Iowa Bldg. Corp. v. Zirbel

• Decision Date: 05 February 1946
• Docket Number: 46733.
• Citation: 21 N.W.2d 576,237 Iowa 242
• Parties: IOWA BLDG. CORPORATION v. ZIRBEL et al.
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

21 N.W.2d 576

237 Iowa 242

IOWA BLDG. CORPORATION v. ZIRBEL et al.

No. 46733.

Supreme Court of Iowa

February 5, 1946

F. T. Van Liew, City Sol., and Herrick, Sloan &amp Langdon, all of Des Moines, for appellants.

J R. McManus, of Des Moines, for appellee.

SMITH Justice.

Defendants as a local board of review, overruled plaintiff's protest of the 1941 assessment of its real estate situated at the northeast corner of the intersection of Sixth and Grand Avenues in Des Moines. The title of the land is in St Ambrose Cathedral but plaintiff owns the building thereon (covering the entire lot) and holds a 100 year ground lease requiring it to pay all taxes. The 1941 assessment was $438,380 (actual value), divided $162,000 on land and $276,380 on the building

Upon appeal the district court reduced the total figure of $438,380 to $403,000-$158,000 on the land and $245,000 on the building. It will be seen this reduction amounted to $35,380, of which $4,000 was on the land and $31,380 on the building. From this decree defendants appeal.

The supervisors of Polk County in 1940 employed a Cleveland, Ohio, company to appraise all Des Moines real estate for taxation purposes. The head of this appraisal company is described by appellants as 'a nationally recognized appraiser of real estate.'

After the appraisal company established its valuations of the various properties the assessor reduced them all (except in a very few instances) by a blanket cut of 10% and the reduced valuations became the 'actual values,' 60% of which constituted the assessments. That was the method pursued in arriving at the above assessment of plaintiff's property.

The office and store part of the building is L-shaped, fronting on Grand Avenue on the south side, 130.89 feet, and on Sixth Avenue on the west 193.8 feet. The lot is bounded by an alley to its full length on the east side 198.8 feet. The west leg of the L is 26 feet deep east and west, the south leg, 48 feet, north and south. The alley is at right angles to Grand Avenue but Sixth Avenue runs slightly east of a right angle line, resulting in a slightly longer line along the west side of the premises than along the alley side. For the same reason the property is only 99 feet wide at the north end.

The Des Moines Theater occupies the northeast part of the building and is within the L, being about 93 feet wide at the front, or south side, 73 feet wide at the back end, 143 feet north and south and about 54 feet high. The entrance is from Grand Avenue through a lobby and foyer. The L part of the building is five stories high with stores on the ground floor and offices above. The building was erected in 1918 and 1919.

I. Section 7109, Iowa Code 1939, as amended provides that property subject to taxation shall be assessed at 60% of its actual value and then says: 'In arriving at said actual value the assessor shall take into consideration its productive and earning capacity, if any, past, present, and prospective, its market value, if any, and all other matters that affect the actual value of the property; and the burden of proof shall be upon any complainant attacking such valuation as excessive, inadequate, or inequitable.'

Appellants argue that under this statute there is a 'strong presumption' in favor of the valuation fixed by the assessor, citing: Butler v. City of Des Moines, 219 Iowa 956, 258 N.W. 755; Bennett v. Board of Review, 234 Iowa 800, 13 N.W.2d 351; Massachusetts Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. City of Ft. Dodge, 233 Iowa 916, 11 N.W.2d 17; and Corn Belt Theatre Corporation v. Board, 234 Iowa 355, 12 N.W.2d 820.

We have repeatedly so held. And we have said the trial court does not become an independent assessing tribunal when appeal is taken to it from the action of the local board of review. Bennett v.

Board of Review, supra, 234 Iowa at page 811, 13 N.W.2d 351; also that relief on appeal will not be given on account of a mere difference of opinion as to valuation. Sioux City Bridge Co. v. Board, 192 Iowa 1224, 184 N.W. 733.

Appellee, however, argues that there is no such thing as a 'strong' presumption and that the adjective 'strong' adds nothing because 'a presumption is merely a presumption--nothing more.' The question is perhaps too technical for serious discussion as all must agree the presumption is rebuttable and the strength or amount of evidence necessary to overcome it must vary according to the varying facts involved. In any case, by the express provision of the statute, the burden is on the taxpayer who questions the assessment.

II. Appellee earnestly contends that under the facts shown here it must be held that the property was not valued by the assessor and that no presumption ever arose as to the correctness of the assessment; that the record shows the valuations all over the city, as made by the appraisal company, were accepted by the assessor and the board, and a general or 'blanket' cut or reduction made in them as a whole, without reference to specific properties and that neither the assessor nor the board exercised any independent judgment in fixing the valuation of appellee's property. This is equivalent to saying that the usual presumption of the correctness of the assessment is overcome by the evidence.

The trial court found that the head of the appraisal company 'in carrying out the contract of his company with the taxing bodies, made an appraisement of the property referred to herein, and the assessor, as was done in nearly every other appraisement' by the company, 'made a blanket reduction of ten percent of the value placed on this property' by said appraisement 'and thereby set up as the 100 per cent or actual value of the property * * * the sum of $162,000 as the land value and $276,380 as the value of the building.'

We have made a careful study of the Record to ascertain whether this finding has support. The head of the appraisal company testified: That he and his employees and associates established what in their judgment represented 100 per cent values of all the properties in the city; that the assessor made a blanket cut and reduced these values 10 per cent in all cases except a few--'probably not many,' 'I don't believe there would be one per cent.'

This testimony is corroborated by that of the only witness who was employed in the city assessor's office at the time the assessment in question was made. We find no contradiction of it. It seems entirely adequate to support the trial court's finding.

Does it justify the further conclusion of the trial court: 'that the presumption in favor of the assessor to the effect that as a public official he has properly carried out his duties has been overcome by the evidence in this case'? While it is the judgment of the assessor which the statute demands, this court has recognized that it is proper for the assessor to make inquiry and as best he can arrive at and fix values. Butler v. City of Des Moines, supra, 219 Iowa at page 958, 258 N.W. at page 756, citing Burnham v. Barber, 70 Iowa 87, 30 N.W. 20.

In the Burnham case the board of supervisors had classified property in the county and fixed valuations on the various classes. Prairie lands, whether improved or unimproved, were put in one class. A copy of the classification was furnished each assessor. This court said: 'The board of supervisors has the power and authority to classify for the purposes of taxation * * *. But the board has no authority to fix the value of such property. * * * Unimproved prairie land may be classified as such; but, however classified, each description of property must be assessed and valued by the assessor. It is his judgment which the statute demands. * * * It is evident that the assessor did not value the real estate in accordance with his own judgment. He simply adopted the valuation fixed by the board of supervisors; for it cannot be supposed that the improved and unimproved land is of uniform and equal value.' 70 Iowa at page 89, 30 N.W. at page 21.

In the Butler case, supra, it appeared that the staff of the assessor's office, consisting of the assessor and his deputies 'made a special study and investigation of values of property in the business district in Des Moines; that they selected what they regarded as the most valuable piece of business property, and used it as the base for the valuation of all other property.' [219 Iowa 956, 258 N.W. 756.] Relative values of other properties were then determined after consultation and in co-operation with a committee of business men and...