Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Appeals and Equalization - 04/21/2011 APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION THURSDAY,APRIL 21, 2011 7:00 P.M., CITY CENTER Council Chambers 8080 Mitchell Road BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Patricia Pidcock, Chair; Brian Duoos, Vice- Chair; Jim Johnson, Lyndon Moquist and Annette O'Connor BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: None 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 7:00 p.m. 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 to hear appeals on value classification. This evening is the first meeting of the Board and they have up to 20 days to complete the process with May 10 being the last day for consideration. Sinell pointed out all of the Board members have had formal training by the Department of Revenue. He reminded everyone that State law requires the determination of market value. Sinell presented the definition of market value explaining market value is usually the selling price of the property. Prices obtained as a result of forced sales should not be considered nor is it the highest value, lowest value or average value; it is the most likely value. Sinell further explained in 2010 Eden Prairie had 108 sales considered to be forced sales or short sales and 37 bank sales. There were 432 sales considered to be market sales or traditional sales and there were a couple hundred more sales not included in these numbers because they were new construction, etc. Pidcock reviewed the procedures that would be followed this evening in hearing the various appeals. The Board members introduced themselves. III. ORDER OF BUSINESS A. REVIEW APPEALS #3 thru#25 AS APPEAR ON THE APRIL 21, 2011 BOAE LIST AND STATUS OF APPEALS BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MINUTES April 21, 2011 Page 2 B. Appeal#3 —Gerald Pitzrick, 12761 College View Dr. #105 Gerald Pitzrick appeared before the Board explaining his property should be valued at $115,000 and not$141,200. There have been several sales in this condo development ranging in sale prices from$78,750 to $85,000. Those properties were on the market for several months before they became distressed sales. This shows the softness of the condo market. Originally these properties were listed between $100,000 and $105,000 and they did not sell. Pitzrick said he believes the value of his property should be just over$100,000. He also explained the Williams Place Development has some unique features. Their association fee is $240 a month and does not include a swimming pool or shared party room. There are four buildings in the development with 12 units and one elevator in each building. All of the maintenance fees appear to go into the maintenance of the elevator as opposed to other amenities. What they get for their monthly association fee impacts the value of their property. Pitzrick said they have two-car garages but they are tandem located in an open facility and this also detracts from the value of their property. Sinell explained staff is working on the appraisal for this property. There are not a lot of comparable sales for one-level loft style condos. Moquist said they do not want to discount distress sales, however, they tend to look at traditional sales. Pitzrick said right now the market situation is pretty unique, especially in the condo market and it will be this way for some time. MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 3 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 5-0. Appeal#4 —Andrew Feng, 9630 Belmont Lane MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 4 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 5-0. Appeal#13 —Michael Steidle, 18947 Magenta Bay MOTION: Motion was made by Duoos, seconded by Johnson, in Appeal No. 13 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 5-0. Appeal#15 —Jean Merry, 6970 Edgebrook PI MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 15 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 5-0. Appeal#16—Dipak Shah, 7993 Lismore Cir MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 16 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 5-0. BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MINUTES April 21, 2011 Page 3 Appeal#17 —Linda Stilwell, 14393 Wilson Drive MOTION: Motion was made by Moquist, seconded by Duoos, in Appeal No. 17 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 5-0. Appeal#18 —Laura Unze, 15685 Manitoba Rd. MOTION: Motion was made by Moquist, seconded by Johnson, in Appeal No. 18 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 5-0. Appeal#20—Nicole & Paul Lainhart, 17625 Lorence Way Paul Lainhart appeared before the Board explaining he is president of this 31-unit single-family development consisting of cluster homes. Currently, there is one home 100 feet from his for sale and another one that has been on the market for nine months. Lainhart said his main concern is the value that has been placed on the land. The value placed on his lot which is .21 acres is $93,800. Each of the 31 home sites in this development are valued exactly the same price even though they are different in size, orientation and value. Lainhart further explained his neighbor's house is on the market for$224,000 and is 400 square feet larger than his home. His home is valued $9,000 more than his neighbor's house and he pays $200 more in taxes. The neighbor's home has an additional bedroom and full bath. The mill rates for the 31 homes are also different. His is the second most expensive home in the neighborhood even though there other homes that are larger with more amenities. Lainhart said he would like to see the value of his property reduced to $170,000. Pidcock pointed out to Lainhart