CLERK OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS 111 NW 1 Street, Commission Chambers Thursday, February 26, 2 p.m.

Transcription

1 CLERK OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS NW Street, Commission Chambers Thursday, February, p.m. VALUE ADJUSTMENT BOARD INTERGOVERNMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION 0 BOARD MEMBERS (Present) Commissioner Juan Zapata, Chairman Commissioner Jose "Pepe" Diaz School Board Member Raquel Regalado Mr. Anibal Duarte-Viera Hani Jardack VAB ATTORNEY Manuel A. Blanco, Esq. 0 COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Jorge Martinez-Esteve Assistant County Attorney STAFF Pedro Garcia, Property Appraiser Lazaro Solis Robert Alfaro, VAB Manager

2 Description I N D E X Page 0 0 I. Elect a new Chairperson II. Discussion re: Information available on the VAB's website III. Discussion re: Current special magistrate application process IV. Discuss re: Implementation of an online for special magistrate application, etc. V. Discussion re: The creation & implementation of a review and selection process of special magistrates. VI. Discussion re: The selection & qualifications of special magistrates in conformance with U.S.P.A.P. VII. Discussion of proposals to change procedures for filing VAB petitions to reduce delay. VIII. Discussion re: Definition of Good Cause and viability of carve-out. IX. Discussion re: Legislation that is being proposed by School Board X. Other Business --

3 0 0 MR. BLANCO: All the members are present. We can begin anytime you want. BOARD MEMBER REGALADO: Well, I called the special meeting, so I guess we'll start the meeting of the VAB. Obviously, we have new members. And the first order of business is electing a Chair. Does our VAB attorney have anything to say about the agenda? MR. BLANCO: No, I was just going to welcome everybody and pretty much hand it to you after the first order of business. Members of the Board, Members of the Property Appraiser's Office, Assistant County Attorney, Deputy Clerk, first of all, I would like to welcome our two new members, Commissioner Jose Pepe Diaz and Ms. Raquel Regalado from the School Board. We have all the Members of the Board in attendance. It is Ms. Raquel Regalado for the School Board; Commissioner Jose Pepe Diaz and Commissioner Juan Zapata, as County Commissioners; we also have Mr. Hani Jardack and Anibal Duarte-Viera as

4 0 0 citizen members. This is a special meeting called by Ms. Regalado, who also has set the agenda, and other items, other than Item No. I. This meeting is in accordance with government sunshine manual under GA, and we are in compliance. The meeting appears to be mostly for discussion of items listed on the agenda that's been provided to you. There have also been six written requests to speak from the public at this Board meeting. I would suggest a time limit for each of five minutes. And you may decide whether or not you want them after the selection of the Chairperson or at the end of the meeting, but there are written requests to speak. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Thank you, Mr. Blanco. Does everyone have a copy of the agenda? CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: I have two copies.

5 0 0 COMMISSIONER DIAZ: Give me one. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: (Handing). COMMISSIONER DIAZ: Thanks. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Do you guys have a copy? Do you have a copy of the agenda? MR. DUARTE-VIERA: Yes, I have it. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Okay, you have it. All right. You have another one? That way you guys don't have to share. COMMISSIONER DIAZ: Thank you, sir. It's okay. We always sit next to each other. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Okay. I think we'll start with the election of the Chairperson, and then we'll hear from the public and then we'll go on with the rest of the agenda. Does anyone have an issue with that? COMMISSIONER DIAZ: You want to open up for nominations? BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Yes. COMMISSIONER DIAZ: Nominate Commissioner Zapata.

6 0 0 MR. DUARTE-VIERA: Second. MR. BLANCO: Motion carries. Mr. Zapata, congratulations, you're the Chair. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Careful what you wish for in life. MR. BLANCO: At this point, it's your meeting to run and you may decide how you want to run it. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Let's kind of run through these things real quick. So, thank you, folks, and I appreciate the confidence. Let's go down all these items. They're all discussion items. You mentioned some folks wanted to speak. Do you know what items they wanted to speak on? MR. BLANCO: I am not aware of exactly what kind of items they want to speak on. I would suggest either in the beginning or at the end. It might be better in the beginning so that they can give you ideas. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Is the VAB

7 0 0 subject also to the Sun Bill 0 with regards to opening it up for anybody to discuss anything on the agenda? MR. BLANCO: If we have a written request from the public, we are. Yes, they're entitled, and we have six written requests. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: So what we'll do is, as we call up each item, anyone wishing to speak on that item, even if you haven't filled out a card, just let us know, come up to the podium and we'll recognize the comment on the item. We'll start with the first item, No. II. Do we read that into the record or -- BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Can I explain it? CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Go ahead. You're recognized, Ms. Regalado. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Thank you very much. The second item has to do with the information that's available to the public on the VAB website.

