Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-13-1991 Board of Review Reconvened Minutes�J �- 1991 RECONVENED BOARD OF REVIEW - MAY 13, 1991 ,/ The 1991 Reconvened Board of Review was held on Monday, May 13, 1991:'. Mayor Peterson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Councilmembers Goetten, Callahan, Jabbour and Butler were present. Representing the City were Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator; Rolf Erickson, City Assessor; and Dave Wilde Assistant City Assessor; and Teri Naab, Recorder. City Administrator Bernhardson introduced each property owner, address and explained the Assessors' valuation and reasoning for such. They are as follows: 1. Art Brambilla, 3838 Cherry Avenue - PID #08- 11;7 -23 33 0003. Mr. Brambilla valuation was at $226,500. 'It has been reduced to $215,000. The reduction in taxes as questioned by Mr. Brambilla at the last meeting was due to a reclassification from seasonal non - homestead to homestead. 2. Jeanette Burch, Big Island - 23- 117 -23 32 0058. The valuation has been reduced from $51,600 to $48,600. 3. Newell Weed, 1385 Orono Lane - 02- 117 -23 34 0003. The valuation is recommended to stay the same at $522,000. Mr. Weed arrived later and explained that the valuation system is unfair as it is based on market value, however the market is down. Relatively a small percentage of houses are currently selling, so to use comparitive sales gives a false market value. He noted also that outstate Minnesota does everything to depress their values while we here, do everything to increase those values, thereby requiring us to pay more taxes and they to pay less. We are taxing ourselves right out of our homes. He feels a fair market value would be $480,000. He also noted that Boyer Construction has indicated that it would cost approximately $500,000 to upgrade the house. Councilmember Jabbour asked Mr. Weed how much property he has. Mr. Weed explained he has about 1 acre. Councilmember Jabbour noted that he had recently purchased a 3 acre parcel for a substantially lower price than what Mr. Weed's valuation for his land is. Mayor Peterson asked Mr. Weed if he currently has an application in with the County for reduction. Mr. Weed noted that it is pending. Councilmember Callahan feels that Mr. Weed should petition to the County for 1991 valuation also and go through the Court of Appeals for a decision for 1990 valuation payable 1991. 1 1991 RECONVENED BOARD OF REVIEW - MAY 13, 1991 It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Butler, to accept the Assessors' recommendation of $522,000, which reflects no change. Ayes 5, nays 0. 4. Neil Bashore, 2565 Woodhaven Drive - 33- 118 -23 41 0008. The valuation is recommended to stay at $163,100. 5. Robin Crawford, 1540 Long Lake Boulevard - 26- 118 -23 33 0007. The valuation was reduced to $83,500 from $87,600. 6. Melvin Peterson, 475 Oxford Road -.05- 117 -23 41 0010. The valuation is recommended for no change at $603,600. 7. Mike Schulte, 4640 West Branch Road - 06- 117 -23 33 0008. The valuation is recommended to be reduced from $115,300 to $108,500. 8. Alan Carlson, 3125 Fox Street - 04- 117 -23 33 0011. The valuation for 1991 is $870,900 and it is recommended it be reduced to $718,000 due to an error in last years changes. Mr. Erickson explained that the Board changed the value from $718,000 on Mr. Smith's recommendation because on the field card the property had not been divided as it should have been. However, the County failed to carry the change over after the Board of Review. The change was just made at the County level and was issued a corrected tax statement. He is therefore recommending to go back to what the Board recommended last year which was $718,000 because of the error. Mr. Erickson feels that the property is worth more, but out of fairness, he recommends this. He also explained he will try to re- evaluated the entire area next year. Alan Carlson, Watertown Road - 33- 118 -23 32 0001. The 1991 valuation is recommended to be reduced from $404,200 to $311,000 because of the removal of buildings and the-property has been reclassified from agricultural to residential. 9. James Lorence, 4460 North Shore Drive - 07- 117 -23 31 0039. The valuation for 1991 is $224,300 and it is recommended to be reduced to $214,000. 10. Matthew Nicoll, 2943 Farview Lane - 04- 117 -23 34 0008. The 1991 valuation is $309,000 and it is recommended to be valued at $280,100. 11. Ron Sheldon, 3225.Bayside Road - 05- 117 -23 41 0017. The 1991 valuation is $353,500 and recommended to be reduced to $310,500. 12. Ward Edwards, 2474 Carman Road - 20- 117 -23 12 0027. K 1991 RECONVENED BOARD OF REVIEW - MAY 13, 1991 The 1991 valuation was $295,500 and it is recommended not to change. Mr. Erickson explained that very often new houses on the lake will sell for more than the construction cost because of the new amenities within. Councilmember Callahan questioned the 1990 valuation for the land which was at $84,000 and wanted to know if the value of the land had doubled in one year. Mr. Erickson noted this was correct and because the lot was vacant among developed lots, it was overlooked the last few years. Also, the property had to have soil corrections to be built upon which raised the value of the land. Mr. Edwards is not being penalized now, he just got a good deal in the past and per State law, once an error is realized, it must be corrected. Mr. Edwards was present to explain the lot was originally valued at $100,000 but was reduced to $80,000 because of the wetland designation on the property. The appraisal from the mortgage company valued the property and, the home at approximately $260,000. The actual cost to build the house including the value of the land and the improvements to the soil was $271,000. The potential for subdivision of this lot is uncertain. The property has no sandy beach and the lakeshore is filled with mil foil. Mayor Peterson asked if it was normal for a new residence to be valued more than the actual construction cost the first year. Mr. Erickson noted that Mr. Edwards was allowing $84,000 for the site. He would not buy that site for $84,000 in today's market. Councilmember Goetten noted that the appraisal was done in 1989, before the house was constructed. Councilmember Jabbour also noted that the valuation for the land used by the mortgage company was $140,000. Mr. Erickson also noted that banks are extremely conservative in their appraisals. It was moved,by Mayor Peterson, seconded by Councilmember Butler, to retain at the valuation of $295,500 recommended by the Assessor. Ayes 5, nays 0. 