Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Appeals and Equalization - 04/10/2008 APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION THURSDAY,APRIL 10, 2008 7:00 P.M., CITY CENTER Council Chambers 8080 Mitchell Road BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Patricia Pidcock, Chair; Mike Best, Vice-Chair; Brian Duoos and Annette O'Connor BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Jim Johnson CITY STAFF PRESENT: City Assessor Steve Sinell; Staff Appraisers: Dave Buswell, Jody Carlson, Barb Cook, John Sams and Colin Schmidt; Assessing Technician Lisa Ramsey and Recording Secretary Carol Pelzel I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chair Pidcock at 7:05 p.m. The Board members introduced themselves presenting a brief background of their experience. II. PROCEDURAL INFORMATION BY STEVE SINELL City Assessor Sinell presented an overview of the process and explained that the Board is appointed by the City Council. The Board is to hear appeals regarding the current year market value and sales information should be leading up to January 2, 2008. Sinell explained that there have been some downturns in the market and there is more happening right now. He reminded the Board that the date of assessment is January 2 not April 10. He also reminded the Board that they are bound by the Open Meeting Law and cannot meet as a group outside of this meeting to discuss these appeals. Sinell reported that value notices were mailed to 22,000 taxpayers on March 5 and since that time they have talked to approximately 400 people with corrections being made on 85 properties. Tonight they have approximately 40 appeals. III. ORDER OF BUSINESS A. Review Appeals#1 through#42 as Appear on April 10, 2008 BOAE List and Status of Appeals Appeal No. 1 —Sreng & Ching Ing, 17997 Strawberry Ching Ing said she would like to discuss her market value and how the Assessor determined the value. She asked if the value is based on the purchase price, market value or on square footage. Sinell responded that all of those factors are taken into consideration. Ing pointed out that according to the Minnesota Realtors Magazine Resource, market values are down. In 2007 her value was at$619,000 and remained the same for 2008. Ing presented comparables and based on those comparables, she felt the value placed on her home is not accurate. BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MINUTES April 10, 2008 Page 2 Pidcock pointed out that the information contained in the magazine article does not affect her area. She explained that members of this Board appraise homes for a living and square footage is only one aspect for determining the value of a home. They also look at lot size, location and amenities. Ing explained that their home is pretty basic and they do not have any amenities. Pidcock said a four-car garage is an amenity. Sinell said they found that they had to lower the value of 80 percent of the condominiums, 67 percent of the townhouses and only 38 percent of single-family homes. He indicated that staff has begun the review of Ing's property and would like to finish that review. Staff is recommending that this property be referred to the Assessor to complete the review. MOTION: Motion was made by Best, seconded by O'Connor, in Appeal No. 1 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 2 —Michael & Christine Secora, 12426 Chesholm Lane MOTION: Motion was made by Best, seconded by Duoos, in Appeal No. 2 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 4 —James Hunter, 9279 Dartmouth Avenue MOTION: Motion was made by Duoos, seconded by Best, in Appeal No. 4 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 5 —Jeffrey Harris, 18654 Vogel Farm Trail MOTION: Motion was made by Best, seconded by O'Connor, in Appeal No. 5 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 6 —Kathleen Adams, 18844 Chennault Way MOTION: Motion was made by Duoos, seconded by Best, in Appeal No. 6 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 7 —Brian & Melissa Wilson, 12393 Chesholm Lane MOTION: Motion was made by Best, seconded by O'Connor, in Appeal No. 7 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 8 —Tom& Jackie Rabiola, 17579 Toft Cove MOTION: Motion was made by Duoos, seconded by Best, in Appeal No. 8 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MINUTES April 10, 2008 Page 3 Appeal No. 9 —Shravan Pargal, 16997 New Market Drive MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Best, in Appeal No. 9 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 10—William Gooding, 17406 Ada Court MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Duoos, in Appeal No. 10 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 11 —Greg Murphy, 12324 Chesholm Lane MOTION: Motion was made by Duoos, seconded by Best, in Appeal No. 11 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 12 —John & Cynthia Veire, 17207 Trenton Lane MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Best, in Appeal No. 12 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 13 —Dipak Shah, 7993 Lismore Circle MOTION: Motion was made by Best, seconded by Duoos, in Appeal No. 13 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 14 —Paul Mangiamele, 11311 Entrevaux Drive MOTION: Motion was made by Duoos, seconded by Best, in Appeal No. 14 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 15 —Stephen & Mary Ann