30. In the interim period, Lot No. 451-B was segregated from the mother and lot 451-B-1 an are of 28, 703 was adjudicated to Dennis G. Gatuslao coverd by Transfer Certificate of Titles No. T-217812. The City Government of Himamaylan offered to buy the property of Dennis Gatuslao through a negotiated sale at a price of Two Hundred Fifty Pesos (P250.00) per square meter as shown in his letter. (Pls. See Annex “H”).

31. That the purchase price of Two Hundred Fifty Pesos (P250.00) per square meter of lot 451-B-1 was still a portion of Lot 451-B when the City Appraisal Committee investigated and conducted another ocular inspection of the Lot 451-B-1 and found that there was son substantial change in the land classification.

32. That respondents take exception to that Par. 2 of page 3 of the Joint Affidavit, which states:

“That as specifically reflected in the Declaration of Real Property Value of the lot owned by Dennis Gatuslao with an area of 28, 703 square meters signed by City Assessor Ferdinand L. Armones on June 26, 2002, the assessed value of the said lot id php 600,000.00 only. Htus, the purchase of the lot as php 7,175,750.00 is grossly over prices and grossly disadvantageous to the city of Himamaylan; x x x x .”

33. That such allegation is rather a deception because Declaration of Real property Values of the Assessor is issued for tax purposes only. It is true that lot 451-B-1 is classified as agricultural for taxation purposes and the assessed value of P600,000.00 is basis for computed the annual tax of the said property. (Underlining for emphasis).

34. The upon ocular inspection of Lot 451-B-1, there are several residential houses standing on the frontage area of lot 451-B adjoining lot 451-B-1. there are residential houses built on the land across the road facing 451-B-1. Most of these houses had a construction cost of less than P175,000.00 are exempt from taxation. Lot No. 451-B-1 can be classified as a rurban land or a land in transition

which sooner or later is destined for change from rural to urban use and may be suitable or residential, commercial or industrial uses. (Underlining for emphasis).

35. That the all land spaces in the poblacion are fully occupied and with the growing population of the city, the expansion of the city is toward Barangay Caradio-an because of its proximity and accessibility thereof. Lot 451-B-1 is just 600 meters from the poblacion.

36. Granting for the sake of argument that the lot 451-b-was classified by the city Assessor of Himamaylan as 1st sugarland; 1st class orchard and 4th class residential and were assigned market values of P 120,000.00 per hectare; P50,000.00 per hectare and P250.00 per sq. meters in accordance with Provincial Tax \ordinance No. 99-01, the markets arrived at was 60 % of eh actual amrke values of the properties mentioned because the assessors, in preparing he schedule of market values were guided by Article VII, C, (1) of the Assessment regulations No. 3-75 of the Department of Finance which is still applicable provides that:

1. the date of he transaction must be reasonably near the general revision date. Sales transactions for the year serve basis for studies on trends of market value.

If the data derived therfrom are inadequate, studies may extend to preceding years, but in no cas shall it be for more than five (now three) years from the general reassessment date.”

37. that there were very few recorded sales transactions of real properties in the city of Himamaylan. In most cases, the sales price in the sales documents weer undervalued and did not reflect the true sales price.

38. that in the deliberation of the schedule of market value by the sangguniang panlalawigan, the members thereof adopt a cautions approach so that the increase in the market values of real properties in the next general revision of real property assessments would not antagonize land owners who were the critical partners of local governments in the implementation of the development programs.

39. that provincial tax ordinance No. 99-01 of the province of Negros occidental was applicable to the real properties of Himamaylan City because the general revision of real property assessment was conducted before the conversion of municipality of Himamaylan into a city.

40. That based on past revisions of assessment of real property, the actual market values of property as compared to the market values contained in the schedule of market values prepared by the assessor, ranges from 50% to 70% . if the medium range of 60% would be use in determining the actual market of Lot 451-B-1, the market value of P250.00 per hectare for residential 4th class had an actual market value of P416.66 per sq. meter./; the market value for orchard 1st class of P50,000 per hectare, P 83,000.00 per hectare; and the market value for sugar land 1st of P 200,000.00 per hectare (not P120,000.00 per hectare as erroneously stated in the report ), P333,33.00 rounded off to P330,000.00 per hectare

41. the assessed value of lot 451—B-1 in the amount of P600,00.00 after applying to the corresponding assessment levels of the market value is the not truly reflective of eh actual market value of the lot 451-B-1 at the time of the sale.

42. that in the case of Republic of the Philippines vs. court of appeals, heirs of Maria Rosales et al, 153 SCRA 429, the Supreme Court ruled that:

It is common knowledge that if there are several commercial establishment in a certain area as in the case at bar, there is no doubt that there will be more persons interested to purchased the property adjacent to these establishment. An owner of the parcel of land in the vicinity, therefore command a higher price.

“x x x x. Various factors can come into play in the valuation of the specific properties singled for expropriation. The values given by provincial assessors are usually uniform for every wide area covering several barrios or even an entire town with the exemption of the poblacion. Individual differences are never taken into account. The value of land is based on such generalities as the possible

cultivation for rice, corn, coconut, or other crops. Very often land described as “cogonal” has been cultivated for generations. x x x x tax values serve as guides but cannot be accurate substitutes for just compensations.

43.the City Appraisal Committee members in rendering an appraisal report are fully aware that such report is merely recommendatory. It is up for the Cuty Mayor and Sangguniang Panlungsod of Himamaylan City to accept it, modify it and even rject it if they find the recommended purchase prices as unreasonable, without factual basis and arbitrary. The circumstances and facts presented by the respondent City appraisal Committee members conclusively disproved the existence of connivance, confabulation and conspiracy among the respondents as well as overpricing of the subject property as alleged by complainants.44.That the herein respondents are adopting the joint counter-affidavits of the other co-respondents and integrated as part of this counter –affidavit.45. That the city appraisal committee members are career officers who were appointed to their present position based on their own merits, qualifications and experience. They were incidentally caught in the crossfire of contending local politicians who are eyeing for elective positions in this coming election. They were merely victims of political intrmaurals while performing their functions as mandated by law.

WHEREOF,the respondent members of the city appraisal committee, namely City Assessor Ferdinand L. Armones, City Treasurer Caroline T. Castro and City Engineer had exhaustively and satisfactorily explained their participation in the determination of the current and fair value of lots 451-b and 451-B-1 which weree identified as the proposed new public site of Himamaylan city and th market value of P250.00 is fair, reasonable and equitable as their actual current market value. Such being the case, there is no legal basis whatsoever to hold them liable of any offense being complained of.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we hereby affix our signatures this ____DAY OF march 2004 at the City of Himamaylan, Negros Occidental, Philippines.

FERDINAND L. ARMONESAffiant

CAROLINE T. CASTRO VICENTE GENOVAAffiant Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this _____day of March 2004 at Himamaylan City, Negros Occidental, Philippines. Affiants exhibited to me the following Community Tax Certificates:

CTC No. Date Place of IssueFerdinand L. Armones _________ __________ ____________

Caroline T. Castro __________ ___________ ____________Vicente Genova __________ ___________ ____________

Copy furnished to:Complainants Clodualdo Subaldo and

Cristina Isidra SilverioSanggunian Panlungsod Himamaylan CityReg. Mail No.______Himamaylan City Post OfficeDate__________, 2004

45.