Opinion ID: 1730025
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: labor house (parcel xxxxxxxxx)

Text: This house, located 3 miles west of the feedlot, was constructed in 1996 at a cost of $76,000. It is a one-story house with an area of 1,160 square feet and a vinyl siding exterior. The assessor's data listed its quality as Fair+ and its condition as Average. The 2004 assessed valuation was $71,893. Gary testified that there was a continuing problem with mold in this house and that the problem existed as of January 1, 2004. Taking this into consideration, he expressed an opinion that the quality and condition of the house were both fair and that its value in 2004 was $58,307. Newell testified that while she was not an expert in . . . mold identification, in 2002, she observed what she considered to be mold on both the main level and the basement of the house. Her inspection in November 2003 revealed the mold was increasing. Newell considered both the quality and the condition of the house to be [f]air. She did not express any opinion as to the value of the house or the effect of the observed mold on value. TERC determined that there were two issues raised by the appeal: (1) whether the decision of the Board determining taxable value of the subject properties was unreasonable or arbitrary and (2) the taxable value of the subject properties on January 1, 2004. TERC determined that it would not consider any equalization issues, because DRI had not raised such issues in its protests to the Board. TERC further determined that DRI had not shown the 2004 valuations of the subject properties to be unreasonable or arbitrary and that the evidence of actual value presented by DRI was not persuasive and was an insufficient basis for relief. TERC affirmed the determinations of the Board with respect to the 2004 valuations of the subject properties.