The Housing Partnership, INC. and Lemay Homes, LLC. vs Jake Zimmerman, Assessor, St. Louis County, Missouri

September 20th, 2019

IN THE STATE TAX COMMISSION OF MISSOURI

THE HOUSING PARTNERSHIP, INC. and )
LEMAY HOMES, LLC. )
             Complainants, )
)
v. ) Appeal No. 18-11088 through
)                    18-11120
JAKE ZIMMERMAN, ASSESSOR )
ST. LOUIS COUNTY, MISSOURI, )
             Respondent. )
)

DECISION AND ORDER

HOLDING

The decision of the St. Louis County Board of Equalization (BOE) sustaining the assessment made by Jake Zimmerman, Assessor, St. Louis County, Missouri (Respondent) is AFFIRMED, in part, and SET ASIDE, in part.

The Housing Partnership, Inc., and Lemay Homes, LLC, (Complainants) presented substantial and persuasive evidence establishing that the following subject properties are exempt from ad valorem taxation under Article X, Section 6, of the Missouri Constitution for tax year 2017-2018:

Appeal Number Parcel Number Address
18-11089 27G210285 309 E. Arlee Ave.
18-11090 27G210274 311 E. Arlee Ave.
18-11103 27G141141 108 E. Etta
18-11111 27G432463 618 Lagro Ave
18-11112 28G440533 9907 Linn Ave.
18-11114 27G141912 108 Mann St.
18-11117 28G440661 206 E Ripa Ave
18-11118 28G440744 208 E Ripa Ave
18-11119 28G440571 218 E Ripa Ave

The Housing Partnership, Inc., and Lemay Homes, LLC. (Complainants) failed to present substantial and persuasive evidence establishing that the following subject properties are exempt from ad valorem taxation under Article X, Section 6, of the Missouri Constitution for tax year 2017-2018:

Appeal Number Parcel Number Address
18-11088 27G120562 229 E. Arlee Ave.
18-11091 27G120993 9720 S. Broadway
18-11092 27G120470 9800 S. Broadway
18-11093 28G431843 9905 S. Broadway
18-11094 27G120324 9806 S. Broadway
18-11095 27G120283 9810 S. Broadway
18-11096 27G120223 9814 S. Broadway
18-11097 28G431834 9901 S. Broadway
18-11098 28G432024 9929 S. Broadway
18-11099 28G432101 9931 S. Broadway
18-11100 27G141691 128 E. Cartwright
18-11101 27G141710 143 E. Cartwright
18-11102 27G120173 9820 Erie Dr.
18-11104 27G141242 110 E. Etta
18-11105 27G141307 143 E Etta
18-11106 27G121152 143 E Felton Ave
18-11107 27G120810 200 E Felton Ave
18-11108 27G412036 9415 Gentry Ave.
18-11109 27G410100 9502 Gentry Ave.
18-11110 27G121662 9833 Joplin Ave
18-11113 28G440506 9910 Linn Ave
18-11115 27G230214 9626 Perrin Ave
18-11116 28G440607 120 E Ripa
18-11120 27G132213 9536 Gentry Ave.

Complainant appeared by counsel Ryan McCarty.

Respondent appeared by counsel Steve Robson.

Case heard and decided by Chief Counsel Maureen Monaghan (Hearing Officer).

ISSUE

Complainant appealed Respondent’s ad valorem taxation of the subject property on the ground that the subject property qualified for exemption in 2018 because Complainants are tax exempt pursuant to 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3) and used the property for charitable purposes. Complainants did not challenge the assessed valuation of the subject property.

