Loading...
1990-04-17 CC Board of ReviewBOARD OF REVIEW MIND &S APRIL 17, 1990 The Board of Review was called to order by Mayor Gary Schwenzfeier. Members present included Jim Krystosek, Donatus Vetsch, Don Cornelius and Bob Braun. others present included Maureen Andrews and two representatives of the Wright County Assessor's Office. The Council was informed that the notice of the hearing had been duly published and posted. The hearing notice was read. The Wright County Assessor reviewed with the Council and the residents present a general overview of what had taken place during the assessing period. He noted that the valuations and classification determined in the 1990 assets are for the 1991 taxes, pointing out that the Assessor's office has nothing to do with the 1990 taxes_ It was rued that all homes increased in value by about 2 to 3%; garages saw a 1% increase, split level homes were increased $500.00 across the board' Agriculture buildings had a 15% economic deprecation credit and that most lots were increase $2,000.00 a lot because the have to 100% of the market value. It was pointed out that the Albertville market is increasing so that the Assessor ` s office must make the necessary adjustments to keel' the values at the correct levels. It was noted. that sales of twin homes in the Barthel Industrial Park have proven to be somewhat lower, noting that the land values have stayed the same but the the building values have been lowered. It was suggested that because some homes have been tax forfeited that this is why these values are lower. It was pointed out that all the Green Acres land in the County had a blanket adjustment, so all farm land that had green acres classification saw an increase. Scott pointed out that the valuations for undeveloped land is figured on the highest and best use. It was noted that the market value is not used for tax purposes unless the property cloMes use. In the event that the land is �- sold the past three years of taxable value and market values are used to determine the added tax. After this general overview, the assessors then went through the peoples questions that were present. Mr. Ralph Ackermann was present and stated that the felt his valuation was incorrect_ He stated that he had 1 homesteaded lot and one that was not. According to Scott, the County records show two 2.5 acre lots that have bem classified as agriculture and have no access from C.S.A.H. #19. Scott stated that the property was the same as last year but that the value increase from $13,100.00 to $13,600.00 this Year. He noted that there was a common easement to the rear property but no dedicated street. The records show that the house is in poor condition, the effect age of the house is 1951, and is classified as average. The value on the house was figured at $37 , 649 . Q0 and the other buildings were valued at $4, 000. 00 for the pole building, $1,700.00 for the garage and $2,500.00 for the porch and land (5 acres) was valued at $20,006-00- It was noted that the house had not be viewed and would not be 1990- It was suggested that if the City Council and the resident wanted the Assessor's Office to review the property they would do so. It was pointed out that the Assessor can not change the classification but that they could change the value if after the review it was found to be incorrect. Bob Braun suggested that he felt that the value on the house seemed high but the land seemed to be in the right area_ If the Assessor's office was to review the Council needed to decide if they wanted to reconvene or did they want to accept the Assessor's findings? A motion was made to have the Assessor's Office review the property for the value on the house and accept the Assessor's findings. The motion was made by Donatus Vetsch and seconded by Jim Krystosek. All were in favor and the motion carried. Mr. Herb Scherber was prat to find out information regarding his house. Scott informed the Council that the value on the house had on � om $78 , 620 to $83 , �0 - � ar�I that the land had increase from cod for the main floor and average for the $16 , 000. 00. The home was g basement. Herb felt -that the value was to high on the house. Scott noted that the house had been reviewed in 1988. Reminding the Council that the valuations need to 90% of the state value. Scott went through the values on the house for a period of 5 years noting that in Years 1988 and 1989 there was a 06 increase across the board. These values are as follows: 1985 $74, 6i0-fG0 1986 $74,600.00 page 2 1987 $75,IM-00 1988 $77,220.00 1989 $78, 500.00 It was noted that the house is 10 years old is in good condition and has the central air, deck, 3/4 bath and 5M finished basement. It was noted that these value run equal to the other housing in the area. There was some discussion regarding the actual tax- Albertville saw 3.1% drop in tax rate. Hearing no other discussion the Council decided to leave as 18. The next house reviewed was one owned by Jerome Scherber. This house had been purchased t,hruugh a foreclosure and the owner felt that it had been valued to high considering the condition of the house. It was noted that the house had been reviewed in 1988 but that the Assersor had not been in it since. It was suggested that the Assessor should change the condition of the house. A motion was made to change the condition from good to fair based on the fact that there will be a review in 1990. lbe- motion was Don Cornelius and seconded by Bob Brawl. All were in favor and the motion carried. Mr. Gene Kolles was the next Person on the review. He felt that his house was valued higher than some of the others on his block. Scott noted that his house was some what larger than the other homes on the block and that it falls within the averages. It was the consensus of the Coxuicil that it should be left the same. Judy Roden questioned the issue of the estimated valuation on their agriculture land. Scott noted again that land must be set at the highest and best use for market value, noting that in this case the land is also green acred. If the land was to be sold that there would need to be an adjustment made for the current year plus the back two years, to compensate for the difference between the green acre value and market value of the sale. It was the Councils