Property Tax Appeal Board Decision 2006-29747-R-1 Dillard

              (Continued on Next Page)
Based on the facts and exhibits presented, the Property Tax
Appeal Board hereby finds no change in the assessment of the
property as established by the Cook County Board of Review is
warranted. The correct assessed valuation of the property is:
LAND: $ 1,749
IMPR: $ 9,856
TOTAL: $ 11,605
Subject only to the State multiplier as applicable.
PTAB/BRW/Jul.08/06-29747
1 of 4
PROPERTY TAX APPEAL BOARD'S DECISION
APPELLANT: Jerome Dillard
DOCKET NO.: 06-29747.001-R-1
PARCEL NO.: 30-17-207-046-0000
The parties of record before the Property Tax Appeal Board are
Jerome Dillard, the appellant, by attorney Rusty A. Payton of the
Law Offices of Rusty A. Payton, P.C., Chicago, Illinois; and the
Cook County Board of Review.
The subject property consists of two buildings situated on one
parcel. Building #1 is a 110-year old, one-story style dwelling
of frame construction containing 1,003 square feet of living area
with a full, unfinished basement. Building #2 is a 79-year old,
one-story style dwelling of frame construction containing 626
square feet of living area with a full, unfinished basement.
According to the appellant, the subject property is a 79-year old
dwelling with 968 square feet of living area.
The appellant’s appeal is based on unequal treatment in the
assessment process. The appellant submitted for consideration
four comparable properties described as one-story frame dwellings
that range in age from 82 to 101 years old. The comparables
contain from 760 to 980 square feet of living area and have
improvement assessments ranging from $2.39 to $5.33 per square
foot. The appellant claims that the subject’s improvement
assessment is $10.18 per square foot, but that figure is based on
the combined improvement assessment for both buildings and on the
appellant’s claim that the subject property contains 968 square
feet of living area. The appellant produced no evidence to
support this claim. Based on this evidence, the appellant
requested a reduction in the subject's improvement assessment.
The board of review submitted its "Board of Review Notes on
Appeal" wherein the subject's final assessment was disclosed.
The board of review presented descriptions and assessment
information on four comparable properties consisting of one-story