be someone from the public, but there is no one from the public here who's going to speak, so we're going to close that, close the public portion of the meeting. That's okay. Yeah, and with that said, I guess we can begin our deliberations, but now, no, so now, yeah, this is procedurally, again, how it works, it's even, I have sometimes trouble keeping track of the process, but so now having heard all the evidence and sort of the legal standard, now it's for the three board members here to reach a decision and articulate the findings that we're going to make that support the decision that we made. So usually the way we do this, I've done this in the past, is to have us kind of do a quick poll to see where we're going, where we're likely to end up, if there's disagreement or not between us, and then kind of go back and fill in the details. So that way also for applicants like yourself, you can hear the final answer before you hear our reasoning, and you don't have to stay to listen to us talk through how we're getting to that answer. If you need to catch a ferry, that's just how we typically, how we typically do it. So all right, so I'm a little thrown off again because I didn't do the jurisdictional thing first, but I guess I'm going to assume for purposes of my polling that we agree that there is jurisdiction and do my poll once again rather than begin going through the reasoning. So I don't know. Because I'm the sheriff, one thing I usually get to do is make them go first to tell me where they'd end up. [1:07:39] Unidentified board member: Even if there's not a lot of or no objective evidence to support this case, I would adhere to the town tax assessments. Okay. Is that fine? Yeah. Yes. I agree. I think there's plenty of evidence that shows the city took account of most of the conditions of the property and made some appropriate adjustments in case they, to me, in case it was thought through. [1:08:18] Eric Larson: In this case, I think I do agree based on the standard here. So I think that the short answer is we're going to deny the appeal. That's where we're going to end up, but you're certainly welcome to. We're not in much of a disagreement about where we're ending up, but we're going to discuss the reasoning and articulate the findings. And then we direct our attorney to draft a written decision that incorporates those findings. And then you'll get a copy of that and then you have a period to appeal. [1:08:48] Ted: So I'm trying to see the time. Yeah. [1:08:51] Eric Larson: Yeah. It's just about a little after two. Okay. So again, you're welcome to sit and watch us talk more. [1:08:58] Ted: I might as well stay and listen and learn more. Yeah,. [1:09:03] Eric Larson: So I can't remember. Do we do a motion and then do it, or do we talk through our findings and then do our motion? Why don't you talk through your findings, and then we can do a motion at the end. Yeah. All right. Well, I think that others can talk before me if you want to articulate things. I'll fill in. Okay. Yeah. [1:09:26] Unidentified board member: I think it seems to me that one of the biggest issues that the applicant has to do with the influence of the new commercial installation on the property next door and I don't, we don't have any professional or, from my perspective, credible evidence that as to its impact on value of the property, subject property. I mean, it was permitted so through the city's planning board planning process. Yeah. [1:10:16] Eric Larson: It's, I mean, I'll also note just for the applicant here that you're not alone. In fact, I think in the time that I've been on the board, no one has actually managed to meet the burden of showing that the that he was manifestly wrong. So we're not treating you differently from others. So yeah, I think the lack of and also I guess I would note for the findings, I wouldn't say that what I what the applicant has stated is not credible. I think we can credit it really what he said, but it's still not sufficient to overcome the burden. You know, something like an independent assessment or a current broker's opinion, even if you had the brokers review the property again today and say this is how much the property is worth was worth in 2025 at the time of the assessment, that's something we could hang our hats on. But at this point, what we have is you know a professionally trained appraiser by the city in the assessment office considering all the factors that you identified and coming up with a number. We don't really have another number from you that we can use to compete. I guess I would add to that, you know, and again the timeline is because of the fire and when people were looking at things, it's a little difficult. So it was really I don't know how much weight to give it, but I would note that the assessed value in 2020 was about 275 000. You know, we have some evidence through the applicant that when consulting with some brokers at that time that they said that the property might be worth somewhere between 325 and 350 000. So that doesn't seem too far off at that time. And as we agree, the property values have gone up considerably since then, and we don't have any different numbers other than the assessor's hard number to put to it for the 2025 assessment. That's, I think, again, just, I don't see anything that the applicant has been able to provide that would give us a different number to work from to show that the city's assessment value is manifest and recognizing that the city's site visit you know after the city site visit that they did consider and themselves adjust the value to reflect the presence of the stool fuel storage facility and the trucks next door, recognizing also as the applicant said they were there for a very brief time and didn't sit with