13. Stewart Perry, 2975 Casco Point Road The valuation for 1991 was $292,100 be reduced to $265,000. 3 - 20- 117 -23 31 0045. and it is recommended to 1991 RECONVENED BOARD OF REVIEW - MAY 13, 1991 14. Lou Smerling, 2683 Casco Point Road - 20- 117 -23 23 0001. It is recommended no change in valuation from $121,200. 15. Dennis Landon, 1375 Vine Place - 08- 117 -23 42 0007 and 08- 117 -23 42 0008. Mr. Landon was present and feels that the reduction on the homesteaded parcel is fine, but feels that the vacant lot next to the property should be reduced. He notes that the lot is unbuildable and feels the land is•less valuable than a vacant lot across the street. Also, there is a parcel across the road near the bridge which has more lakeshore and less value. . Mayor Peterson asked if Mr. Landon would be better tax wise to combine both properties. Mr. Erickson indicated that the taxes would remain the same i as the parcel is currently secondary homestead. Mr.- Wilde noted that lakeshore property is valued at approximately $900 per foot and that is what the value came to at approximately 180 feet, but very narrow and long. Mr. Landon -feels it is worth about $10,000 and he could probably se 11 for such: for a person to put a dock on. v ,Y The Councilmembers indicated that to do that is illegal without a principal residence first. It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to reduce the valuation from $16,300 to $12,000 for the vacant lot (P.I.D. 07- 117 -23 42 0008), and to accept the recommendation of the Assessor to reduce the homesteaded parcel from $173,600 to $168,200. Ayes 5, nays 0. 16. Christopher Tully, 1355 North Arm Drive - 07- 117 -23 41 0067, 0068 and 0073. The 1.9.91._valuation.is $760.00 and fecommerided to be reduced to $60,200: _ 17. Kelly Shaughnessy, 2150 Colin Drive - 03- 117 -23 21 0015. The 1991 valuation was $191,500 and is recommended to be reduced to $179,600. 19. R.F. Potas, 2190 Shadywood Road - 17- 117 -23 42 0007. The valuation for 1991 is $274,900 and is recommended not to change. 4 1991 RECONVENED BOARD OF REVIEW - MAY 13, 1991 20. Jim Rivers of Windward Marine, 1444 Shoreline Drive - 11- 117-23 22 0004, 0005,0006, 0007 and 0010. The valuation for 1991 is $620,000. Mr. Erickson explained he recommends the commercial parcel be lowered $35,000 to $590,000, but maintain the residential at the same value, and this is based on the County appraisal and the fact that the market is down. Mr. Rivers noted that a few years ago all the properties were lumped together, now it is to their advantage to split between commercial and residential. He also noted that there hasn't been a true sale of a marina of late and so it should be based on income. He feels the property valuation should be reduced substantially to reflect the current down market. Councilmember Callahan has compared the figures of Mr. Rivers and that of the County appraisal. He noted that the dif f erence f rom what Mr. Rivers provided and f rom that the County is using in its appraisal as income from the property is $22,000. In reaching the lower figure, Mr. Rivers has included real estate taxes which include $20,000 whereas the appraiser took a flat amount for expenses, but when he figured capitalization rate,. "he, included a'5% capitalization rate to recover the* taxes.' Therefore, even though they went at it differently, it shows Mr. Rivers is missing the capitalization rate in his figures. There is little difference when this is figured in -to both figures. •The value by the appraiser might well be reduced by $50,000 -r. 60,000 from the $626,000 and that actually is close to Mr. River's figure at $580,000. He felt that it is-on the low, end of the scale. Councilmember Jabbour concurred with Mr. River's theory that income producing property should be assessed and valued upon the income, except there is a difference with seasonal income producing property. When the ratio of property taxes was insignificant to.the- income being produced, the valuation wasn't raised to match the income. The valuation cannot keep going down to ref lect the lack of income being produced. It was moved by Councilmember Jabbour, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to change the valuation to $550,000 from $620,000 and this difference should come off the commercial parcel valuation, not the residential parcels. Ayes 5, nays 0. It was moved by Councilmember Callahan, seconded by Councilmember Butler, to adopt the Assessors' recommendations for the 1991 valuations of properties presented to the Board at the reconvened 1991 Board of Review. Ayes 5, nays 0. k 1991 RECONVENED BOARD OF REVIEW - MAY 13, 1991 Mr. Erickson also noted that those person who had submitted letters to the Board for the meeting of April 30, 1991 and were included in the minutes from that meeting will be reported to Hennepin County so they may continue their appeals process. They include the following: H.D. Berman, 3650 Casco Avenue - 20- 117 -23 31 0043 Kurt Nejezchelba, 2625 Kelly Avenue - 20- 117 -23 14 0026 Ormond L. Luger, 2696 Caroline Avenue - 20- 117 -23 24 0034 Lakeside Marina, Inc., 08- 117 -23 41 0012, 08- 117 -23 44 0004, 08- 117 -23 44 0005, 08- 117 -23 41 0014 and 08- 117 -23 41 0007 Councilmember Butler asked the Assessors to include their valuation for the current'year in the sales manual distributed to the Councilmembers for the Board of Review. That way they can compare the selling price to the valuation placed on the property. It was moved by Councilmember Goetten, seconded by Councilmember Jabbour, to close the 1991 Reconvened Board of Review at 7:03 p.m. Ayes 5, nays 0. Barbara A. Peterson, Mayor 0 othy M. lin, City Clerk 6