KOOCHICHING COUNTY BOARD OF EQUALIZATION 06/12/12

KOOCHICHING COUNTY BOARD OF EQUALIZATION

Opening Session 2012 – Tuesday, June 12, 2012; 1:30 p.m.

MEMBERS PRESENT:   Commissioners McBride, Adee, Hanson, Ecklund, Pavleck, Auditor/Treasurer Bob Peterson

MEMBERS ABSENT:     None

COUNTY STAFF ATTENDING:   County Assessor Peterson, Administration Director Jaksa, Appraiser Polkinghorne

OTHERS ATTENDING:   None

Oaths of Office were conducted for members of the County Board of Equalization. The Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Certification was completed with four of the Board members having training certification.  The Chairman opened the Board of Equalization (BOE) session to review 2012 property valuation and classification for taxes payable in 2013.   The Auditor-Treasurer stated that there were no appointments scheduled for today’s session but that there were two written appeals received.

The County Assessor opened with a report on the Department’s work plan and what was done for the 2012 assessment year.   The work plan includes completion of the lake area which is defined as going to the Second Bridge area for equalization purposes, noting that the sales continue in this area at high values.   The Assessor reviewed a number of parcels in the lake area, comparing the assessed value to the sale value to demonstrate this point.     For 2012 valuation purposes, work included adding more of the lake area, equalization of a small area in the City of International Falls and a 5% increase on the rest of the lake area.   The land value for equalization purposes in the rest of the County is done.   Otherwise the work plan will continue with implementing the building schedule for the rest of the County and automating assessments to eliminate the manual field cards.  The Assessor stated that the State has informed the County that there is no state increases mandated this year which means the Department is doing their job.

    1.   Letter received, Parcel # 13-035-41000 (80 acres).  The property         owner is contesting the 2012 assessment of his property.   The Assessor stated that in 2006 this individual asked that this same property be reviewed due to the amount of wetlands and the Assessor at that time went out to the property.  The 160 acres was assessed at $53,900 and the Assessor reduced it to $38,400.  Since that time there have been 2 State land increases and there was a building added to the property.  The 2005 valuation was $53,900; 2006 $38,400; 2010 $59,600 and 2012 $83,500.  In addition, the Appraiser discussed with the individual the option of putting the land into Forest Land Management Program to reduce his taxes.   The Assessor recommends no change as the valuation is justified.  The Board concurred that they heard no facts to contradict the Assessor’s valuation of this property.

    2.   Letter received, Parcel #s 65-025-11000, 65-025-42000, 65-025-34000, 58-031-00100:   The property owner though noting a decrease in the valuation  for 2012, questioned the per acre value that is being applied to their property that they claim is wetland or land that is only accessed by foot.  The Appraiser stated that the property owner had called and that he went out to review this property and reduced the value for buildings and the land, for an overall reduction of $33,000 for their six parcels.  Regarding the value per acre and the Assessor’s land value schedule, the Assessor stated that acre valuation is justified and recommends no change.  The Board concurred that they heard no facts to contradict the Assessor’s valuation of this property.

With no other business, the Board Chair recessed the meeting at 2:30 p.m. and will reconvene on Tuesday, June 19, 2012 at 6:00 p.m.

KOOCHICHING COUNTY BOARD OF EQUALIZATION

Reconvened Session 2012 – Tuesday, June 19, 2012; 6:00 p.m.

MEMBERS PRESENT:   Commissioners McBride, Adee, Hanson, Pavleck, Auditor/Treasurer Bob Peterson

MEMBERS ABSENT:     Commissioner Ecklund (other County Business)

COUNTY STAFF ATTENDING:   County Assessor Peterson, Administration Director Jaksa

BOE/2012-01  Motion by Hanson, seconded by Adee to reconvene the 2012 County Board of Equalization.  Voting yes:  McBride, Adee, Hanson, Pavleck, Peterson.  Motion carried.

000   The Board completed the Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Certification for the reconvened session.