8 0 0 I did some research on other County VABs. There's a lot more information that's available. Presently, the Miami-Dade County VAB does not even have a listing of the members of the VAB on the website. There is some general information as to such orderly what is the VAB, and why the VAB was created and some information about its powers, but I thought it was important to have candid conversation about the information that we want made available to the public, especially before budget. And to get an idea of what would be the cost of putting that information there, and how far we want to go regarding transparency and disclosure. Personally, I think that we should begin with a listing of the members of the VAB. We should also have meeting information. If we have meeting minutes, I think that all that should be made available. And I would like to know how the other members feel about this issue.

9 CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Commissioner Diaz. 0 0 COMMISSIONER DIAZ: I'm the new boy here in the crowd. So you guys don't have this already in here? BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Uh-uh. COMMISSIONER DIAZ: Is there a reason? So at least I can understand, is there a reason why it's not put in there? Because I'm agreeing totally with Ms. Regalado, but there might be -- there's a reason for this, right? MR. BLANCO: I believe it was just never brought up. And if there's a list of items that you would like to include, I think the more transparent we are, the better off we are. If there's a list of items that we could, you know, create on there and get it done. Mr. Alfaro's office will work on it and we'll get it done. COMMISSIONER DIAZ: Let me go to the purpose of this Board, in raw form, what is it?

10 0 0 0 MR. BLANCO: Discussion, under raw form, it's just a pow wow between everybody to make, you know, a determination regarding certain questions, issues that Ms. Regalado has determined are important. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: And, Commissioner Diaz, if I may. I mean, so a lot of us are new, so I've only been here -- well, I was here for two years, but we have -- you know, Mr. Blanco is new. And, Mr. Alfaro, how long have you been here? MR. ALFARO: I've been with the Value Adjustment Board for years. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Who was the -- we had another attorney before that. MR. ALFARO: Mr. Bob Tischenkel was the interim attorney. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: So we've actually had some changes here. And I think what we're looking to do, and I think what Ms. Regalado was trying to accomplish with this agenda is for us to kind of do a refresher, take this in a

11 0 0 different direction, be a lot more proactive about how things are happening. Obviously, it's not through any intentional actions, there has been maybe a neglect that has happened over time that has kind of caused some problems. And I think they need to be looked at, and I think they need to be addressed and I think we need to be quite forceful, because this is an important process. And I know that when you look at, compared to other VABs around the state, they're not having the same issues we're having. So I think we need to get to the bottom of that, and understand what's driving those issues, kind of do a refresh, and really kind of shed some light in this whole process, because this kind of happens a little bit in the shadows. Folks really don't know about it, some don't understand the process, so I think that needs to change. So I think looking at some of the items on the agenda, that's what Member Regalado is trying to change, and I think

12 0 0 we should seriously take a look at this. So how do we get that process moving forward? COMMISSIONER DIAZ: One more, because I just want to get a better understanding, because I know I see our court specialist typing away. And so all these meetings are recorded just like we do our zoning meetings and so on? MR. BLANCO: This is an official Board meeting. It's a special Board meeting officially being recorded, yes, it is. COMMISSIONER DIAZ: So there's information there. I'm with what Member Regalado is asking for. Again, I am new. This is all fresh. And I've never been in one of these before, so I'm just trying to figure out the process. Usually when we do zoning meetings, everything is dictated, and typed up, and it's verbatim as to what we do and say here. So that's already part of this, which I'm happy, because -- that happens

13 0 0 in every meeting. Am I correct? MR. BLANCO: That is correct, there will be transcripts when we have official Board meetings. COMMISSIONER DIAZ: Member Regalado, I guess you'll explain as we go down each one. And Chair Zapata has already given me the raw view of what I wanted. So as to clarity and transparency in all our government is very important. So I'll be very supportive of changes that meet all that, Member Regalado. I just wanted to know where we were and why are we doing this, so thank you. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: You're recognized, Ms. Regalado. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Thank you. So to the point at hand, Mr. Blanco, what you said is that you would like a list of what we would like to see on the website? MR. BLANCO: Correct. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: So the first, I think, would be the members of

14 0 0 the VAB. There should be an enumeration of the members. There should also be some information as to how those members are selected and by whom. There should be meeting information, the dates for past meetings and future meetings, whenever the meetings are established. There should be a link to the minutes. There should also be a link to the statutes that regulate the VAB. Now, what this Board has to decide is how far back we want to go with the transparency when we talk about the past meetings and minutes. How far back do you want to go, since there's nothing on the website? CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: I think we can -- I think what would be a reasonable amount of time, Do you have a suggestion, Mr. Blanco? BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: I'm going to say two years. MR. BLANCO: I'm asking, Mr. Alfaro,

15 0 0 since I don't know what is possible logistically. MR. ALFARO: Two years. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Two years. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Two years sounds good. That would be two years more than we had in the past. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Thank you. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: So you're clear on the list? Everybody okay with it? Does anybody have any sort of objection? Any addition to the list? Okay, let's move on to the next item. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: This has to do with the magistrate application process. I had a meeting with Mr. Blanco and was able to get some information on how the magistrate -- we currently conduct the magistrate application process. So I would like to identify the members on that, and it's something that we should add to our online presence. One of the things we talked about in

