Loading...
1986 06 09 Board of Review I I I Ar.J'\ t'-,;';" t';"~ -.,"" .~ SPECIAL MEEI'ING - BOARD OF REVIEW AND mUALlZATION JUNE 9, 1986 -1- Mayor Hamilton called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. with the following mem- bers present: M:lyor Hamilton, Councilmembers Watson, SWenson, Horn and Geving. Staff present included: Don Ashworth, City M:lnager; Barbara Da.cy, City Planner; Bill M:>nk, City Engineer. mNTlNUATION OF THE BOARD OF REVIEW AND mUALIZATION: The Council reviewed and discussed each }?Circel (see attached reference Nos. 1-42). Points discussed included the propa--rty owners concern as ~ll as the assessor's reconmendation. The assessor's recarmendation was prePared following individual meetings with each of the proPerty owners. Persons wishing to add to the assessor's recarmen- dation included: L.J. Renner (25-2750030): Mr. Renner has atterrpted to sell the proPerty at a value of $1.00 to $1.25 per square foot for the }?Cist 8 years. He sold the adja- cent Parcel for approxim3.tely $1.20 per square foot. He ha.s continuously }?Ciid taxes and assessments and does not believe the $1.50 per square foot to be reasonable. Scott Winter, Assessor confirmed the County };X)licy that vacant land is assessed at t of rrarket value. Also, that the sale consurrmated by the City (north side of the railroad tracks) was at $1.95 per square foot. The Board concluded that the value of Mr. Renner's }?Circel and the approxim3.te 4 other Parcels at the ~st end of West 79th Street should be set at $1.00 per square foot. Ayes All. Richard Hartung (25-0150500): Mr. Hartung had reviewed the assessor's recarmen- dation. Additionally, he had just received Mr. Winter's application form and analysis of how the }?Circel would be taxed if under green acres. Mr. Hartung stated that Mr. Otto (his Partner) previously disfavored green acres, but he was unsure as to why. He was very pleased with Mr. Winter's analysis and would be pursuing a green acres designation. He disagreed with the $3,000 per acre com- Parable sales statistic used by Mr. Winter. This figure may be correct if you had a 10 or 20 acre }?Circe1. H~ver, with 100 or rrore acres, the sale price would reduce. Discussion occurred regarding green acre values. Mr. winter noted that the value used was one established on a county-wide basis. A grading system was used. The highest value would be $2,000 Per acre. Average values are closer to $1,000 to $1,500 Per acre. Mr. Hartung agreed that the average sale price would be a rroot };X)int under green acres. He would continue to p.lrsue this option. No action was taken by the Board. David Luse (25-0220620): Mr. Illse was not present. Mr. Winter noted that Mr. Luse did not agree with the assessor's reccmnendation, i.e. he p.Irchased the property for $105,000 and believes that that should be the estim3.ted value. Mr. Winter acknowledged that the $105,000 sale price ha.d been confirmed by his office. However, they have used $2,500 per acre regardless of sale prices. '!he Board disagreed. All earlier actions ha.d been based on canparable sales within the area. Accordingly, the Board acted to set Mr. Luse's value at $105,000. Ayes All. Frank Kurvers (25-0132500): Mr. Kurvers was not present. Mr. Winter noted that except for the Persons sPeaking and Mr Luse the 0 1 th . , n y 0 er person not 50 Special Meeting - June 9, 1986 -2- satisf ied with the recarm::mdation of the assessor was Mr. Kurvers. In light of the Board's action on the west end of West 79th Street, Mr. W nter ~ndered if I the Board wished to establish a similar policy for the east end of West 79th Street. Board rrembers concluded that the policy should be consistent for all vacant parcels in that general area. Ayes All. There being no other action before the Board, Councilmernber Geving rroved, seconded by Councilmernber Horn that the assessor's recorrmendation be approved for parcels 1-42 of the attached Exhibit 1 with the exception of the specific changes voted on by the Board during the individual review process. All voted in favor and the rrotion carried. Mayor Hamilton closed the Board of Review rreeting and re-cpened the rreeting as a special rreeting of the Chanhassen City Council to consider setting a date for sale of the 1986 municipal bonds. Councilmernbers Present: Hamilton, Horn, Watson, Geving. Councilmernbers Absent: Swenson Staff M?mbers Present: Don Ashworth, City Manager: Jean Meuwissen, Treasurer: Barbara Dacy, City Planner: Bill funk, City