Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-21-2004 Board of Appeal and Equalization MinutesMINUTES OF THE ORONO LOCAL BOARD OF APPEALS AND EQUALIZATION MEETING Wednesday, April 21, 2004 7:00 o'clock p.m. is ROLL The Orono Local Board of Appeal and Equalization met on the above mentioned date with the following members present: Mayor Barbara Peterson; Council Members Jim Murphy, Jim White and Lili McMillan; Representing staff were City Administrator Ron Moorse and Recorder Glenda D. Spiotta. Hennepin County Senior Appraisers Kim Jensen and Bill Davy, and Appraiser Tom Kunik were present. Council Member Bob Sansevere was absent. Mayor Peterson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. APPEALS Mayor Peterson welcomed the public to the annual Orono Local Board of Appeal and Equalization meeting. Mayor Peterson invited the assessors to provide a brief summary of the appeal process. She explained the appeals would be heard one at a time in the order in which persons arrived and signed in at the Council Chambers. • Davy introduced the Hennepin County staff members, Ms. Jensen and Mr. Kunik. Davy explained that since 1998 Orono has contracted with Hennepin County to provide property assessment services, noting that Ms. Jensen was involved with Orono since then. He gave an overview of the appeals proceedings and role and duties of the assessor, which, by state statute, is to establish a property's market value as of January 2, 2004 that is then used to determine property tax payable in 2005. He explained the market value is the highest price a property could bring when exposed on an open market involving a willing buyer and willing seller. Davy stated the assessment is based on actual sales that occur in the city of Orono. Davy reported there are about 2900 property parcels in Orono and 131 property sales occurred in 2003. The assessors conduct ratio studies on the sales, then compare what the properties actually sell for to the current 2003 assessment. This indicates how far the assessed market values are below the actual sales prices. Davy stated the real estate market is continuing to raise sales prices and the demand for properties in Orono continues to be very high. Davy reported the sales study for October 1, 2002 to September 30, 2003 determines the 2004 ratio of assessed market value to sales prices. He advised the median ratio of 96 -976/o to satisfy Hennepin County assessment standards as well as the Minnesota Department of Revenue standards. Further, he explained the assessor also reviews random properties not sold to see how much the assessor had adjusted those properties. Davy reviewed the Board of Appeal and Equalization meeting process, pointing out that this meeting • is the second level of appeal, the first level taking place when the property owner contacted the assessor to discuss the market value. The assessors physically inspected some local properties after hearing from the property owners and either came to a reduction in value or the homeowners know the values were corrected. At this meeting, the City Council sits as the Board of Review and hears Page 1 of 11 MINUTES OF THE ORONO LOCAL BOARD OF APPEALS AND EQUALIZATION MEETING Wednesday, April 21, 2004 7:00 o'clock p.m. concerns expressed by property owners, and assessor staff are advisory only. Davy advised the third • level of appeal is to the Hennepin County Board, which meets the last two weeks in June 2004 to consider property value appeals. The final 2004 market value appeal level is to the Minnesota Tax Court by April 30, 2005. The assessors received many phone calls and Davy explained the majority of questions were about the limited taxable value increases. He described that the limited taxable value which was set by the Minnesota State Legislature in the 1990's when 20 -25% market value adjustments were common, was set to expire in 2001 but was extended. Taxable value increases are currently limited to 15% and for the next two years will also be at 15 %. Murphy asked for confirmation that the Minnesota Legislature reviewed that percentage each session and, over time, the goal is to eliminate the gap and that the two numbers (market value and taxable value) will become the same. Davy agreed with Murphy's description and advised that this year many properties have a market value that is the taxable value, and this will occur next year as well. He advised the limited market value is set to be phased out. Gerald Walsh, 180 Big Island, commented that in his letter of meeting notice and valuation it was not made very clear that this is a second level of appeal and that property owners should make contact with the assessors as a first level. Mike Adair, 650 Tonkawa, also indicated he did not understand from his letter that this was the • second level of appeal. 