Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOR- May 5, 2009 C I T Y 0 t: �ANJDOVE, ANDOVER BOARD OF REVIEW RECONVENE MAY S, 2009 - MINUTES The 2009 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization was reconvened to order by Mayor Mike Gamache at 7:01 p.m., Tuesday, May 5, 2009 at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW. Andover, Minnesota. Councilmembers present: Sheri Bukkila, Don Jacobson, Mike Knight, Julie Trude Councilmember absent: None Also present: County Assessor, Mike Sutherland Anoka County Residential Assessor, Jason Dagastino Appraiser, Mike Ducklow City Attorney, Scott Baumgartner City Administrator, Jim Dickinson © Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Knight to reconvene the 2009 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Meeting. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Dickinson stated on April 23, 2009 the City of Andover conducted the initial 2009 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization. That meeting was recessed to reconvene on May 5, 2009 at 7:00 p.m. to allow City Staff and County Assessor Staff to secure answers for unanswered questions at the initial hearing on April 23, 2009. As part of an appeal from Mr. Winslow Holasek, the question is whether or not the Local Board of Appeal and Equalization could adjust the tax value of the properties that Mr. Holasek is appealing. It was determined at that meeting that an opinion should come from the Anoka County Attorney's Office and Assistant Anoka County Attorney felt they could not provide legal advice to the Andover Board of Appeal and Equalization. It is the City Administrator's and City Attorney's opinion that the Local Board of Appeal and Equalization can act on the market value of the properties in question but not the tax value. The tax value is set by the Minnesota Department of Revenue. Councilmember Jacobson asked what the tax value is for Mr. Holasek's properties. Mr. Ducklow stated it is $2,752 /acre for his tillable land. Councilmember Jacobson asked if the only thing they can do tonight is act on that number. City © Attorney Baumgartner stated they can act on the market value and not tax value. Mr. Dickinson indicated Mr. Holasek stated what is in question is this is the tillable value of the land, but Mr. Holasek has other properties that do not qualify as tillable acreage. © Annual Board of Review Reconvene Meeting Minutes — May S, 2009 Page 2 Councilmember Knight asked how they determined the market value. Mr. Ducklow indicated the overall market value of the land is derived by sales. The taxable market value is derived from a guide that is given by the Minnesota Department of Revenue. They give a per acre value according to true Ag sales and then the County adjusts accordingly by what type of soil is in the County. That average State wide average is $4,000 /acre; however, everyone in Anoka County with tillable land is valued at $2,752 /acre for tax value. DISCUSS GREENACRES APPLICATION TO ANDOVER PROPER TIESIDISCUSS APPEAL OF MARKET & USER VAL UATIONS — HOLASEK PROPERTIES Mr. Winslow Holasek stated he is also questioning the value of the rest of his property such as the woods on his property. He asked how the $2,752 /acre was set because there are three classifications for tillable land in Anoka County; "A" being the best, `B" being the next best, the forest and they based their valuation on almost every parcel in the County. He stated they recognize the difference in value from "A" to `B" because of poor soil but there is no recognition for "C" being a poor soil and was valued at the same price and he wondered why that was. Mr. Sutherland stated essentially what Mr. Holasek said is correct, Anoka County used to have © the soil classified as "A ", `B" and "C ", with not many acres of "A ". They have a lot of `B" and some "C ". When the State came up with the new ranking, from a Department of Revenue Sales Study from the Southwestern part of Minnesota through Ag sales was used as a basis to equalize Ag land values statewide. The State gave the County a basis and percentage which was interpreted to mean that eighty percent of the $4,000 /acre is for their best Ag land. He stated the fairest thing to him was to lump it together and use the average percentage from their percentages as a basis for value of all the acres County wide. Councilmember Trude asked when a category is picked how the County picks it. Mr. Sutherland stated they still have records to see what the land was recorded at but because the number only has validity and meaning for them when they compare their per acre Ag values with Isanti, Sherburne and Hennepin Counties. Councilmember Trude asked if all of Mr. Holasek's properties fit in the classification of `B ". Mr. Sutherland stated they are all in "C ". Councilmember Knight asked if every County is free to make an arbitrary decision as to this type of thing. Mr. Sutherland stated the State has given them the basis and as far as the number they are using, when they said eighty percent of $4,000 it would be different per County. When he looked at Anoka County it seemed reasonable to say they needed to be something less than the "A" land value in the County. Councilmember Knight asked if there is a statute that laid this out. Mr. Sutherland stated there is a description of the process in the Statute but he is not aware of a specific Statute indicating exactly how to compute it. Annual Board of Review Reconvene Meeting Minutes — May 5, 2009 Page 3 Councilmember Jacobson stated in Mr. Holasek's letter there are twenty parcels listed and he wondered if they are all "C" class. Mr. Ducklow indicated they are. Councilmember Jacobson stated the value on all the parcels is $2,752 /acre and he asked Mr. Holasek what he is suggesting and the reason why it should be reduced. Mr. Holasek stated they have to look at the land and not a Statute. He stated the value of this land at eighty percent of the land sold in the southern part of Minnesota is not realistic since they cannot get many bushels of produce per acre because of the sandy soil. Mr. Holasek stated this is an eighty -three percent increase in valuation in two years. He stated this is an unrealistic increase. Mr. Holasek submitted a letter to the Board, which read: "As I said in my April 25, 2009 letter to the board I object to my 2009 properties valuations as being too high (see 4 -23 -09 letter for pin numbers). The AG user valuation for class B & C tillable land was raised from $1,500.00 per acre in 2007 to $2,752.00 