Engineer Consultants Present: Andrew Merry, Strong and Corrick Securities Robert Voto, Voto Reardon, Tautges and Canpany SEl' RJBLIC HEARI~ DATE, 1986 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS: The City Manager stated I that Mr. Merry was present to discuss the details of the proposed bond sale (Exhibit 1 of Councilroernber packets). Mr. Voto was present to discuss the tax implications of the proposed sale in light of current levies and the proposed restructuring of the City's municipal debt (Debt Analysis Report as included in Councilroernber packets). Mr. Merry reviewed in detail each of the enclosures included in Exhibit 1 (description of proposed bond sale including project descriptions, anticipated assessments/general obligation levies, maturities, etc.) Councilwoman watson asked for clarification regarding the City's bond rating. Mr. Merry noted that the City would seek a new bond rating fran M:>ody's as well as to provide the option to bidders to bid the proposed issue as a AAA security insured under MBI standards. As a part of the process, the City would be making application to MBI to assure that this alternative was open to bidders. Mr. Merry believed that by providing alternatives to bidders, that the City should receive the rrost competitive bid. Mr. Merry was very impressed with the City's overall financial improvement during the past two years, but was reluctant to state that such would result in a higher bond rating, Le. it is difficult to state what factors an individual reviewer may consider as important (city debt per capita, city debt versus valuation, overlapping debt per capita, etc.) The entire rating process is very subjective. Bob Voto: Mr. Voto reviewed the Debt Analysis Report as prepared by City per- sonnel. The process used was similar to that of the financial audit, Le. all financial records are the responsibility of the City. The audit report is I prepared by the City with the auditor's function being that of verifying the information presented and to note areas of concern. A similar process was used in regards to the Debt Study. I I I 47 Special Meeting - June 9, 1986 -3- Salient points of the Auditor's review include: - The City should be congratulated. No cities currently under contract with Voto, Reardon and Tautges have a similar docurrent providing an overview of the city's total debt and providing an analysis of such. - The proposed debt deletions suggested through the debt analysis report can be rrade without impairing the financial integrity of the City's debt service funds. Caution should be taken to insure the debt studies are con- tinuously updated to verify interest earnings, delinquency projections in comparison to actual, etc. For example, the Bonds of 1972/73 have a marginal balance in 1990, but such will be only a t.errporary situation as a large receivable exists in 1991. - The proposed Bonds of 1986 have been prrposely structured so as to coin- cide with the existing City debt structure. Using a 3% growth/inflation factor can reasonably assure the City of a stable debt program. Potential reductions in future levies can occur by continuous re-analysis of funds such as the Refunding Bonds of 1983. The City Council discussed various aspects of the Debt Analysis Report and pro- posed bonding with Mr. Merry and Mr. Voto. Councilman Geving expressed concern wi th the long term debt structure as proposed and the City's current tax levels. Resolution Nos. 86-35 and 86-36: Mayor Hamilton noved, Councilwanan Watson seconded, passage of Resolution No. 86-35 providing for the issuance and sale of $195,000 General Obligation Equipment Oertificates of Indebtedness of 1986 and Resolution 86-36 providing for the issuance and sale of $4,615,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1986. The following voted in favor: Mayor Hamilton, Councilmembers Horn and Watson. Councilman Geving voted against. M:)tion carried. WORKSFSSION 00 PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE: Councilmernbers discussed noving the date for review of the proposed Zoning Ordinance back to late September or early October. This was done .in view of the busy sumner nonths. At that time, the Council will dedicate an entire week to complete the project. A notion was rrade by Councilwanan Watson and seconded by Councilman Horn to adjourn the neeting. All voted in favor and the notion carried. TIME: 10:30 p.m. Don Ashworth City Manager I I I BOARD OF EQUALIZATION AND REVIEW EXHIBIT 1 June 9, 1986 Ref. Name/ No. Address Parcel No. Ccmrents 1 Carol Watson 25-300540 7131 Utica lane No improvements were rrade to house this year and assessment still w=nt up. 2 3 4 Assessor's Recorrmendation: No change. Board's Action: Approved as reccmnended by Assessor. Paul Prenevost 25-1950011 Chanhassen Mall Value was assessed at $377,000 when the building was purchased for $120,000 in 1985. . Gene H. Fury 2821 Washta Bay Road Assessor's Recamendation: Reduce to $151,300. Board's Action: Approved as recarmended by Assessor. 