OARB 2013

The property owner and the municipality appealed the 2012 property assessment of a vacant commercial lot.

The property had been assessed at $1,173,000, but the owner and MPAC had previously agreed to reduce it to $630,000 via Minutes of Settlement, which the municipality refused to sign.

The owner had purchased the property in 2010 for $525,000 after it sat on the market for 15 years due to environmental stigma.

The Assessment Review Board found that the 2010 sale price of $525,000 was the best evidence of current value, rejecting the municipality's comparables as vastly superior.

The Board reduced the assessment to $525,000 and found the municipality's refusal to settle unreasonable, inviting submissions for costs.

The appellant, owner of the Calabogie Peaks Resort, appealed the property tax assessments for four parcels of land for the 2009-2012 taxation years.

The properties included a hotel, timeshares, and a ski hill.

MPAC valued the properties using the income approach, direct sales comparison, and cost approach, respectively.

The appellant argued for a much lower valuation based on a discounted cash flow and sum of the parts valuation, emphasizing the resort's financial losses and the cost to sever the parcels.

The Assessment Review Board largely accepted MPAC's methodology but made minor adjustments, reducing the hotel's value due to higher energy costs and reducing the timeshare values to remove GST from the sales data.

The Board declined to award costs to the appellant.

The appellant appealed the property tax assessments for its pulp and paper mill for the 2009-2012 taxation years.

The central issue was determining the current value of the large industrial portion of the property using the cost approach.

The appellant argued for a model approach based on a modern, efficient mill to isolate functional obsolescence, while the respondent used a rationalization approach based on the existing structures.

The Board preferred the appellant's model approach, finding it better captured the functional obsolescence of the aging, disjointed facility.

The Board also determined that an external obsolescence allowance of 53.5% was appropriate due to the industry's economic challenges and the mill's excess operating costs compared to industry norms.

The assessment was reduced accordingly.

The appellant property owner appealed the commercial vacant classification of its 31.45-acre parcel located within the urban boundary of Fort Erie.

The owner argued the lands should be classified and valued as 'farm lands used only for farm purposes' under s. 19(5) of the Assessment Act, as a local farmer had been cultivating the land since 2006.

The municipality and MPAC opposed, arguing the farming was an illegal non-conforming use and the property did not constitute 'farm lands'.

The Assessment Review Board held that the lands qualified as farm lands for the 2007-2012 taxation years, finding that actual farming use is the primary determinant for assessment purposes, regardless of zoning legality or future development potential.