16 0 0 the meeting that I think the Board should consider is beyond the old school publication and newspaper. I would like it to be on the VAB's website. And I would also like it to have a flash on the Clerk of the Courts' website, if possible, when they open up the application period and have people be able to click on the actual application, should they want to apply as a magistrate. MR. BLANCO: This is actually more of a procedural issue, so I would like to defer this to Mr. Robert Alfaro for the meantime. If there's any legal questions regarding this, I'll gladly answer. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Commissioner Diaz, were you going to ask a question? COMMISSIONER DIAZ: No. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: I have a quick question. So who manages our website, that process is through whom? MR. ALFARO: Our website is managed by the Clerk of Courts. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: All right. They should not have an issue with this, should

17 they? 0 0 MR. ALFARO: I don't think so. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Okay. Discussion? Anybody from the public wishing to talk about that? I think we're done. Let's move forward. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Moving right along to IV. So the online process, I was thinking of creating a specific time and an address. We talked about this in our meeting also, and it's something that's very doable. Currently, the way that the application process works, is that the staff of the VAB designates a particular period that opens the application period and then it closes. I would like there to be more predictability for that, so that people in the general public would have an idea of when that particular season is. As we discussed in our meeting, part of the issue there is the need. So what I was thinking is that we can create a 0-day period of submission. And then

18 0 0 that would give, you know, us a little bit more information, especially since we're going to have a flash on the Clerk of the Courts' website as to when that window is. Is there an issue with that, Mr. Alfaro? MR. ALFARO: No, there's no issue. We usually give 0 days for the applicants to submit an application. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: What's the process that we have right now? We don't have an online process? MR. ALFARO: The applications are not filed online. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: So do we have advertisement? Do you advertise it? MR. ALFARO: We advertise in three or four different newspapers. We send application, advertisements to different organizations, such as the Cuban American Bar Association, Dade County Bar Association and the Appraisal Society. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: And all those is cleared by the 0-day period? MR. ALFARO: Yes, that's correct.

19 0 0 And they disseminate that information to all the members in their, I guess, entity that they have. And they'll go ahead and send those applications to our office within the deadline that we advise them. And after those applications are received, they are screened by the VAB attorney, who will then screen it for minimum qualifications, and will give them to the Department -- to the Board members for the special magistrate selection. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: So we're adding the online component, that's your suggestion and then the review of the current advertising? Do you see anything that requires any sort of changes or enhancements? BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: I would like, just so we're clear on point, the online presence, we need to establish an address, info ad, whatever, so the people can send it directly. And then regarding the advertising, my suggestion would be to also include it in the Florida Bar. And it's another

20 0 0 0 organization. I understand that we have CABA, but, Mr. Alfaro, if you can come up with a list of other ones. The majority of these organizations have free dissemination of these application processes, so I think that we could possibly go a little out of the box on this. MR. ALFARO: Okay, we'll provide a list. And if you have anymore -- CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Would it make sense to go to the law schools? Would the law schools have an alumni kind of database so we can have that? Would that work? MR. ALFARO: It's up to you, whatever you suggest. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: I'd take a look at the law schools also. I mean, I don't see why we can't maybe have the law schools -- MR. BLANCO: The attorney magistrates aren't the biggest concern. It's the appraisal magistrates at this point. That's the bulk of the hearings.

21 0 0 CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Okay. MR. BLANCO: Legal hearings are very minimal. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Mr. Garcia, do you have any suggestions on how we can reach out? MR. GARCIA: No. The way you present, it appears to me that maybe to get information to the realtors association also, so they can -- CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: That would be good. MR. GARCIA: -- provide that information to them. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: That's a very good idea, the realtors association. MR. ALFARO: Commissioner Zapata, I have a list of the entities that we use. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Why don't you this, why don't you circulate that list. If we have any suggestions, we can give that to you. If we have anybody from the public that wishes to comment on this item? Okay, next.

22 0 0 BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: The next has to do with creating a window for this application process. The one that I recommended was May st through July th, understanding that it's a 0-day period. So somewhere within that timeframe would be a 0-day period. And obviously there would be the possibility of a waiver, if there is a need for more magistrates, but one of the things that we discussed at our meeting that I wanted to hear from the other members of the VAB, is I really believe that if you want to enhance the application for this process, you have to give it a certain amount of predictability. So if we have a window where everyone knows, if they miss it one year. I know in the past what you've done, is you base it on the need, but it's kind of like baseball, sort of who finds out, and who's checking the website and who knows what's going on. So I think if we provide actual dates, we can tell people

23 0 0 ahead of time that the application process is going to occur within that season, it will make it a lot easier. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Anybody have any comments/suggestions on that? That sounds all doable? All good? MR. BLANCO: It's my understanding -- I was a magistrate for many years, for years. It's always been done roughly at around that time period. The only issue that's been happening recently is the surplus that's been falling behind for a couple of years, the VAB is behind right now, but we're working on that and it should be doable. There's no reason why not once we catch up. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: That is good to hear. Anybody from the public, any comments on this item, Item No. V on the agenda? Okay, next one. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Item No. VI is a little bit more complicated. And this one I'm happy that the property appraiser is here, who can speak to this

