HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP April 24, 2002
~C!J->.-'
~ 5·1·ù~
CITY OF ANDOVER
1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD NW. . ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304. (763) 755-5100
FAX (763) 755-8923. WWW.C1.ANDOVERMN.US
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
BOARD OF REVIEW - CONTINUED
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS
APRIL 24, 2002 - 2:00 pm
AGENDA
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. OPEN PUBLIC HEARING - CONTINUED
_.
3. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING
4. BOARD OF REVIEW - FINAL ACTIONS
5. SCHEDULE SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETINGS
a. JOINT COUNCIL MEETING/SPORTS COMPLEX
TASK FORCE - MAY 1,2002 - 6:30 pm
b. GROUND BREAKING CEREMONY -ANDOVER
STATION -MAY 8,2002 -11:30 am
6. OTHER BUSINESS
7. ADJOURN
.--. -"- - --- -~ .
C~ OJ:U
~~5·7.<>~
CITY of ANDOVER
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING/BOARD OF REVIEW, CONT.
APRIL 24, 2002 - MINUTES
A Special City Council MeetingIBoard of Review was called to order by Acting Mayor
Ken Orttel at 2:00 pm, Wednesday, April 24, 2002 at the Andover City Hall, 1685
Crosstown Boulevard NW, Andover, Minnesota.
Councilmembers Present: Don Jacobson, Mike Knight, Julie Trude
Councilmembers Absent: Mayor Mike Gamache
Also Present: Maureen Devine, Division Manager/Property Taxes
J anene Hebert, Mary Boyle, Jerry Faust, Diana
Stellmach, Jonelle Sawyer - Assessor's Office Staff
Dick Lang, County Commissioner
Dave McCauley, County Cornmissioner
John Erar, City Administrator
Jim Dickinson, Finance Director
Bill Hawkins, City Attorney
Others
Acting Mayor Orttel explained that the Board of Review has been continued for
discussion on the procedures that were used to come up with the valuations.
Motion by Jacobson, seconded by Trude to reopen the public hearing. Motion carried
unanimously.
Acting Mayor Orttel stated that the city is attempting to find out why some people along
the river were valued higher than others.
Diana Stellmach, Assessor's Office, presented an overview of the mass appraisal process.
The most important thing is that you have equalization between jurisdictions that share
school districts. A brief overview of how agricultural parcels are assessed was also
given.
Councilmember Knight asked how large parcels are valued. Ms. Stellmach explained
that they are valued on a per acre basis.
Councilmember Jacobson stated that last year when the appraisals were done we assumed
they were accurate. Now when you look at Coon Rapids and Andover there are some
large differences in the valuations. He noted that a property on Crooked Lake is valued
at $130,000 and one in Coon Rapids is $84,000. Mary Boyle, Assessor's Office,
explained that the properties on the north end of Crooked Lake are more desirable than
those on the south end. Ms. Boyle stated that there is an artificial market now. We need
to bring our valuations up to what the properties are actually worth.
Special City Council MeetingIBoard of Review, Cont.
April 24, 2002 - Minutes
Page 2
Councilmember Jacobson stated that lots are consistently $45,000 - $50,000 more in
Andover than in Coon Rapids on Crooked Lake. Ms. Boyle noted that the shoreline in
Andover is much more desirable than in Coon Rapids. Last year there were no sales on
the lake to use as comparables, but this year there were sales. The actual sales prices of
the properties are what they use to determine what properties are worth. Coon Rapids
uses the same criteria as the county. However, they have restructured their land zones.
The Assessor's Office will be looking at doing that restructuring in Andover also. She
also explained that properties with sewer and water are valued higher than those without;
tillable or wooded lots are higher in value and marginal property with standing water part
of the year will have a lower value. Ms. Boyle reviewed a handout entitled "Benchmark
Properties in Andover". She stated that many property owners assume that because their
valuation goes up their taxes will also go up, which is not true. The reason for
benchmarks is to show how values change and how taxes change.
Councilmember Jacobson asked if there is any system at the county that throws a red flag
up if there is a big discrepancy, like if a clerical error was made. Ms. Boyle noted that
they look at a printout each year to see if there is something that is out of line. The
problem now is that river property and lakeshore are in the same zone. Next year they
will be in two different zones.
