Should poorly run properties win tax assessment reductions when, if run by other parties, they wouldn't be losing money and property value?: Trump Doral Resort

The Trump Doral Resort in Miami is in the news because President Trump, who still maintains his ownership interest in various properties in North America and overseas, planned to have the G-7 conference there, which would have provided great financial benefit to him, even though such self-dealing is specifically precluded by the US Constitution.

He backed off because of the criticism ("Trump’s plan for the G-7 was blatant corruption. He was right to drop it," Washington Post).

Relatedly, the Post reports ("Trump’s prized Doral resort is in steep decline, according to company documents, showing his business problems are mounting") that since Trump has become President, the fortunes of the Trump Doral Resort have declined significantly, and the company is seeking a reduction in its tax assessment as a result. From the article:

At Doral, which Trump has listed in federal disclosures as his biggest moneymaker hotel, room rates, banquets, golf and overall revenue were all down since 2015. In two years, the resort’s net operating income — a key figure, representing the amount left over after expenses are paid — had fallen by 69 percent. ...

“They are severely underperforming” other resorts in the area, tax consultant Jessica Vachiratevanurak told a Miami-Dade County official in a bid to lower the property’s tax bill. The reason, she said: “There is some negative connotation that is associated with the brand.” ...

the statistics provided by the company’s consultants to Miami-Dade County — which are legally required to be accurate — showed competing resorts in the same region of Florida still outperformed the Trump resort in the key metrics of room occupancy and average room rate.

JW Marriott Miami Turnberry Resort & Spa in Aventura is one of the many hotels in South Florida outperforming the Doral National Resort.  

Penalize poor management don't reward it. But should poor or toxic management be a justification for property tax reductions when if the building/property had been better managed, revenues and property values wouldn't have dropped?

I say no.

This is no different from valuing upward properties that have been rezoned.  Granted, that can be a displacement strategy too, to shift properties generating limited revenues to higher, more profitable uses. 

But that is how zoning and property tax assessments work, and poor performance in the face of better performance elsewhere ought to be penalized, not reward.