Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO LOCAL BOARD OF APPEAl.S AND EQUALIZATION MEETING <br />Wednesday, April 21,2004 <br />7:00 o'clock p.m. <br />concerns expressed by property owners, and assessor stafi'arc advisory only. Davy advised the third <br />level of appeal is to the Hennepin County Board, which meets the last two weeks in June 2004 to <br />consider property value appeals. The final 2004 market value appeal level is to the .Minnesota Tax <br />Court by April 30,2005. <br />The assessors received many phone calls and Davy explained the majority of questions were about <br />the limited taxable value increases. He described that the limited taxable value which was set by the <br />Minnesota State Legislature in the I990 ’s when 20-25% market value adjustments were common, <br />was set to expire in 2001 but was extended. Taxable value increases are currently limited to 15% and <br />for the next two years w ill also be at 15*!^o. <br />Murphy asked for confirmation that the Minnesota Legislature review cd that percentage each session <br />and, over time, the goal is to eliminate the gap and that the two numbers (market value and taxable <br />value) w'ill become the same. <br />Davy agreed with Murphy ’s description and advised that this year many properties have a market <br />value that is the taxable value, and this will occur next year as well. He advised the limited market <br />value is set to be phased out. <br />Gerald Walsh, 180 Big Island, commented that in his letter of meeting notice and valuation it w as not <br />made very clear that this is a second level of appeal and that property owners should make contact <br />w ith the assessors as a first level. <br />Mike Adair, 650 Tonkawa, also indicated he did not understand from his letter that this was the <br />second level of appeal. <br />1) Alan Nettles, 1940 Shoreline Dr, PID #10-117-23 47 0007, valued at $810,m <br />Mr. Nettles explained his property w ith 121’ front feet of lakeshore two years ago increased 5132,000 <br />and three years ago increased 5125,000 w ith the house value frozen at 5148,000, with the land value <br />increasing 5350.(KM) recently. He slated Iheie have been no improvements to the property but there <br />have been some problems such as an unloeated drainage ditch collapse w ith flooding that caused the <br />loss of 10-11 trees. He added that the house actually detracts from the property value, citing a <br />properly at 1910 Heritage Lane Shoreline w ith 127’ front feet of lakeshore valued at 5865,000. <br />Kunik responded that he had talked w ith Mr. Nettles. <br />Mr. Nettles stated the property docs not have a modem house, the driveway has sinkholes and <br />believed the property would be more valuable without the house. He stated the market v alue is <br />neither accurate nor fair. He agreed he would meet further with the as.sessor and asked where to <br />secure appeal fomis. <br />Mayor Peterson confinned that Mr. Nettles would meet with the assessor to review’ the land value. <br />Davy staled the assessors do not conduct a full comparables stu<ly at this stage, but a full-blown <br />appraisal would be done at the level three appeal. \lr. Nettles asked for tlic assessor’s documentation <br />for applying to his property. Davy indicated general grow th in lakeshore property values was used. <br />Page 2 of 11