FINDINGS OF FACT

  1. Authority.  Complainants timely appealed to the State Tax Commission (STC) from the decision of the BOE.
  2. Evidentiary Hearing. Upon agreement of the parties on May 20, 2019, the issue of exemption was presented on the record with all pending objections withdrawn.
  3. Identification and Description of Subject Properties.
Appeal Number Parcel Number Address Description
18-11088 27G120562  

 

229 E. Arlee Ave.

The property has been used as green space since 2014. The plan is for it to be a side yard for a neighboring residence. Exhibits U and V.
18-11089 27G210285  

309 E. Arlee Ave.

The property has been vacant land since 2015.   The plan is to combine the property with 27G210274 for development as a house. Exhibit U.
18-11090 27G210274  

 

 

311 E. Arlee Ave.

 

 

The property was acquired in 2013. There are preliminary plans developed for the property to include a remodel of the improvement. Urban Werks conducted a feasibility study. Vatterott, contractor, is estimating the cost for the project for rehab and an addition. Parcel 27G210285 may be combined. Exhibits N and U.
18-11091 27G120993 9720 S. Broadway The property has been vacant land since 2017.   The plan is for commercial or mixed use. Exhibits J and U.
18-11092 27G120470  

9800 S. Broadway

 

 

The property has been vacant land since 2014.   Environmental assessments were needed.   The plans are for a mixed use of offices and apartments. Exhibits R and U
18-11093 28G431843  

9905 S. Broadway

The property has been vacant land since 2013.   Environmental assessments were needed.   The plans are for a mixed use of offices and apartments. Exhibits R and U
18-11094 27G120324  

9806 S. Broadway

The property was acquired in 2016. Environmental assessments were needed. The plans are for a mixed use of offices and apartments. Exhibits R and U
18-11095 27G120283  

9810 S. Broadway

The property was acquired in 2016. Environmental assessments were needed. The plans are for a mixed use of offices and apartments. Exhibits R and U
18-11096 27G120223  

9814 S. Broadway

The improvements are to be removed in 2019.   Environmental assessments were needed.   The plans are for a mixed use of offices and apartments. Exhibits R and U
18-11097 28G431834  

9901 S. Broadway

The property was acquired in 2013. The improvements may be removed in the future.     Plan for commercial use. Ex J: Plan for commercial mixed use
18-11098 28G432024  

9929 S. Broadway

The property has been vacant land since 2017.   They are developing plans for commercial development. Exhibits J and U.
18-11099 28G432101  

9931 S. Broadway

The property has been vacant land since 2017.   They are developing plans for commercial development. Exhibits J and U.
18-11100 27G141691  

128 E. Cartwright

The property has been used as green space since 2015. The plan is for it to be a side yard for a neighboring residence. Exhibits U and V.
18-11101 27G141710  

143 E. Cartwright

The property has been used as green space since 2014. The plan is for it to be a side yard for a neighboring residence. Exhibits U and V.
18-11102 27G120173  

9820 Erie Dr.

The property has been used as green space since 2014. The plan is for it to be a side yard for a neighboring residence. Exhibits U and V.
18-11103 27G141141  

108 E. Etta

The property was acquired in 2016. The improvements are to be removed in 2019.   They are conducting a feasibility study. The need to develop plans. Exhibit U
18-11104 27G141242 110 E. Etta The property was acquired in 2016. The improvements are to be removed.   They will develop plans. Exhibit U.
18-11105 27G141307 143 E Etta The property was acquired in 2016. The improvements are to be removed.   They will develop plans. Exhibit U.
18-11106 27G121152  

143 E Felton Ave

The property has been used as green space since 2015. The plan is for it to be a side yard for a neighboring residence. Exhibits U and V.
18-11107 27G120810  

200 E Felton Ave

The property was acquired in 2016. The improvements are scheduled to be removed in 2019. Plans have not been made for this property. It is possible that they property may be sold to a local landlord or investor. Exhibits J, S, and U.
18-11108 27G412036  

9415 Gentry Ave.

The property was acquired in 2015. The improvements were removed in 2018. The plan is to sell for a multi-development site. Exhibit J.
18-11109 27G410100  

9502 Gentry Ave.

The property has been used as green space.   The plan is for it to be a side yard for a neighboring residence. Exhibits U and V.
18-11110 27G121662  

9833 Joplin Ave

 

The property was acquired in 2012. It is land only. They are holding it until plans at 9800 S. Broadway are completed.   Exhibits J and U.
18-11111 27G432463 618 Lagro Ave The property was acquired in 2015. A home is planned for the property. They are estimating the cost. Exhibits Q and U.
18-11112 28G440533  

