Please, I'm going to go ahead and gavel in, okay? All right, without any further ado, we are going to gavel in this 2026, Thursday, August 6, 2026 meeting of the Value Adjustment Board here in the Council Chambers at City Hall at St. James. Today's meeting will be conducted according to the published agenda and the applicable provisions of Florida law and administrative rules, the board's adopted procedures, and parliamentary procedure. Where a legal or procedural question arises, we will certainly consult with the board attorney for any of those things. Pursuant to Florida law, the first thing we must do, we've called this meeting to order, is a roll call of members. We will do an introduction, as you see, for each of the members coming up, but at this point, I will start with a roll call. And if you could just say your name and present, please. And we'll start to my left. Will Lewis, present. Reginald Blount, present. Rockman Johnson, City Council, present. Shirley Dasher, present. And we'll do introductions with the entirety, but that's the roll. Madam or Mr. Clerk, do we have a quorum? We do, Mr. Chair. Thank you very much. Moving on, before we start the meeting, our first order of business pursuant to Florida law is that we must appoint legal counsel. And this year's legal counsel recommendation from the staff is Erin Thalwitzer for the 2026 VAB year. With no change, the attorney will be paid an hourly fee, or the recommendation of the staff is for the attorney to be paid an hourly fee of $225 an hour, not to exceed the amount of $60,000 annually. The not to exceed amount will be inclusive of all legal services, including litigation, mileage, and all other fees. There will be no cost for travel time. That's the recommendation of staff. I will certainly entertain a motion to make that recommendation, if there's one. I'll make a motion. Okay, we have a motion. It's been motioned and seconded that we retain legal counsel, Erin Thalwitzer, as our VAB attorney, VAB clerk, and then Mr. Thalwitzer, if you'll accept, but VAB clerk. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I was going to just say that it might be good to confirm with Mr. Thalwitzer that that that's his understanding of the agreement. I was going to get to him before we took a vote. Yep. Yep. Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Before we get to that, Mr. Thalwitzer, do you accept, are you able to accept this obligation for this year? Yes, sir. And I'm grateful for it. Okay. Thank you. And thank you for your work that you've done in the past. Thank you. Are there any discussion from the board itself? If not, there is a motion on the floor to retain Erin Thalwitzer as our 2026 VAB year attorney. All in favor, say aye. Aye. All opposed? You guys have it. Congratulations. And thank you for serving as our attorney again. Our next thing, is I wanted to start out this year with something a little bit different. I think it's important with all of the work that we do here at the Value Adjustment Board. Before I start this official, official business, I want to start out in gratitude personally. There's a brilliant mathematician, astronomer, and architect, Benjamin Banneker, who once said, presumption should never make us neglect those things that appear easy to us, nor despair make us lose courage at the sight of difficulties. And sometimes when we're in spaces like the Value Adjustment Board, there could be difficulties. But that's an appropriate charge, I believe, for the work in front of all of us. Property taxation can appear technical in many ways and complicated and distant from everybody's lives. But that's what we're here to do to make it easier and certainly more palatable. And the responsibility is to make certain that the process is fair, accessible, understandable, but worthy of the trust that has been entrusted to all of us to ensure that the work of the people is done. I'm deeply grateful to Council President Nick Howland for entrusting me with the responsibility of chairing the board this year. This is the first board of committee that I've chaired officially, and so I'm very excited to see what happens. And for me, it's very momentous as a product. I know this board is composed from the school board and the council. So as a product of Duval County Public Schools, I believe as an example of what can be. I'm really happy to be in this space. Over the last few weeks or month, I've worked to study all of the laws specific to VAB to understand and prepare what's required. And I know that we collectively will do that every day to ensure that everyone gets the best of us. I also want to thank Councilmember Will Lanon, who chaired this board during previous years and now serves as chair of the Finance Committee. I will be continuing, obviously, having served with him on the board, looking at what he has done and what we can do to strengthen the process even more. For the VAB staff, our VAB chief Heather Pellegrin, excuse me, yeah, VAB chief Heather Pellegrin, who I got to take a little personal responsibility when I sat on the personnel committee, had a hand in making you the chief of VAB. So I've known you for a long time personally, and I'm really, really thankful for the work that you do and taking calls, even sometimes way after hours, to give me some insight on VAB. Also, thank you to Jason Teal, our VAB clerk, Jonathan Griffiths, Andrew Cable, and so many others who have made VAB or continue to make VAB great. I also want to recognize I don't see any other elected officials in the audience, but I certainly would be remiss if I didn't recognize Joyce Morgan Danford, the Honorable Joyce Morgan Danford, Duval County Property Appraiser and former member of this body. Thank you for your leadership and your service that you provided while on this council, but certainly on VAB. And we see it's so interesting that you went and became the property appraiser. So it's a wonderful way to see that how this continues and moves forward. So thank you for your leadership consistently. Under Florida law, just to make sure that we're all on the same page, this board hears petitions involving property tax, property value assessments, denied exemptions or classifications, portability decisions, tax deferral matters, and other determinations. We provide taxpayers with an orderly, impartiable, accessible process so that we can make sure they have redress if there are issues. So to everyone watching this, this process belongs to you. Information, filing a petition, applicable deadlines. If you go to Jacksonville.gov and put in Duval VAB, you can get that detail. Also, it's on the back of the trim notice that the property appraiser sends out on a regular basis. You can always find information about that there. That is what this is about. So today, thank you for the work that you're doing. Thank you for indulging me for a few moments. That fulfills our statutory composition and requirements and we will move on. If there are no comments to start out the year from any of the board members, let's move on into the agenda. Our next order of business is introduction of board members and board clerk and we'll allow you, if you don't mind, just take a few moments so the public knows who you are. If they don't, if you could introduce yourself and just give us a brief bit about who you are and what you bring to the board and we'll start to my left. Good morning. I'm Will Lewis. I've been an executive and resident of Duval County for over 30 years and currently a volunteer with the Duval School Board. Thank you, Mr. Lewis and thank you for serving this