1) Alan Nettles, 1940 Shoreline Dr, PID #10- 117 -23 47 0007, valued at $810,000 Mr. Nettles explained his property with 121' front feet of lakeshore two years ago increased $132,000 and three years ago increased $125,000 with the house value frozen at $148,000, with the land value increasing $350,000 recently. He stated there have been no improvements to the property but there have been some problems such as an unlocated drainage ditch collapse with flooding that caused the loss of 10 -11 trees. He added that the house actually detracts from the property value, citing a property at 1910 Heritage Lane /Shoreline with 127' front feet of lakeshore valued at $865,000. Kunik responded that he had talked with Mr. Nettles. Mr. Nettles stated the property does not have a modern house, the driveway has sinkholes and believed the property would be more valuable without the house. He stated the market value is neither accurate nor fair. He agreed he would meet further with the assessor and asked where to secure appeal forms. Mayor Peterson confirmed that Mr. Nettles would meet with the assessor to review the land value. Davy stated the assessors do not conduct a full comparables study at this stage, but a full -blown • appraisal would be done at the level three appeal. Mr. Nettles asked for the assessor's documentation for applying to his property. Davy indicated general growth in lakeshore property values was used. Page 2 of 11 MINUTES OF THE ORONO LOCAL BOARD OF APPEALS AND EQUALIZATION MEETING Wednesday, April 21, 2004 7:00 o'clock p.m. • Murphy summarized the assessors arrived at a percentage based on their analysis and that percentage was applied citywide by category. He understands Mr. Nettles question to be if the assessors compared his property to other like properties in this category, and that the assessors have not done this yet. Davy concurred that no individual comparison had been done at this stage for Mr. Nettle's property. Mr. Nettles indicated that is an unsatisfactory process, and that he wants to be engaged in a process that has some anchor points for discussion. He is looking for some sort of documentation and needs some comparisons in order to resolve his questions. Kunik pointed out a property sale down the street from Mr. Nettles' property. The assessors extracted the house/buildings, and then that increase was applied to Mr. Nettles' property value, as the front feet lakeshore values were comparable. Kunik referenced a conversation he had with Mr. Nettles where they had agreement on the consistent value for the front foot lakeshore. Mr. Nettles stated he had not agreed but understood Kunik's explanation. He disagreed that his property should be compared as a `like' property to those on Heritage Lane as his property has the lift station, the old stage house, and the marina which he believed is a different setting. Davy stated he would meet with Mr. Nettles, who restated he wants to understand the rationale for the property's great increase in value. • Jensen interjected the perception appears to be that the assessors are defending the values, however, in the mass appraisal system, sales data are used to value properties but it is not a perfect system. The goal is to be at 95 — 100% of market sales values on an open market. Technically, she advised, the burden of proof is actually on the taxpayer to demonstrate when the values should be less than its assessment value. Jensen invited Mr. Nettles to provide information to the assessors on why he believes the assessed value should be lower. Mr. Nettles replied he provided some of that information already to the assessors, such as an appraisal done in 2003 for $585,000 for refinancing purposes, which is a lot less than the assessed $810,000 value. Mayor Peterson observed that properties are being sold for such high values currently and that does have an impact upon all property values. Mayor Peterson confirmed that Davy would contact Mr. Nettles to set up a time to meet. Moorse asked the Board to set a date and time, within the next twenty (20) days, for the reconvened hearing when the assessors return with the appeals recommendations, prior to any property owner leaving this meeting. Upon a calculation of days, the reconvened hearing was set for May 10, 2004, 2) Don Kielley, 1670 Shadywood Rd, PID #17- 117 -23 210015, valued at $622,000 is Mr. Kielley indicated that he, too, misunderstood the he either had the option to call or to come in person and sit down with the assessors on this date. He acknowledged that he brought no comparable property information with him. Page 3 of 11 MINUTES OF THE ORONO LOCAL BOARD OF APPEALS AND EQUALIZATION MEETING Wednesday, April 21, 2004 7:00 o'clock p.m. Mr. Kielley stated he had two points to make and was willing to meet with the assessors to discuss • them. He pointed out the property is close to the intersection of CR 19 near 51 which is a heavily used road as well as the attendant traffic noises at the stop signs. He explained the road is dangerous and described that when he walks his dog their experience is that the traffic is often faster than the posted 35 mph. Also, it is dangerous because of a bend in the road and limited visibility. Mr. Kielley's second point relates to the house that was a cottage with three side porches of 1920's construction. In 1996 they did some extensive first floor remodeling and after that went to have similar work done on the second floor but were told that due to foundation problems, a steel superstructure over the first floor like a `cover' would have to be built for a second story. A visit to the basement would show the foundation issues. Davy confirmed the assessors would contact Mr. Kielley to view the property and house. 