Docket No. 05-02025.001-F-1
3 of 3
purportedly prohibited by the County Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan as argued by appellant.
In support of the contention of law regarding the improper method of assessment, appellant's counsel submitted a five-page brief. The brief indicates the subject property was reassessed for 2005, a non-general assessment year [emphasis in original]. Counsel argued the notice of the subject's assessment increase was not timely mailed to the taxpayer nor was the notice of the subject's increased assessment timely published.
In support of these claims, counsel submitted copies of a page printed from the Jo Daviess County internet website labeled "2005 Real Estate Assessment Information" for the proposition that the official publication of real estate assessments for 2005 occurred in various publications throughout Jo Daviess County on January 18 and 20, 2006. It is noted that properties in East Galena Township, where the subject parcel is located, were published in the Galena Gazette on January 18, 2006. Moreover, this "2005 Real Estate Assessment Information" from the website sets forth the deadline for filing assessment complaints with the Jo Daviess County Board of Review by February 17, 2006 for appeals from East Galena Township.
Counsel further argued the subject property was not reassessed on or before June 1, 2005, which is contrary to and in violation of Section 9-160 of the Property Tax Code (35 ILCS 200/9-160). Additionally, counsel argued in the brief that publication of the assessments was not made on or before December 31, 2005, which is in violation of Section 12-10 of the Property Tax Code (35 ILCS 200/12-10). Counsel also argued the subject's notice of assessment change was not mailed to the taxpayer in a timely manner, which is in violation of Section 12-30 of the Property Tax Code (35 ILCS 200/12-30). Lastly, counsel contended the classification of "Rural Residential/Recreational Property" has not been established by ordinance of the Jo Daviess County Board, which is in violation of Section 9-150 of the Property Tax Code (35 ILCS 200/9-150). In further support of these claims, counsel argued that the statutory provisions for publication and notice are designed for the benefit and protection of taxpayers. Moreover, these statutes are mandatory and require strict and timely compliance. In conclusion, counsel argued the failure of the Jo Daviess County assessment officials to give timely publication and notification vitiates the tax resulting from the increase in assessment. As authority for this proposition, counsel cited Andrews v. Foxworthy, 71 Ill. 2d 13, 15 Ill. Dec. 648 (1978).
Although appellant did not appear to testify at the hearing with regard to the use of the subject property, appellant's brief concluded that the "subject property easily falls within the definition of a 'farm.'" Based on the foregoing evidence, the appellant requested the subject parcel be afforded a farmland classification in accordance with the 2004 assessment amount, or, in the alternative, based on the legal argument, the assessment
