04-21-2004 Board of Review MinutesA

Home Browse Search

: MINUTKSOFTIIK ORONO 1.0CA1. BOARD OF APPFALS AND KQUAU/ATION IVIFFTING Wednesday, ApHI 21,2004 7:00 o'clock p.m. Murphy askal what is llic square footage of the existing house. Ms. Blackstone conllnned the hou.se to be 480 s.f., is livable aiul rented out pre.sently. She stated the parcels are 50 ‘ x 330’ and it has no lakcshore access. She expressed her expectation that both parcels would increa.se the same percentage, as opposed to one parcel jumping 25% more than the other. Murphy asked Davy, if the two parcels are adjacent, what is the din'erential between the two to justify dirTcrent values. Davy responded the home is valued at SIO.OtM). Ho\>'cvcr, he explained the a.s.ses.sors are valuing it as an as.semblage property rather than as two single parcels. Murjdiy questioned why the values of two adjacent properties owned by the same people but not legally combined are considered as combined parcels. Davy replied that the value would be even higher if the parcels were considered separately. Murphy asked why the assessors make an arbitrary decision to consider parcels combined or to be leH separately, and does this create an advantage if the parcels are combined. Davy stated it is not a huge difference between whether the parcels arc combined (S155,()()0) or valued separately (est. $I75,0()0). Murphy asked if the assessors are ‘playing catch-up ’ on the one parcel, tt> w hich Davy agreed indicating that when the focus is on the primary parcel, the sccondar>' parcels may fall behind in valuation and then may result in a si/eable adjustment. Ms. Blackstone interjected that she hail an extensive conversation w ith the a.ssessor last year (2003) as she believed the assessors w ere doing ‘catch-up ’ on the property value but there was never any indication that 2lM)3 was only a partial ’catch-up ’ and subsequent years would see additional increases. I ler question now is w hether this is another partial jump in valuation for 2(M)4 and w ill she see further significant jumps in 2005 assessments. She stated she understands that property values have to increase and that is not necessarily a bad thing but does not see the rationale for the substantial jump in the one parcel. Davy ad\ ised the parcels are correctly at market value now and any changes for 2005 will result only trum sales activity in the market. Ms. Blackstone rcspotidcd that is w hat she heard last year from the a.s.ses.sors. Mayor Peterson asked if Ms. Blackstone w ished to have an assessor \ isit the property w ith her. Ms. Blackstone replied that she did not think that was necessary . She emphasi/cd she wanted to know why one parcel increased significantly more than the other pareel. Mayor Peterson asked Davy to call Ms. Blackstone and spend as much lime as needed to address her issues. Davy agreed to call Ms. Blackstone. PageSof 11