consensus that the value on the land should not be changed. A representative of Pats 66 was Present to discuss the values on their Property. Scott noted that the station had not been fully completed on January' 2, 1989 and was therefore valued. at $97,100.00 This year the total valuation was $156, 3(?0-00. There was discussion regarding what the land had been bought for and what the building had cost to construct. Chuck noted that he had seen a significant increase in taxes, which Scott pointed out was the reflection of the full value being on the building. Bearing no other discussion the Council decided to leave this one the The Virgil Pouliot"s property was reviewed next. This property had seen an increase in valuation. Scott noted that this was a direct result of the improvements done to the property, such as the new stucco work. This work improved the condition of the house. David Cornelius` home was reviewed next. The question was raised regarding why this house would be valued higher in the City, of Albertville compared to if it had been built in the township. It was pointed out that sewer and water property has a higher value than lots with septic and well systems. No action was taken on this property. A motion was made to adjourn the Board of Review. `lie motion was made by Donatus Vetsch and seconded by Jim Krystosek. All were in favor and the motion carried. The C"aleil next discussed the issue regarding the fact that the majority of Westwind being in the Elk River School District. Mr. DeMatteis from St. Michael -Albertville School District was here to discuss the issue. Scott had brought over a copy of a map which shows that most of the Westwind Subdivision is located in the Elk River School District. Mr. DeMattiB will be sending a letter to Elk River to see if they can get this matter straighten out since the children in the Westwind Subdivision are currently going to the St. Michael -Albertville schools. The Council next reviewed two bids for recycling. Bids were received from Wright Recycling and Polka Dot Recycling. The bid from Wright Recycling was the lower of the two bids. A motion was made to accept the Proposal from Wright Recycling and to authorize the preparation of a contract. The motion was made by Bob Braun and seconded by Jim Krystosek. All were in favor and the motion carried - Rearing no other business a motion was made to adjourn the meeting- The motion was made by Jim Krystosek and seconded by Domtus Vetsch. All were in favor and the motion carried. M Form 3--aerk's Posted Notice ASSESSMENT NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, That the Board of Review—*fgpx x b= of the City Albertville WOf Inright sty, Minnesota, will meet at the office of the Clerk in said Albertville City Hall at 7:00 o'clock P• M., on Tuesday , the 17th day of April 19 90 for the purpose of reviewing and correcting the assessment of said City for the year 1990 All persons considering themselves aggrieved by said assessment, or who wish to complain that the property of another is assessed too low, are hereby notified to appear at said meeting, and show cause of having such assessment corrected. No complaint that another person is assessed too low will be acted upon until the person so assessed, or his agent, shall have been notified of such complaint. C l t� Given under my hand this Clerk of the of Lq *Applies only in cities whose charters provide for a Board of Equalization. POWERS AND DUTIES OF LOCAL BOARD OF REVIEW 1. The clerk shall give published and posted notice of board of review ten days prior to such meeting. The board of review shall complete its work within 20 days of convening date as specified in the notice of the clerk. Any action taken after that adjournment date would be invalid. A majority of the members may act at such meeting, and adjourn from day to day until they finish the hearing of all cases presented. The assessor shall attend, and take part in the proceedings, but shall not vote. 2. In case any property, real or personal, shall have been omitted, the board shall place it upon the assessment list with its market value. No assessment of the property of any person shall be raised until that person has been duly notified of the intent of the board to do so. On application of any person feeling aggrieved, the board shall review the assessment and correct it as shall appear just. If a person feeling aggrieved by an assessment fails to apply for review at the local board, he may not appear at the county board of equalization or Commissioner of Revenue to contest the valuation. Although the local board of review has the authority to increase or reduce assessments, the total adjustments must not reduce the aggregate assessment by more than one percent. 3. The board does not have the authority to reopen former assessments on which taxes are due and payable. The board considers only the assessments that are in process in the current year. Occasionally a taxpayer may appear with a tax statement and protest the taxes or assessment of the previous year. The board should explain tactfully that it has no authority to consider such matters. ,4. The 1990 valuation card has a message again this year: NOTE: Appointments requested for 1990 Board of Review. For appointment call 682-3900 or Metro 339-6881. There were many reasons for trying this approach to better organize the board of review for its intended purpose. People come to talk about unrelated matters such as: condition of roads, snowplowing, water run-off, objectionable neighborhood conditions, etc. Tax statements always seem to pop up at board of review. If there are mechanical errors or explanation of the tax computation, this can be taken care of beforehand. If a person has a question on the new valuation it will give the assessor a chance to review the problem and probably satisfy the taxpayer. If not, they would be put on the agenda for the board of review. The assessor could better present to the board facts justifying the assessment instead of taking considerable time paging through books for an unprepared presentation. 5. Regardless with appointment board will be heard. Every �-. answer will be given for any or not, every person appearing before the courtesy shall be extended and a reasonable such problem someone may have.