9907 Linn Ave.

The property was acquired in 2016. They plan on demolishing the improvements and combine it with 206 and 208 E. Ripa for a house on the property. Exhibit Q
18-11113 28G440506 9910 Linn Ave The property was acquired in 2015. The improvements were removed in 2017. Exhibit Q
18-11114 27G141912 108 Mann St. The property was acquired in 2015. The improvements are to be removed pursuant to the development plans. Exhibit U.
18-11115 27G230214  

9626 Perrin Ave

 

 

Plans are being developed. Plans may include a large residential development. It is possible they will build homes to sell at market value and possibly make it a joint venture with a developer.   Exhibits J and U.
18-11116 28G440607  

120 E Ripa

The property has been used as green space.   The plan is for it to be a side yard for a neighboring residence. Exhibits U and V.
18-11117 28G440661  

206 E Ripa Ave

 

 

 

The property was acquired in 2016. The improvements will be demolished. UrbanWerks will study the property for new construction. Preliminary plans have been developed for rehabilitation of 208 E Ripa with an addition. This property will be included along with 9907 Linn. Exhibit O and U.
18-11118 28G440744  

208 E Ripa Ave

The property was acquired in 2015. The improvements are to be removed in 2019.   Preliminary plans developed and costs need to be estimated. It will be combined with 206 E. Ripa and 9907 Linn. Exhibits O and U
18-11119 28G440571  

218 E Ripa Ave

The property was acquired in 2016. The improvements are to be removed in 2019.   Plans are developed and the costs are being estimated. Exhibit U
18-11120 27G132213  

9536 Gentry Ave.

The property was acquired in 2015. The improvements were removed. The property will probably be developed in 2020. Trying to develop plans (Exhibit U)
  1. Assessment. Respondent classified the following properties as residential property and determined the following values as of January 1, 2017:
Appeal Number Parcel Number True Value in Money
18-11088 27G120562 $     17,300
18-11089 27G210285 $     23,400
18-11090 27G210274 $     58,900
18-11091 27G120993 $       6,500
18-11092 27G120470 $     40,500
18-11093 28G431843 $     21,600
18-11094 27G120324 $     85,500
18-11095 27G120283 $   282,000
18-11096 27G120223 $     33,800
18-11097 28G431834 $     55,000
18-11098 28G432024 $     28,200
18-11099 28G432101 $     23,700
18-11100 27G141691 $     21,000
18-11101 27G141710 $     23,400
18-11102 27G120173 $     23,300
18-11103 27G141141 $     52,400
18-11104 27G141242 $     48,800
18-11105 27G141307 $     77,700
18-11106 27G121152 $     23,400
18-11107 27G120810 $     29,600
18-11108 27G412036 $     25,200
18-11109 27G410100 $     23,400
18-11110 27G121662 $     32,600
18-11111 27G432463 $     23,200
18-11112 28G440533 $     41,100
18-11113 28G440506 $     19,700
18-11114 27G141912 $     62,700
18-11115 27G230214 $     27,000
18-11116 28G440607 $     18,100
18-11117 28G440661 $     34,000
18-11118 28G440744 $           600
18-11119 28G440571 $     39,600
18-11120 27G132213 $     22,400

5.  Board of Equalization. The BOE sustained Respondent’s values of the subject properties.

6.  Complainants. The Housing Partnership (formerly known as Lemay Housing Partnership, Inc) is a Missouri non-profit corporation established in 1998. (Exhibits C and D). The stated purpose is to develop, rehabilitate and construct affordable housing and provide affordable housing opportunities to low and moderate income individuals and families. Lemay Homes, LLC, is a single-purpose entity created by The Housing Partnership. Lemay Homes cannot derive profit. (Exhibit U) It is allowed to receive low-income housing tax credits.