Chicoine, 11530 Landing Road MOTION: Motion was made by Best, seconded by Duoos, in Appeal No. 15 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 16 —Steve & Kathy Sather, 10432 Purdey Road MOTION: Motion was made by Best, seconded by Duoos, in Appeal No. 16 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 18 —Jeffrey Sloan, 9494 Riley Lake Road MOTION: Motion was made by Best, seconded by O'Connor, in Appeal No. 18 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 19 —Mark& Elaine Tauatz, 6920 Ticonderoiza Trail BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MINUTES April 10, 2008 Page 4 MOTION: Motion was made by Best, seconded by Duoos, in Appeal No. 19 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 20—Emily Khieu, 17846 Fruitwood Lane Emily Khieu explained that she purchased this property in 2004 for $530,000. The estimated market value is now set at$650,800. She stated that the house next door to hers sold for $555,000 in January, 2008. Khieu asked why her value continues to go up when the market is going down. She said she questioned why her property value has been increased when the neighborhing property sold for$555,000 and she also asked what her home's value is based on. Khieu presented comparables and said she feels her house is appraised incorrectly. She has not made any improvements to her home. Sinell explained that an inspection of this property has not been made and they would like the opportunity to view the home. He also pointed out that the Board cannot lower the value of the home until an inspection has been made. MOTION: Motion was made by Best, seconded by O'Connor, in Appeal No. 20 to refer this item to the Assessor to inspect and complete review. The motion carried, 4-0. Appeal No. 21 —Don Ramler& Susan Orton, 16760 South Shore Lane MOTION: Motion was made by Best, seconded by O'Connor, in Appeal No. 21 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 22 —Deane & Joan Conklin, 15529 Junegrass Lane MOTION: Motion was made by Best, seconded by O'Connor, in Appeal No. 22 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 23 —Chester Swietkowski, 6610 Countryside Drive MOTION: Motion was made by Best, seconded by Duoos, in Appeal No. 23 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 25 —Philip & Catherine Dien, 10444 Purdey Road MOTION: Motion was made by Duoos, seconded by Best, in Appeal No. 25 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 26 —Stefan Peterson & Shanti Shah, 6311 Country MOTION: Motion was made by Best, seconded by Duoos, in Appeal No. 26 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MINUTES April 10, 2008 Page 5 Appeal No. 27 —David & Nancy Westby, 6734 Boyd Avenue MOTION: Motion was made by Best, seconded by Duoos, in Appeal No. 27 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 28 —Gary Radel, 18141 Overland Trail MOTION: Motion was made by Duoos, seconded by Best, in Appeal No. 28 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 29 —Martin Wheeler, 6399 Ginger Drive Martin Wheeler explained that he purchased the home in May of 2004 for $770,000. At the time they had a purchase agreement on another home in Eden Prairie but his wife wanted this house. Against his better judgment, they purchased the house. When they purchased the house in 2004 he felt they overpaid for it. A home two doors down from theirs sold in October, 2004 for$559,355. That homeowner tastefully remodeled the home and in October, 2006 that same house sold for$550,000, a 2 percent loss. During this time, the value of his home was set at$800,000. Wheeler said he has done some comparisons of home sales in Eden Prairie for a 12-month period. There were 16 homes sold for an average price of $500,000. The assessor did inspect his home and provided him with three comparisons valued at$198 per square foot. The assessor did offer to reduce the value to $790,000. Wheeler presented some comparisons of homes that were sold in 2006 and 2007. O'Connor said she is familiar with this area and that there was a huge swing on lot prices when it was initially developed. Wheeler said he is not asking to not pay taxes but he wants his home valued fairly. Sinell pointed out that this is a preliminary estimate and he recommended that the Assessor be allowed to complete the work on this property. MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Duoos, in Appeal No. 29 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 30—Adel Hashw, 12238 Jasper Lane MOTION: Motion was made by Best, seconded by O'Connor, in Appeal No. 30 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 31 —Doug Stansbury, 9439 Olympia Drive Doug Stansbury explained that an assessor did go through his home last year and they agreed on a value of$750,000 and this year it was valued at the same price. There are multiple issues with the home including the need for a new roof, windows and deck. Stansbury said he is asking that the value be reduced to $700,000. BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MINUTES April 10, 2008 Page 6 Sams said it would be a good idea for him to go out to Stansbury's house again and take pictures of the issues discussed. He would then work up another appraisal. MOTION: Motion was made by Duoos, seconded by O'Connor, in Appeal No. 31 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 32 —Peter & Cynthia Decesare, 10599 Parker Drive MOTION: Motion was made