Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
MINUTKS OF TilK <br />ORONO LOCAL BOARD OF APPEALS AND EQUALIZATION MEETING <br />^ dnesday, April 21,2004 <br />7:00 o’clock p.m. <br />Murphy summuri/cd the assessors arrived at a percentage based on their analysis and that percentage <br />was applied citywidc by category. He understands Mr. Nettles question to be if the assessors <br />con:pared his property to other like properties in this category, and that the assessors have not done <br />this yet. <br />Davy concurred that no individual comparison had been done at this stage for Mr. Nettle's property. <br />Mr. Nettles indicated that is an unsatisfactory process, and that he wants to be engaged in a process <br />that has .some anchor points for discussion. He is looking for .some sort of documentation and needs <br />some comparisons in order to resolve his quc.stions. <br />Kunik pointed out a property sale down the street from Mr. Nettles’ property. The asses.sors <br />extracted the house/buildings, and then that increase was applied to Mr. Nellies' property value, as <br />the front feet lakcshore values were comparable. Kunik referenced a conversation he had with .Mr. <br />Nettles where they had agreement on the consistent value for the front fool lakeshore. <br />Mr. Nettles staled he had not agreed but understood Kunik's explanation. He disagreed that his <br />property should be compared as a ‘like’ property to lho.se on Heritage Lane as his property has the liH <br />station, the old stage house, and the marina which he bclieveil is a different setting. <br />Davy slated he would meet with Mr. Nellies, who restated he wants to understand the rationale for <br />the property’s great increase in value. <br />Jensen interjected the perception appears to be that the asses.sors are defending the values, however, <br />in the mass appraisal system, sales data are used to value properties but it is not a perfect system, <br />fhe goal is to be at 95 100% of market .sales values on an open market. Technically, she advised, <br />the burden of proof is actually on the taxpayer to demonstrate w hen the values should be less than its <br />iUise.ssment value. Jensen invited Mr. Nettles to provide infonnation to the assessors on why he <br />believes the assessal value should be low er. <br />Mr. Nettles replied he providal some of that infonnation already to the assessors, such as an <br />appraisal done in 2(M)3 for $585,000 for refinancing puqioses. which is a lot less than the assessed <br />$810.(MM) value. <br />Mayor Peterson obsen ed that properties arc being sold for such high values currently and that does <br />have an impact upon all property values. <br />Mayor Peterson eonrinned that Davy wouUI contact Mr. Nettles to set up a time to meet. <br />Moorse asked the Board to set a date and time, within the next twenty (20)days, for the reconvened <br />hearing when the assessors return w tth the appeals recommendations, prior to any property owner <br />leaving this meeting. Upon a calculation of days, the reeon\ened hearing was set for May 10. 2tX»4. <br />2) Don Kielley, 1670 Sbadywood Rd, PID ffl7-l 17-2.3 21 0015, valued at $622,000 <br />Mr. Kielley indicated that he. tiu). misunderstiHul the he either had the option to call or to come in <br />person and sit down w ith the assessors on this date. He acknow ledged that he brought no comparable <br />property information with him. <br />Page 3 of 11 <br />i