that this Board's job is to assess the value of the property as of January 2, 2011 which establishes the value for taxes payable in 2012. Lainhart said he is surprised that an economist or an individual with a financial background does not serve on the Board. Homes listed in his neighborhood right now begin at$239,000 and no one has indicated any interest in the property. Lainhart said he would be happy to sell his home at the price they feel is appropriate as of January 2. Duoos said Lainhart has a lot of good valuable information and asked if Lainhart had any specific comparables from the neighborhood. Lainhart responded the home next to his went on the market for$239,000 and was reduced to $224,000. This house has new mechanicals and new windows. Johnson said it would be very helpful to see the City's review appraisal before they make any decision on the value of this property. MOTION: Motion was made by Duoos, seconded by Johnson, in Appeal No. 20 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 5-0. BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MINUTES April 21, 2011 Page 4 Appeal#21 —Mark Ahmann, 9426 Olympia Drive MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by O'Connor, in Appeal No. 21 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 5-0. Appeal#23 —Katrina Buetow, 18528 Wynnfield Rd. MOTION: Motion was made by Moquist, seconded by O'Connor, in Appeal No. 23 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 5-0. Appeal#24 —Matt Johnson, 11553 Welters Way MOTION: Motion was made by Moquist, seconded by Duoos, in Appeal No. 24 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 5-0. Appeal#25 —Srikanth Renukunta, 12795 College View Dr. #105 MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by Duoos, in Appeal No. 25 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 5-0. C. HEAR OTHER PERSONAL AND WRITTEN APPEALS FROM SIGN-UP LIST OUTSIDE COUNCIL CHAMBERS Appeal#26—Tim Ashenfelter, 14801 Pioneer Trail Sinell reported this appeal is for five buildings located at Flying Cloud Airport. Tim Ashenfelter explained he owns a number of hangar buildings at Flying Cloud and he leases land from MAC and is charged ground rent per square foot for use of the land. It has been determined that these buildings are considered personal property and are assessed by the City to set a value from which the tax is calculated. Ashenfelter indicated the past two years have been devastating for his business and for commercial property values. He stated a building similar to his sold in 2007 for $900,000. That exact same building was sold again within the past six months for $500,000. This is 45 percent less than its value in 2007. Ashenfelter said the value for his buildings is assessed at$4,342,000. He recently had two separate appraisals done on his hangars and believes between the two appraisals the true value is somewhere between $2.8 and $3 million. Ashenfelter said his assessed value has never been brought down since 2007. He also believes that his assessed value is 40 percent higher than it should be. Even though his appraisals don't include any value for the land, the facts are that his two appraisals show a real 40 percent drop in value. In response to a question from Johnson, Ashenfelter explained his business is to store aircraft and to perform aircraft maintenance. He does employ ten mechanics. Johnson indicated part of the appraisal is based on return investment for income. He asked if the appraiser had looked at other companies at other airports. Ashenfelter said they BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MINUTES April 21, 2011 Page 5 used the entire United States to get comparables and they found the drop in value across the board. Hangar values are down in the entire country. O'Connor asked if this property is considered personal property, how does the City charge for personal taxes. Sinell explained land used by MAC is exempt from property taxes including runways, control tower, navigation system, etc. However, anytime a unit of government makes property available to an individual, association or corporation for private use the property is taxable. The value is the same as if the individual owned it and the tax is the same as if he owned it. It is very clear in the State Statute that the tenant pays taxes as if he were the owner. Sinell further explained the City's numbers are very similar to the petitioners in terms of the building. Ashenfelter said the City is valuing the land at a much higher value than what the buyers want to spend. MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by Moquist, in Appeal No. 26 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 5-0. Appeal No. 27 —Al D. Keenan, 18515 Pioneer Trail Sams explained this appeal was received by the City this afternoon and staff is working on the appraisal. The City assessed the value of this two acre parcel at $250,000. MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by Duoos, in Appeal No. 27 to refer this item to the Assessor to complete a review appraisal. The motion carried 5-0. C. SCHEDULE NEXT MEETING The next meeting of the Board of Appeal and Equalization is scheduled for Tuesday, May 10, 2011, at 7:00 p.m. D. CLOSE THE BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MEETING TO ADDITIONAL APPEALS MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by Duoos, to close the Board of Appeal and Equalization meeting to additional appeals. The motion carried 5-0. IV. CONTINUE THE BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION MEETING MOTION: Motion was made by Johnson, seconded by O'Connor, to continue the Board of Appeal and Equalization meeting to May 10, 2011. The motion carried 5-0 and the meeting was continued at 8:15 p.m.