25-5050330 Property assessment increased fran $87,400 last year to $96,000 this year. Has no lakeshore access. Assessor's Recamendation: No change - remain at $96,000. Board's Action: Approved as reccmnended by Assessor. J.O. Klinkenberg 25-5500130 91 Cascade Cir. 11 % increase in their assessment. '!his does not equate with the real estate rrarket nor their neighbor's assessed value. Assessor's Recarrmendation: No change - remain at $105,300. Board's Action: Approved as recarmended by Assessor. 2~9 Ref. No. Name/ Address 5 Tan pzynski 7340 Frontier Tr Parcel No. 25-8200280 6 Howard Noziska 25-3300060 1120 Hesse Farm Rd 7 Tan Droegemueller 25-6030270 1740 Pheasant Cir 8 Terrance O'Brien 25-0023100 1420 rake Lucy Rd -~"'(Q) Ji \...:..) I ....#>>.~ Ca1ments I The market value of the house is $85,200 and it was assessed at $94,600. Assessed value has increased 45% since 1983. The only improvements rrade is the addition of 90 square feet of living space. Assessor's Recomnendation: Reduce fran $94,600 to $89,700. Board's Action: Approved as recomnended by assessor. Believes a 10-12% increase is unrealistic. Has his own private road, septic system and ~ll. His neighbor with public utilities sold their home for 35 % less than their assessed value. Assessor's Recomnendation: Reduce fran $191,000 to $181,000. Board's Action: Approved as recarm:mded I by assessor. Lives in a new developnent that is 35-45 % complete. Their lot was assessed at $30,000 when they paid $27,000 for it. Assessor's Recomnendation: No change - rerrain at $30,000 for land and $96,400 on building (Tbtal - $126,400). Board's Action: Approved as recomnended by assessor. Assessed value has tripled since 1982. He did add a garage last year and the taxes ~t up $400.00 Assessor's Recomnendation: No change - rerrain at $72,300. Board's Action: Approved as recomnended I by assessor. I I I ~f;'); ...~~ l'ty Ref. Name/ No. Address Parcel No. Carments 9 Brian Marshall 25-0122000 Feels that they are over assessed Chanhassen Post $65,000 and reccmnends that the building Office should be calculated based on incane. Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce fran $192,800 to $158,000. Board's Action: Approved as recorrmended by assessor. 10 Hartung & otto 25-0150500 Had a 58% increase on agricultural prop- 400 South Oak St erty which is out of line with the Waconia, .MN market. last year it increased 2% which is contrary to the market. Assessor's Recommendation: No change - remain at $287,500. Board's Action: Approved as recorrmended by assessor. 11 Bev Ricker 25-3500230 The assessed value has stayed the same, 7608 Huron but he value of the proPerty has decreas The yard and basement are under water. Assessor's Recommendation: No change - remain at $74,800. Board's Action: Approved as recorrmended by assessor. 12 Russ Stoddart 25-8050040 Just platted property into 4 lots. The 1611 W. 63:rd St. lot that has no sewer or water is being assessed rrore than the two buildable lots. The hanestead is approximately the same before the property was subdivided. Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce fran $9,500 to $2,000. Board's Action: Approved as recorrmended by Assessor. 25-8050010 Assessor's Recarnmendation: No change - remain at $107,800 Board's Action: Approved as reccmnended by assessor. ed. as 60 Ref. Name/ No. Address 13 laVerne Butler 10685 Cty Rd 43 Chaska, MN 14 L. J. Renner 4440 Manitou Rd Tonka Bay, MN Parcel No. 25-0151700 25-2750030 15 Joseph Kandiko 25-3320270 10421 Bluff Circle 16 Bob Johnsen 1237- 43! Av NE Mp1s, MN 55421 25-3300070 Carments I His property is agricultural land and he understands that agricultural land value has dropped 26 %; however, his assessments keep going up. He has 30 acres of farm land and 50 acres of swamp. Assessor's Recorrmendation: No change - remain at $261,600. Board's Action: Approved as reCC>IllIeI1ded by assessor. His value ~t from $76,000 to $139,000. He feels it is either a mistake or just out of line. Assessor's Recoomentation: No change - remain at $139,100. Board's Action: Approved at $1. 