24 0 0 issue, too. This has to do with the selection and qualifications of the special magistrates. Can we have some general information about it? I know we spoke about it at length in our meeting, but just for the edification of the other members, what are the current qualifications that we have and are there any recommendations as to qualifications that we could add? MR. BLANCO: A magistrate must be -- if you're a legal magistrate, you have to be a current member of the Florida Bar in good standing. The same requirement is for the appraisers. Right now with the exception of one, who has been here for about, years, they're all now state certified general real estate appraisers. The one gentleman, the one exception is a residential appraiser. That is beyond what the state requires. The state requires that you either be a residential or general. It makes more sense to have general real estate appraisers, since they're qualified to do

25 0 0 any kind of property. And as far as the personal property appraisers are concerned, they just have to be designated by, let's say, ASA, they have to have a proper designation. There is no quote/unquote license for personal property, established organizations. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: What about U.S.P.A.P.? MR. BLANCO: The U.S.P.A.P. regulations, which we have copies for all of you, if you want, we did print them, if you hold on a second, we'll provide them. I'll get to your question about U.S.P.A.P. right now, I was stating the minimum qualifications for the record as per magistrates. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Well, let me ask you a question. All these other VABs across the state, do they have any higher qualifications? I mean, do they all work off the minimum? I'm always very hesitant why government is working off the minimum

26 0 0 standards. I mean, nobody tells their children get the minimum grades in school. No boss would every ask their employees to do the minimum. We always seem to be obsessed in government and push for the minimum. So who has the highest standards? Let's kind of shoot for that. MR. BLANCO: I'm not aware, Mr. Zapata, what the other counties are doing. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Let's do this. And I don't know, Ms. Regalado, what you're suggesting, what you want to do with regards to this, but I think we should take a look at it and I think us being able to say that Miami-Dade County has the highest standards would probably be a good thing as opposed to having the minimum. MR. BLANCO: There is no problem, no issue with me when it comes to that. Now, Ms. Regalado, you were asking about the U.S.P.A.P. qualifications and such. I think as per our conversation, your main concern was the issue of out of County appraisers, magistrates coming in

27 0 0 and not knowing the business, et cetera, et cetera. There is a provision within U.S.P.A.P., which requires competency, however, that is for appraising purposes. This is not an appraisal duty, per se. This is a quasi-judicial position. The competency issue, as per U.S.P.A.P., you can actually become competent. However, what that causes, to become competent, you have to ask questions, which causes delay. So, therefore, in a roundabout way, the out of County appraisers, if they don't know the Miami-Dade market area do create quite a few delays, because there's a big learning curve with that. They have to know the County. And it's up to you to come up with some kind of rules. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Ms. Regalado, any suggestions? BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Yes, I think it's a great idea, Mr. Chair, to have some sort of research done on what the qualifications are for magistrates in

28 0 0 other districts. I think that that will give this Board some information that is very useful. But, you know, speaking of that -- and you're correct to state that part of my concern was the out-of-town magistrates, particularly Palm Beach, you know, and the impact that they would have here, but beyond that, one thing that I wanted to ask that's related to this, and we didn't have a chance to talk about it at our meeting that I think is pertinent to this determination, do we do any type of review of the magistrates? I know that, you know, this Board approves the list of the magistrates, but is there any sort of annual review and what is contained in that review. Because, for example, if we were to decide to add competency to that, how would that flush out? When would you have that conversation about an individual's competency? Would you have it before? Would you have it after? MR. BLANCO: At this point, it's a

29 0 0 matter of trying to put it on the future applications that you must be competent within the County. You must know the County as a requirement. How to police that, there is no way. As long as an appraiser or an attorney is licensed, they are available. You know, you can't exclude them based strictly on residency. If his competency is -- BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: I understand that, through the chair, but, first, let's take part by part then. Do we have an annual review of magistrates? Do we review our magistrates? Is there any sort of review? I mean, do we go through their case log? You know, how are they doing on that? Their timeliness? Their attendance? Is there any document that encompasses that before we approve them for a following year? MR. BLANCO: There are some audits, but as Mr. Zapata stated, I am new at this position. I started in October. As far as I know, correct me if I'm

30 0 0 0 wrong, I don't believe there's any annual review for magistrates. We do review decisions. Would you like to jump in? MR. ALFARO: Me and the attorney review the special magistrate recommendation, make sure that they comply with the rules. And as far as, you know, when we get their applications, we submit to you, the Board members, a summary sheet of their qualifications and experience. And that's how you select them at the selection meeting. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: So there is no information on case load, on timeliness? CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Ms. Regalado, are you trying to get to where we have a clear process of how we evaluate these folks and procedures? BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Yes. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Do we have something now? Do we have a process or procedure in place or is it just kind of