3) Gail Blackstone, 4475 Forest Lake Landing, PID #07- 117 -23 24 0023, 07- 117 -23 24 0024 Ms. Blackstone explained that last year the property value for this property went up very significantly on the two parcels at this address: 47.2% for PID #07- 117 -23 24 0023 and 28.6% for PID #07 -117- 23 24 0024. She called the assessors office at that time and ultimately decided not to come to the 2003 Board of Appeals and Equalization Meeting for a variety of reasons, including that values needed to move to reflect the value of the land. Ms. Blackstone expected an increase for 2004 to reflect the reasonable proportion for this category of • property. The increase in PID #07- 117 -23 24 0023 is 10.5% but the concern she has is over the 35.2% increase on PID #07-117-23 24 0024. She stated she does not understand this year why the one parcel increased over another 35 %. Ms. Blackstone advised she did call the assessors but was unsatisfied with the response. Mayor Peterson asked if the assessors had visited the property. Davy indicated this is a land issue and he did drive by the property and reviewed some of that area's land values. He stated that some of the land values are increasing quite astonishingly but the percentages are sound. Davy reported the 2003 land value was $86,000 and for 2004 is $95,000 on PID #07- 117 -23 04 0023 and the 2003 land value was $52,000 and for 2004 is $71,000 on PID # -07- 117-23 04 0024, both being similar in size. Davy advised that the two parcels together form a buildable site with a combined value of $155,000. He reported that the next door property is valued at $155,000, too, and looking at other properties and what they have sold for over the past few years has led to making some pretty significant adjustments for this property. White asked if the site was truly buildable. Ms. Blackstone described the property as being quite sloped both lengthwise and towards the streets but it does have a tiny cabin on it which would need to be demolished before any building could occur, and would also involve extensive site grading. She repeated that she understood last year • when the increases occurred to adjust for sales but did not expect a huge adjustment to happen two years in a row. Page 4 of 11 MINUTES OF THE ORONO LOCAL BOARD OF APPEALS AND EQUALIZATION MEETING Wednesday, April 21, 2004 7:00 o'clock p.m. • Murphy asked what is the square footage of the existing house. Ms. Blackstone confirmed the house to be 480 s.f., is livable and rented out presently. She stated the parcels are 50' x 330' and it has no lakeshore access. She expressed her expectation that both parcels would increase 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 differential between the two to justify different values. Davy responded the home is valued at $10,000. However, he explained the assessors are valuing it as an assemblage property rather than as two single parcels. Murphy 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 left separately, and does this create an advantage if the parcels are combined. Davy stated it is not a huge difference between whether the parcels are combined ($155,000) or valued separately (est. $175,000). is Murphy asked if the assessors are `playing catch -up' on the one parcel, to which Davy agreed indicating that when the focus is on the primary parcel, the secondary parcels may fall behind in valuation and then may result in a sizeable adjustment. Ms. Blackstone interjected that she had an extensive conversation with the assessor last year (2003) as she believed the assessors were doing `catch -up' on the property value but there was never any indication that 2003 was only a partial `catch -up' and subsequent years would see additional increases. Her question now is whether this is another partial jump in valuation for 2004 and will 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 advised the parcels are correctly at market value now and any changes for 2005 will result only from sales activity in the market. Ms. Blackstone responded that is what she heard last year from the assessors. Mayor Peterson asked if Ms. Blackstone wished to have an assessor visit the property with her. Ms. Blackstone replied that she did not think that was necessary. She emphasized she wanted to know why one parcel increased significantly more than the other parcel. • Mayor Peterson asked Davy to call Ms. Blackstone and spend as much time as needed to address her issues. Davy agreed to call Ms. Blackstone. Page 5 of 11 MINUTES OF THE ORONO LOCAL BOARD OF APPEALS AND EQUALIZATION MEETING Wednesday, April 21, 2004 7:00 o'clock p.m. Ms. Blackstone thanked the Board for their consideration of her issues. 