Loading...
1984 06 07 Board of Review I I I BOARD OF REVIEW MEETING JUNE 7, 1984 The Chanhassen City Council, acting as the Board of Review, met in the Chanhassen Municipal Building on June 7, 1984, at 7:30 p.m. Present at said meeting were Mayor Hamilton, Councilwoman Watson, Councilwoman Swenson, and Councilman Geving. Councilman Horn was absent. Mayor Hamilton opened the meeting by stating that the Board was meeting for purposes of property tax equalization. Scott Winter, Ivan Arnold, and Gene Mahan was present from the County Assessor's Office. Chuck Lawson - 25-0051800 - My question is on classification. It should have been 3CC-classification. They had a change of law this last year. I sent my certificate of blindness to the State like they told me to. I called them last week and they said it would be sent out to the assessor last week. I do have a certificate of blindness with me if you would like it tonight. Scott Winter - We will probably be sending out a letter stating that this change has taken place when we do get the certificate from the state. Don Sennes - 25-1600500 - Last year my market value was $101,700 which I think is about $10,000 too high and you looked at it and recommended $96,900 which the county accepted last year. Unfortunately this year it is back up to $101,700. I still think it's too high. Scott Winter - I have got the parcel here. The only thing that I can say is that the information that was in record from the Board of Review was very incomplete. It didn't give any justification for new values so I left the values as were placed on by the assessor before me. I believe I talked with Mr. Sennes to schedule a review of his property and I believe there is a finished basement that is calculated in his value and there is no finished basement on his property and I believe that is the discrepancy in his valuation. Helen Loebl - 25-8270060 - We have seen almost a 25% increase in our taxes this year. Tn checking back on previous tax statements, I found out that the market value on the house in the past six years has been increased 68% which does not seem to be too realistic in todays real estate market. I don't believe houses are appreciating that much now. Scott Winter - The increase was on the structure. Your valuation this year is the same as it was last year. The payable taxes this year have increased from the previous year. Mayor Hamilton - Perhaps the assessor should review the property. Arthur Kimber - 25-5050060 - This goes back to last year and carrys on. When I bought my home I paid $20,500 for it in 1965. Last year the esti- mated market value was $80,800 and I took this up at the Council meeting and also with Lana (Larson) and Craig Zinter. I was told that part of the tax burden there was because we had lake access and the formula ran that the tax base was 10% of the the unimproved lot value and they average about $25,000. The homeowner's association supposedly owned Lot 11, Block 3 which is a strip of land 30 feet by 170 feet, lakeshore. It was set aside by the developers for recreational area and lake access. Since 1966 we have been trying to convince the people here that Lot 11 does not exist. On your records here for the sanitary sewer and the aerial photo it showed the lot was 65 feet out in the lake. I personally, out of my own pocket, Board of Review, June 7, 1984 -2- had it surveyed by Schoell and Madson last October. The lot is actually 90 some feet out in Lake Minnewashta but we were still sent a tax statement this year for a lot that does not exist. The people are still to be best I of my knowledge paying lake access tax for using a public highway to get down to the lake. There is no Lot 11. I resigned from the Minnewashta Homeowner's Association because of that fact. I never use the thing. I can see no real reason why I should pay 10% additional tax for a lot that doesn't exist to be used as lake access. I sent a certified letter to Zinter's office setting forth these facts and I have resigned from the homeowner's association so as of January of this year I was not a member of the association so I don't feel I should be subject to the tax. This is an elective thing. You don't have to belong to the homeowner's association. Many of the people in the Manor do not belong to it because of the tax problem. My estimated market value this year is again $80,800 and for what I am getting, I think it's too much money. What do you think? Scott Winter - According to our record, last year the County Board did exempt that Lot 11 from taxation and all recommendations from the County go to the State and the State can tax it again. Mayor Hamilton - Scott, are you aware of what percent of tax is assessed to a property owner who is a member of an outlot association? Scott Winter - No. Like all values whether there is an association, there is still the value of the land that is established by the market. Arthur Kimber - I talked with Craig Zinter before he left and asked him about people who have lake access as part of their own property and are I also co-owners through the homeowners association which would certainly make them equally obligatory to whatever claims the lots has on taxes. He tells me they do not pay the extra tax because they have lakeshore property and that's an inequity which you might consider. Karen ~ ~ 25-0920040 - What I am contesting is the market value that was given to our home. It jumped from $79,400 to $92,400 which is $13,000. I did go down to the courthouse and talk to the people there about this and they told me there is two reasons why this home jumped like that. The first is that there was a screened in porch and a deck on the home that they didn't realize was there and they gave that a value of $4,500 which I feel is excessive. In checking with the neighbors, it was put on before we bought the home, and it is a temporary structure with a tin roof that attaches to the eaves and no foundation. The other thing that he said brought up the value was the house was measured wrong and that there is 200 more square feet which is true. I went through a bunch of MLS listings and xeroxed a bunch of them where houses were for sale and still are for sale and houses that have sold and houses that, we couldn't find one the exact size, but when it comes to lot size and type of home, square footage, the selling price was not $92,400. They varied all the way from $90,000 on down to $83,000 and so I guess that's why I am contesting. Another thing I thought was kind of interesting when going through these is according to Scott our taxes will jump $500 which will bring our taxes to $2,000 a year for a two bedroom home. All these homes that are on this piece of paper I whether they are $92,000 or $83,000 homes, there taxes are less than ours are at the