31 0 0 done as it goes? MR. BLANCO: No, we do not. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Well, I don't think we're going to figure out a process now. So, Ms. Regalado, I mean, could you work with Mr. Blanco and Mr. Alfaro and maybe create a process? Is that something that we need to vote on, that we need to approve or how does that work? MR. BLANCO: Eventually, if there is a process, it would be up for a vote and approval, a resolution. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Are you looking at a certain timeline that you'd like this to happen in? BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: I'm happy to work with Mr. Alfaro and come up with at least a one page, you know, checklist of what we would like to know about magistrates before approving them. I understand that there is some review of the work that they do, but beyond that, there are other logistical things that I think that we should consider when giving

32 0 0 them the opportunity to be a magistrate for another year, so I'm happy to work with you on that. When would you like to have it back? CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: When could you have it back? Obviously we need to have this in place sooner, as soon as possible. Would that be correct? BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Right. MR. BLANCO: Yes, yes, it would, but we would need some form of list as to what the ideas are. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Thirty days work? BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Yeah. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Let's do it in 0 days. Let's come back with those ideas and suggestions. Let's take a look at it and see if that process makes sense. And there shouldn't be a sort of entitlement. Folks need to be able to justify and prove that they're providing good work. This will kind of take us in that direction. Any other comments? Anybody from the

33 0 0 public wishing to speak on this item? Yes, sir, you're recognized. MR. DIXON: My name is Tom Dixon. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Sir, get to the microphone. Name and address, please. MR. DIXON: My name is Tom Dixon. I have an office at Coral Way in Miami. I have appeared before the VAB hearings. And I'm hearing you say that you want to review the actions of the special magistrates. And I'm very concerned that you may do something that will jeopardize their independence. That is, if the special magistrates know that you're going to review their decisions every year, they may be inclined to not favorably recommend changes, because you may decide, oh, he's granted too many reductions last year, therefore, we're not going to permit him to appear next year. I've appeared in front of the Broward County Value Adjustment Board many years, and I have received no reductions. Why? I suspect, although I can't tell you as a fact, that those masters, who gave

34 0 0 reductions, don't come back. So be very careful in the review of the special magistrates that you do not create a situation that they are intimidated as to the decisions that they make. How fast they do it, how quickly they do it, their attendance, but I think it might be unfair for them to be analyzed in terms of the reductions they grant. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Could you state your name and address again for the record. MR. DIXON: Sure. Tom Dixon, D-i-x-o-n, Coral Way, Miami, Florida. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Perfect. Thank you. All right. I'm not going to have a debate between those, so did you -- BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: No, I just have a comment. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Do you have a question? BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Just to ask the attorney and clarify the point. Thank you, Mr. Chair, just to clarify the

35 0 0 point. My understanding of our conversation a few minutes ago is that there is already some sort of review of the cases. What I'm talking about adding is attendance, and timeliness and other issues. There appears to already be a process that looks at the nature of the work. That really isn't my focus. I was talking about other issues that we may also want to consider, but I am completely understand your point, and obviously we're going to consider that as we move forward. My idea was just, you know, to get some understanding of what the magistrates are doing. At the end of the day, I think we're all for autonomy, but statutorily this Board is responsible. And we have abdicated a lot of our power to the magistrates, so it's just a matter of accountability, but thank you. MR. DIXON: Thank you. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Thank you very

36 much. Anybody else wishing to speak to this item? 0 0 Mr. Diaz. COMMISSIONER DIAZ: Mr. Chairman, I'm trying to understand. I think I understand what the gentleman is saying, but that's why I asked the questions earlier on. And if we're all under the Sunshine Law, disclosure and transparency is extremely important. And I view, what we all do, everything is done in public, and everything is done that way, so there is transparency. I'm here, so I've got to catch up to and learn, too, but I kind of catch up pretty fast. But, Ms. Regalado, I wholeheartedly agree that we know what everybody does. Now, I can understand where the gentleman is coming from, and I guess I'll learn more down the road, but, you know, transparency means that everybody knows what everybody does. And I particularly believe that

37 0 0 that's the way it should be, Mr. Chairman, moving forward, but unless I hear differently from why as to -- I heard what the gentleman said, and I respect that, but I don't think that somebody would do that, that we won't hire someone or do something. And, again, I need to know the powers, the ability of this Board, but I think that we need to do more than what I'm hearing. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Mr. Alfaro, I think what we'll need is side by side current information that we're collecting and maybe some of the recommendations for changes, so that we can kind of understand for folks who need to kind of bring themselves up to speed, me included, to better understand this, I think that information would be good. Ms. Regalado. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Just as a point of clarification, because earlier when Commissioner Diaz made the question as to the power of the Board, the answer that was given by Mr. Blanco really was as

