Opinion ID: 2622017
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: The State Board exercised its best judgment in deriving the capitalization rate adjustment

Text: Olen Residential argues that the State Board failed to exercise its best judgment in deriving its 2.25 percent capitalization rate adjustment. But, as the State Board's decision is presumed valid, [31] it is Olen Residential's burden to demonstrate that the State Board did not exercise its best judgment, [32] which it failed to do. Olen Residential's argument is belied by record evidence demonstrating that, in deriving its 2.25 percent capitalization rate adjustment, the State Board indeed exercised its best judgment by (1) discussing at length the appropriate capitalization rate adjustment, (2) reviewing the district court constructional defect judgment, and (3) reviewing the Assessor's income and expense statements. Accordingly, we conclude that Olen Residential failed to show that the State Board did not exercise its best judgment in selecting a 2.25 percent capitalization rate increase applicable to each property.