05-09-2005 Board of Appeal and Equalization Reconvened Packet

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION WcdacMiay, April 20,2005 7:00 o’clock p.m. Davy stated what is not always included in the valuations are any improvements that have been made to properties. Davy stated the Assessor’s Office looks at estimated market value, which docs not always include improvements to homes. Winton noted the homes in his •leighborhood are fairly new. Peterson noted the Assessor did visit this quadrant of the City where this property is located. The Board requested the Assessor visit the Winton property. 6. Scott Momson, 1525 Sixth Avenue North, PID 26-118-23 33 0033, inquired what the justification is for penalizing something that has not yet been sold and the owner has not realized any capital gain on it. Morrison stated he would like to know what that justification is for penalizing that theoretical gain in the maricet. Davy stated a study of the sales throughout the City has been conducted and that people are paying more and more for properties, which is the reason for the higher valuations. Davy noted the Assessor’s Office is required to assess properties based on current market v'alue. Morrison inquired whether the state gives the property owner a rebate if the house is valued at a much higher amount than what it actually sells for in the future. Davy indicated the property owner would get an abatement from the state for one year. Morrison stated in his opinion a one year abatement is not fair if the property owner has been paying taxes on a higher valuation for a number of years. Davy stated the sUte rarely needs to issue an abatement since the Assessor’s Office is generally slightly below what the home sells for. Morrison indicated he built this home in 1998 and that every year since his valuation has consistently gone up S40,000 to S50.000. Momson stated the taxable marketable value for this year has gone from $736,000 to $827,000. Morrison stated at this rate next year’s taxable marketable value would be $932,000. Morrison indicated he has the same complaints regarding the roads as expressed earlier and that he was told by the City of Orono that Spring Hill Road is Long Lake’s responsibility. Morrison stated the City of Long Lake informed him that Spring Hill Road is Oitmo’s responsibility. Morrison stated he has a problem paying taxes when he is not receiving any benefit from the City or the County. Morrison stated there should be a reasonable cap put on properties as far as valuations. Murphy commented he understands the frustration property owners feel with the valuation process but that the tax fbrms received by the property owners include sUte, county, school and city taxes. Murphy stated the Orono portion of the tax sutement is the smallest portion of the uxes and that the City has maintained a consistent levy over the years. PAGES