38 0 0 to the nature of this special meeting. It really wasn't as to the power of this Board, just as a clarification. So maybe, you know, we want to deal with that head on, because it's actually very important to the next three items how much power this Board has and how much autonomy it has. You know, I think there may be a little of history as to its creation and implementation. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: All right. Any other comments on No. VI? Oh, I'm sorry, Mr. Jardack. MR. JARDACK: Mr. Chair, on what the gentleman said here, I think the review is basically to assess the qualifications and the competence of that individual, that appraiser that have been doing the work here. Based on that, I think that would be due process that we need to do. MR. BLANCO: You'd be treading on dangerous ground, if you do a statistical analysis as towards reductions made. That has to be a no-no. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Mr. Blanco, I'm

39 0 0 the wrong guy to tell that I'm treading on dangerous ground. COMMISSIONER DIAZ: And I'm the other one. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: That's kind of like waving, you know, like a flag. COMMISSIONER DIAZ: This happens here all the time. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: We kind of rather like that, but you know what, let's go ahead and take a look. And, you know, if there's a compelling argument to do it, we'll do it. If not, we won't. COMMISSIONER DIAZ: Absolutely. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: I think revisiting, looking at it, you know, flushing it out, I think it's something that will be good. Any other comments on this, Ms. Regalado? BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Mr. Blanco still has not answered Commissioner Diaz's question about the authority of the Board. That is necessary for the next three items.

40 0 0 0 CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Mr. Blanco, what can we do or we can't do? It's usually easier to say what we can't. MR. BLANCO: This is not any form of organizational meeting, but if anybody wants to raise something up in motion per se, but I think this is more of a discussion meeting. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: It's a duly noted meeting, so we can take any action at this time. MR. BLANCO: That is correct. COMMISSIONER DIAZ: So at this time then, could you give me a structure briefly as to what our powers are, as Ms. Regalado asked, what my interpretations were. That's what I meant by raw form earlier. MR. BLANCO: I don't understand the question. COMMISSIONER DIAZ: What this Board's actual responsibilities are. MR. BLANCO: The Board's responsibility, you oversee -- you select the magistrates. You know, we analyze who

41 0 0 the magistrate applicants are. We have an organizational meeting. COMMISSIONER DIAZ: Excuse me, Mr. Blanco, one second, and again I apologize to all ahead of time, and I'm going to say it again, I'm new at it. Let's not do it at,000, let's view it at a little lower. When you say that we suggest, based on your suggestions? MR. BLANCO: You actually select the magistrates. There's going to be a certain amount of magistrate applicants. They're going to be screened to see whether or not they qualify, if they have the minimum qualifications, whether their license is current, et cetera, whether they have any kind of issues with DBPR for appraisers, with the Florida Bar. COMMISSIONER DIAZ: Their background. MR. BLANCO: Their background. That being said, then the Board gets a list of applicants, and then the Board selects the magistrates at the organizational meeting, which is typically around October, I believe, October/November.

42 0 0 October/November, in that organizational meeting, there's a bunch or several items that must be addressed by state law and by DOR rules, et cetera. So once we get over with all that, then we have the selection. It's not always necessary to select them there. If the Board decides to retain, you know, the incoming magistrates or the existing magistrates, but it's up to the Board always. You have the ultimate say. COMMISSIONER DIAZ: That's it? MR. BLANCO: Well, you also set rules. I don't know what the question is per se. COMMISSIONER DIAZ: I'm trying to learn exactly what we do here. So based on that, then we'll have that power to set. And that happens once a year only? MR. BLANCO: Once a year is the selection, because we do it per tax year, that is correct. COMMISSIONER DIAZ: Okay. MR. BLANCO: So, yes, that will be

43 0 0 00% your decision, taking into consideration everything that's been talked about, the competency, et cetera. COMMISSIONER DIAZ: No, I understand what the gentleman was saying before a little bit. Okay, thank you. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Ms. Regalado. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Yes. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Are we done with this item? BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Almost. Well, I think this is important to understand the next three items, so just as a point of clarification. And, again, I don't mean to get all attorney on you, but I think it's important just to have an explanation of the statutory creation of the Value Adjustment Board. So the Value Adjustment Board was created by Florida statute. There's one for every county. Obviously their purpose was to hear appeals regarding -- to hear appeals regarding properties, to deny exceptions, petitions relating to

44 0 0 assessment, appeals and concerning ad valorem tax deferrals, right? This particular Board abdicated law that's the magistrates. There were changes in the rules at a state level. And there have been several promulgations of rules. And, Mr. Blanco, I wanted you to explain a little bit about the statutory aspect of it. I'm glad that you said that we could vote on policy. We can, you know, do that as a board. I think historically this Board has simply approved the magistrates or approved information that came before it, but one of the reasons for this meeting was, one, to achieve the transparency aspect of it that I think is very important in order to gain the trust of the electorate, but also to have a candid conversation about our role in the current crisis with the backlog of the properties. So I know that there's lots of people that are participating in that, and there has been some discussion, but I believe