year. I'm Reginald Blunt, native here of Jacksonville, Florida. I serve on the Duval County School Board representing District 5. My background is in construction and education and I was asked by the current chair to serve in this position and I'm very honored to serve in this position next to my friend, Councilman Rockman Johnson. That's it. Rockman Johnson, City Council. My name is Shirley Dasher. I am the City Council appointed citizen member. I've served with many nonprofits for over 30 years and enjoyed that work and I feel it's a privilege to get to serve on the VAB board. Thank you. Thank you, board member, and thank you all for your service. I believe the VAB clerk, based on what I see, needs to – should I just say your name or do you want to introduce yourself or say – I'd love to hear from you always, Mr. Council, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Jason Teal is the VAB clerk. I'm the VAB clerk. I'm also the City Council secretary and director, so the two hats that I wear. I'll let my VAB chief introduce herself, but I will say that she is very capable and extraordinary in this role. She handles all of the issues when the public comes in with a lot of questions about how their trim notices work. Jonathan Griffiths and Andrew Cable are her two VAB assistants and between the three of them, they handle the hundreds of magistrate hearings and appeals that get filed and they are your go-to for technical questions or for information about the VAB process as well as any particular VAB item. I will say this with regard to our outside counsel. One caution is that our outside attorney represents the VAB, the Value Adjustment Board. He is actually prohibited from giving legal advice to members of the general public. While we're taking this opportunity to explain things to the public, I do want to make that abundantly clear is that people call with questions and in good intentions. They have questions and they want to know what to do about certain things. He is actually prohibited from providing legal advice because he cannot represent multiple clients at the same time. He's VAB's attorney. If you get questions from folks, legal questions, you may want to encourage them to seek private counsel. Legal aid is always a good option and be able to pass that on as well. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Mr. Clerk. I appreciate it. Heather Pellegrin, VAB Chief, going into my 23rd year with the VAB. Wow. Almost done. I'm here 24-7 for anything you guys need, any questions. Me and my staff are always available, so please feel free to reach out. There's no dumb question. We'll help any way we can. Without any further ado, I think, and Mr. Thalwitzer, obviously, you're our counsel, so that goes without saying. By law, to all of the board members, I'm going to individually poll each of you. I need you to respond, yes or no, like you do on the airplane when you're flying. This is from the state. For the record, are there any additional disclosures, training, acknowledgement, or remedial action that you feel is required for your service on this board? No. No. Oh, thank you. No. And for me, no, so that satisfies that requirement. There's no legal, excuse me, no additional training or acknowledgement that's needed. Thank you, and let's move on to the next agenda item, and I want to make sure if there's, are there any issues with that? Is that the, that satisfies the law with that part? Okay, so let's move on to our next agenda item, which would be the appointing of the Special Magistrates. We'll now consider this item. Mr. Clark, please present the proposed roster and staff recommendation. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So the proposed roster for the 2026 Value Adjustment Board Special Magistrates include, I believe, our current roster. I don't know that we're adding anybody new, two, sorry, two new members. So it will be Pamela Andrea, who is under the tangible personal property type. Max Antonov is commercial residential. Jael Boers is residential. David Burbridge, residential. Reginald Carter is commercial residential and tangible personal property. Edward Delorier is commercial and residential. Austin Hollis Jr., commercial residential. Caleb Hollis, residential. John Marino, residential. Henry Mullen Jr., residential. Alex Rudin is tangible, tangible personal property. Jonathan Smith is an attorney. Mel Ward is commercial and residential. And Alex Yampolsky is commercial and residential. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And to the members of the board, you'll find the details in your packet if you have questions about them. So that's one attorney special magistrate, three tangible personal property attorneys, five general special magistrates, and six residential. These special magistrates, again, will have appropriate licensure and proof of compliance with the Department of Revenue and Special Magistrate training requirements. And the staff is recommending compensation for these special magistrates at $125 per hour. I'll entertain a motion to adopt these special magistrates and hire them for this VAB year. Moved by board member Blunt and seconded by Ms. Stasher. Let's move forward. All in favor, say aye. All opposed? And there the ayes have it. So congratulations to our special magistrates. They have been hired for the year. Now board members, there are three questions concerning the proposed roster qualifications and classifications, training requirements and compensation. I think we've answered those questions. I want to make sure I'm following the law. So we can move on to section four, correct? Thank you. Yes, Mr. Chair. Agenda item four is a ratification of the board designee. This designee will, the ratification of a board designee to approve or deny late filed petitions, good cause rescheduling requests and related administrative matters authorized by law or board procedure. And the agenda reflects that the VAB chief has served as the board designee for good cause late filed petition matters with the assistance from the VAB attorney as needed since 2024. The VAB chief has also served as the board designee for good cause rescheduling cases since 2013. Mr. Clerk, would you please present the recommendation and identify the individual who serves as the board's designee? Thank you, Mr. Chair. And so as the VAB clerk, I would recommend that the board adopt the historical pattern that in procedures that the VAB clerk's office has, has, has in, I guess, had in place since at least 2013. The VAB chief is, as she previously introduced herself, Heather Pellegrin. She's well qualified based on her over 20 years of experience with handling VAB matters. And with that, Mr. Chair, we would recommend that the, the board ratify the procedure to procedure or to administratively approve or deny the late file petitions based on those grounds. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, Ms. Pellegrin, do you have any comments regarding the administration of these requests or the standards that will govern your review? Okay. There are no questions, um, to our council. Are there any limitations or conditions that should be stated in this motion? Okay. With that, uh, I will, uh, entertain a motion to appoint and ratify, uh, VAB chief Heather Pellegrin is the board's designated to approve any, approve or deny any good cause late filed petitions, good cause rescheduling requests, and other authorized administrative matters with consultation and assistance from the VAB attorney as needed in accordance with the applicable law and board procedures. It's been moved and seconded, um, there, uh, to allow Ms. Pellegrin. All in favor, please respond by saying aye. All opposed. Okay. The ayes have it. Congratulations. Thank you, Ms. Pellegrin. I think that moves us to agenda item number five, which is the local administrative procedures and forms. Um, we'll consider this. The board has advised that any local procedure must be ministerial in nature and must remain consistent with the governing statutes, case law, attorney general opinions, and rules of the Florida Department of Revenue. The board's procedures and forms must be made available to the public and accessible to the board clerk's website. Mr. Clerk, if you could present the proposed local administrative procedures and forms, including the matter identified on the agenda concerning petitioner standing, uh, as it relates especially to the portability petitions. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So you have in front of you a paper click, paper clipped package. Uh, the first page is the special magistrate application. Uh, this is the, the package that's been prepared and, and, uh, if you will, honed over the years based upon changes to the law, as well as, procedural aspects that, uh, um, that have come into, uh, into play. But this is the same package that was used last year. Uh, so there are no, there are no changes. Um, so what you'll find in here is, uh, the various forms, uh, that the VAB office uses. You'll find notices. You'll find, um, different documents that are, are part of the, uh, administrative process for how one files, uh, a VAB, uh, petition or a VAB appeal. Um, and, uh, it, it directs, uh, individuals to the correct, um, or directs, uh, citizens to the correct individuals within the VAB office as to where to submit appropriate documentation and what materials fall under that. Uh, and so, um, uh, as I've mentioned, um, this has been tweaked over the years to, uh, to address issues that come up. So we think this is a good product. Uh, and, um, uh, if there is an issue that arises over the course of this year, we don't expect any, but if there is, uh, then we will have, have no problem adjusting, uh, to, to accommodate, uh, new information or new issues that will have to come back to the board, uh, the board though, for, uh, approval if, and when it does become an issue. But again, we don't anticipate that. So with that, Mr. Chair, I would recommend that the board adopt these materials, uh, as the, uh, 2026, uh, procedures and documents for this upcoming VAB year. Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Uh, we want to make sure that we allow legal counsels to weigh in. So, Mr. Thalwood, sir, would you have any feedback on the legal side as our counsel about these forms and or procedures? No, sir. I've already reviewed them, proved them. They're good to go. Gotcha. With that, thank you so much, Mr. Thalwood, sir. Uh, board members, their, their question, uh, are there any questions regarding legal authority for these procedures, ministerial character, public accessibility, or any other questions, uh, that it allows or discussion about these forms? Okay. Doesn't seem to be any questions with that. We'll entertain a motion to, uh, adopt the 2026 local administrative procedures and forms as presented by staff and reviewed by board council. And again, this is a reminder that these forms and all for those that are watching are available on the VAB website right now. Okay. We have a motion and a second, um, for the forms to be accepted. All in favor, please respond by saying aye. Aye. Aye. All opposed? No. Okay. The ayes have it. And these procedures are adopted. We can now move on to agenda item number six. Nope. Let's, uh, step back. I want to recognize the, I have here going on after that, but go ahead, uh, let's recognize the council, which is Mr. Thalwitzer. Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Under five, it's the second bullet. There's a petitioner standing, uh, and then parentheses, primarily portability petitions item. This is a really discussion item. Um, some of the board members and staff who were here last year may recall that there were a number of petitions in which there were issues raised with regard to petitioner standing. Um, and I, I think that was just something that we wanted to discuss and... Was this the issue, and forgive me, is this the issue about the rule that the property appraiser's office brought up last, at our last meeting about making that administrative change? It is. Thought we were taking that up later. Okay. No worries. And if the property appraiser wanted to, uh, speak on this, I guess subject to the board's discretion, this would be an appropriate time for that. But generally the issue is, and without, you know, trying to frame it, um, favoring one side or the other. Um, what'll happen often in portability cases, a property sells, the seller will want to, uh, or desire to increase the value of the formerly owned, of the property, homestead specifically, that they formerly owned in order to increase the portability that they can then transfer to their new property. How that goes about, there's a few different ways it could happen. But what the VAB is really concerned with and what the VAB is, uh, able to, to, I guess, decide on that is whether the petitioner is the owner, or at least the owner's representative, and whether that party has standing. Whether they have a legal right to pursue, to file the petition and pursue it before the VAB. And there's, there's very, again, there's various ways that that can kind of come before the VAB, but that was the crux of the issue. Um, my recommendation last year, when the property appraiser brought deferral requests on a number of these, was to reject those requests and adopt the recommendations. Um, if the property appraiser wants to present, or if the board has any questions, I'm trying to give a real, you know, high-level overview of it. I'm happy to answer any questions, but this would be the time for the property appraiser, I suppose. Thank you for the advice, Mr. Counsel. And I think that I, I tend to agree, uh, if the property appraiser's office could approach, if there's a, a recommendation that you have on how we can handle these portability issues, uh, we recognize the property appraiser's office at this time. Thank you so much. Joyce Morgan, Duval County property appraiser. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair, and welcome to the new board members, uh, school board member Blunt and Mr. Will Lewis, and welcome back, Ms. Dasher. So, this did come up at our last meeting of, uh, the VAB last year. And so, as far as the PAO office is concerned, this issue is one that we would like, um, for our VAB to adopt as it was adopted by the Miami-Dade, uh, VAB procedure as well. So, number one, requiring a petitioner seeking an increase in market value to be the current owner on the filing date and on the hearing date. And number two, acknowledging that written authorization from the new owner does not cure a former owner's lack of standing. And I, I know we have two new board members who have not really heard this. So, I do have with me my division chief from the residential department, Sage Sullivan. She is the one whose department deals with this day in and day out. And she can talk specifically and, uh, give you more examples of how this would work and why it is really, really important for us here in Duval County to adopt pretty much the same procedure that is done in Miami-Dade. Sullivan. Good morning. Sage Sullivan, property appraisers office, residential division