7.  Complainants’ Evidence. Complainant offered the following Exhibits:

Exhibit Description
Exhibit A Articles of Organization
Exhibit B Limited Liability Company
Exhibit C Articles of Amendment for a Nonprofit Corporation
Exhibit D Corporation in Good Standing
Exhibit E Second Amendment and Restated Bylaws
Exhibit F IRS 501(c)(3) status
Exhibit G IRS 990
Exhibit H Audited Financial Statements 2016-2017
Exhibit I Handout explaining the organization
Exhibit J Power Point on Properties
Exhibit K Strategic Plan including senior apartments, affordable new homes, commercial and retail space, and mixed use space.
Exhibit L Business Plan Framework
Exhibit M Goals and Outcome Report
Exhibit N Renovation Plan
Exhibit O Renovation Plan
Exhibit P Subrecipient Agreement
Exhibit Q House Plans
Exhibit R Senior Living Plans
Exhibit S Renovation Plan
Exhibit T Renovation Plan
Exhibit U Written Direct Testimony (WDT) Kate Reese
Exhibit V Written Rebuttal Testimony (WRT) Kate Reese

 8.  Respondent’s Evidence.

Exhibit Description
Exhibit 1 Wynell Landers CV
Exhibit 2 Field Inspection
Exhibit 3 Table Properties
Exhibit 4 Properties Record Card
WDT Wynell Landers

9.  Taxation of the Property. Complainants’ evidence was substantial and persuasive to establish that the following properties qualify as exempt from ad valorem taxation under Article X, Section 6 of the Missouri Constitution on January 1, 2018.

Appeal Number Parcel Number Address
18-11089 27G210285 309 E. Arlee Ave.
18-11090 27G210274 311 E. Arlee Ave.
18-11103 27G141141 108 E. Etta
18-11111 27G432463 618 Lagro Ave
18-11112 28G440533 9907 Linn Ave.
18-11114 27G141912 108 Mann St.
18-11117 28G440661 206 E Ripa Ave
18-11118 28G440744 208 E Ripa Ave
18-11119 28G440571 218 E Ripa Ave

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION

Jurisdiction

The Commission has jurisdiction to hear this appeal and correct any assessment which is shown to be unlawful, unfair, arbitrary or capricious. The Hearing Officer shall issue a decision and order affirming, modifying, or reversing the determination of the Board of Equalization, and correcting any assessment which is unlawful, unfair, improper, arbitrary, or capricious. Mo. Const. art. X, sec. 14; Sections 138.430, 138.431, 138.431.4, RSMo. 2000[1] 

Presumption In Appeal

There is a presumption of validity, good faith and correctness of assessment by the BOE. Hermel, Inc. v. State Tax Comm’n, 564 S.W.2d 888, 895 (Mo. banc 1978); Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Ry. v. State Tax Comm’n, 436 S.W.2d 650, 656 (Mo. 1968); May Department Stores Co. v. State Tax Comm’n, 308 S.W.2d 748, 759 (Mo. 1958).   This presumption is a rebuttable rather than a conclusive presumption.   The presumption of correct assessment is rebutted when the taxpayer presents substantial and persuasive evidence to establish that the BOE’s valuation is erroneous and what the fair market value should have been placed on the property. Hermel, supra; Cupples-Hesse Corp v. State Tax Comm’n, 329 S.W.2d 696, 702 (Mo. 1959).

Exemptions

Taxation of property is the rule and exemption from taxation is the exception. United Cerebral Palsy Ass’n of Greater Kansas City v. Ross, 789 S.W.2d 798, 799 (Mo. banc 1990). Tax exemptions are not favored in the law, and statutes granting exemptions are to be strictly, yet reasonably, construed against the one claiming the exemption. Missouri Church of Scientology v. State Tax Comm’n, 560 S.W.2d 837, 844 (Mo. banc 1987), State ex rel. Union Electric Co. v. Goldberg, 578 SW2d 921,923 (Mo. Banc 1979). A property owner who claims the exemption bears a substantial burden to prove that his property falls within the exempted class. United Cerebral Palsy Ass’n of Greater Kansas City, 789 S.W.2d at 799.

Under Missouri law, all property, real and personal, actually and regularly used exclusively for religious worship, for schools and colleges, or for purposes purely charitable and not held for private or corporate profit, except that the exemption herein granted does not include real property not actually used or occupied for the purpose of the organization but held or used as investment even though the income or rentals received therefrom is used wholly for religious, educational or charitable purposes, are exempt from taxation for state, county or local purposes. Section 137.100(5).

