Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004 05-03 CCM Board of Appeal & Equalization MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MAY 3, 2004 CITY HALL - COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met as the Board of Appeal of Equalization and was called to order by Mayor Myrna Kragness at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Myrna Kragness, Councilmembers Kathleen Carmody, Kay Lasman, Diane Niesen and Bob Peppe. Also present were City Manager Michael McCauley, Assistant City Manager /Director of Operations Curt Boganey, City Assessor Nancy Wojcik, Hennepin County Assessor Tom May, and Deputy City Clerk Maria Rosenbaum. Others present were Appraiser Jill Brenna and Appraiser Technician Karen Casto. 2. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE OF THE LOCAL BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION AND REVIEW OF THE BOARD'S DUTIES City Assessor Nancy Wojcik discussed the purpose of the Board of Appeal and Equalization that is required by Minnesota Statutes Section 274.01 provides that the governing body of each City or a duly appointed Board will serve as the Local Board of Appeal and Equalization. This review is held each spring and the Board has the responsibility to review the assessed valuation and classification of property within the City. This year's review is limited to the 2004 assessment; which affects taxes payable in 2005. The review by the Board should focus only on either the market value or the classification of each property and should not directly concern itself with issues of actual property taxes of a particular property. Ms. Wojcik reviewed the duties of the Local Board of Appeal and Equalization, the limits of authority for the Board, and reported on the review for informal and formal procedures. She asked that the Board remember that the issue at hand is the market value or classification of the property at hand, not the taxes, and informed that if the Board feels there are cases difficult to decide, the cases may be affirmed. The property owners have the opportunity to continue on to the County Board of Appeal and Equalization. 05/03/04 -1- 3. ASSESSOR'S REPORT Mr. Wojcik reported on market values, the appraisal process, classification issues, the 2003 re- inspection program for the 2004 assessments, and the assessment valuation procedures used for residential, apartment, and commercial/industrial. She discussed the 2004 assessment tax capacity payable in 2005 by property type, the comparisons of the Brooklyn Center assessed value by property type payable taxes 2004 to 2005, the tax rates payable 2004 that were applied to 2003 assessments, the comparison of total residential estimated market value and total limited market value for assessment years 2002 -2007, and overall value change and percentage information regarding residential neighborhoods, 2003 versus 2004 valuation changes for residential properties, and residential sale information from the Realtors MLS System. Overall the increase in value citywide including all property types is 9.0 percent and excluding new construction is 7.4 percent. Citywide residential single - family detached only is 10.5 percent and excluding new construction is 10.2 percent. Ms. Wojcik discussed the 2004 overall property type value changes, the commercial and industrial analysis from 2003 to 2004, and the apartment analysis from 2003 to 2004. 4. APPEARANCES BY TAXPAYERS WITH APPOINTMENTS The following had contacted the City Assessor and made an appointment to address the Board: William Kenny, 7036 Willow Lane North Steven and Janet Jordan, 6640 West River Road Lawrence Marofsky, 7022 Brooklyn Boulevard Erma Myers, 7030 Brooklyn Boulevard Michael and Barbara Nelson, 7034 Brooklyn Boulevard James and Lucille Huber, 7070 Brooklyn Boulevard Ms. Wojcik informed the Board that Erma Myers, 7030 Brooklyn Boulevard, had reached an agreement and was removed from the list to appear before the Board. All other names were called and none were present to address the Board. 5. APPEARANCES BY TAXPAYERS WITHOUT APPOINTMENT 1. Edward Doll, 1201 57 Avenue North, addressed the Board to express that he believes his estimated market value of $346,000 for the four -plex that he owns is high and asked the Board to consider lowering the market value. Ms. Wojcik informed the Board that Mr. Doll had contacted her office on May 3, 2004, and that they discussed the property. She discussed that she had not seen an expense report from Mr. Doll and informed him that he could appear before the Board to be heard. 05/03/04 -2- City Manager Michael McCauley discussed that the Board can either sustain or continue the market value up until May 23, 2004. If the Board chooses to continue the market value the City Assessor can review the property with the owner and continue the hearing to the May 10, 2004, City Council meeting. The owner would still be able to appear before the County Board after the May 10, 2004, hearing. A motion by Councilmember Carmody, seconded by Councilmember Niesen to continue Mr. Doll's market value to the May 10, 2004, hearing. Motion passed unanimously. 2. Gene Wright, 5615 Brooklyn Boulevard, addressed the Board to express his concerns and frustrations with market values and distributed information regarding the capitalized net income and vacancy rates for his commercial property. Ms. Wojcik informed the Board that Mr. Wright had not contacted her office before April 9, 2004; however she did have a conversation with him approximately two weeks ago and informed him of the hearing. She suggested that he attend the hearing to allow the Board to make the decision on whether to sustain or continue his market value. She informed the Board that she would recommend that Mr. Wright's market value be sustained and that he continues to the County Board where he would be able have a separate appraisal conducted on his property and to allow the County to discuss more detailed methodology for commercial property market values. A motion by Councilmember Lasman, seconded by Councilmember Carmody to sustain Mr. Wright's market value. Motion passed unanimously. 