old rate of $79,400 and they are homes that have lake rights which we don't have lake rights. We are across the street from Lake Riley. Scott Winter - You stated, on that screen porch, a figure of $4,500. That was the screen porch and the deck. The screen porch is only $2,100. I I I Board of Review, June 7, 1984 -3- Mayor Hamilton - I think perhaps you should have a meeting and review this some more and perhaps look at her property. Scott Winter - Again, going by the schedules that we base through the sales analysis of those properties that this house, for that time frame, was selling at approximately at the value that we have placed on it. We will go through the property again. Allen Fox - 25-8200130 - I am specifically requesting a reduction in the front foot-valuation on my lakeshore property. I was here two years ago and requested reassessment and Lana did come out and re-evaluated it and made a token reduction in the structure and I specifically requested reconsideration in the lakeshore valuation. At that time Zinter said the top for Lotus Lake was $800 a front foot and his definition of prime lakeshore property was level lot, approximately five feet elevation with a sandy beach and a sandy bottom. None of the above do I have. It's a pie lot with a steep inaccessible slope to the beach. No sandy beach. Muddy bottom. They didn't change the assessment which is $700 a front foot. Last year the assessment stayed the same. I was not here last year but subsequent to that, just recently, I learned that a piece of property up on Christmas Lake was assessed at $600 a front foot and I am far from prime on Lotus Lake. I feel this is inequitable and I ask that my front footage assessment be reduced. Councilman Geving - I would like to have you take a look at the proper- ties to the east and west of Mr. Fox and check several of them in the area. Scott Winter - Our records show $650 and for the remaining portion $520. You are saying that you found out that a parcel was $600 on Christmas Lake? Allen Fox - Specifically, Miles Lord. Scott Winter - His is $1,000 a foot. It has been the same assessment since, it's been the same assessment since the 1982 assessment payable 1983. Mayor Hamilton - Will you review that property. Wallace Otto - 25-0150500 - First of all I would like to apologize for not offerTng you thanks for your support last year and I will do it tonight. I appealed and you upheld it but after I left here it kind of fell apart. The 76% of the income that the property generates goes for taxes in this community. I think that's too high. The valuation from the time that we bought it has gone up 95% plus and in that period of time the land has been going down. Last year at this meeting the assessor said that marginal land was assessed at $500 an acre but in the letter that I received he valued it at $1,100 an acre. That's wet, waste land. Since August 24th of last year the parcel of property has risen 46% and I would like to see the documentation where this has taken place on agricultural land. Another statement that was made this evening that all lands were evaluated and raised, I have a list here of properties throughout the county, the only part that seemed to have raised was in this area here. This is quite a lengthy list. The majority of them have all gone down. uoard of Review, June 7, 1984 -4- Scott Winter - Other than Chanhassen and Chaska, we had a state increase last year from the State of Minnesota across the county. The increases ranged from 5% to 20% on agricultural land for 1983 and the same value was held for 1984. Our records show that 1983 this property was on at $234,900. As far as the decrease last year, it just wasn't honored. I Karen Slathar - 25-0231400 - The problem that we have is with the pro- perty class itself. It1s listed as vacant land, non-homestead. Our land has been used for agricultural purposes and the problem is we are paying over $1,000 a year taxes on land that is used for that and I would also like to include that part of that is swamp land too. ~ Klingelhutz - The property is south of Lyman Blvd. right after you turn the corner to the right going south on 101. It has got about 5! acres of tillable land and the rest lays in that big slew. My son has been farming it for the last couple of years and before that their boy, Jeff, farmed it. There is no home on that property. Scott Winter - The state recommendation is that they be at ten acres or greater for agriculture and being that this is, I think at the end of the meeting I will recommend it for ago Jeff Farmakes - 25-3000230 - I was here last year and asked for a reva- luation. It was revalued. It was revalued from $173,000 down to $142,000. You recommended that. I believe also that the county approved that. Mr. Zinter, at the end of the year, disagreed with it and decided to send it to the state. They upheld it and my taxes for this year was I based on $142,700, however, I wound up paying $200 less in taxes. Mr. Zinter when I was arguing with him, told me just because my valuation was lowered doesn't mean I am going to pay less taxes and he was right. When we came to this community I went and talked to Lana and asked her approximately what she thought we would wind up paying and this was in 1981. She estimated that she thought that based on current levels that we would wind up paying about between $2,100 and $2,400 a year. I realize a lot has changed since 1981 and now, however, I would like to read off what my tax assessment has been for the last three years. 1982 was $1,295, that was a partial. The following year was $3,852 and this year, after the reduction came to $3,610. I now received a letter saying that my valuation has been brought up again to $173,000 with no explana- tion. My projected taxes would now be approximately $5,700. I have no explanation for that other than we are being forced out of our home. I don't understanding dealing with Lana and Zinter, how they can take the attitude in dealing with that type of money in giving false statements. When I was talking with her last year, we were talking about the fact that she was charging me for all three levels of my home even though the bottom level is basement. She said she would take care of it. It was never taken care of. My house is still listed for that. I am even listed for an extra fireplace. I am listed for things that aren't in my home but apparently when she came out to look at the home it was in a partial stage of completion and after dealing with here for three years and not getting anything resolved other than, of course, the devaluation I I got here, it was the only response I have gotten in three years. Quite frankly I don't see how we can stay in this community because surrounding communities don't charge nearly that. A