chief. So, I'm going to keep the, uh, technical assessment jargon as limited as I can and try to speak to this. Uh, so, the issue is here, what we're looking at is a former owner basically seeking a higher market value, right? Because a higher market value can increase that former owners save our homes for portability. They can take that to another home and they can apply that to reduce that taxable value for their property. The value review though can expose facts that affect the property and its current owner. So, the new owner that just bought that property, um, which could include changes, additions, improvements, discovered that review. So, those changes and additions, what have you, they will go on top of that assessment cap. So, any kind of an addition or, um, a renovation, what that does is that has to be assessed at just value for that year. So, we may have a brand new addition that say maybe it wasn't permitted properly and it got missed and now because of that petition, it kind of puts a microscope on that property and now we see it and we say, okay, we have to assess that properly. Now we find it, we have to put that on and we have to assess it properly. So, what that would cause is an increased taxable value for that property and what that's going to cause is a higher tax bill. Except now it's a new owner and so that new owner is potentially going to get a new tax bill. So, they might have gotten one tax bill and then once it goes through the petition process, there's the potential that they're also going to get a second tax bill once we make the correction. So, that is a, a potential concern and we just have to follow the proper procedures, right, for when we're making our assessments. Um, so, the former owner, owner may benefit from a higher value but the current owner may face tax consequences for the property. So, that is a huge concern. Uh, when the petition form changed a few years ago, there were an additional checkbox and it used to be just a value review. They added an additional checkbox that it could be a value increase or a value reduction. Once that was, once that was added, there was a new rule or the rule was amended, I should say, for in the Florida Admin Code. Uh, it now states specifically in petitions to increase the just value, the property appraiser may provide an increased value before or at the hearing. Uh, and the petitioner may settle or withdraw prior to the hearing. So, if we were to beforehand say, hey, you guys petition this, with that petition, we're going to go in with an increased value, and that increased value, there will be some market value adjustment that will increase it, but it's also going to have some taxable increase, some assessed value increase that's also going to increase that tax bill. In which case, we could come with a settlement before going into the hearing. However, if the petitioner does not agree, we are allowed statutorily to go in with that increased value to the petition. Prior to these value increase checkboxes, um, you would basically go in and you wouldn't be able to go in with an increased value like that, basically not to be punitive to go into those, those hearings. Now, the property appraiser is allowed to do that. Last year, when we saw these issues, we, we didn't have a policy going in, um, who had standing and, and all of that. So, we were going in with hypothetical values. If we were to increase it, this is what it would be. Uh, the special magistrates didn't really know how to address those, and so, uh, any of those increases were just increased with a market value increase, giving a, a high portability increase. Uh, this year, if the standing is allowed for an owner change, so in other words, the petitioner is no longer the owner, uh, we will be going in with that increased value if it is so justified. So, we just kind of wanted to make that known. Um, if, if, uh, the ownership change does happen and the hearing is with, uh, the former owner, we will be making those value increases, which is allowed by, um, by statute. Is, before you leave, um, to Mr. Thalwood, sir, is that something that we would need to take a specific action for, or would that, would they be able to just, it seems as though, from what I'm reading here, that they can just explain that as a rule publicly, and that's just how we do business, but help me understand, and I'm sure the board members as well. I think you're on, excuse me, I think you're on the right track, basically. So, I, I agree with, um, actually, the points that Madam Property Fraser made. So, the, the two points that, uh, have standing. We've got to have the current owner, both at the time of filing, and on the date of the hearing. I agree with that. I've, I've put that opinion in writing many times because it mirrors, uh, my understanding, at least, of the Department of Revenue's position on it. Um, and I have that documented, which is why I've been pretty clear on it. The second point, that authorization essentially from a current owner does not give standing to a prior owner. I also agree with that, uh, and that, I, this isn't with my understanding of, of DOR's position as well. What I don't necessarily recommend is putting that in the form of a, a formal, local procedure. I've, uh, given that opinion to the clerk. I'm certain of it at least once, probably multiple times since I've been counsel. I'm happy to do it again, and I'm happy to make that opinion main, made known again to the special magistrates if it would be helpful. Putting it in, in a local procedure, though, I don't see it as necessary because it is simply consistent with what I believe to be the law. Um, that could change. Um, it may or may not. If it does, then we'd have to change that, and I don't think there's much of a benefit to anyone to having a procedure that does nothing more than mirror the law. If there was some difference there, then that might be different. As for the policy considerations, just to be extremely direct, that's, that's not within my purview, and it's really not within the VAB's purview. Uh, we should be concerned with following the procedure, recognizing the rights that everyone has, following the law the best we can, and we, to, at least as, as long as I've been here, and that's my ability, we've been doing that on this issue at least. So, I understand why it would be helpful, um, perhaps to all parties to have formal written procedure on it, but I don't know that it's necessary, and it could come back and be something that just requires more work in the end. Um, and I'm, I'm also aware of the Miami-Dade, uh, I don't know if it's a procedure or just an opinion, whatever it is, there's a, there's a document that the VAB attorney put together a few years ago on it, um, and, uh, I, I don't think that something like that would be helpful. Um, it, it kind of, uh, I don't think it's solved any problems that, uh, simply giving the guidance on the law would not also, that's my position on it. Thank you. Uh, is there any, before I come to the board, just so we can have all the details, is there any, uh, anything to add from the clerk or the, um, chief, VAB clerk or chief, about this specific issue? Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, through the chair to the board, so the only thing that I would add on that is, is a, uh, I agree with Mr. Thalbusser's position on it, which is that it sometimes creates a cumbersome process when you establish a local policy that just mirrors what's in the state, state laws and state rules. Um, really from the standpoint of if those state laws or rules change, then our local policy now all of a sudden is, is out of date. Um, what it also does is that if you mirror, uh, what's going on in the state laws or state regulations, then any opinions that, uh, either legal opinions or attorney general opinions or DOR opinions, uh, are, are issued to interpret and apply those laws and regulations, you can, you can take advantage of those and give you the guidance of that as well. Um, sometimes it creates an issue if you've got a local procedure, uh, that, um, you know, it's a question as to whether or not those, those guidance documents or interpretation documents would even apply to your situation. So, um, this is one of those things where it's just sometimes easier to just say we rely on what's in the state law and state regulations and give that guidance to folks and educate folks on those points without there being a, a next step about having something, because it implies that you're doing something different, you know, if you adopt something locally. So, um, so I, I, I, um, would support, uh, the position that Mr. Thalwitzer has, has, has expressed. Um, and, uh, that would be the only thing that I would add, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Before I come back to the property appraiser, any comments or questions from the board? Yes. Being new at this, um, I'm sure that I would have the opportunity to come to property appraiser's office and ask a little more detailed questions about this. Is that okay? Great. I would recommend against it. We're in a, the board, it sits in a quasi judicial capacity. It'd be similar to a judge speaking with one party. It's a general issue. So it's not quite that severe, but it's, it's a similar sort of an issue. So I, I would recommend against it. So any of those, just for my information, if I may, uh, Mr. Blunt, any time we do have those kind of conversations, if we choose to, which is what you're recommending against, but they need to be declared ex parte in this body publicly? Is that what you're saying? Or you shouldn't have them at all prohibited? I'm advising. Yeah, I'm advising against any one-on-one contact with either the property appraiser's office or petitioners or their agents by the board members or staff. And I'm, I'm here. My job is to help advise the board. So. Okay. I can answer any questions, anytime to the best of my ability. Okay. That was my question. Yep. So you can sit down with you and ask specifically, and thank you. Any other from the board, um, from the, the property appraiser's office, is there, is it your recommendation for us to do something different other than what's been recommended by the clerk and the attorney? Uh, Tiffany Pinkstaff, Office of General Counsel. I'm the attorney for the property appraiser. Thank you for recognizing us today. Um, Mr. Chair, I think what we identified at the end of the last lab season and at the last board meeting, if I remember correctly, is that part of the issue here is a procedural issue from the standpoint that, and please correct me if I'm wrong, Heather, but that the, the petitions auto populate with the current owner of the property. So if I sold my homestead to Sage, the petition's going to come up with Sage's name as the petitioner, but she's not the petitioner. I'm the petitioner. So while I appreciate Mr. Thalwitzer's recognition that, that he agrees with our legal premises, the problem is from a procedural standpoint, and again, I'm not sure how to, to, to address this, but that's really what this boils down to. Wouldn't that, I have a question for you, and we'll get to your, in the audience, I see, and I do have your card. Wouldn't that though, however, if we're in this space and that does happen, wouldn't that be something procedural as it relates to technical things that happen as opposed to something that we would need to provide a procedure for as a law or a rule that the board would vote on? Well, I think maybe that's what they were trying to avoid in Miami-Dade. I think that's why Miami-Dade adopted a procedure, and I, I completely understand and respect Mr. Thalwitzer's advice to the board. I, I don't, I'm not trying to run afoul of that. I'm just saying that that's, that's the conundrum that at least I finally figured out at the end of the VAB season last year, was that it's really the fact that it appears that it's the current owner that's the petitioner, but it's not the current owner. It's the former owner. Will the, let me ask this to the VAB clerk and maybe the attorney, will this procedure fix that? Because it sounds more like something going on that's technical as opposed to procedural. So I don't think having this procedure, and again, I, I gotta think just, I'm just giving you my point of view. Uh, one of the former members of this council, in fact, the first, uh, uh, African-American president, Earl Johnson, was to say something famously, you're now creating a solution for a problem that doesn't exist. And I, I think about that and I'm wondering if that's what we're doing here. Plus the, the other part of it, as was mentioned earlier, this is a, a body in order to help people who are having issues with evaluation of their property. And so the main thing that we should be concerned about, at least in my opinion, is flexibility. And if we handcuff ourselves with yet another procedure that may limit the flexibility, we have to ensure that people have the right to hear, uh, to get their, their, their grievances or, or, uh, what have you met. So wouldn't it be, could someone speak to that? Wouldn't it be technical as opposed to procedural? If, if, I agree with you. If the board were to adopt a procedure mirroring what Madam Property Appraiser said, and what I agree with about what the law is about standing, I don't see how it would change that. That, I agree with you. It sounds like a technical, practical issue rather than a legal. And you're saying when you, thank you for that, you're saying again, when you put it in that it's populating and you don't see who the actual property owner is, is what you're saying. You see, you see who the current owner is based on the property record card that's maintained in the property appraisers canva system. That's what auto populates. Do you interface with the clerk of court for that? Not the clerk of court, no. How, how do you get, who populates this? How does this stuff get into the system? I think VAB, I think the VAB clerk does. VAB clerk system pulls the information from the property appraisers system from an electronic standpoint. Gotcha. Ms. Pellegrin, is there something that you could do with you and your team that could alleviate this issue for the property appraiser? So when someone goes online to file a petition, they type in their parcel or real estate number. They type that in. Whatever is currently on record with the property appraiser's office as the owner of record for that parcel is what populates on that petition. They go in and make their payment. That petition comes through to us. So whoever is the current owner of record under that parcel is how that petition is filed. So we're not going to know if John Smith is really the one filing it behind the keyboard if it's under Mary Johnson. Is there a way, and do you have something, Mr. Blunt, you want to put in? Is there a way for that not to auto-populate so they can put it in as themselves or there would be another box that they can say it's really Mary Johnson? So they have the option to type over the name. They can put the parcel in and where it auto-populates Mary Johnson, they could type over it and put their name. Some people don't