that process over the course of 24 hours or a week, which might influence their decision [Michael Goldman: but I] guess I guess the jurisdiction we're going to have to ask the city another question but this appears to be a in terms of subject matter an issue where the applicant is claiming that the property was substantially overvalued and the appeal was timely filed and they answered sure as far as we can tell all the requests for documentation from the city so I think the only question is whether the taxes were sought were properly were adequately paid yeah we're just checking that right now because we're not allowed to hear the hearing if you don't actually pay the amount that I claim, okay, that's due to them, so I paid. Yeah, good idea again. [1:14:19] Ted: Didn't I feel like, yeah. [1:14:28] Eric Larson: That you showed up, I had [1:14:35] Ted: a father that taught us that, pay your bills. [1:14:43] Eric Larson: Other things to add to our findings? No, I agree. Council, is there some element that I'm missing [1:14:50] Unidentified board member: here? You feel like you have enough? No, you checked all the elements of jurisdiction and made findings to support that, and I'm not seeing any from the board. Pretty clear your idea of your rationale to make your findings and reasonings that one of the members of the board try to make that into a motion. You're welcome to break up the jurisdiction piece from the merits piece. That's usually been the board's practice is to have separate votes on this. I [1:15:31] Eric Larson: want to give that a try, give you some practice in case someone else has to share some of that. I'll [1:15:40] Unidentified board member: make a motion to find that we had jurisdiction to hear the appeal and it's time to file. To your motion, Lee, that jurisdiction to hear the appeal because the board finds it was timely filed, all 706a requests were applied with, all taxes certainly [1:16:12] Eric Larson: may I jump in with the friendly amendment that in this case it wasn't a 706a request, ever since I had to make sure that I could create that, no outstanding [1:16:26] Unidentified board member: 706? Yeah, yes, as [1:16:34] Unidentified clerk/board member: amended. Second promotion moved by Lee Lowry, seconded by Chair Larson. Lee Lowry? Yeah. Charlotte? Yes. Finding [1:17:17] Eric Larson: I guess I'll move to find that the board has found that the applicant did not beat the burden of showing that the assessment was substantially overvalued and therefore denied the deal. I [1:17:43] Unidentified clerk/board member: second. All right. Moved by Chair Larson. Seconded by Lee Lavery. Chair Larson. Yes. Lee Lavery. Yes. Chair Larson. Yes. Passes 3-0. [1:17:54] Eric Larson: Then I'm going to revert that. Go ahead. [1:17:57] Unidentified board member: Do you mind if I just summarize some of what I heard as the key rationale and assume there's consensus on those points, plus any of the members say otherwise. I heard that the Board found that the primary argument from the applicant was that the property was substantially overvalued, or the assessment substantially overvalued the property because it did not count for the impact of value of the neighboring use. And the Board found that not to be critical credible because in fact the assessment did account for the neighboring use and did so following a site visit. Further, the Board found that while the testimony was credible, it was not sufficient enough to demonstrate affirmative evidence that the property was overvalued. Anything else the Board wanted to add? [1:19:05] Eric Larson: I guess I would tweak the first finding just a little bit. Again, my view was it wasn't that it wasn't credible, it's just that it wasn't persuasive. And I felt like I could credit everything that the applicant said and still found that it didn't meet the burden. New speaker Yeah, [1:19:34] Unidentified board member: that comes in here. New speaker You could bring it in now. New speaker [Speaker F (unidentified): Nothing] further restricted. I think I was interrupting you with a motion that struck me. New speaker [1:19:59] Eric Larson: So I would move that the [1:20:02] Unidentified clerk/board member: attorney [1:20:05] Unidentified board member: how do I go the Board of Assessment Review attorney it's a written decision and delegates to the chair of the authority to sign so it is actually 10 days I'm not going [1:20:22] Eric Larson: to shortchange my son and we have time before the applicant's decision is due right when is that decision due because we don't want to prejudice any right to appeal I think we're well within the right my sense was October 26th did [1:20:46] Ted: you get that yeah October 25th well thank you [1:20:49] Eric Larson: yeah you're you have the right to appeal our decision until October 22nd but we're going to get you we're directing our attorney yes you give us a written decision within 10 days for [1:21:03] Unidentified board member: you for them and that written decision as the sports practice will include information on how you can file an appeal if you want to take this to the next step sketch thank you so much [1:21:17] Eric Larson: yeah thank you so moved can I say so moved you can move [1:21:28] Unidentified clerk/board member: by Chair Larson seconded by Lee Lowry Chair Larson yes make [1:21:39] Eric Larson: a motion to adjourn I'll second that [1:21:44] Unidentified clerk/board member: motion to adjourn moved by Lee Lowry seconded by Chair Larson Lee Lowry yes passes 3-0 meeting concludes at 2 9 p.m. stop reporting thank [1:21:59] Eric Larson: you for your time thank you thank you thank you Yeah, it's very sympathetic to the difficulties. Free advice is not free advice, but the only thing I would note is you don't need to get a