45 0 0 that legally we have the right to make certain changes. Obviously we have to navigate to statute, but the statute was created to make this an autonomous board. And I hope that as we consider the next few items, the members of this Board will take into consideration that we are indeed autonomous. And that while a lot of the heavy lifting is done by the magistrates, we could, if we so desire, create policy or procedure that would impact this process. MR. BLANCO: Well, you may add to the policies provided that they're not in direct conflict with the Florida Statutes and with the DOR regulations. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Right. MR. BLANCO: As long as you want to add something, that's only room for improvement as long as it's not addressed by the Florida statutes. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Right, which gets back to the Chairman's earlier point about the minimum requirements. So, you know, as we go forward with

46 0 0 this conversation, we want to have a little bit of guidance from you as to what the statutory limitations are and our ability to go beyond those and not be in conflict with them. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Ms. Regalado, just to kind of wrap this up, we're done with Item VI? BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Yes. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: I think we might as well start getting real comfortable with the idea that we're going to push whatever boundaries are there. And obviously the only way of doing this, we're going to revisit, and look at, and enhance, and modify and do as much as we can to try to really be a VAB that sets example for the rest of the state. So, you know, and I think it needs certain interest of this community, and obviously I think that has maybe has been the case in the past, but I think we've had issues lately. And I'm not interested in pointing fingers, but I'm definitely interested in addressing the issues that

47 0 0 are here. So let's make sure we keep an open mind towards things. And we make kind of things happen as opposed to trying to find ways to protect the old ways of doing things. Next item, Item No. VII, Ms. Regalado. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: This gets into a conversation about the one-time allowance for an extension of time without Good Cause. The next following items are related to this. My concern is -- and I want some guidance as to what you believe, Mr. Blanco is or is not in violation with the statute. Obviously we'll talk about what is being proposed in Tallahassee, but as we discussed, Good Cause has been interpreted by the magistrates that serve this Board very broadly. And I think that that's something that should be considered going forward, but if you could please explain the process of the automatic delay without Good Cause and then the Good Cause delay,

48 0 0 because I want to ensure that there is no magistrate shopping. And I would like the Board to have some information on how cases are tied to magistrates and how that information is disseminated to the clients and to the magistrates, how exactly that process works. So I guess that deals directly with Mr. Alfaro. So if we can start there, then we'll go down the legal road as to our ability to consider changes. MR. ALFARO: In regards to the free reschedule -- I assume that's what you're talking about. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Yes. MR. ALFARO: The Petitioner, as long as they submit a statement in writing five days prior to the hearing date, they're entitled to a reschedule without any good reason, as long as we have it. And that's by the rule and by the statute. Now, if anything doesn't fall within the five days, we'll have to go to the Good Cause. And we have certain guidelines. And the VAB attorney, you

49 0 0 know, will have to tell us whether they have Good Cause or not in order to reschedule the case. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Through the Chair, explain the five day thing. So, logistically, how does the freebee work and when does it trigger? Because my concern is, is staff preparing for a case and then the minute we walk in, you know, you raise your hand and you say freebee. MR. BLANCO: Five days. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Five days. MR. BLANCO: Five days prior to the hearing. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Five days prior to the hearing. MR. BLANCO: That's correct. That's an automatic thing that's being addressed right now in the House bill, the proposed House bill. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Right, we'll talk about that in a little bit. How is that communicated? How is a

50 0 0 0 freebee -- what do you have to do? What's the process for triggering that? MR. ALFARO: The Petitioner requests the rescheduling in writing five days prior to the hearing date. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: How are they submitted? MR. ALFARO: In writing, whether fax, or by mail. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: And how are the five days logged, in the sense the day you receive it by mail? My question is, is there a procedure or a rule that we have? MR. ALFARO: The rule says that it has to be received in writing in the VAB office five days prior, not counting the day of the hearing. So we notify the Petitioners days in advance, at least days in advance. And they have, if you will, or 0 days to send that request for reschedule in writing to our office. And that's how we determine whether it has -- you know, it will be entitled for the free reschedule

51 0 0 or not. It can only occur one time. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: And how do you convey that information? I mean, that goes to the question of paring up the magistrates with the cases. How is that relayed then? Does it just not get given to a magistrate, because it's an automatic freebee? My point is to establish, is there any employee time lost with the freebee, just as a general question? MR. BLANCO: Employee? To what extent? BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: You're preparing your case, and they don't show up. MR. BLANCO: Property appraiser. MR. ALFARO: The only time lost, is that we mail notices out, okay, we prepare the boards, we send the hearing notices out, we prepare the agenda for the board. But, I mean, if we get those cases rescheduled, then they're just not going to go to the magistrate. They'll be eliminated from that agenda. And like I

52 0 0 said, it has to be in five days prior. MR. BLANCO: Within the time constraints required by law. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: This question goes to the property appraiser. When do you receive that information and how do you receive that information? MR. SOLIS: Once a request is made for reschedule, Mr. Alfaro notifies our office and then we pass it along to the staff so they can prepare their case load. Typically, we have one person going to the hearing for an entire day. On certain circumstances, we may have multiple staff. So depending on who's requesting the reschedule and the impact, it could be something as simple as one case out of, or it could be all, depending on the composition of the board and who's making the request. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: And when do you receive that? MR. SOLIS: I think we receive it immediately.