pay attention to that. They just scroll through it, pay it, and then it submits. Who administers this system where they're doing it? Is it the property appraiser or your office? So we have Axia, which is where they go online, put in the parcel, pay the fee, and the petition is submitted. It's pulling through ITD from CAMA, which is their system that holds the records of who owns the property. Let me ask you this. Is there a way, because again it sounds like, and again I tend to agree, I don't want to have more government and more rules that that would handicap us. Is there a way for there to be, and I'm assuming with Axia ITD administers that, or? No, it's ours. So you can go in, the reason I'm asking, is there a way to put some kind of thing in there, like a little notice, you know, when you're filling out forms online that says you can change this, you can put in the actual owner. Is there some way that we can put that in as a part of the system? That's why I was saying ITD. I mean, I'm sorry, was it technology solutions now? I'm sorry. I can check with, well, it's Axia. It's not ITD. It's our system through an outside vendor. Would you get with them? So we can check with them and see if there's a way to turn that off, but the tape runs every night and pulls the parcel information. That's fine, but if it runs and it's pulling over the information that's confusing, that's having some issues with the property appraiser's office, I want people to be able to say, this is a possibility, and I'm thinking the solution would be Axia, you and technology solutions, talk to Axia and see if they can put some kind of label under it to let them know you can now change what's in this. It doesn't have to be what's auto-populated. That would seem like a solution. Would that work for the property appraiser's office? Yeah, I think so. Okay. And can you, if we, because I don't think it needs a procedure right now. Could we be able to hold on that until the next meeting? And if you could bring back information to see if they can make that change to identify that it doesn't have to be the specifics that have been pulled over in like a little asterisk with a note underneath it to draw attention to it. So most of the fields in Axia have an asterisk. It's a required field. You can't move to the next screen until they are all filled in. You can search by name. You can search by parcel. You can put your address in. However you choose to fill in to auto-populate your information, or you can manually type it all and not auto-populate. But like you said earlier. So I can ask them if we can put that on there. However, keep in mind we get six, seven, eight thousand petitions a year. This has only happened with a handful. It also doesn't come to our attention because we don't know who is filing the petition or if it's wrong or an incorrect owner until the property appraiser brings it to our attention. So we're not, as a staff of three, we don't know that it's not the correct owner until a hearing's been scheduled, the time has come, and it's brought to our attention. So maybe when the petitions are input and they start working these, if they could, you know, if we have missed one and this doesn't happen, let us know then prior to us scheduling a hearing. These petitions are input in August and September. Some of these we don't hear about till February, March, April. I mean the sooner we know the better so we can handle the petition, get it out of here and not move forward. That would help us as well. The sooner we know the better because right now we're scheduling thousands of petitions and hundreds of hearings as Jason said earlier and some of them don't even need to go to hearing because they're not the owner. Well and that's why I do believe, and you said it earlier, that at many times people may be going so quickly. I won't say they don't read, they're just going so quickly and trying to get it filled out. They don't know they have the option to change the name on there. So if we could ask Axia Technology Solutions and your office to kind of powwow together, to me, something in red, not just an asterisk, but something in red that says you don't have to go with the populated information but you can go if you need to change it, if you're not the current owner or what have you, which should satisfy what the property appraiser's office needs and satisfy your office. So I think that would be the best course of action and we should be able to have that by, and I'm coming to you in the audience in just a moment. We should be able to have that by next meeting, if you don't mind. Just bringing back feedback if they can make that change. And it seems that the property appraisers office agrees with that. So Ms. Pinkstaff, thank you for bringing that up. And I think that's a solution. So good stuff. Thank you. Did anybody from the board have any feedback? All right, I wanted to bring up, I know I had as a part of this, uh, Casey Vachel wanted to opine on this. Uh, if you could come up and we'll put three minutes on the clock, uh, for Mr. Vachel about the, uh, this specific issue. And if we need to extend the time, we will, please. If you don't mind, uh, it does, your address is not here. I do want you to put it on the card. You can just say address on file, please. We won't take that away from your time. Thank you. We'll get it. We'll get it afterwards. Yeah. Thank you. Okay. My bad. So to recap, the, um, the petitioner on the VAB was the correct party, but the petition that was reflected in the property appraiser system was not, and I don't understand the system. So I may not be even close to accurate on this, but it was my understanding that the date you guys pull your, um, your owners by is a fixed date. Whereas the VAB system is actually more accurate. So in this case, excuse me, the property appraiser went into Axia, verified that the application was filed by the proper party, but that their system did not have that proper party listed. So, you know, the, the issue of it not correlating with the actual owner is actually a pretty small window of opportunity. But the issue was by the time it was reaching the property appraiser, they were not seeing what was actually filed. And in fact, to hopefully circumvent this, we've kind of established our own internal policy that we're not going to do it electronically because this is an issue and a paper DR 486 removes any question because that is what we are manually filing. And back to their point of only the current owner can file. I agree. Uh, the issue was their system was showing a previous owner. The petition in Axia was showing a current owner and that for good reason created confusion. So, you know, if, if anyone on this side knows a little more about that aspect of when the dates for your tax roll show who the proper owner is, I think that would provide insight. And actually I spoke with Ms. Morgan back when, and it really didn't, the confusion now seeing it in front of me makes a little more sense. It's not that Axia is wrong. It's that Axia doesn't mirror what the property appraiser gets because, correct me if I'm wrong, but you guys are not looking at Axia to see the petition. You have your own system indicating that there's a petition on file. Is that correct? So, I think that may be more of the issue and it's not an Axia issue. Cause I made the mistake. I didn't change it one year in a different County. I learned from it. That's on me, but the system as a whole works correctly. It's just the two systems are not on the same platform and therefore don't talk to each other. So I'm going to pause. I