00/ sq. foot for a total of $90,000. He stated that without making any improvements over last year, his assessment ~t up $7,500. He stated that he and his neighbors refinanced with same rrortgage canpany and their assessment only ~t up $300. I Assessor's Recoomendation: No change - remain at $180,300. Board's Action: Approved as reca:rrrended by assessor. They stated that the property is a vacant lot in Hesse Farms. They noted that last year it was estimated at $21,300 and this year at $31,800, which is a 50% increase. They stated that since 1982 assessments have increased 50%. Assessor's Recc:mnendation: No change - remain at $31,800. Board's Action: Approved as recoomended by assessor. I I I I r::. it "ytJ Ref. Name/ No. Address Parcel No. Ccmrents 17 Evelyn S. lDhr 25-5450040 She stated that there was an increase 6240 Hummingbird of $743. She noted that rate has gone up consistently over past years with no improvements to house. Assessor's Recommendation: No change - remain at $119,200. Board's Action: Approved as recarrnended by Assessor. 18 ROO. Hjelm 25-0230500 He stated that he has 40 acres of fam 6909 Oakland land and assessed value ~t fran Richfield, MN $86,000 to $95,000 this year. Assessor's Recarrnendation: No change - remain at $95,000. Board's Action: Approved as recommended by Assessor. 19 Tim Bryker 25-5500070 He stated that assessments are 15% or 92 Cascade Cir $13,000 over last year's. He stated that the improvement was a deck and his back yard is on a busy street. Assessor's Recommendation: No change - $104,200. Board's Action: Approved as recammended by assessor. 20 Jon Gilfillan 25-5500200 He stated he had an increase fran last 90 Shasta Cir E. year of $15,800. He noted that improvements was addition of deck and lives next to T.H. 101 which is noisy. Assessor's Recarrnendation: No change - remain at $103,400. Board's Action: Approved as recommended by assessor. r.::, 5t U..:...J Ref. No. Name/ Address 21 Ibn Mezzenga 6731 Galpin Blvd. The Greenery Co. 22 Harry Ahrens Hamburg, MN 23 M=rle Volk 8470 Galpin Blvd. Parcel No. 25-0032800 25-5050370 25-0150700 25-0151500 Carments I He owns 12 acres of agricultural land. He felt there have been very dramatic increases in assessments without any justifiable explanation. Assessor's Recarmendation: No change - remain at $88,600. Board's Action: Approved as recarmended by assessor. He stated that the property is Outlot B in Minnewashta Manor which is completely submerged. He stated that his appraisal ~nt fran $200 to $1000 this year. Assessor's Recarmendation: Property value is the minimum. Should remain at last year's value. Board's Action: Approved as recarmended. He stated the 22 acre parcel which had a $20,900 increase in value; 77 acres had $95,400 increase; and on 80 acres fran $186,000 to 194,000, all of which is agricultural land. I Assessor's Recarmendation: No change - remain at $56,400. Board's Action: Approved as recarmended by assessor. Assessor's Recarmendation: No change - remain at $194,200. Board's Action: Approved as recorrmended by assessor. 25-0151510/1 Assessor's Reccmnendation: No change - remain at $235,200. 25-015150/2 Board's Action: Approved as recarmended by assessor. Assessor's Recarmendation: No change - remain at $49,300. I Board's Action: Approved as recarmended bvassessor. ~E 0D ~1Jl lUJ \0 Ref. Name/ No. Address Parcel No. Carn1ents 27 Cathy Mitchell 25-2100070 She stated that they have a house and it 170 Cascade Ct. is the first tiIre being assessed, which ~t up fran value it was bought at. She stated that houses in area are being sold at a loss. Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce fran $104,100 to $101,700. Board's Action: Approved as recamnended by assessor. 28 Al Krueger 25-0024000 He stated that over the past three years 1600 Lake Lucy Rd he has had a 40% increase and has between 35-40% high and low of water. He \\Uu1d like to discuss with Assessor how that is factored into the assessment. Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce fran $167,500 to $150,000. Board's Action: Approved as recommended by assessor. 29 Al K1ingelhutz 25-0231610 He stated that he wanted to discuss his 8600 Great Plains assessment with Assessor. Assessor's Recommendation: No change - remain at $164,700. Board's Action: Approved as recorrmended by assessor. 30 Roberta Buchheit 25-1700050 She did not speak. 