4) Mike Adair, 650 Tonkawa Rd, PID #05- 117 -23 33 0005 Mr. Adair also indicated he had not understood the meeting to be stage two of the appeals process, did not know about stage one, apologized and stated his appreciation of the Board's time to hear his concerns. Mr. Adair expressed he was stunned and troubled by the 34% increase in market value for his property. He acknowledged he has a valuable piece of property on which he grew up and purchased from his parents but stated he finds it unbelievable that the market is being driven by the `haves' and that the average person has trouble staying on his own property. Mr. Adair stated he wanted some understanding of how the property value could increase so much in one year. Davy confirmed the parcel has more than 50' of lakeshore. Mr. Adair agreed and stated he understood the majority of the property's value was in the land itself. Davy expressed that in the Tonkawa area the assessors have seen the entry type of market parcels increase drastically over the past several years. The assessor had values of about $350,000 and now the values have increased to $550,000 or more based on sales that have occurred. • Mr. Adair acknowledged that he understood the relationship of values to sales. • White questioned if the assessors are trying to keep the assessed values so close to market values or at least in the 95 -100% range, why does a parcel increase over 35% when the average increase in lakeshore is 10% this year. Davy stated the only reason for the larger percentage is that it was undervalued and even with constant analysis of the markets and sales that occur, unfortunately there are some properties in certain areas, on certain bays, or certain home types that will receive dramatically higher increases than the average. Murphy empathized with Mr. Adair's concerns, explaining that the City Council has struggled with the issue of keeping Orono residents at home on their properties, especially with lakeshore properties and on Tonkawa with its expensive properties. He concluded that it is a free market situation. Mr. Adair replied he lived in the Tonkawa area long before the recent high sales prices occurred. Mayor Peterson asked Davy if part of the problem with the higher increases experienced by Ms. Blackstone and Mr. Adair's properties is because of the 2004 Reevaluation area in the southwest quadrant that was physically visited this year. Davy indicated it does not necessarily mean it would not have gone up by that much. He explained the increases are primarily based on sales in that area for the year. Murphy asked Mr. Adair for the taxable market value on his property. Mr. Adair responded the • taxable market value is $450,539 for 2005 with 100' of lakefront. He advised he was not interested Page 6 of 11 C: MINUTES OF THE ORONO LOCAL BOARD OF APPEALS AND EQUALIZATION MEETING Wednesday, April 21, 2004 7:00 o'clock p.m. in selling the property but wanted to continue to live there. Mr. Adair concluded by requesting some consideration for a reduction in value Kunik confirmed the assessors would call Mr. Adair to further discuss the valuation. Mayor Peterson thanked Mr. Adair for his frank comments and concerns. 5) George and Mary Torkelson, 670 Tonkawa, PID #05- 117 -23 33 -0009 Mary Torkelson advised that last year they did not do anything about the valuation increases because of personal /family matters that were occurring then. Ms. Torkelson acknowledged that Jensen did visit the property and the house value is as low as possible. George Torkelson asked why the valuation is so high on a 50' lot that has building restrictions. He stated they have lived in the house since 1958 but it is in need of substantial repairs. Ms. Torkelson acknowledged she spoke with Davy and conducted some realtor and Internet research of neighboring property values. She presented information about the house next door that she believed has been undervalued for many years. She stated that 100' lakefronts or larger are worth more per foot than a 50' lakeshore lot. Next door to the Torkelsons is a lot that has 101 -103' of lakeshore, and Ms. Torkelson reported that the value of the lot is $7,356.40 /foot of lakeshore compared to the Torkelson's at about $9,000 /foot of lakeshore on a 50' lot which she believed is not as valuable as a 100' lot. She referred to realtor comments about the restricting impacts of Orono • rules and regulations on smaller lots. Ms. Torkelson concluded they are fighting the over 38% rise in land value. Ms. Torkelson advised that computer information about the adjacent property is incorrect, noting that the record indicates 1947 as the year of construction. There has been substantial remodeling and it is now 4 — 5 times larger with huge decks and other site improvements. She repeated information she received from the assessor that its estimated market value is $783,000 and the taxable market value is $521,200. She emphasized there is a difference in what can be built on a smaller 50' lot when compared to a 100' lot. She pointed out their position is that they should not be paying over $9,000/ lakeshore front footage compared to about $7,000 /lakeshore front footage. Mr. And Mrs. Torkelson stressed the smaller lot is less valuable because the property owner is limited to what improvements may be done on the property. Murphy conveyed that the City Council has struggled with the 50' lot situation with the lakeshore setback requirement and side yard setbacks and acknowledged improvements on the 50' lots are challenging. White asked what was the last year's percentage increase on the Torkelson property. Ms. Torkelson did not have the exact percentage and due to the poor condition of