just hit my zero. If you guys have any questions, I will answer them. But that's kind of what I noticed on that aspect. Thank you. I appreciate you. And we'll let you know if we have some questions for you. Yes, sir. You're good. And we'll let you know if we have questions. Is there any, from the property appraiser's office, does, and I don't want to beat the dead horse. I think we have a solution with you going and talking to Axia. When you get the information that you're populating with, are you getting them from the clerk's office, the clerk of court? Is that where you're getting the property records of ownership and those things? Is that, and do those systems automatically populate from the clerk? If I remember correctly, Sage Sullivan, if I remember correctly, I think I know the case he was talking about, and I think it was a hand filled in petition. And so it was the different owner that we had. And then I think maybe when you guys entered it in Axia, because don't you take the hand filled petitions and then you enter them into Axia. So once it gets entered into Axia, it then populates from our system, from the property appraiser's office system. And so then it will overwrite whatever was in the property appraiser's system. The Axia system will overwrite. Correct. Right. So once that it's, it's keyed in to Axia, it will then overwrite. So then we saw the paper, the paper copy was scanned in, right? So we saw the scanned in paper copy, but then we saw what was in Axia and it was contradicting. And so that was what the confusion was with that. But back to the initial thing, the data that you get, that data, those data come from Jody, the clerk of court's office. Yes. Our, our records come in from the clerk of courts. It comes in via a third party system that scans in those records, the deeds and whatnot into our CAMA system. And then the Axia is pulling our ownership records from our system into Axia daily. So, and I think, so everything is, everything's talking and smoothing back and forth. And again, as was said earlier, this only has happened a infinitesimal number of times. This is not something that happens regularly. Yeah. I think we had 14 last year, if I can remember correctly. And over the past few years, has this happened a lot? No. So I don't think we need a procedure change for it. But if we could have that on the website, if I'm, you know, think I don't hear any objection, just on the website, something in red that says you can change this. That way, when you get those records, they work. Cool. Thank you very much. Any other questions or discussion about this? Let us move on. We can now move to item six, I believe, and agenda item number six. And if you don't mind, Ms. Pellegrin, just report back to us at the next meeting. So we know if that change is made. We'll now consider this item. The presentation will address the respective roles within the property tax system, opportunities of taxpayers to participate, and the rights of the afforded property taxpayers. Mr. Clark, please proceed with the presentation or identify the appropriate presenter. Mr. Thalwitzer will be updating the board on this one. Thank you. Yeah. What I usually, this is a required item. We've got to do this at each organizational meeting. What I usually try to do is just walk briefly through the process, how it gets to the VAB and what can happen at the VAB and after. So usually the standard route through the VAB begins with the trim notice issued by the property appraiser. Before it gets to that point, the local government set the millage rate, which appears on the trim notice along with the proposed assessed values, exemptions, and other property tax items. After the trim notice is issued and received by the taxpayers, they have essentially three options. If they want to try to do something about that, they can file a VAB petition, file a lawsuit in the circuit court, or seek an informal conference with the property appraiser. If they file with the VAB, it goes to a hearing before, in most counties, a special magistrate. It's an evidentiary hearing. It's informal, but there's still minimum due process procedures that have to be observed. After the hearing, it goes through myself, the VAB attorney, to make sure that the special magistrate's recommended decision complies with the law, and then it goes to the board who refused for compliance with the law. At that point, if the board adopts the recommendation, it becomes a final decision which can then be appealed to the circuit court again. The VAB is not required at any point. It is an alternative to the court system, but taxpayers can file a lawsuit without going to the VAB or to appeal the VAB's decision. So the idea is really that it's an informal, less expensive, and somewhat easier process for people to appeal their property tax issues. Thank you. Board members, any questions or comments? Nope. All right. There being none, I think that satisfies that specific thing that we must do, so I believe that we can ... That doesn't require formal action, so I believe we can move on to agenda items seven, and this will be ... Again, that information will be retained as a part of the record. It's now time for the adoption of filing fees and petitions filed for the 2026 VAB year. The board is authorized to adopt a filing fee not exceeding $50, and I must take a little bit of privilege and say I work real hard personally on ensuring that we were able to get that number to $50. It had not changed since the 1980s, and it was one of my personal projects, so I am really happy that we were able to get it through in one legislative session. For petitions filed using the MU form, the filing fee will be the amount established by the board with an additional charge of $5 for each additional parcel as permitted, but staff has recommended that the board adopt a filing fee of $50, and the fee will remain subject to the exceptions provided by section 194.013 of the Florida statutes. Mr. Clark, is there any additional information the board should receive before we vote on this filing fee? Mr. Chair, the only other information that I would add at this point is alluding to the last VAB year was the year that it got raised to $50, and so it was ... It still doesn't cover the entire cost, just so you know, but that prior to that action, that filing fee hadn't been touched in decades, and so ... You're welcome. Yes, and so, you know, so that is the amount that we were authorized statutorily to be able to collect, and so that's the justification behind that dollar amount, but that's the basis. It worked well last year, and we would appreciate it if the board would adopt that filing fee this year. Thank you. Just because I need to do this via record, to our council, does this proposed fee comply with applicable law? Yes, sir. So, I will entertain a motion to establish a filing fee for 2026 VAB year at $50 per petition, with a charge of $5 for additional parcels included on that form as it relates to Florida statute 194.013. Okay. We have a motion by Board Member Lewis, seconded by Board Member Blunt. Is there any discussion? All right. All in favor, please say aye. All opposed? And the ayes have it. So now, it will be the filing fee for the 2026 VAB year is established at $50, and that is subject to all legally required exemptions and limitations. All right. Let's move on to agenda item number eight. This is the tentative schedule for the 2026 special magistrate hearings. In establishing the schedule, we as the board must consider the number of petitions, possibility of rescheduled hearings, and the