Minutes 09-17-2019 Regular Meeting

Browse Search

12 Commissioner Marcoplos said it seems odd that some residents picked up it, while others did not. Nancy Freeman said it may depend on the person, the level of research conducted, the attorney that was chosen, etc. Commissioner Dorosin said it could also depend on how a parcel is shaped. PUBLIC COMMENT: John Guibert said this is a very complex subject. He said he would like to address the question of why other landowners were not concerned or aware of the issue. He said the owner of the Arrowhead land (the Nichols family) was also the President of Lake Orange, Inc. at the time that all of these deals were made; when the land was transferred from the five owners to Lake Orange, Inc., which was land from 620 down. He said this was also the time when the transfer of 615 and down was made. He said ownership was well known, and the County required that the land between 615 and 620 be owned by Lake Orange, Inc. He said the County was to be informed of, and given the right of first refusal on this land, in the case that there was a transfer of the land to another owner. He said the County wanted to protect 615 to 620, which was the maximum flood stage. He said it is unequivocal that this land is owned by Lake Orange, Inc., and the owner of the Arrowhead subdivision knew full well. He said the very first deed for each of the 15 lots accounts for an exception of the land between 615-620, which did not convey as part of the sale. He said the Nichols family knew they had made a mistake, and did not solve it by a survey, but rather by noting the exemption of the land on the deeds. He said there was a new survey of sorts in the 1980s, which was an attempt to show where the lines lay on the 615-620 contour, but staff rejected these surveys for every lot. He said this all shows that both Lake Orange, Inc., and the owner of the subdivision knew exactly who owned the land. He said it also very clear that the County was informed. John Guibert said two newer subdivisions were built in the 1990s, and this issue was clearly handled, and the land delineated, so as to avoid these same problems. He said in order to know what amount of back taxes one should claim, one must know the amount of land in question, and the percentage of one’s taxes it constitutes. He said he did a survey of his land, to determine how much of his land between 615 and 620 belongs to Lake Orange, Inc., and on which he had paid taxes. He said this survey showed he paid taxes on land that belonged to somebody else, and the County was aware due to the 1986 plats that were attached. He said there has never been any sale of the 615-620 land, and if there were, the County would have to first be advised and given the right of first refusal. He said ownership is clear in his mind, as is the question of double taxation. He said he has paperwork back to 2003 showing that he has paid taxes on the 0.37 acres of land owned by Lake Orange, Inc. He said the County has changed his taxable land to 1.53 acres, but he, and all previous owners, have been taxed for the land all the way to the water line. He said 2 parties were paying taxes on the same piece of land, which is a clear case of double taxation. He said staff can explain the basis on which the County has been taxing Lake Orange, Inc. Commissioner Dorosin referred to a picture on page 13 of the PowerPoint, and asked if the property with the blue arrow belonged to John Guilbert. John Guibert said yes. Commissioner Dorosin asked if the dock belonged to him, and if he built it. John Guibert said the dock was pre-existing, and is accessed through a recorded easement. Commissioner Dorosin asked if the Board has a copy of this easement. John Guibert said there is an easement for every lot in the subdivision. He said the easement was granted to each of the families that donated land from 620 out, after they donated the land from 620 in and below. He said this happened in 1972, and is documented.