by Best, seconded by O'Connor, in Appeal No. 32 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 33 —Bruce & Kathy Riemer, 10570 Prairie Lakes Dr. Kathy Riemer explained that she had talked to the assessor last year and they did review her home at that time. At that time the value of her house had been increased from$614,000 to $663,000, an 8 percent increase in a declining market. Riemer said she did not appeal the value last year. She further explained that she had contacted the realtor they purchased their home from and asked him for an analysis. The realtor gave them a sale price between $566,000 and $590,000. They live in a small neighborhood so it was hard to find comparables. Their home is one of the smaller homes in the neighborhood and they do not have many of the amenities that others do. They have a very basic home for that neighborhood. There was one home in the neighborhood that is much larger but with the same floor plan that sold for$830,000 a couple of years ago. Riemer reviewed the comparables prepared by her realtor and her home is valued much higher than any of the comparables. Riemer said she believes her house is overvalued. Duoos pointed out that Riemer's house was built in 1997 while the comparables used were built in 1991 and 1994. Those homes would sell for less. Sinell mentioned that the comparables listed are spread out all over town. This neighborhood has not seen a lot of turnover. MOTION: Motion was made by Duoos, seconded by Best, in Appeal No. 33 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 34 —Donald & Ruth Tate, 9411 Libber Donald Tate said he believes his property is assessed well above the market value. He explained that there are two very equivalent townhomes in the same development and are currently on the market for$434,000 and $439,000. They have been listed at or above this price for a significant time and have not been sold. Tate said he has had two realtors look at his property within the last couple of weeks and they recommended that he not attempt to sell his property for more than $400,000. They indicated that a more reasonable market price would be $390,000. He also indicated that the market analysis he had done indicated three possible selling prices; $379,000, $389,000 and $399,000 being the top price. Tate said his property is currently assessed at$476,000. He said he believes that to be unreasonable given today's market. There have been very few sales in his area. There were four other units listed BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MINUTES April 10, 2008 Page 7 and withdrawn because they could not sell them. Tate stated that the assessor has looked at his property but has not had time to prepare an assessment. Duoos indicated that certain properties have taken a bigger hit than some other types of properties. He also pointed out that some of the comparables were from 2003 that sold for $396,000 and the petitioner paid $396,000. MOTION: Motion was made by Best, seconded by Duoos, in Appeal No. 34 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 35 —Stew Stender, 12221 Chadwick Lane MOTION: Motion was made by Best, seconded by Duoos, in Appeal No. 35 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 36 —Richard Musser, 16100 Baywood Lane MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Best, in Appeal No. 36 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 37 —ALS West, Inc., 7513 Mitchell Road MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Best, in Appeal No. 37 if income and expense information is received, this item is to be referred to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 38 —LaJaun & Cheryl Willis, 12455 Cockspur Court MOTION: Motion was made by Best, seconded by Duoos, in Appeal No. 38 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 39 —Glenn & Marcia Ehorn, 17529 Hackberry Court Tim Ehorn stated that his home is one of five homes that have a three-car garage and his home was the last one to be completed in the development. The developer is still in the process of finishing the homes. Ehorn explained that after his home was completed, the developer sold off the ten remaining lots to another builder. From 2006 to the present time, ten units have been foreclosed. The ten units were built in the development and each of the ten units was unfinished. Just last week they did put garage doors on five of the units. Ehorn said that people have expressed an interest in building and living in the development but because of the vacant units they don't want to move into the development. The two active homes on the market are middle units and have been on the market for almost one year. They were relisted with the same agent but at a different pricing. Ehorn stated that one of the units was purchased for $465,000 in 2004 and is now on the market for$439,000 while the other unit is listed at$434,000 and had been purchased in 2004 for$515,035. BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MINUTES April 10, 2008 Page 8 O'Connor indicated that the biggest impact on this development is the open units without garage doors. Sinell said staff would like the opportunity to finish their appraisal on this property. Ehorn said he believes the main cause of concern for this development is the foreclosure units in the development. MOTION: Motion was made by Duoos, seconded by O'Connor, in Appeal No. 39 