ASSESSMENT APPEALS BOARD. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES: BOARD NO.3 In re 2014 Application No. 2011-015359 Application of: Assessors ID No: 5534-037-009 PARAMOUNT PICTURES CORP. FINDINGS OF FACT. ‘The application of Paramount Pictures Corp. (“Applicant”) requesting a change in the assessed value of property located at 5451 Marathon Street, Los Angeles, California was heard before the County of Los Angeles Assessment Appeals Board No. 3, Maggie Soleimani, Chairperson, Henry Tapia and Mason Yost, Members of said Board, on April 25" through April 29", May 24"", May 26" September 1, 2016 and May 23, 2017 The Applicant appeared through Wade Norwood, Attorney and Tim Landolt, appraiser with Vista Valuations. The Los Angeles County Assessor appeared through Frank Diaz Jr., and Carlos Tovar, Assessor's Representatives, and Andre Riel, Assessor's Investigating Apprais erand Drew Phillips, Assessor's Appraiser Specialist and Expert Witness. Evidence, both oral and documentary, having been introduced on behalf of the Applicant and on behalf of the County of Los Angeles through its Assessor, the Board makes its Findings of Faet as follows: Hoa. wo2124762.1 olL DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY The property which is the subject of this application consists of Personal Property and Fixtures situated at the Paramount studios lot located at $451 Marathon Street in the City of Los Angeles (’Subject Property"). The Personal Property and Fixtures were assessed on the secured roll. The real property, land and improvements that were originally at issue on this application were bifurcated and withdrawn by the Applicant at the outset of the hearing n. ENROLLED VALUES. rata The property was appraised for ad valorem property tax purposes and enrolled by the Assess total cash value of $164,769,490, This is allocated $11,086,592 to Personal Property and $53,682,898 to tures. Fixtures: $11,086,592 Personal Property: $53,682,898 U. APPLICANT’S OPINION OF VALUE AND REASONS FOR FILING ‘The Applicant originally sought a reduction to a full cash value of $79,500,000, but later revised its opinion of value to $81,100,000. That opinion was again revised due to the removal of double assessed construction in progress (CIP) costs. The Applicant’s final opinion of value was $69,700,000, allocated as follows $42,600,000 to Personal Property and $27,100,000 to Fixtures, based on the following statement contained in the application: HOA Imi :CTYPE OF ASSESSMEN- Regular Assessment: Value as of January 1, 201 REASON FOR FILING: El. ALL PERSONAL PROPERTY/FIXTURES: © At the hearing, the Applicant requested that Issue A ~ Decline in Value, be withdrawn, Vv. APPLICANT'S CASE The Applicant originally sought a reduction to a total merket value of $79,500,000. The Applicant later revised opinion of value to $81,100,000. During the course of the Hearing, the Applicant informed the Assessor of a possible double assessment of construction in progress (CIP) costs. The Assessor investigated the issue and removed the double assessed CIP costs and proposed a value reduction 10 $137,397.278. This figure was allocated $83,714,380 to personal property and $53,682,898 to fixtures. That recommendation was not accepted by the Applicant. ‘The Applicant's appraiser, Mr, Landolt presented a cost Approach to value the Subject Property. ‘The Applicant argued for economic obsolescence and stated BOE requires that appraisers remove all forms of obsolescence: "[rJeproduetion or replacement cost shall be reduced by the amount that such cost is estimated to exceed the current value of the reproducible property by reason of physical deterioration, misplacement, over-or under improvement, and other forms of depreciation or obsolescence” (Property Tax Rule (6) (e)). oato2nes7021 -3-