Under the three-pronged Franciscan test, a complainant claiming exemption from property taxation must prove that (1) the subject property is actually and regularly used exclusively for purposes purely charitable; (2) the property is owned and operated on a not-for-profit basis; and (3) the dominant use of the property must be for the benefit of an indefinite number of people and must directly or indirectly benefit society generally. United Cerebral Palsy Ass’n of Greater Kansas City, 789 S.W.2d at 801, citing Franciscan Tertiary Province of Missouri, Inc. v. State Tax Commission, 566 S.W.2d 213 (Mo. banc 1978).  Complainant’s failure to prove any single element is sufficient for denial of exemption.

The actual use of the real property is the controlling factor in a determination of whether or not the real property is exempt from taxation. Franciscan Tertiary Province of Missouri, Inc., 566 S.W.2d at 224. The dominate use of the property must be for the benefit of an indefinite number of people, for the purpose of “bringing their hearts under the influence of education or religion, by relieving their bodies from disease, suffering, or constraint, by assisting them to establish themselves for life, or by erecting or maintaining public buildings or works or otherwise lessening the burdens of government.” Id.

Discussion

Under the three-pronged Franciscan test, a complainant claiming exemption from property taxation must prove that (1) the subject property is actually and regularly used exclusively for purposes purely charitable; (2) the property is owned and operated on a not-for-profit basis; and (3) the dominant use of the property must be for the benefit of an indefinite number of people and must directly or indirectly benefit society generally.

The evidence presented provided the various uses or planned uses for the property including green space, affordable housing projects, commercial projects and mixed use projects. Other than property used as “green space,” the property is in various stages of development from obtaining the property to plans and cost projections.

Green Space

The following properties are deemed “green space” by Complainants. (Exhibit V)

Appeal Number Parcel Number Address
18-11088 27G120562 229 E. Arlee Ave.
18-11100 27G141691 128 E. Cartwright
18-11101 27G141710 143 E. Cartwright
18-11102 27G120173 9820 Erie Dr.
18-11106 27G121152 143 E Felton
18-11109 27G410100 9502 Gentry Ave.
18-11113 28G440506 9910 Linn Ave
18-11116 28G440607 120 E Ripa

These properties are deemed green space by Complainants. No courts have addressed the issue of whether land held for the purpose of preserving “green space” is “actually and regularly used” for a charitable purpose so that it is exempt from taxation. Nonetheless, “each tax exemption case is peculiarly one which must be decided upon its own facts, turning upon the particular record presented.” St. John’s Mercy Hosp. v. Leachman, 522 S.W.2d 723, 725 (Mo. banc 1977). A review of cases makes it clear the determinative fact is that some actual activity must be undertaken in order to meet this requirement. Sunday School Bd of Southern Baptist Conv. v. Mitchell, 658 S.W.2d 1, 5 (Mo. banc 1983); see also Missouri United Methodist Retirement Homes v. State Tax Comm’n, 522 SW2d 745 (Mo. banc 1975) (a charitable use exemption depends upon the use made of the property and not solely upon the stated purpose of the organization). The property must be dedicated unconditionally to a charitable activity, and “it is the purpose for which the owner actually uses the property that is controlling, not potential purposes for which the property could be used.” Abbott Ambulance Inc v. Leggett 926 SW2d 92, 96 (Mo. App 1996) (Emphasis added) Since it cannot be said that the properties are “used”, it cannot be said that it would be entitled to exemption from taxation.

Commercial

Complainants own ten parcels in which the current development plans are commercial use or include commercial use. Land and improvements held for the purpose of commercial endeavors would not be a use that would qualify a property for exemption. Such use would not bring hearts under the influence of education or religion, relieve bodies from disease, suffering, or constraint, or otherwise lessening the burdens of government. Also, there is case law authority indicating that the promotion of economic or business interests is not inherently a charitable use as charity is defined for property tax purposes. See, Home Builder’s Ass’n v. St. Louis Cty Bd. of Equalization, 803 S.W. 2d 636, Mo. App. 1991).