Councilmember Trude asked why the river lots in Ramsey are so much lower than in
Andover. Ms. Boyle explained that the lots in Ramsey are smaller and they have more
strict building codes. The properties in Andover are more valuable because you can do
more with the property.
Councilmember Jacobson stated that at the previous meeting he asked Mr. Jagusch if he
personally went out to inspect the properties and he said yes. We know that this is not
true. Janene Hebert, County Assessor, noted that they discovered that he did not view the
parcels and they have talked to Mr. J agusch and told him that new construction must be
physically inspected. Ms. Boyle noted that the new construction is assessed at the end of
the year. Additional assessors were sent out to Andover to physically inspect each new
construction parcel.
Maureen Devine, Property Records & Taxation Manager, explained that looking at the
blueprints is acceptable to the state but the county tries to get to the homes. Ms. Boyle
noted that 25% of the properties are assessed from May to October and new housing is
done later.
Councilmember Trude asked how we would know if any of the new houses were missed.
Ms. Boyle explained that the county gets copies of the building permits and if one is
missed they will know. Homestead filing is another way to check. They rely heavily on
information they receive from the cities.
Special City Council MeetingIBoard of Review, Cont.
April 24, 2002 - Minutes .
Page 3
Councilmember Jacobson stated that we have identified some areas of concern and asked
what the county will do to correct the problems. Ms. Boyle explained that they are fine
tuning the land zones and adding more land zones. This year three senior appraisers at
the county are reviewing Andover properties. Because the values went up drastically
doesn't mean the taxes will go up drastically.
Winslow Holasek, 1159 Andover Boulevard asked how many classifications there are in
the Green Acres program. Ms. Boyle stated that there are five. Mr. Holasek asked how
agricultural property is valued. Ms. Boyle stated it is $8,000 per acre for tillable and
wooded, maybe $7,500.00. Mr. Holasek presented a letter appealing the valuations on
his properties until he is able to review the valuations with the assessor and reserving his
right to appeal to the County Board of Appeals and Equalization.
Ed Hamilton, 6615 Highway 10, Ramsey, noted that the valuation on his property went
up 40%. He presented a letter stating that he feels the value on his property is excessive
and reserved the right to appeal.
Rod Pakonen, 13890 Holly Street NW removed his objection.
Jim Neilson, 4949 Marystone Boulevard stated that the assessor has met with one of his
clients and tried to get them to accept a figure that was not proper. As of April 8th, he
was told that the county was going to reduce the Timber River Estates properties. When
his property was done he told the county that his property is not as valuable as they say it
is. He was also told that the county was going to reduce all of the river lots. Ms. Boyle
had told him that that information was not in their system yet, which made him unhappy.
He didn't think that this meeting should be closed until the county finalizes the river lots.
When a person needs to go to the County Board of Appeals you don't get as good a
response as you do from the city because the county has more people to deal with. This
is the level where you get something done. He noted that his value is not proper when
compared to the properties in Timber River Estates. His son's property valuation went
up $30,000 in six months. There was one sale in that area within the last six months and
that property is not the same as his son's. Taxes are not controlled by the assessor; they
only control market value.
Ms. Boyle stated that the county is recommending a reduction on Mr. Neilson's land
value to $128,200 which will bring his total valuation from $491,600 to $460,800. She
believes this is a fair value.
County Cornmissioner Dave McCauley explained that the County Board of Equalization
is not composed of the County Board. The Board consists of appointed citizens, one who
lives in Andover. That group makes recommendations which go right into the tax
system. The recommendations are not approved by the County Board.
Special City Council MeetingIBoard of Review, Cont.
April 24, 2002 - Minutes
Page 4
Councilmember Knight stated that his will be appealing his valuation
Ms. Boyle noted that on Steven Neilson's property they are recommending a reduction to
$346,300 with the land value going from $S3,700 to $70,000. She explained that the
Council has three options in regard to the county's recommendations. They can 1) take
no action; 2) affirm the valuations; or 3) reduce or increase the valuations.
Motion by Jacobson, seconded by Trude to reduce the amount of Mr. Neilson's valuation
to the sale price of$331,SOO.
Councilmember Jacobson amended his motion to reduce the price of the land to what he
paid for it and leave the rest of it alone.