3840 lime Cedar Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce fran $154,000 to $144,100. Board's Action: Approved as recommended by assessor. I I I I I I r:;,~ CuU' Ref. Name/ No. Address Parcel No. Carirents 31 Arnie He:i 25-1700060 He state:i that his heme value was 3860 lDne Cedar reduce:i in 1983 and advise:i that they would receive tax relief in 1984. Taxes raise:i again in 1984 for 1985 and 1986. Would like value reassesse:i with can- parable real estate. Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce fran $163,500 to $150,000. Board's Action: Approve:i as recarmende:i by assessor. As the assessed value for the previous two parcels are recorrmende:i to be decrease:i, Mr. Winter felt that the following two parcels should also be re:iuced (even though no canplaint was recei ve:i) to have all hemes in the neighborhood canparable. * Ralph Kant 25-1700040 Assessor's Recorrmendation: Reduce fran $160,100 to $155,800. Board's Action: Approve:i as recarmende:i by assessor. * James Lipe 25-1700070 Assessor's Recarmendation: Reduce fran $134,100 to $122,300. Board's Action: Approve:i as recarmende:i by assessor. 32 John Rykhus 25-2730570 Assesse:i at 9% over what they just 6517 Gray Fox Cu. bought house for. Assessor's Recommendation: Reduce fran $105,300 to $95,000. Board's Action: Approve:i as recarmende:i by assessor. 33 Alan H. Dirks 25-8100100 Feels assesse:i to high for value of 331 Deerfoot Tr homes in area. Would like to discuss with Assessor. Assessor's Recarmendation: Reduce fran $148,000 to $140,700. Board's Action: Approve:i as recarmende:i by assessor. h",/:. C2.J-'- Ref. No. Name/ Address 34 Louise Fenger Box 396 Chanhassen, MN Parcel No. 25-8000140 35 Larry Zamor 25-8900030 531 W. 79th Street 36 Jerome Carlson 8280 Galpin Blvd. 37 Etl Ryan 6730 Galpin Blvd. 38 reo Gray Apple Valley Red-E-Mix 25-0160100 25-0034810 25-0132200 Ca:rlrents Hane was built in 1968 and taxes went up $5,000 since last year. She feels it should be reassesse:i not rrore than last year's. Assessor's Recammendation: No change - remain at $158,100. Board' 5 Action: Approved as recarmende:i by assessor. Cbjection to property tax increase. He net with Scott Winter on May 20, 1986. Assessor's Recoomendation: Reduce fran $1,155,600 to $749,000. Board's Action: Approve:i as recoomende:i by assessor. I Feels that since he resides on this prop- erty he should be receiving hanestead credit. I Assessor's Recommendation: remain at $173,700. No change - Board's Action: Approved as recammende:i by assessor. He asks why valuation has increase:i so substantially over the last two years. Assessor ,'s :RecooIrendation: No change - remain at $195,200. Board's Action: Approve:i as recoomende:i by assessor. cpposed to increases. Feels not con- sistent with surrounding area. Assessor's Recammendation: No change - remain at $202,600. Board's Action: Approve:i as recarmended by assessor. I I I I Ref. No. Name/ Address Parcel No. 39 Chaska Investment 25-0151200 7401 M=tro Blvd. Suite 315 Edina, MN 55435 25-0200800 25-0220100 25-0221300 25-0160600 25-0220700 40 David Luse 25-0220620 Natural Green, Inc 1600 Arboretum Blve ~""'! c:...!I J.i_ Caments Protesting against the increase in value of agricultural land. Assessor's Recomnendation: No change - remain at $365,800. Board's Action: Approved as recommended by assessor. Assessor's Recomnendation: remain at $100,800. No change - Board's Action: Approved as recommended by assessor. Assessor's Recomnendation: No change - remain at $145,000. Board's Action: Approved as recomnended by assessor. Assessor's Recomnendation: No change - remain at $215,000. Board's Action: Approved as recommended by assessor. Assessor's Recommendation: No change - remain at $288,500. Board's Action: Approved as recomnended by assessor. Assessor's Recommendation: remain at $152,900. No change - Board's Action: Approved as recommended by assessor. Disagrees with the assessed valuation. Assessor's Recommendation: No change - remain at $187,500. Board's Action: Valuation reduced to $105,000. p;,'7> v'~ Ref. Name/ No. Address Parcel No. Carments 41 Frontier Dev. 25-0130500 Valuation too high. 13.44 Acres Assessor's Recommendation: No change - remain at $2,752,900. Board's Action: Approved as recorrmended by assessor. 42 Frank Kurvers 25-0132500 Valuation too high. Assessor's Recomrendation: No change - remain at $53,600. Board's Action: Value set at $l.OO/sq. foot. (Sq. footage to be determined by assessor). I I / I