valuation of $143,000 for instance in Deephaven comes to $2,400. Here I am paying $3,600 for that. I I I Board of Review, June 7, 1984 -5- Scott Winter - I had talked with Mr. Farmakes. We had not set a definite date for inspection of the property. Mayor Hamilton - I think prior to Craig Zinter being the assessor for the county, the board and the previous assessors had attempted to keep the percentage of tax and the percentage of assessed valuation lower than, to a more reasonable level than what Zinter did. He wanted to get up to 95%. Taxed at 95% of your assessed valuation. That is not, as I understand, what the County Board wanted to do and it was not their pre- vious policy, however, their hands were tied. Wallace Otto - I just have one question, over the past year it has been confusing-fO me. We call these Boards of Equalization and I have sat on some of these myself, with the intention that properties of like value be of equal value on the assessment and I think that's where the objections are coming. There is such a vast difference in the properties. I don't care of you raise mine as long as every other property is the same. It's just a method of dividing the cost. Now, if I am wrong in that, I would like clarification. Mayor Hamilton - That the purpose of doing this is to try to equalize the property tax. Wallace Otto We have two parcels that are identical and there is a vast difference:- Not that I want the other one raised. Jack Gagnon ~ 25-7950100 - I have had all of my answers given to me. I guess I don't understand, you did make a slight reduction in my tax last year but then when I got my statement this year it went right back where it was. I think they should have notified me. Scott Winter - On Mr. Gagnon's property there was new construction picked up of a deck. That's where the increased value came was that new construction. Merald Krogstad - 1035 Holly Lane - (Submitted a letter) Gentlemen. Because of illness we are not able to attend the meeting on the above date but would appreciate a review of our property taxes. Your office stated that a letter could be submitted. In 1976 the estimated market value was $53,040 and in eight years it has risen to $155,800. Taxes in 1976 were $1,890.28 and are now $4,767.38. Our basement is unfinished. Three bedrooms, one fireplace and two bathrooms. Total footage is approximately 1,375 square feet. Estimated value has tripled in these years. Mrs. Helga Krogstad is also unable to attend as she resides in Minneapolis and would appreciate review of Crane's Vineyard Park, Part of Lot 9, Lot 6, valued at $45,000. Two unlivable cabins. Sincerely yours, Marilyn A. Krogstad. Vern and Dorothy Zetah - 25-0800210 - I have got the same problem that he has. My market valuation that I am charged for is way above what I can sell it for. I have had two different real estate people and I have it listed and he is $30,000 less than what you have got it listed for and that's supposed to be 90% of the assessed value. They take one look at what my property and see what the tax statement is, which is $4,100, and that's the last we see of them. In the last three years it went from $94,000 to $151,000. Last year we were here, they said they would take a look at the property, well, they said we had lakeshore and I said go down and take a look at it. No, they said, it's too steep, I got my good Board of Review, June 7, 1984 -6- shoes on. They knocked off $15,000 just to pacify us and that's all that was said. Now it's back up again. Right now it's $139,900. Mayor Hamilton - How much lakeshore do you have? Vern Zetah - It was 100 feet but then Sunrise Hills came through with the storm sewer so they took 50 of it. They have got a bunch of rock across it and you can't even get to the lake side. Dorothy Zetah - We put it on the market $5,000 below your valuation and we got no results. Mayor Hamilton - I am familiar with your lakeshore property because I try to walk down there sometimes to fish. You can't walk through it. Councilman Geving - What is the assessed valuation of the running foot on the lakeshore? I Scott Winter - It is $600. Dorothy Zetah - We had it on the market for $134,900 which is $5,000 below, now we have dropped it to $119,000 to see what happens. Lewis Woitalla - Lots 1927-1931, Carver Beach - These are the lots that I sold last year an~went to the variance committee to get a variance to put a house on it and Dale Geving shot me down at the variance committee and said I couldn't put a house on it. I came down here, which he is also a Councilman which I think is a conflict of interest, and he shot me I down here. What I can't understand, now I have an unbuildable lot in Carver Beach that is valued at $9,000. How do you explain that? The lot is absolutely worthless. It should be zero. It has 8,900 square feet. I am stuck with a lot that I can't do nothing with. Scott Winter - A neighbor or something would possibly want to buy it so there is some value to that land. Lewis Woitalla - I was advised by an attorney to sue. I paid sewer assessment on it for five years. I lost all the interest money on it. Scott Winter - We will go out and take a look at the property. Priscilla Faris - 25-2600110 - I am speaking on behalf of my parents who live on Christmas Lake, Judge and Mrs. Miles Lord. Last year we con- tested the value of the property and it was lowered from $282,400 to $218,600. In the last three years there has been a 32% increase. This years valuation is back up to $279,300. I would also like to speak to the news article that I know the gentleman over there got his information out of and it mentioned in that news article that the judge had criticized his 1982 assessment of $282,400. It had jumped from the previous year of $189,000. He did not go through any formal channels that year to contest it and consequently his taxes were not reduced. I thought the newspaper article was rather confusing. Last year I came here and went through the I formal channels of protesting and we did get them reduced. The other thing about the article, it never mentioned the reason why the board reduced it and I believe that part of it is because of the public access that's next door and I would like to speak a little bit to that about the public access and what it is like to live at that prestigious point on Christmas Lake. Number one, I have drawn a map here of my parents pro- I I I Board of Review, June 7, 1984 -7- perty and you can see that this is the house and this is the lake and here is the fire lane that the City has maintained for years and years and here is a sewage pump and their house is here and they have a little one bedroom cottage over here. They have a dock here and this part is usable because they have pulled the weeds but this is all swamp over here