Only choice for board was to drop airport tower value
To the editor:
Re: Control Tower Assessment Appeal in Kelowna Could Hurt, March 12 Capital News.
As a person with very extensive expertise in [property] assessment and assessment appeals, it is clear to me this decision is clearly flawed.
I have read the decision of the Property Assessment Appeal Board and it would seem to me the appeal board was not incorrect, rather the assessment authority failed to properly defend their assessment.
The board was thus left with no option than to rule based on the best evidence put forward to them.
It is clear to me that Nav Canada is looking to obtain a Stated Case from the Supreme Court. A Stated Case would force the assessment authority to then value all airports on the same formula and Nav Canada would not need to appeal any other of their properties. The role of the assessment authority is to provide an “equitable” Assessment Roll, meaning that all airports would then have to assessed similarly.
This would mean that when the next roll comes out with new lower valuations, an attempt would have to be made to try to overturn the Supreme Court Stated Case (not so easy).
The case can be won on a number of different fronts and the municipalities/cities should pool together to defeat Nav Canada in the current Supreme Court appeal. They should not depend totally on the assessment authority to look out for their interests.
Kelowna and any other city/municipality with an airport should apply for intervener status in the current Supreme Court Appeal of those affected cities of the appeal board ruling.