Complainants failed to present evidence that the following properties are being used for a charitable purpose in that the substantial and persuasive evidence presented was as their future use involving commercial endeavors.

Appeal Number Parcel Number Address Description
18-11091 27G120993 9720 S. Broadway The property has been vacant land since 2017.   They plan is for commercial or mixed use. Exhibits J and U.
18-11092 27G120470 9800 S. Broadway

 

 

The property has been vacant land since 2014.   Environmental assessments were needed.   The plans are for a mixed use of offices and apartments. Exhibits R and U
18-11093 28G431843 9905 S. Broadway The property has been vacant land since 2013.   Environmental assessments were needed.   The plans are for a mixed use of offices and apartments. Exhibits R and U
18-11094 27G120324 9806 S. Broadway The property was acquired in 2016. Environmental assessments were needed. The plans are for a mixed use of offices and apartments. Exhibits R and U
18-11095 27G120283 9810 S. Broadway The property was acquired in 2016. Environmental assessments were needed. The plans are for a mixed use of offices and apartments. Exhibits R and U
18-11096 27G120223 9814 S. Broadway The improvements are to be removed in 2019.   Environmental assessments were needed.   The plans are for a mixed use of offices and apartments. Exhibits R and U
18-11097 28G431834 9901 S. Broadway The property was acquired in 2013. The improvements may be removed in the future.     Plan for commercial use. Ex J: Plan for commercial mixed use
18-11098 28G432024 9929 S. Broadway The property has been vacant land since 2017.   They are developing plans for commercial development. Exhibits J and U.
18-11099 28G432101 9931 S. Broadway The property has been vacant land since 2017.   They are developing plans for commercial development. Exhibits J and U.
18-11110 27G121662 9833 Joplin Ave

 

 

The property was acquired in 2012. It is land only. They are holding it until plans at 9800 S. Broadway are completed.   Exhibits J and U.

Development For Charitable Use

In Franciscan the Court reasoned that the property “must be dedicated unconditionally to the charitable activity in such a way that there will be no profit, presently or prospectively, to individuals or corporations.” 566 SW2d 224 (emphasis supplied).

In many instances, a religious, educational or charitable entity may, either through purchase or by donation, obtain an unimproved or partially improved tract of land for which it is intended that the property be developed and used for a tax-exempt purpose. The issue becomes how a not-for-profit entity might obtain the benefit of its statutory right under Section 137.100 while it intends and seeks to develop the land for what would clearly otherwise be an exempt purpose and use.

Taking the present fact situation as the basis for the illustration, a parcel of property was obtained by Complainants. Complainants may be looking to a real eventuality of constructing an improvement which use would qualify it for an exemption. From past appeals the State Tax Commission looked to elements as a fund raising program for a new building, a building committee, plans and drawings, or plans for consultations with architects and government officials about locating of a new facility. These activities would clearly manifest a definite intention to develop the property for Complainants’ charitable use. An erection of a sign noting the site to be the future home of the affordable housing would be further tangible evidence of the realistic intention that the property was to be utilized in the future for a charitable purpose. Certainly, bringing on site the equipment to actually commence initial construction is clear evidence of development for the exempted use.

Such activities as have just been outlined provide a basis that the “intention” to develop is something more than just a hope or dream that is some time away from realization and actualization. Each case will vary from fact situation to fact situation and no hard and fast rule can be laid down to address every case of the acquisition of undeveloped land and the elements and steps that would qualify as the property being in use for an exempt purpose. It would be something far less than having the facility ready and presented as a turnkey operation and more than simply an entity agreeing that at some time in the future when things are right that development of the land would be commenced.