so it's about 35 feet of usable lakeshore. More than that, in the sum- mertime the City has decided that in order to protect swimmers they have chained this so that people can't drive in and launch their boats. They were launching 15,16,20 foot boats in there. There are a lot of skin divers and little kids and some days there may be 20-30 people down there swimming but they thought it was such a dangerous situation that they chained this up. Well, as a result most of the people that want to launch their boats just zip right over in here and knock on the door and say, hi, we would like to launch out boat. As we sat tonight two boats came in just to be friendly and launch their boat, without calling. She says she gets sometimes between five and ten boats a day that come in and knock on the door and want to use the little road. But more than that they have people coming in in the middle of the night knocking on the door. They urinate allover the property. They defecate, they swear, they throw rocks, they throw cans, they scream and yell if my folks don't let them in to go to the bathroom or use the phone. One of them got in a fist fight with my Dad. They have stolen their lawnmower. They have stolen some other goods. My folks are afraid to stay and they are afraid to leave. They know they can't sell the place for what it is valued at. They had a realtor come out and say it would be about one third the value because of the nuisance. The police are out there checking a lot of the time. The other catch 22 is that all the neighbors on Christmas Lake, those who don't have their own access, ask if they can use my folks place and they don't want to get in trouble with their neighbors but if they turn people down, they have made enemies. It's a real catch 22 place to live. This last winter my Dad found someone knocking on the door screaming call 911 emergency. Some guy who was skin diving. Dad went out there and pulled him out of the ice. It's like they are gatekeepers or park rangers over there and I think they should be paid for their effort. In my estimation, they have a nice house, it's two bedroom. I feel this is not a very prestigious place to live and I feel badly for them that they have to put up with it. I think they have a nice lot. They have a nice house but it's in a real bad area and they have a lot of problems with it and I would like you guys to come out and spend some time on a Saturday or a Sunday and just see what it's like in the summer. You might think I am joking about this but it isn't a pleasant place to be a lot of the time. Councilman Geving - Just for the record, we were requested by the resi- dents of the area to chain that road off and we didn't do it. We did it as a response to a problem down there. Mayor Hamilton - You will get in touch with Mrs. Faris or Miles Lord and family to arrange a time to go out there? Scott Winter - Yes. Irene Gritchie - 25-3000840 - In 1982 my taxes were $455.00 and in 1983 they went to $544 and now they jumped to $780. In 1982 my property was estimated at $78,900 and I put my property up for sale in January and the market value was $81,900 and the tax value was $81,600 and I got this letter and my market value is $79,300, why did it go from $86,900 down to $79,300? Board of Review, June 7, 1984 -8- Scott Winter - For some reason we see on the field sheet a 90% value was used on land over what it was in 1983. It went from $22,400 down to $20,100 for the assessment of 1984. There is no explanation on the card. This estimate was done by Lana before she left and there is no explana- tion. I will review it. I Franklin Kurvers - 7220 Chanhassen Road - I am here complaining about the whole City as far-as-taxes in the City of Chanhassen. They basically chose to fire the assessor and if they chose to fire the assessor because he was doing an inadequate job then I think the City of Chanhassen should be re-assessed and the whole county because if he was incompetent I am certainly sure we are all being over taxed. I think we should call the state to come into Chanhassen and take over in Chanhassen and go right through our City. I know we are over taxed. I know people that live on Lake Minnetonka and our taxes here are twice as high. There is something wrong here some place. I want to start here and I am going to the County Board also. Mayor Hamilton - That's a good idea. I think this board can take some action to try to pursue that direction and see where we can get. We will probably end up having to go to the county also. I think it's a good idea and we will try to pursue it. Richard Derhaag - 25-0251900 - I will start out by asking a question. It's based on size, which is an acre, the house is large but it should be based on age too. I believe it was built in 1967. It's valued at $91,200 which I think is excessive considering the age. The condition is good. The acre lot, I don't know if it's out of line because of the lot. I If someone would come in and give me $91,000 I would walk out of here smiling. I feel in the neighborhood of $80,000/$85,000 would be more justified than $90,000. Scott Winter - I will try to set up an appointment to review the property. Joyce Hagedorn ~ 1145 Holly Lane - My home is over 100 years old. It was a burned out granary that was moved on the property. I have had two Carver County Commissioners come through the house and after being at the house, I was not there I was at work, and they laughed and said you are getting taxed for keeping a clean house. I am being taxed for property that I don't own and I have been taxed on that for five years. I understand I don't get a reduction and I don't get any pay back from paying taxes that I don't own the property. I don't want the property and I am being taxed for it. What do I do? It's a two bedroom house. It's a story and a half. I am being taxed $32 a year for a stairway that goes downstairs to an old crummy basement and we put some plastic on the outside of that and we are being taxed $32 for that little thing. We didn't pay that much for the plastic. If I ever once in five years I have never dared to take my children down to the lake because I would have to go through that chain and I would feel like a criminal. My deed to my property states that I have the right to go down there but I don't feel I have the right. My property is so old it talks about a share of going out on horseback and kicking out the tenants that were in there. Scott Winter - This was built in 1900 and remodeled in 1978. This has one acre and 45/100. I I I I Board of Review, June 7, 1984 -9- Joyce Hagedorn - I don't own that other half. That's on the Bowen pro- perty. Scott Winter - Have you any survey to prove that you don't own this property? Joyce Hagedorn - No. We have been to the Carver County Court