Ms. Boyle expressed concern that if a change is made in a valuation it hopefully will be
what the property will sell for. Mr. Erar stated that county assessors are professionals
who are licensed by the state. At some point in the past there were concerns and the
county sent out more assessors to review Andover's valuations.
Motion by Jacobson, seconded by Trude to withdraw the motion.
Councilmember Jacobson asked if the county thinks that a 5 percent increase in six
months is appropriate. Ms. Hebert stated that if the city is comfortable with 5% than they
would be also.
Jim Neilson felt that $60,000 is appropriate for the land value. He stated that he would
agree to $336,300 as an overall valuation.
Motion by Jacobson, seconded by Trude that the valuation be adjusted to $336,300 with
the land portion at $60,000 which is about an $11,000 valuation increase total on the land
from the assessed value at the date of purchase which occurred in the last year and the
rest of the portion to the building because of the closeness of sale. Lot 4, Block 3 in that
neighborhood was soil for $47,900 which was in September, ~:;'õhly slightly assfmeG (u'Y'uockd:5, 1 .>-
h th 4"à<S>U h 1 th' Th 1 .. 1 d' .
more t an e¡va ue 0 t e ot at at lime. e arge percentage mcrease m an pnces m
that vicinity have not been supported by sales data or other information.
Motion carried on a 3-yes (Orttel, Trude, Jacobson), I-abstain (Knight), I-absent
(Gamache) vote.
Acting Mayor Orttel noted that the next property is 4949 Marystone Boulevard. The
current valuation is $491,600 and the county is recommending a reduction to $460,SOO.
Special City Council MeetingIBoard of Review, Cont.
April 24, 2002 - Minutes
Page 5
Motion by Trude, seconded by Jacobson to adjust the land portion to $115,000 and the
building would be at the rate set by the county for an overall decrease of $13,200. Other
parcels on the river are larger and have improved roads for access; the property is almost
bisected by
the high water line; there is an extreme drop-offto the river and the property has no direct
view of the river.
Motion carried on a 3-yes (Jacobson, Orttel, Trude), I-abstain (Knight), I-absent
(Gamache) vote.
Ms. Boyle stated that on the Funk property on Crooked Lake the county is recornmending
no change to the valuation and the owner has agreed. Mr. Neilson stated that he spoke to
Mrs. Funk who told him that she would try to sell the property for the assessed value but
she was not happy with the assessment.
Motion by Jacobson, seconded by Trude to keep the valuation as recommended by the
assessor with the understanding that the property owner or her attorney may attempt to
have the property looked at again and if warranted, the county will reduce the valuation.
The county wí1l provide to Mr. Neilson sales comp data. Motion carried unanimously.
Motion by Trude, seconded by Jacobson that the Ed Hamilton property and the Winslow
Holasek properties be looked at by the county assessor to resolve their concerns before
the County Board of Equalization without us taking any action. Motion carried
unanimously.
Motion by Trude, seconded by Jacobson that PIN 06 32 24 33 0019 be reviewed by the
supervising assessor for accuracy of valuation. Motion carried on a 3-yes (Orttel, Trude,
Jacobson), I-abstain (Knight), I-absent (Gamache) vote.
Mr. Neilson thanked the Board for their assistance.
Motion by Jacobson, seconded by Trude that prior to the city setting the 2003 budget and
approving the contract with Anoka County, that we have representatives of the
Assessor's Office come back to the City Council in November or December to give us a
report on their progress. Motion carried on a 3-yes (Jacobson, Trude, Knight), I-no
(Orttel), I-absent (Gamache) vote.
. - ..- .- .
Special Council MeetingIBoard of Review, Cont.
April 24, 2002 - Minutes
Page 6
Motion by Jacobson, seconded by Trude to adjourn the Board of Review. Motion carried
unanimously.
SCHEDULE SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETINGS
Motion by Jacoson, seconded by Trude to schedule ajoint Council/Sports Complex Task
Force meeting for May 1, 2002 at 6:30 pm. Motion carried unanimously.
Motion by Trude, seconded by Jacobson to acknowledge the ground breaking ceremony
for Andover Station at 11 :30 am, Wednesday, May 8, 2002. Motion carried
unanimously.
Motion by Knight, seconded by Trude to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 4:45 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
dJ~ ¿fd
Vicki Volk
City Clerk