Complainants did not present substantial and persuasive evidence that the development of the following properties is something more than just a hope or dream that is some time away from realization and actualization:

Appeal Number Parcel Number Address Description
18-11104 27G141242 110 E. Etta The property was acquired in 2016. The improvements are to be removed.   They will develop plans. Exhibit U.
18-11105 27G141307 143 E Etta The property was acquired in 2016. The improvements are to be removed.   They will develop plans. Exhibit U.
18-11107 27G120810 200 E Felton Ave The property was acquired in 2016. The improvements are scheduled to be removed in 2019. Plans have not been made for this property. It is possible that they property may be sold to a local landlord or investor. Exhibits J, S, and U.
18-11108 27G412036 9415 Gentry Ave. The property was acquired in 2015. The improvements were removed in 2018. The plan is to sell for a multi-development site. Exhibit J.
18-11115 27G230214 9626 Perrin Ave

 

 

Plans are being developed. Plans may include a large residential development. It is possible they will build homes to sell at market value and possibly make it a joint venture with a developer.   Exhibits J and U.
18-11120 27G132213 9536 Gentry Ave. The property was acquired in 2015. The improvements were removed. The property will probably be developed in 2020. Trying to develop plans (Exhibit U)

Complainants have presented substantial and persuasive evidence that the following properties have been developed to such a point that manifests and intention and real eventuality of constructing an improvement for Complainant’s charitable use.

Appeal Number Parcel Number Address Description
18-11089 27G210285 309 E. Arlee Ave. The property has been vacant land since 2015.   The plan is to combine the property with 27G210274 for development as a house. Exhibit U.
18-11090 27G210274 311 E. Arlee Ave.

 

 

The property was acquired in 2013. There are preliminary plans developed for the property to include a remodel of the improvement. Urban Werks conducted a feasibility study. Vatterott, contractor, is estimating the cost for the project for rehab and an addition. Parcel 27G210285 may be combined. Exhibits N and U.
18-11103 27G141141 108 E. Etta The property was acquired in 2016. The improvements are to be removed in 2019.   They are conducting a feasibility study. The need to develop plans. Exhibit U
18-11111 27G432463 618 Lagro Ave The property was acquired in 2015. A home is planned for the property. They are estimating the cost. Exhibits Q and U.
18-11112 28G440533 9907 Linn Ave. The property was acquired in 2016. They plan on demolishing the improvements and combine it with 206 and 208 E. Ripa for a house on the property. Exhibit Q
18-11114 27G141912 108 Mann St. The property was acquired in 2015. The improvements are to be removed pursuant to the development plans. Exhibit U.
18-11117 28G440661 206 E Ripa Ave

 

 

 

The property was acquired in 2016. The improvements will be demolished. UrbanWerks to study the property for new construction. They developed preliminary plans for rehabilitation of 208 E Ripa with an addition. This property will be included along with 9907 Linn. Exhibit O and U.
18-11118 28G440744 208 E Ripa Ave The property was acquired in 2015. The improvements are to be removed in 2019.   Preliminary plans developed and costs need to be estimated. It will be combined with 206 E. Ripa and 9907 Linn. Exhibits O and U
18-11119 28G440571 218 E Ripa Ave The property was acquired in 2016. The improvements are to be removed in 2019.   Plans are developed and the costs are being estimated. Exhibit U

Conclusion

Although a taxing statute is construed strictly against the state, an exemption statute is strictly construed against the one claiming the exemption. State ex rel. Union Electric Co. v. Goldberg, 578 S.W.2d 921, 923 (Mo. banc 1979)State ex rel. Dravo Corp v. Spradling, 515 S.W.2d 512 (Mo.1974)Tiger v. State Tax Comm’n, 277 S.W.2d 561, 564 (Mo.1955)American Bridge Co. v. Smith, 179 S.W.2d 12, 15 (1944)Mississippi River Fuel Corp. v. Smith, 164 S.W.2d 370, 377 (Mo. 1942)State ex rel. Spillers v. Johnston, 113 S.W. 1083, 1084 (Mo. 1908).

Appeal Number Parcel Number Address
18-11089 27G210285 309 E. Arlee Ave.
18-11090 27G210274 311 E. Arlee Ave.
18-11103 27G141141 108 E. Etta
18-11111 27G432463 618 Lagro Ave
18-11112 28G440533 9907 Linn Ave.
18-11114 27G141912 108 Mann St.
18-11117 28G440661 206 E Ripa Ave
18-11118 28G440744 208 E Ripa Ave
18-11119 28G440571 218 E Ripa Ave

ORDER

The assessed valuation for the subject property as determined by the BOE for the subject tax day is SET ASIDE in part and AFFIRMED in part.