House and we have shown that we don't own it. Scott Winter - They can definitely say that you don't own part of these lots. Some where somebody has to get the records straight. Joyce Hagedorn - That's what I am here for. Scott Winter - As far as our office is concerned the records of lots being owned by people come to us from the Auditor and indirectly from County Recorder. You are going to have to go back and there is going to have to be some documents brought forth somewhere. Joyce Hagedorn - My neighbors across the street have a swimming pool and their valuation on their house is lower than mine and there house is only 14 years old. The other property we have rented out. It is all woods and when we bought it they said there would be buildable lots and they have said that we can't build on it so we want all the footage from the lake on back has to be at zero because it's of no value. Mrs. Harry Coffin - 25-4200290 - Mine is very simple, I was listening tonight you said that market value is to be about 90% to 95% over what you bought it. We bought this home in March 1984 for $142,000 and esti- mated market value is $139,000 so we are being taxed 97.9%. Scott Winter - I have viewed this property this year and I can't forsee any change. Mrs. Harry Coffin - Why am I paying 97.9% when everybody else is paying ~and 90%. The people that had it before me were paying 95% of the value. That's my question. They bought it for $179,000 and they were paying taxes on $167,000. So I buy it for $142,000 and you are going to tax me on 97.9%, that doesn't seem right. Mayor Hamilton - Zinter has stated and everybody that I have talked to about the taxes has stated that you use a sale price in a community to establish the assessed valuation of that neighborhood and of that pro- perty. Here you have got a sale price of the property, $142,000, I don't care what that property sold for six years ago. Now you have got a current sale. That should be the base that you are going to use to establish the assessed valuation. Scott Winter - But remember he established his appraisal as of January. She bought it in March or April. How are you going to equalize it? Are you going to deviate from the schedules then? Our basis for appraisal ended September 1983 whatever sales occur since September 1983 will go into a new sales ratio study for our basis of appraisals for next year. It will take an affect on the market that we will be using for appraisals next year. Councilman Geving - What is going to happen is that after tonight, Scott is going to review this case and give a recommendation to this board and Board of Review, June 7, 1984 -10- we will meet one more time. At that time we will make a decision in your case. Gerry Maher - 25-3000250 This is a copy of some information that I got I from Scott this morning regarding comparison of homes in Greenwood Shores. A few points of interest that I am complaining about at this point and that is if you notice there is a home in there owned by Way which is Lot 1, Block 6, in 1983 its estimated market value is $92,500. In 1984 its estimated market value is $95,200. That house happens to be three homes away from mine and is the identical house and it1s a little bit different lot. We will agree with that. It has the same amount of square footage. It happens to pay a tax of $1,808 while I pay a tax of $2,357. To this date I have never had an assessor in my house. When the house was constructed, four months after it was partially done we had a lady come through at that point. We have had on two other occasions someone leave a note on the door. We have called back for appointments, no one has ever come through the house. The other thing that is very interesting is in 1982 my taxes were based on estimated market value of $72,700. In 1984 my taxes are based on an estimated market value of $107,000. It happens to be between 1982 and 1984 an increase of 33% in the estimated market value and a 56% increase in tax while at the same time if you take the comparison of the information that I got from Scott this morning, the average of these homes turns out to be between 1983 and 1984 of 3% in the estimated market value while only paying an 18% tax increase. There, again, I am not necessarily complaining that my house is not valued properly. It's interesting to find out that it's been valued and never been checked as far as I am aware of, and, number two how is that under the circumstances that out of eleven homes on there, I nine of those homes remained with the same market value between 1983 and 1984 when mine increased some 26%. How is it that a home that is in the same location, on the same street, three houses away, the same amount of square footage pays $500 less in taxes? It seems to be a massive ine- quity under the circumstances. There are other homes in there and if they go through it as far as the amount of square footage, located on the same street, the same area, the same development, there is a house that is two houses away from me on the lake and it has 2,100 square feet, his valuation in 1983 and 1984 was $109,000. Now he is on lake Lucy with 400 square feet more than I have, a little bit older home, and only $2,000 difference in estimated market value. Mayor Hamilton - Why don't you make an appointment with Scott and have someone take a look at it. Betty Drury - 25-0361100 - Mine is commercial property and I wanted to know if you could give me any idea why the property went from $4,800 to $6,200 in one year. The property is not even buildable. Our estimated market value is $141,000 and assessed value is $53,000. Scott Winter - Is your residential and commercial property all one building? Betty Drury - Yes. I Scott Winter - There was a State Law change that commercial property con- nected with residential who also carries the homestead on it. There was supposed to be new tax statements issued. You will be receiving a new tax statement and the taxes will be reduced because of the new law. I I I Board of Review, June 7, 1984 -11- Scott Winter - According to our records it shows that she was not living in that property. We will call her. Donald Coban - 25-0231100 - I appeared before the board last year and I spoke my little piece about where we live. We live just north of Lyman Blvd., west of new Highway 17 and our house basically overlooks the pro- posed or planned dump site. I appreciate the help that the board gave us last year reducing our valuation because of that. However, this year I find out that the county has boosted it right back up. One of the things that I hope the board will consider again this year is that we still are a proposed site and the valuation of people coming in is still, they still consider that as a detriment. Mayor Hamilton - That's right. All these