The opinion
Pfeifer, J.,
dissenting.
{¶ 25} The court in this case places undue reliance on a speculative possibility while ignoring a harsh economic reality. The court is unduly impressed with the possibility that the difficulties encountered by Weber Sisters may be its “management practices.” At the same time, the court accords little value to evidence that “[immediately after the May 2003 sale it became clear that two tenants slated to occupy the largest portions of the building — Boston Market and Fiesta Fresh— would not take possession.” I am willing to believe that this problem had more to do with market weakness than with Weber Sisters’ management practices. Weber Sisters has presented enough evidence for us to conclude that there has been a change in the market. The property is virtually empty; it doesn’t make sense to value it as if it were fully leased. I would reverse the decision of the BTA and reinstate the sound conclusion of the BOR. I dissent.
Lundberg Stratton, J., concurs in the foregoing opinion.