Opinion ID: 2524934
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Superior Court Properly Denied Alvarez's Motion to Supplement the Record.

Text: Alvarez made a motion below to supplement the record on appeal to include the entire borough assessor's file on each of the three properties concerned in this appeal. The superior court denied this motion on the grounds that Alvarez failed to show that any of the materials that she sought to add either were considered by the Board, or were not already present in the record on appeal. As the Borough points out, Alaska Appellate Rules 604(b)(1) and 210 are controlling on this issue. Appellate Rule 604(b)(1) establishes that the record for an appeal from an administrative agency consists of the original papers and exhibits filed with the administrative agency, and also establishes that Appellate Rule 210 applies, with some limited exceptions not applicable here. Rule 210(i) allows for modification of the record on appeal if the record does not truly disclose[ ] what occurred in the trial court, or if anything material is omitted from the record: Power of Court to Correct, Modify or Supplement. ... [I]f any difference arises whether the record truly discloses what occurred in the trial court, the difference shall be submitted to and settled by that court and the record made to conform to that court's decision. If anything material to either party is omitted from the record on appeal by error or accident by court personnel, or is misstated therein, the parties by stipulation, the trial court, or the appellate court ... may direct that the omission or misstatement shall be corrected. All other questions as to the content and form of the record shall be presented to the appellate court. Alaska Statute 29.45.210(d), which specifically concerns hearings before municipal boards of equalization, also applies and provides: An appellant or the assessor may appeal a determination of the board of equalization to the superior court as provided by rules of court applicable to appeals from the decisions of administrative agencies. Appeals are heard on the record established at the hearing before the board of equalization. [7] The record on appeal in this case included all parts of the borough assessor's files that were submitted as evidence at the Board hearing and marked as exhibits. Alvarez claims that the Board considered and made reference to materials in these files that were not formally marked as exhibits, and that these materials should have been part of the record on appeal. The Borough, citing Cool Homes, Inc. v. Fairbanks North Star Borough, [8] claims that the record established at the Board's hearing, and therefore the record on appeal, properly consisted only of those materials marked as exhibits. We have considered the issue of supplementation of the record on appeal of an administrative agency decision in several previous decisions. [9] In these decisions, we stated that the record on appeal in such cases properly consists of evidence that was either submitted to or considered by the administrative board. [10] We have also noted that a superior court's refusal to supplement the record is harmless if the excluded material would not have changed the outcome of the dispute on appeal. [11] None of the material that Alvarez claims was wrongly excluded was actually submitted to or considered by the Board. A review of the transcript of the Board's hearings indicates that all of the materials presented to, considered by, and discussed by the Board in these hearings, both formally and informally, are contained in the record on appeal. These materials are:  the assessor's reports on each of the properties, including the appeal forms filled out by Alvarez;  the list of comparable properties used by the assessor to calculate the market values of lots A and B;  the assessor's assessment valuation history for lots A and B and for the residential property;  Alvarez's classified ads placed in an attempt to sell lots A and B;  correspondence between Alvarez and the assessor concerning her residential property; [12]  photographs of Alvarez's residential property with associated commentary;  the assessor's written explanation of its corrections to the residential property's value;  the as-built survey of the residential property included in the assessor's report;  an affidavit from Alvarez's tenant describing certain interior features of one of the buildings on Alvarez's property;  a map of properties in the area of Alvarez's residential property showing other encroachments similar to the one on Alvarez's property. This is a complete list of all materials considered by or submitted to the Board, as the transcript indicates. [13] All of these materials appear in the record on appeal. Therefore, none of the materials that Alvarez claims were wrongly excluded from the record on appeal were submitted to or considered by the Board. The record on appeal was complete, and the motion to supplement the record was properly denied.