availability of special magistrates and hearing facilities. Also, the requirement that the board remain in session until all petitions have been heard and the board's work is complete. Staff recommends the hearings begin October 2026 and continue until all petitions have been heard with the hearings anticipated to continue through April of 2027. Mr. Clark, any additional information regarding this or Madam Chief? Thank you, Mr. Chair. The only issue is that I'm required to read into the record that the hearings will begin in October of 2026 and will run until all petitions have been heard. There is, it's a rolling deadline, if you will, based upon the number of petition count. We anticipate, based upon prior years, that it will be concluded by approximately April of 2027. However, you never know. The goal of the VAB offices is to always have them concluded by June 1st. And so, just so you know, that's approximately what the hearing deadline will be. Thank you. Madam Chief, do you have anything to add? I want to read it just so it's in the record. The dates and you can see it on the agenda have been noticed on January 14th, 2027, February 11th. No? Oh, sorry. I'm ahead of myself. I'm sorry. We approved it. It said I needed to read it into the record. I'm running, trying to get, I guess, the timing. We start a little late. Okay. Okay. That's good. That's good. We're smooth. I will now entertain a motion to approve the tentative special magistrate hearing schedule. Again, hearings beginning October 26th and ending approximately. And I say that approximately because, as the clerk has said, this may change depending on the number of partitions, but it authorized VAB staff to make necessary administrative scheduling appointments consistent with the law. Is there a motion? Okay. It's been moved by Board Member Blunt and seconded by Board Member Dasher. Is there any discussion? Since it's been properly moved and seconded, no discussion. All in favor say aye. Any opposed? And the motion is adopted. We'll now consider agenda item number nine, which is the VAB schedule, here we go, of monthly meetings for the 2026 VAB year. Staff recommends the board meets once monthly starting January, 2027 at 1130 AM in this chamber for City Hall at St. James. The proposed meeting dates are January 14th, February 11th, March 11th, April 15th, and May 13th. Mr. Clerk, are there any known schedule and Madam Chief, any known scheduling conflicts or additional considerations? No known scheduling conflicts. The only additional consideration is that the board always has the authority to schedule special meetings if you desire, if there is a need for it. We don't anticipate any needs and so we anticipate that this will be your meeting scheduled for 2027. Thank you. Board members, please review those dates. Are there any questions, conflicts, or proposed modifications that you have? Okay. That being said, I will entertain a motion to propose, to accept this proposed monthly meeting schedule subject to lawful notice and necessary amendment approved by the board. Okay. Moved by Board Member Blunt, seconded by Board Member Dasher. Any discussion? It's been properly moved and seconded. Any discussion? Okay. All in favor, please respond by saying aye. Any opposed? Nay. And the ayes have it. Please publish this notice and the schedule of meetings as required by law, Mr. Clerk. I believe we can move forward to agenda item number 10, which is the acknowledgement of documents available to the public and members of the Board. The following documents are available through the VAB website. Rule Chapter 12D9 of the Administrative Code containing the Uniform Rules of Procedure of Hearings before the Value Adjustment Board and Special Magistrate. Rule Chapter 12D10, the Florida Administrative Code containing the rules applicable to hearing and decision requirements. The Government in the Sunshine Manual addressing Florida's Open Government and Public Meeting Requirements. The Uniform Policies and Procedures Manual for Value Adjustment Boards, including rules 12D51.001, 12D51.002, and 003 of the Florida Administrative Code, and Chapters 192 through 195 of Florida Statutes containing the laws governing property taxation, assessments, and assessment administration. Mr. Clerk, please confirm these materials are available at this time via the VAB website. Mr. Clerk, we hereby, or sorry, Mr. Chair, we hereby confirm that those documents are available. This item does not require any formal action by the Board. It's just for informationally. Thank you, Mr. Clerk. And I ask any of the Board members, please remain familiar with the materials and to direct all the legal questions to Mr. Thalwitzer, our Board Council, if there are questions that exist as it relates to these documents. But this is informational, as the Clerk shared, and for the record. I believe, without any further ado, that the published agenda provides that all of the items that moving forward will make sure that we follow the Sunshine Statute, so all of the meetings that are coming will be published in a timely manner. Any additional conversation from the staff or the Board? Any Board members have any final comments? With that, there is a public comment section that's here. I'd like to bring up Sophia Spencer for public comments. And Ms. Spencer, please state your name and you can say address on file for the record. Give us one moment. I don't think your mic is on. Can you reset her time, please? Go ahead, Ms. Spencer. Sophia Spencer, 3566 Capra Road, Jacksonville, Florida, 32218. I come to the Board because my homestead exempt was removed and I contacted the property appraiser on February 3rd to ask why it was removed because my taxes jumped from $1,000 to $5,000. And I spoke with Erin Tanner who said that it removed because my address, my husband and I own the property and my address changed and not his. So she removed it because of that. And I have multiple properties in Nassau County and Jacksonville, but my primary residence is in Duval County. So I lost my homestead. I reapplied and got it back. But now my taxes have more than quadrupled during that time. Thank you. I think that's a specific issue. Ms. Morgan, could you and your team stay after for a few moments and meet with Ms. Spencer? And I appreciate you bringing it to the Value Adjustment Board. I believe we've also passed petition time, correct, at this point. However, I think the property appraiser will certainly be amenable to hearing you. Ms. Spencer, thank you for coming in and you can certainly use the green room for a conversation. Okay, I appreciate you. Thank you for sharing that. Are there any other comments? If not, thank you so much for being here. Before we adjourn, I just want to make sure that I look forward to a wonderful, wonderful year. I think that it's going to be very simple and easy. And government earns trust one fair process at a time. The integrity that people have trusted in us. I know that moving forward, I plan to do even more to ensure that people know the Value Adjustment Board is here so that everyone who wants to be able to have the right to challenge, if need be, what their property is assessed to be, they have it and we will listen to them. So that is the spirit of the work of our 2026 County Value Adjustment Board. Thank you for your service. And I look forward to our meetings upcoming. Thank you as well to the property appraiser's office. I know you all do such a great job. So thank you for bringing this to us and sharing your time with us this morning. With that, it is 1250 and this meeting is adjourned.