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 40—Michael & Corrine Fritz, 17531 Hackberry Court Michael Fritz explained that he lives in the same townhouse development as the previous speaker. He indicated that he does not have a three-car garage. The previous speaker pretty much summed up the problems in their development. A unit did sell in November 2007 for $398,000 and had an estimated market value of$442,000. Another unit sold in April 2007 for$475,000 and had an estimated market value of$480,000. Fritz presented other examples of units sold in the development. Pidcock said she believes this Board has a good outline of what is happening in this neighborhood. MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Best, in Appeal No. 40 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 41 —Eric Kang, 8163 Antrim Cove MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Duoos, in Appeal No. 41 if an inspection of the property is allowed, to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 42 —Thomas Kuenzli, 16450 Valle MOTION: Motion was made by Duoos, seconded by Best, in Appeal No. 42 if an inspection of the property is allowed, to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Recess A short recess was called after which the meeting was reconvened at 8:25 p.m. B. Hear Other Personal and Written Appeals Appeal No. 43 —Jennifer Karner, 10284 Meade Lane Jennifer Karner stated that she probably should have appealed her value in 2007. At that time it was set at$636,800 and after talking to the appraiser it was dropped by $10,000 for 2008. Karner said she did look at some comparables and presented them to the Board. She BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MINUTES April 10, 2008 Page 9 explained that the value of the homes are not going up but are dropping. The house directly behind her has been on the market for a year and is listed at$570,000. In looking at the 2007 value for homes in her neighborhood, she found the value assigned to those homes all under $600,000 and many of those homes have better updates than hers. Her value was reduced to $626,900 from$636,800. The home located at 10348 Meade Lane sold for $624,000. Karner said it is unlikely that they could sell their home for$609,000. MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Best, in Appeal No. 43 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 44 —Ullas Kamath, 7017 Beacon Circle Ullas Kamath explained that his home is valued at$353,400 for 2008, the same as last year. Like some of the other people that spoke this evening, he should have appeared before the Board last year. The home at 7005 Beacon Circle sold in September 2007 for$373,000 and he believes it is in foreclosure at this time. House prices have gone down in 2007 while his estimated market value for 2008 has remained the same. Kamath stated that his backyard abuts Dell Road which is a busy road and he has water logging in his backyard during March through May. He also stated that his home has not been renovated and the conditions of the floors, walls, windows, etc. have a downward effect on the value. Kamath said his property has not been reviewed for the last eight or nine years. MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Duoos, in Appeal No. 44 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 45 —Avis Larson, 6284 Cranberry Lane Avis Larson said she is concerned that if she decides to sell her home the price would not compare to the estimated market value. She presented comparables. MOTION: Motion was made by Best, seconded by O'Connor, in Appeal No. 45 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. Appeal No. 46 —Paul Drach, 17061 New Market Drive Paul Drach said he feels his home's market value has been set too high. When the highway was constructed, it was bermed up and not taken down. His view is of the walls. Drach said his backyard backs up to the light rail corridor and for resale in a high inventory market this may be seen as a negative. He also explained that there is work that needs to be done on the home including a new roof. The home was built in 1994 and they have not made any improvements to it. This is a very barebones home with an unfinished basement. Drach said he feels an estimated market value of$450,000 is too high. MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Best, in Appeal No. 46 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MINUTES April 10, 2008 Page 10 Appeal No. 47 —Atia Ibrahim, 11230 Lanewood Circle MOTION: Motion was made by Best, seconded by Duoos, in Appeal No. 47 if an inspection of the property is allowed, to refer this item to the Assessor to complete review. The motion carried 4-0. C. Schedule Next Meeting MOTION: Motion was made by O'Connor, seconded by Duoos, to schedule the next meeting of the Board of Appeal and Equalization for Tuesday, April 29, 2008, at 7:00 p.m. The motion carried 4-0. D. Close the Board of Appeal and Equalization Meeting to Additional Appeals MOTION: Motion O'Connor, seconded by Best, to close the Board of Appeal and Equalization meeting to additional appeals. The motion carried 4-0. IV. CONTINUE THE BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MEETING MOTION: Motion was made by Duoos, seconded by O'Connor, to continue the Board of Appeal and Equalization meeting to April 29, 2008. The motion carried 4-0 and the meeting was continued at 8:50 p.m.