3. Todd Paulson, 6408 Willow Lane North, addressed the Board to express his concern about his land value doubling without justification or notice and to ask how the City's Assessor office compiled the land values. Ms. Wojcik discussed that land values are not based on particular properties and are based on overall assessments. River properties have increased immensely over the past three years and are based on the highest and best use. She was contacted by Hennepin County and informed that the land values for waterfront properties needed to be adjusted and that she is required by law to make such adjustments. These adjustments were based on total size and site value through four groups of comparison sizes. Mr. McCauley suggested that if the Board was not comfortable with sustaining Mr. Paulson's market value at this time and wanted more information regarding the assessments of waterfront property that the Board could continue Mr. Paulson's market value to May 10, 2004. This would allow the City Assessor to obtain more information on how waterfront properties are being assessed. A motion by Councilmember Carmody, seconded by Councilmember Niesen to continue Mr. Paulson's market value to the May 10, 2004, hearing. Motion passed unanimously. 05/03/04 -3- 4. Gary Brown, 7012 Willow Lane North, addressed the Board to discuss his concern about the increased land values and the vacant lot next to him. He expressed that he believes that the vacant lot next to him is a fair and equitable market value and that his market value should be valued at the 2003 assessed value of $82,500. Ms. Wojcik discussed that the vacant lot had been missed through the mass appraisals and that the vacant property would be current with next year's assessment. Hennepin County Assessor Tom May discussed that all assessments are looked at for the same with all cities and that the segments with all cities are reviewed and suggested to City Assessors. Mr. Brown expressed that he believes there are circumstances that the Board needs to be aware of regarding the two waterfront properties that sold in the $400,000 range. 5. Darryl Sannes, 7006 Willow Lane North, addressed the Board to discuss the recent properties that sold on Willow Lane and to question the difference between the sales. The property at 6900 Willow Lane North was not on the market and was sold to an acquaintance for approximately $425,000. The property at 6858 Willow Lane North was on the market for what he believed to be a legitimate sale of $412,500. In January the property at 6500 Willow Lane North sold for approximately $270,400. Ms. Wojcik discussed that all sales do need to be considered and that the sale of the 6500 Willow Lane North property was sold in January 2004 and that this sale would be put in the next assessment study period for the 2005 assessments. Ms. Wojcik recapped that the City had two big sales and that these sales have caused the waterfront market values to be higher than usual and that she is required by law to assess the properties under State regulations. She expressed that all those not favorable of their market values to continue on to the County Board. The County Board will be able to assess individual properties and provide more detailed information as to the outcome of the market values. The Board continued discussions regarding land values and was in consensus that the waterfront property owners continue to the County Board. Ms. Woj cik informed that those who continue on to the County Board will be able to make an appointment and have the opportunity to have an appraiser do an appraisal of their individual properties. The property owners will be notified of the appraisal before the County Board hearing. A motion by Councilmember Carmody, seconded by Councilmember Lasman to sustain Mr. Brown's market value. Motion passed unanimously. 6. Ron Schmidt, 6518 Willow Lane North, addressed the Board to question why he would be paying more than a property that is larger than his property. 05/03/04 -4- Ms. Wojcik discussed that the total market value factor is looked at and that properties in floodplains, and with adjacent influences, are also something to factor in the assessments. A motion by Councilmember Carmody, seconded by Councilmember Lasman to sustain Mr. Schmidt's market value. Motion passed unanimously. 7. Diane Sannes, 7006 Willow Lane, addressed the Board to question if the information received this evening could be shared with associations and if residents who wanted to appeal their market values not present this evening would be able to continue to the County Board. Ms. Wojcik discussed that the information this evening is public and that anyone at anytime could contact her office; and that only those present this evening who appealed would be able to continue to the County Board. A motion by Councilmember Carmody, seconded by Councilmember Niesen to sustain the Sannes' market value. Motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Niesen expressed that she believes that it would be fair for the City to pursue State representatives regarding the tax system and to have them hear the complications that citizens are facing. She informed that she would like to focus on this and will move forward with discussions regarding this issue. Councilmember Carmody questioned if the property owner at 6448 Willow Lane North would like to have his property sustained so that he could continue on to the County Board with the neighbors present this evening. Mr. Hildreth expressed that he would like to continue his market value to the County Board. A motion by Councilmember Carmody, seconded by Councilmember Peppe to sustain Mr. Hildreth's market value. Motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Peppe expressed that he also would like to see that the State representatives are made aware of the difficult tax structure and suggested that the waterfront associations contact their State representatives. Councilmember Carmody questioned if the appeals by appointment needed to have a motion in order to continue to the County Board. Mr. McCauley responded that there would need to be a motion by the Council. A motion by Councilmember Carmody, seconded by Councilmember Lasman to sustain the following: 05/03/04 -5- William Kenny, 7036 Willow Lane North Steven and Janet Jordan, 6640 West River Road Lawrence Marofsky, 7022 Brooklyn Boulevard Michael and Barbara Nelson, 7034 Brooklyn Boulevard James and Lucille Huber, 7070 Brooklyn Boulevard Motion passed unanimously. 6. CONSIDERATION OF WRITTEN APPEALS There were no written appeals. 7. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Niesen expressed that she would like to have more information at the May 10, 2004, hearing regarding the commercial /industrial properties and informed that she is bothered by the figures presented in the materials. A motion by Councilmember Carmody, seconded by Councilmember Lasman to adjourn the meeting at 10:30 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. City Clerk May 05/03/04 -6-