the house, they did not express any comments about last year's increase. But with the huge, over 38 %, increase for 2005, they had to present their objection. Mr. Torkelson indicated they probably would have to sell • the property as the house has to have immediate work and does not know what they will be allowed to do. Page 7 of 11 MINUTES OF THE ORONO LOCAL BOARD OF APPEALS AND EQUALIZATION MEETING Wednesday, April 21, 2004 7:00 o'clock p.m. White asked what is the valuation of the property and Ms. Torkelson stated it is $473,000 for land • value which comes to about $9,000 /foot for lakefront. Mr. Torkelson repeated that adjacent properties are about $2,000 - $4,000 less per foot for lakefront than their property. Mayor Peterson asked Davy to return to the Torkelson property for a site visit, meet with them and listen to their arguments. White acknowledged there are building constraints with the 50' lots and estimated that such lots can only support about a 1500 s.f. house, a minimum size house. Davy summarized the valuation looks at the first 50' at a higher value, then with more footage, the value drops. Mr. Torkelson disagreed with this statement explaining that the larger properties can have larger homes with $1,000,000 homes or higher on 100' lots which makes them more valuable than a 50' lot. Davy repeated the assessors look at the first 50', than at the 50 -100' values. Ms. and Mrs. Torkelson stated this results in discrimination against smaller lots with the building restrictions due to limited space. Ms. Torkelson referred to a recent newspaper ad for a lakeshore lot with 115' on lakeshore with the asking price of $1,585,000. Mayor Peterson conveyed her opinion that the most difficult issue to deal with over the past 10 -12 years has been with the residents who have been in the city for a long time who are now at or near • retirement age with fixed incomes and rising property valuations /taxes. These are the foundation people who built Orono. Mayor Peterson stated she sympathizes with these property owners who may be being taxed out of their homes. She told the Torkelson the city is fighting this issue. Mayor Peterson requested Davy to visit the Torkelson property, as she does not want to lose these residents who have built the community. She referred to former Mayor Jabbour who was quite a proponent of this issue, too, in trying to not force residents to leave Orono based on property valuations. Ms. Torkelson stated the city never caught their neighbor's house building activities and now has such a low valuation compared to the Torkelson's property and condition of their house. With having two appeals from the Tonkawa area with over 30% valuation increase, Murphy questioned if all 50' lots on the lake are going up 35% this year. Davy responded that probably not as it depends on the proximity to sales that occurred and certain properties may already be closer to the market values. He further explained that actually tear -downs on 50' lots get to the $450,000 - $500,000 category and this is found in Orono, Tonka Bay and Shorewood, too. Murphy expressed he is troubled by the thought that there may be other locations in Orono that will see such increases, citing the off -lake average increase at 7.5 %. is Page 8 of 11 • MINUTES OF THE ORONO LOCAL BOARD OF APPEALS AND EQUALIZATION MEETING Wednesday, April 21, 2004 7:00 o'clock p.m. Davy responded that he hoped that adjustments on property values were made every year the way they should have been, but he cannot guarantee that there would be no large increases because, if sales ratios dictate, they will be faced with making higher adjustments than the average. Ms. Torkelson stated that in comparison to their neighbors' property values, with their many improvements, the value has not been raised (per the Internet) which also lists it as being built in 1947. Davy explained that 1947 is the original construction date and that there is an effective age which is more reflective of the building with improvements. He offered to provide the effective age to the Torkelson's. Davy indicated that, if building permits were issued and if viewed by the assessors and added for improvements, the amounts should be shown on the Internet. Mayor Peterson encouraged Ms. Torkelson to contact the city staff to get information about what can and cannot be built on their 50' lot. Mayor Peterson confirmed that Davy would contact the Torkelsons to get answers to their questions. Murphy added that they need to understand that 50' lots are selling for $500,000 in the current market. He concurred with Mayor Peterson that the city is not interested in forcing people out of town due to the increasing property values. • Mr. Torkelson concluded by repeating his position that their smaller lot is less valuable because of the site improvement limitations on it. Mayor Peterson encouraged them to contact the city staff and perhaps find there is more that can be done on their lot than they assume. Mayor Peterson thanked the Torkelsons for presenting their information. Mr. and Ms. Torkelson expressed their thanks to the Board. 