53 0 0 BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Is it five business days or does that include weekends? MR. ALFARO: We try to give it to them as soon as we can. I think the question relates more to property appraiser's office, because they're the ones who prepare those cases. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Right. Obviously the magistrate is not doing the prep. MR. ALFARO: It's not going to get to them. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Right, but my point is, to the property appraiser's office, if they're losing any man time because of this? I mean -- MR. SOLIS: I mean, technically, yes, because -- let's just look at a simple example. Let's say I'm scheduled for a board tomorrow, or, let's say, five days out. I'm all prepared. I'm getting ready for that board. My time has already been allocated to spend an entire day at that hearing. If that entire board is

54 0 0 rescheduled, then that's one lost day, plus when those cases get rescheduled again for a future date, then if they stay together, I have to re-prepare for that hearing. If they get split up, then now my time is split up among multiple hearings and I'm scrambling to participate in those hearings. Unfortunately, since these cases get scheduled out 0 days later, you basically have to at least refamiliarize yourself with all those cases. Now that's one extreme example. The other example would be that out of my cases, only one gets rescheduled. That has a relatively minimal impact you're talking about, because you're talking about one case out of. So there you have both extremes: You have an entire board being rescheduled, because that agent requested a rescheduling of all their boards, or you can have one case being rescheduled out of, which has a roughly minimum impact and then, of course, we have everything in

55 0 0 between. You can have where one agent is not able to attend for Good Cause, and they had either the majority of the cases, let's say, 0, 0 cases, or they only had or cases. So really the impact is dependent on the number of cases that have been rescheduled for that particular board and the loss in productivity to the staff that's assigned to that board, because those cases have to be reviewed again and prepped prior to the actual hearing. MR. BLANCO: By the way, the reschedule is not per se per an agent. It's for the Petitioner. An agent may request it on behalf of the Petitioner, but it's the Petitioner, I think, is what Mr. Solis was saying. MR. SOLIS: Yes, when I said agent, it's synonymous with Petitioner, property owner, et cetera. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Let me ask a quick question. So there's a process in place right now, correct?

56 0 0 MR. BLANCO: That's correct, there's a process. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Ms. Regalado, you're suggesting some changes to that process? BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Yes. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Do you have a concrete proposal? BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Well, first, I wanted to establish -- CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Because what I would suggest to you, we're going to be coming back in 0 days. And if you have something that you want to bring up of some changes, we'll take a look at that. COMMISSIONER DIAZ: In the meantime -- BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Well, I just want to get on the record, what's the possibility of those five days. This is statutory. We're going to talk about the proposal in Tallahassee, it's statutory. I wanted to know more about the process and the communication about the five days. And if that is something that

57 0 0 is established or this is just the way that we do things and we hope we do it right. MR. BLANCO: The process is one thing. And you're 00% correct, this is something that has to be discussed at Tallahassee. We have no way to change that here in the VAB. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: But we can -- MR. BLANCO: We can suggest. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: We can up the standard. And that goes -- that's one of my questions. So, you know, presently the agent or the Petitioner has to notify you in writing within five days, you know, and you notify the property appraiser. Could we add that they have to notify the property appraiser, too? That it has to be a dual notification? How quickly do you notify them? MR. ALFARO: We notify them as soon as we get the request and as soon as we do the actual reschedule.

58 0 0 And to answer your question, it's five calendar days, not business days. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Oh, so it could cover a weekend? MR. ALFARO: Yes. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Has that been interpreted by case law? Has that been challenged? Is there anyone else that does five business days? Five business days versus five calendar days? MR. BLANCO: I do not know the answer to that question, whether it has ever been challenged by case law. BOARD MEMBER REGALADO: So then that's going to be my request. Obviously I read the statute, and I understand we're limited to the five days, but I would like to work on drilling down on that, specifically for weekends and holidays, because it just seems that it should be five business days. And if you could find some information as to if other VABs have made a determination that it's five business days and not five calendar days. If there's any information on that, that

59 0 0 would give us some flexibility as a Board to define those five days. MR. BLANCO: All that is accomplishing, however, is that, you know, you still have the automatics; you're just extending the time? BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Right. MR. BLANCO: Okay. BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: Yeah. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Anything else on this item? Ms. Regalado, we're good on No. VII? BOARD MEMBER MS. REGALADO: We're good on No. VII. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Anybody from the public wants to speak on No. VII? MR. BLANCO: I think we have a couple of gentlemen here. CHAIRPERSON ZAPATA: Sure. I'll give you each two minutes. Your name and address please for the record. MR. MANDLER: Good afternoon, my name is Jeffrey Mandler. I'm an attorney here in Miami. And I'm located at 00 Southeast nd Street in Miami. And it's a