The form contains several boxes with different ways to describe the property. There are blank boxes or spaces for the assessor's account number, code area number, deed volume and page or instrument number, date recorded, lot number, block number, addition name, number of acres, township, and range. Plaintiff did not do this. Although the form anticipates that the applicant will describe the property in greater detail than Plaintiff did, the application form was accepted by the assessor. The assessor's failure to return it for completion is not Plaintiff's error.
Defendant contends that newly acquired or constructed property requires a new application.
However, the statute does not address newly acquired or constructed property. Normally, newly acquired property would not have been included in the prior application. Because construction may extend over several months, if the application is filed after completion of construction, the owner may lose the exemption or incur a late-filing penalty. On the other hand, if the owner files the application before construction begins, it is faced with the problem of describing and seeking exemption for property that does not exist. The court notes that Plaintiff's first application, filed in 1992, described only the land and not the improvements that were later constructed on that land.