Complainants presented substantial and persuasive evidence establishing that the following subject properties are exempt from ad valorem taxation under Article X, Section 6, of the Missouri Constitution for tax year 2017-2018:

Appeal Number Parcel Number Address
18-11089 27G210285 309 E. Arlee Ave.
18-11090 27G210274 311 E. Arlee Ave.
18-11103 27G141141 108 E. Etta
18-11111 27G432463 618 Lagro Ave
18-11112 28G440533 9907 Linn Ave.
18-11114 27G141912 108 Mann St.
18-11117 28G440661 206 E Ripa Ave
18-11118 28G440744 208 E Ripa Ave
18-11119 28G440571 218 E Ripa Ave

Complainants failed to present substantial and persuasive evidence establishing that the following subject properties are exempt from ad valorem taxation under Article X, Section 6, of the Missouri Constitution for tax year 2017-2018:

Appeal Number Parcel Number Address
18-11088 27G120562 229 E. Arlee Ave.
18-11091 27G120993 9720 S. Broadway
18-11092 27G120470 9800 S. Broadway
18-11093 28G431843 9905 S. Broadway
18-11094 27G120324 9806 S. Broadway
18-11095 27G120283 9810 S. Broadway
18-11096 27G120223 9814 S. Broadway
18-11097 28G431834 9901 S. Broadway
18-11098 28G432024 9929 S. Broadway
18-11099 28G432101 9931 S. Broadway
18-11100 27G141691 128 E. Cartwright
18-11101 27G141710 143 E. Cartwright
18-11102 27G120173 9820 Erie Dr.
18-11104 27G141242 110 E. Etta
18-11105 27G141307 143 E Etta
18-11106 27G121152 143 E Felton Ave
18-11107 27G120810 200 E Felton Ave
18-11108 27G412036 9415 Gentry Ave.
18-11109 27G410100 9502 Gentry Ave.
18-11110 27G121662 9833 Joplin Ave
18-11113 28G440506 9910 Linn Ave
18-11115 27G230214 9626 Perrin Ave
18-11116 28G440607 120 E Ripa
18-11120 27G132213 9536 Gentry Ave.

Application for Review

A party may file with the Commission an application for review of this decision within 30 days of the mailing date set forth in the Certificate of Service for this Decision. The application shall contain specific facts or law as grounds upon which it is claimed the decision is erroneous. The application must be in writing addressed to the State Tax Commission of Missouri, P.O. Box 146, Jefferson City, MO 65102-0146, and a copy of said application must be sent to each person at the address listed below in the certificate of service.

          Failure to state specific facts or law upon which the application for review is based will result in summary denial. Section 138.432

Disputed Taxes

The Collector of St. Louis County, as well as the collectors of all affected political subdivisions therein, shall continue to hold the disputed taxes pending the possible filing of an Application for Review, unless said taxes have been disbursed pursuant to a court order under the provisions of Section 139.031.8

Any Finding of Fact which is a Conclusion of Law or Decision shall be so deemed. Any Decision which is a Finding of Fact or Conclusion of Law shall be so deemed.

SO ORDERED this 16th day of August, 2019.

STATE TAX COMMISSION OF MISSOURI

 

Maureen Monaghan

Chief Counsel

 

Certificate of Service

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing has been sent electronically or mailed postage prepaid this 16th day of August, 2019, to:

Complainants’ counsel, Ryan McCarty, rmccarty@polsinelli.com

Counsel for Respondent, Steve Robson, srobson@stlouisco.com

Assessor, stc-correspondence@stlouisco.com

County Collector, mdevore@stlouisco.com

 

Elaina McKee

Legal Coordinator

 

Contact Information for State Tax Commission:

Missouri State Tax Commission

301 W. High Street, Room 840

P.O. Box 146

Jefferson City, MO 65102-0146

573-751-2414

573-751-1341 Fax

[1] All statutory citations are to RSMo 2000, as amended