per acre in 2009. This is an unrealistic increase of 83.5 %. The County Assessor's office referred to an email from Mr. Larry Austin of the Minnesota Department of Revenue saying the base valuation for tillable and the percentage for Anoka County is set by the department and is non appealable to the local or County Board of Appeal. I asked the County Assessor's office for the Minnesota Statutes that the Minnesota Department of Revenue based these statements of theirs on. I received no specific statues that gave authorization to the Department of Revenue to do this. So I believe the local Andover Board of Appeal has the right to adjust the $2,752.00 class C tillable valuation placed on my property. I have light sandy soil classified as class C tillable by the Assessor's office yet it has the same $2,752.00 valuation placed on it as the better class B tillable soil in the County. This is neither just nor correct. The County recognized a difference between the class B tillable as being a poorer soil than class A when it adjusted the price from $3,200.00 per acre for the class A tillable to $2,752.00 for class B & C but it failed to recognize a valuation difference between the class C and B soil. Thus I am asking the Andover Local Board of Appeal to consider adjusting the $2,752.00 valuation placed on my class C tillable soil to a lesser value than the class B valuation of $2,752.00. I can only grow 60 to 80 bushel corn on my sandy soil verses the 150 to 200 bushel corn that can be grown on the heavier soil. Therefore I am asking the Board to consider adjusting the value of my tillable soil to a more realistic valuation, which would be in the $1,600.00 to $1,800.00 range per acre. I also ask the Board to adjust the $5,000.00 per acre valuation placed on my tillable peat soil to the same as my other tillable, as there is no basis to value it differently. Thank you." p Annual Board of Review Reconvene Meeting Minutes — May S, 2009 Page 4 Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Knight, to adjust the market value on the twenty parcels from the existing $2,752 per acre to $1,500 per acre, which is the same rate as appeared in 2007, and the reason is due to poor sandy soils which are not typical to the rest of Minnesota. Councilmember Trude thought it would be helpful for the minutes to have Mr. Holasek's point made and the letter included for the County to see and review. Mayor Gamache asked Mr. Holasek if he asked them to reduce it last year. Mr. Holasek indicated he did. Mr. Sutherland stated $4,000 is the base for the State, the soils in Southern Minnesota would be 130 -140 percent so in the southern part of the State the amounts would be more than $4,000 /acre. The $4,000 is considered one hundred percent. Mr. Dickinson stated he is concerned if they are to do a drop in value for one particular landowner that it does not provide for equalization throughout the community. By reducing the value of one farmer in the City they do not have equalization throughout the City. Councilmember Trude stated every time they act they act on a complaint and that person who complains, their value is potentially changed. Then in the next years assessment cycle it is reviewed by the local assessor and the values are more equalized out. She thought the complainer usually benefits from their work and efforts and the next assessment cycle they are equalized. They do not know what will happen with the appeal when it goes to court. Mr. Sutherland understood where Councilmember Trude was coming from but they should realize there is a difference here. Over the years the State has had a number of programs. Normally if Mr. Holasek's parcels were not in green acres the value would be extremely higher and he would be paying higher taxes on each parcel. He stated Mr. Holasek has an exemption. The difference between his market value and his taxable value is an exemption that exists since the State of Minnesota has a program called "green acres ". He stated the market value that Mr. Holasek would likely see would be $30,000 /acre if it were not in green acres. The taxable market value is the exemption difference. Motion carried unanimously. Councilmember Jacobson stated Mr. Mike Ducklow's name was misspelled throughout in the previous minutes and should be corrected. Motion by Jacobson, Seconded by Knight, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 7:34 p.m. j Respectfully submitted, Susan Osbeck, Recording Secretary C I T Y � F © ND OVE I�a 1685 CROSSTOWN BOULEVARD N.W. • ANDOVER, MINNESOTA 55304 • (763) 755 -5100 FAX (763) 755 -8923 • WWW.CLANDOVER. MN. US TO: Mayor and Councilmembers FROM: Jim Dickinson, City Administrator SUBJECT: Reconvene — 2009 Local Board of Appeal & Equalization DATE: May 5, 2009 INTRODUCTION On April 23, 2009 the City of Andover conducted the initial 2009 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization. That meeting was recessed to reconvene on May 5, 2009 at 7:00 p.m. to allow City Staff and County Assessor Staff to secure answers for unanswered questions at the initial hearing on April 23` ( Jason Dagostino, Molly Johnson and John Duklow from the County Assessor's Office will be © present at the meeting to assist with discussion and answer questions. Attached to this staff report are the following: - Winslow Holasek appeal letter - Draft minutes of the initial hearing from April 23rd - Mn. Stat 274.01 - April 23` Board of Review Packet DISCUSSION As part of an appeal from Winslow Holasek (appeal attached), the question was whether or not the Local Board of Appeal and Equalization could adjust the tax value of the properties that Mr. Holasek was appealing. It was determined at that meeting that an opinion should come from the Anoka County Attorney's Office. As of the writing of this staff report (April 29 that legal opinion has yet to be rendered. It is the City Administrator's and City Attorney's opinion that the Local Board of Review and Equalization can act on the market value of the properties in question but not the tax value The tax value is set by the Minnesota Department of Revenue (see attached Mn. Stat. 274.01). i ACTION REQUESTED The Council is requested to reconvene the 2009 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization, and follow the following Agenda: 1. Discuss Green Areas Application to Andover Properties 2. Discuss Appeal of Market & User Valuations — Holasek Properties 3. Close 2009 Local Board of Appeal & Equalization Reconvene City Council Meeting Resp t ly submitted, J t.. 1 Dickinson Attachments