Despite Drury's contentions, it has not produced substantial or persuasive evidence that the Commission relied on anything but the true value in money or its value in exchange....Although the hearing officer states that Drury failed to meet its burden of proof because it failed to present an opinion of market value and substantial and persuasive evidence that the value it proposed is indicative of the market value of the subject property, we find instead that Drury failed to meet its burden because it failed to overcome the presumption that Assessor's valuation is correct.D'ya hear that, huddled masses yearning to pay lower taxes? The burden of proof is on you -- not the taxman. Definitely something worth thinking about before you spend five-and-a-half years fighting one of these.
Support Local Journalism.
Join the Riverfront Times Press Club
Local journalism is information. Information is power. And we believe everyone deserves access to accurate independent coverage of their community and state. Our readers helped us continue this coverage in 2020, and we are so grateful for the support.
Help us keep this coverage going in 2021. Whether it's a one-time acknowledgement of this article or an ongoing membership pledge, your support goes to local-based reporting from our small but mighty team.
Join the Riverfront Times Club for as little as $5 a month.