properties that were near the dump site are probably going to have a hard time giving the property away until that dump site issue is settled. That1s the reason why we reduced it last year. I think that it should not be increased until that issue is settled. Edward Worm - 25-0080300 - My concern tonight is one thing that's so dif- ferent,-rhTs-little map that you people put out and have in so many pla- ces and this is my property right here and it's shaded just like Susan Park and Ches-Mar Park and we have been trying to sell for a long time. We have sent people to City Hall and our realtors have been to City Hall to talk to Mr. Martin about this and he said it was a mistake. That1s an awful mistake and mighty costly for us. Scott Winter - I talked with Mr. Martin on this and he review it and it is on the map it is classified wrong but in the books it is supposed to be classified as low density residential so the maps that were put out show it as a wrong classification. There should be a change made in that map. Councilman Geving - For tax purposes and valuation purposes it has no affect on what you have got on your books. Edward Worm - There have been mistakes in the assessor's office. Not this ma~e has redone our property lately and has done a fine job and I wish he could do that for more people. Our sheets showed City water and sewer. What would City water and sewer do for our property if it was there. It will never be there. That's another mistake that's mighty costly. Councilman Geving - We will take steps here to direct staff to change those maps. Edward Worm - This thing about water and sewer and there are half a dozen more thTngS that were from the Zinter days and mighty costly mistakes. Mr. Winter is new in Carver County and he hasn1t learned everything about Chanhassen either. He changed quite a few things and he has got things pretty right and my house site, that bothers me. It1s $17,500 for the site. The site is so close to the highway. It1s unbuildable according to the present level of the lake. I have complained about the lake outlet being plugged up. It would be an unbuildable lot according to your ordinance. Our garden is shot. We had to move to higher ground. I just think I could find a quite place for $17,500 in a small town on a street with sewer and water. I wouldn1t be assessed $17,500. I would appreciate it if you would take a look at that site. Board of Review, June 7, 1984 -12- Merle Volk - 25-0151500 - 158 acres, $430,900. It is not lakeshore. We had to-rent-more pasture after the county put in the road. The pasture has been full of water all spring. It's a terrible mess. I think we had better see if we can get somebody out there. The taxes on that thing, this year $10,973. My son-in-law is farming the land. I can't raise the rent on the kids. The property is hills, swamp, and woods. I Wallace Otto - Merle's and my property join together and I would like to speak jointly with Merle here on a comment that was made earlier. I pre- sented this list and they said it was nullified. If that's really true our taxes are down because on here ours is some of the properties that went up so if they took this list and nullified it ours will have to revert back to last years. If that's truly the case. Otherwise they would nullified only the ones that were reduced and held the ones that were raised. Merle Volk - We settled out of court last year. I may have to do the same thing this year. I am getting tired of this. Every year. There is no way that I can hang onto that. The county even got the front yard screwed up so the water don't drain. We got water allover. I think they busted the tile lines when they put the road in. Scott Winter - His valuation was $328,400, $430,900 this year. You settled out of court last year. He is what you settled for: $320,000. The reason that your taxes are so high is that it is non-homestead and that you do have some commercial property connected with this. Merle Volk - Did I get that zoned commercial? I Councilwoman Watson - Not that I am aware of. Scott Winter - The commercial valuation is $49,300 for this year. Merle Volk - There is a pole shed. Don't forget that pole shed, when the county~ght that other building from me on Highway 41 they depreciated it. I want to see a depreciation now too. That's a 20 years building and it's five years old. Scott Winter - Are they paying rent to you for that house? Merle Volk - Basically they pay me $7,000 a year for the farm land and the house. It's pretty sad when your rent does not cover the taxes. I would like to have you people come and look at the house. I think it was built in 1880. Scott Winter - We will take a look at it and look at classifications and determine whether or not some of these things are right. Julius Smith - I am here on behalf of United Mailing, Instant Web, Inc., Park Two, Frank Beddor's Christmas Lake stuff and also his personal resi- dence and some other parcels. I might say that I am not here to complain about all of them. I have checked United Mailing and Instant Web and I they are within the contract guidelines that we worked out with the audi- tor and the HRA. I would like to start with Mr. Beddor's residence and parcels on Christmas Lake. 25-0020600, 25-0025200, 25-0020610. The City reduced the valuation to $265,800 by reducing Frank's house from $180,900 down to $154,300. After it went to the state and there was some jiggling around with it, it went back up but it didn't go all the way up to the I I I Board of Review, June 7, 1984 -13- original assessment and it was a total then of all of them of $338,300. There was a real problem because we asked for it. There hasn't been a change in the property except we had a tax split this year. We asked to have a separate tax statement for the McWade house and the Beddor house. They took $19,600 off of the Beddor land and added it to the McWade land which is alright and they actually transferred that but suspiciously the house went right back up to $180,900 and exactly what they had it before and yet there is no change so there is a net increase in the valuation of $23,500 because we had the parcels split. That's a 15% increase over what was the rate last year and I guess I am really questioning that. The assessor then told me that the statement that was sent out was wrong and I guess we figured it out. You said the valuation of $328,300 should not be that. That it should be $308,700 but we are still $23,500 high. So then he said, I guess we left the house off last year. Well, except I think you erased the records because when I was there in the court house and I copied all those records, the house was there. The difference in assessments increase happens to be what that house was but it was on the record last year and all I am saying