6) Gerald and Valerie Walsh, 180 Big Island, 23- 117 -23 23 0036 Mr. Walsh questioned why their property is classified as residential when it actually is a seasonal property. Davy questioned if it had ever been residential before they purchased the property. Mr. Walsh replied it had not been a residence and that the city has it classified as seasonal. Mr. Walsh asked at what point an improvement is added to the property valuation, noting an $8,000 improvement is on the property statement and wondered if it was a value from the septic system installation. Mr. Walsh further asked that if the cabin shell is not included in the value, there still was more than a 40% property value increase on top of last year's over 40% increase. He expressed a concern about what the end value of the cabin will be when it is done and fully on the property statement. • Murphy asked if the property was on the interior of Big Island. Mr. Walsh replied that the property was a lakeshore parcel with about 100' of lakeshore, with a $194,000 residential value on an angle lot about 200' at it deepest point. Page 9 of 11 MINUTES OF THE ORONO LOCAL BOARD OF APPEALS AND EQUALIZATION MEETING Wednesday, April 21, 2004 7:00 o'clock p.m. He expressed his concern for being additionally assessed in the future for value already on the tax • statement. Davy explained the property would be assessed as partially completed according to the stage it is at on the January 2, 2004 assessment date. Mr. Walsh described the cabin's shell was completed but had no electrical or plumbing or interior walls completed. Davy offered to review their property record to determine if the shell was valued, and reiterated the assessors attempt to take a conservative look at initial construction for estimates of improvements, especially if the building is just starting and property owners are not able to use it. White asked for a purchase history from Mr. Walsh who indicated he purchased the property in 1997 for less than 1/3 its current value. Davy stated the assessors will also review the seasonal versus homestead residential status and offered to explain the application process to the Walshes, in addition to the property's value. Mr. Walsh indicated the property had previously been a campground. Mayor Peterson confirmed the assessor would contact the Walshes to follow -up on the questions raised. Davy advised the assessors will contact the Walshes and determine if there is a new value, and if the property owner is in agreement with the value, then the assessors will inform the Board of Appeal on its continuation meeting, set for May 10, 2004 with a recommendation for market value reduction. If the property owners are not in agreement with the assessors' recommendation, they may further appeal to Hennepin County. Mr. Walsh indicated he could not attend the May 10, 2004 meeting but that Valerie Walsh will attend if necessary. Mr. Walsh thanked the Board for their consideration. Mayor Peterson asked the assessors if any property owner letters were received and should be added to the record. Davy replied there were no letters received. Mayor Peterson asked for other comments. McMillan asked for information about the relationship between land value and the building on it. Davy explained that the land is valued separately, and is compared to bare land sales or land indicators of sales with buildings and is compared to similar land values. Murphy commented that there certainly continues to be a huge gap in understanding what MnDOT thinks a property is worth and what the community knows the property to be worth. White remarked, from his experience, MnDOT seeks to appraise property it needs to acquire for road projects at the lowest property values in an attempt to keep road improvement projects less costly. Murphy stated that as a community activist he believes that as long as a state agency as large as MnDOT artificially deflates road construction costs with its lower appraised values, the real costs are • not known, and if known, would have a negative impact on public approval of road projects. Page 10 of 11 • • • MINUTES OF THE ORONO LOCAL BOARD OF APPEALS AND EQUALIZATION MEETING Wednesday, April 21, 2004 7:00 o'clock p.m. White described his family situation when MnDOT acquired his parents' property in the Hiawatha Avenue Corridor in Minneapolis purchasing it at only the original purchase price with no consideration given for its equity value. This was before the Uniform Relocation Act provided moving benefits, so moving costs were also left to the property owners. White stated people like his parents are decent people who built this state but received reduced land values from MnDOT. Mayor Peterson emphasized that Murphy's and White's comments about MnDOT land acquisitions be placed in the record. Moorse asked for a confirmation of the Board of Appeal and Equalization Meeting reconvening date and time, and requested the assessors to advise the property owners of the reconvening date and time. Mayor Peterson confirmed the Board of Appeal and Equalization Meeting be reconvened on May 10, 2004 at 6:30 p.m. ADJOURNMENT Murphy moved, White moved, to adjourn the Orono Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Meeting on April 21, 2004 at 8:40 p.m. VOTE: Ayes 4, Nays 0. ATTEST: Linda S. Vee, City Clerk Page 11 of 11 Barbara Peterson, Mayor