is the same property, because we have split it, is now $23,500 higher. I find it really inconceivable that they just lost the house for a year. There are erasures on there. I have got the figures right here from your office. I verify them twice a year. All I am saying is I think we ought to be reduced back to where we were last year. Scott Winter - The records show the $23,500 on the back page where the calculations were put together. The only thing that happened was it just wasn't transferred over to the front page for 1983. The records are here. You are right. Julius Smith - They just keep going up. Did all houses on Christmas Lake go up 15% this year1 We have checked an awful lot of them and they didn't. This rate went right back to where it was prior to a reduction last year and even with the changes it's just $23,500 higher. You are saying last year they should have been way higher than you indicated they were going to be? Scott Winter - Yes. This is what happened and I haven't got any reason why it happened. None of us three sitting here were involved with it at that time. Julius Smith - If we haven't done anything and the taxes have about doubled in the last three years, how can they suddenly go up $23,5001 There is something radically wrong with that. I really don't understand that. I can't seem to get any answers other than, well, gosh, I don't know. Scott Winter - The way the tax laws are written up right now, some of the things that are occurring right now just don't make sense but it comes out because of legislative laws that we are obligated to operate under. Julius Smith - I understand that but values are being placed on here. Then values are being agreed to and then they go right back to where they were before. I have heard it three times tonight. Whenever a value is knocked down a year later it is right back to where they were before. Why does that always happen? Scott Winter - This was the previous assessor's orders. We only work for him. Board of Review, June 7, 1984 -14- Julius Smith - What you are really saying then, this is just a grand waste of time. I understand a lot of it isn't your problem. Mayor Hamilton - I hope we don't have that same situation. I am cer- I tainly Quite sure that any time that any reduction was made at the City level that you could just bet your boots that Zinter would do everything that he could raise it up the next year. He absolutely did not like any- body reducing anything that he had done whether it was a good reason or not. Julius Smith - We would like to see it go back to last year. We don't think the value should go up because we just separated the parcels. An interesting statistic, I won't bore you with it because I am sure you have heard it many times, but if a man has a $200,000 house and another one has a $67,000 house, the guy in the $200,000 house, say he earns $75,000 a year and the guy in the $67,000 house earns $25,000, so he earns three times more and the house is valued at three times more, how much more tax does he pay? Over ten times more. Mayor Hamilton - The point that Mr. Kurvers raised earlier is quite valid. How we accomplish that, I am not sure and it is going to take a while to do. Certainly the City ought to be totally reviewed and the County should be reviewed also because we know there are a lot of ine- quities. Julius Smith - You know the one that always bothers me is that they always say, well, the state says they are all the same. The taxes in Hennepin County per square foot on industrial plants aren't anything like I they are here. I mean valuations. What do they mean it's the state. Hennepin County's taxes are far lower than ours. When I say taxes I mean valuation. I do all kinds of plants allover Hennepin County and they don't come anywhere close on a square foot basis to Carver County and while Mr. Zinter may have said the State says we ought to have 83% or whatever that number is for value for industrial plants, every other assessor in this State says, well, the law might be that but we have got it down here at about 60%. What I am saying is there isn't equa1ization- between the counties. It isn't a little bit different, it's monumentally different. It's unbelievable. When people say, well, it's a State Law, that doesn't really do a lot for me because apparently 86 counties are violating the State Law. Mayor Hamilton - Sixty to 95% is the range in which you apparently can tax property at the assessed va1uati.on. The county has always said they wanted to remain somewhere at 75% to 80% and they always had for years. Julius Smith - How can they do that. I am looking at a plant in Hennepin County not more than a mile down the road from another plant here and the valuations astronomically different on a square foot basis and they are essentially the same kind of buildings. I don't understand it. Scott Winter - We don't either. We try to figure out why the State, they are supposed to do equalization between counties. That's their respon- sibility. To us it doesn't appear they do. It would sure make our job a lot nicer if they did do equalization. Julius Smith - I have six parcels left. I am talking about parcels 25-5650010 through 25-5650090. These are essentially Lots 1-6, Block 1, Park Two, forget 70, 80, and 90. I just want to note that Lots 1-6, I I I I Board of Review, June 7, 1984 -15- Block 1 in Park Two valuations have increased substantially. They are the same this year as they were last year. Last year, for example, an assessed value of $9,000 up to $23,000. Scott Winter - Then they were reduced to $12,000. Julius Smith - That's not how they came out on the tax returns. Those particular six lots have increased substantially in value and the lots are really not ready for any, there is nothing there yet. They haven't changed at all from what they were two years ago. I understand the rules of thumb. A guy plats property, puts sewer and water in it and you give him three years to get it up to speed. What I am saying is sewer and water isn't in it. We have no objection to those lots that have sewer and water line Lot 1, Block 3, but those six lots are not conveyable, they are not buildable. They might be platted but that's it. Scott Winter - Let's go back to the number that ends with 10. We have, for 1983 $12,000 worth of market value on it. For the number that ends in 20, $12,200, and 30 was at $47,300 and they reduced it to $23,600. 40 is $33,500 and 50 is $18,400, 60 is at $23,100. They cut everything in half last year and it is still that way this year. Julius Smith - They are identical to last year although those are up pro- bably, from the year before last to last year they went from an assessed value of $9,400 to five times that. We still feel those lots are still over priced. You couldn't sell those for $23,500 today. You couldn't do it. Next year they probably might go, hopefully. Mayor Hamilton - We have a letter from Robert M. and L. Bowen, parcel 25-2550050. They would like their parcel reviewed. We have a letter from the Derrick Land Company, the Fox Chase property, parcels 25-2700010 through 25-2700520. We also have a letter from M. A. Gedney Company requesting a review of the estimated market value of their property. Parcel 25-0030700. We have a letter from Louise Fenger requesting review of her parcel. Parcel 25-0124800. A letter from Laura Lundquist, parcel 25-6850030. A letter from Sharon Gagnon, parcel 25-0800220 requesting review of their valuation. A letter from Francis Faber, parcel 25-4950790 requesting review of their valuation. How soon can you respond back to us on each of those? Scott Winter - The first one, the Lawson property on the reclassifica- tion, I will wait until I get the recommendation from the State. The Sennes property, I will set up a date to meet with them. The Loebl pro- perty, I also will set up a date to review with them. The Minnewashta Homeowner's Association, I believe the Board at this time can make a recommendation on that. The Kimber property on Tanagers Lane, again I was waiting for some recommendation from the Board, if they want me to review or not. For what was there and the information that was given it didn't seem that our information was out of line for the property. I guess there was a question whether they were paying additional taxes on having that outlot. In the valuation system, I don't see anything on our card that is indicating that there is a increase for value because of that type of property. Mayor Hamilton - I think that whole question has to be answered. Is there some way we can find out if property values are increased due to an outlot. Board of Review, June 7, 1984 -16- Councilman Geving - Review the question of association members. Mayor Hamilton - I am saying the question of the outlot situation and a person who is a member of that association paying more tax on his own property plus paying tax through the association for having the outlot. Scott Winter - I know of one like Lotus Lake which I went through. They have got that large outlot in front of their property and we have only got $1,800 on that entire 1,800 feet. I Councilman Geving - Are the other 44 homeowners paying extra because of that? Scott Winter - Yes. Actually that outlot should be up at $180,000 because of the front footage that they have. They can pay it to their association or the individual lots. I reduced the value on the outlot to near nothing because the value was in their homes. That one I think I have got appropriate now because I have reduced that outlot so low but some of the others maybe not. The Karen King property, I will review it. I was out there once already. The Fox property, I will review that, also the adjoining lots. Then we are to the Otto property. I will ask some direction from the Board. It stayed the same as last year. Do you want me to review the property again? Mayor Hamilton - I thought our reduction last year was appropriate. I think he should have had that last year. Scott Winter - I will not review it then. You will wait until the second I meeting to make a decision on this. The Slathar property, that one does come under the State Guidelines and I will review the property and assess it as ago The Farmakes, I will contact him to set up an appointment to review his property. The Gagnon property, that was just a question, we settled that. The increase that he had was actually that additional deck on the property. I would recommend no change at this time but I will bring it up at the next meeting. The Krogstad property, I will have to review the property. The Zetah property, I will also review the property. Woitalla property, I will go out and review the property. Are they buildable? Councilwoman Watson - We denied a building permit. Scott Winter - That makes a difference. Councilman Geving - You have to look at the lot to evaluate it. We have termed it unbuildable and have refunded all of his assessments to date. As far as the City is concerned it is unbuildable lot. Scott Winter - Then we are to the Miles Lord property. I will review the property. We have the Gritchie property and I will reivew that one. I will review the Derhaag property. The Hagedorn property, review that and respond back. Also, with the other Hagedorn property. This one has actual lakeshore and the cabin is built far back. She felt the lakeshore I didn't have any value to them and should be exempt. Mrs. Coffin, I have reviewed the property. I don't forsee that I need to review it again. Along with theirs I would like to make one comment. Last year Nigel Chilvers was in and the Board reduced his value and he has sold his pro- perty. They had lowered it from $99,000 to $98,000. He turned around and sold the property for $158,000. Then we are to Maher, I will review I I I uoard of Review, June 7, 1984 -17- that property. Then we are to the Drury property. That was non- homestead last year so we will have to contact them to find out if it should have been homesteaded last year. This years assessment looks correct. Coban, that was lowered and raised, I will review the entire area. Edward Worm, I have been out there four times already. I did put all his sheds on the tax rolls. The Volk property, I will review and also possibly make the classification change. Councilwoman Watson - If he has a drainage problem created by County Road 18, maybe someone from the County would look into that too. Scott Winter - We are to the Frank Beddor properties. We will go through and review the house. All the parcels for Park Two, I have looked at those already and I don't see any classification change. Don Ashworth - Julius was talking about the difference is the cost per square foot for properties in Hennepin County and I am sure he was talking about The Press property. You assess The Press property for us, right? That's the piece that's in Hennepin County but I thought the assessor's office in Carver assessed. CPT, The Press, Lyman Lumber. Scott Winter - That's news to me. Isn't that why the assessor is here from Hennepin County? Don Ashworth - We have to sign that we held the hearing. Maybe Stolz collects the taxes. Scott Winter - I will check it out. I will review all the letters also. I will try to get them done as soon as possible. Don Ashworth - The Council should set the meeting date tonight. Mayor Hamilton moved to continue the Board of Review meeting to June 26, 1984. Motion seconded by Councilwoman Watson. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilwomen Swenson and Watson, Councilman Geving. No negative votes. Motion carried. Don Ashworth City Manager