    1.    Appointment #1.  Parcel #s 15-030-43000 & 15-032-22000. Property owners stated that two of their multi- adjoining parcels went up in value.  They referenced a 40 acre parcel which they purchased for $2,500 and the County valuation that went from $7,400 in 2011 to $19,500 in 2012 and there is no improvement on the property.   They referenced another parcel with an increased value over 2011 and stated the same concern.  The Assessor stated that the land schedule was implemented county-wide which revalued and equalized land values.  The Assessor reviewed the land schedule as to the per acre charge per the different land types, for example, Land 1 $700 per acre, Land 2 $500 per acre, Land 3 $350 per acre and further stated that land is then discounted based on distance from access.  This property owner has 8 adjoining parcels and collectively for 2011 the value was $239,600 and for 2012 it is $192,500, a drop in value of $47,100.  The Assessor provided information on one parcel that was sold by this property owner in 2011 for $34,000, compared to the County’s value of $31,600 and another parcel sold in 2011 for $31,500, compared to the County’s value of $14,300.  The property owner stated that these two parcels had access accessibility and reviewed the other parcels that do not have access and are low land, thus disputing the high per acre value.   The property owner felt the parcels should be looked at individually, the two that increased in value and not look at the parcels collectively.  In response to a Board question, the Assessor stated that prior to implementing the land schedule there was no consistency in land values and now the County land is equalized based on a land schedule developed with sale data and state guidelines, noting that on an average, 40 acre tracts are being purchased at $1,000 per acre.   In response to what option the property owner has beyond the Local Board of Equalization, the Administration Director reviewed information for submitting an appeal to Tax Court.  In considering the information provided, The Board concurred that they heard no facts to contradict the Assessor’s valuation of this property.

    2.    Appointment #2:  Parcel # 06-085-00100 and 06-085-00090. The property owner has attended the last two County Board of Equalization sessions with the same concern, that his 4 lots on Lynx Island are overvalued based on there location on the island.  That stated to him in the previous BOE meetings is values are based on sales and he asked what the current sales are to support these values.   The Assessor stated that nothing has sold this year or last year on Lynx Island.  However, three places have sold recently in this general area of the lake and that overall sales on the lake are very strong, in demand.  The property owner stated that there is only cannel access to these 4 lots on the backside, otherwise it is all swamp.  The Assessor stated that Lynx Island is not valued the same as the rest of the lake.  The big lake properties run at $700 per foot.  For the 800 foot frontage for these four lots, 200 feet is valued at $390 per foot due to the channel access and the remaining 600 feet is at $120 per foot, the lowest value on the lake.   In response to the sales data, the Assessor stated that the past year sales are now outdated but that sales continue strong for lake property.  There has been no data to support a drop in values based on sales so there is nothing to justify a decrease in the value of this lake property.  The value did increase 5% due to an overall increase of 5% put on the lake area for 2012. The property owner stated that with the high taxes paid by lake property owners, they receive little service.  Board members stated that the Assessor in the first session reviewed the number of sales in the lake area and what people are paying which supports the value of this land.  The Board concurred that they heard no facts to contradict the Assessor’s valuation of this property.

    3.    Written Appeal:   Parcel #06-085-00040.    The property owner is dissatisfied with the value of his property on Lynx Island.  (Lot 4, Section 8, Township 70, Lynx Island).  He feels the value is high compared to current sales and that this property is not mainstream island property.  That the cabin is without a permanent foundation, no plumbing or septic system and concluded that values should be reduced when sales are very limited.   The Assessor reviewed the valuation of the property with the Board, which is lake front.  200 feet is valued at $600 per foot and 49 feet at $180 per foot for a total land value of $128,800 which is justified lake shore land value.  The Board concurred that there was no facts presented to contradict the Assessor’s valuation of this property.

    4.    Appointment #3 –  Golf Course representatives stated concern with the great jump in the valuation and the resulting tax increase, as the business did not plan for this large cost increase.   The Assessor reviewed the prior valuation of the Golf Course land to the 2012 value based on the county land schedule and then compared the prior land value to the adjacent land value.  The Assessor did not know why the Golf Course land was valued so low but they found others like this in the county during their implementation of the land schedule.   There is no arguing the land value adjustment and the Business representatives concurred.   The representatives however, stated that with the bad economy golf courses are not doing that well, including this one, and inquired on whether there was any way to graduate this increase so they can better plan for the tax increase.   Both the Assessor and Board members stated that the program to do this was eliminated under the State Property Tax System.  The representatives concluded that they couldn’t dispute the land value adjustment but came to the meeting to find out if there was any means to assist them with the large increase and now know there is not an avenue.  

    5.    Appointment #5:  Parcel #50-082-01010.  The property owner stated that he purchased his property for $120,000 in August of 2011 and that the County’s 2012 valuation of the property is at $124,700 (land and building).  He further stated that the purchase price included personal property but provided no supporting data. He feels the house value is high and valuation as a whole is high due to the purchase price having personal property included in it.   The Assessor stated that when the property owner first contacted him, the value on the field card was $130,900 and wasn’t in the CAMA System.  When he entered it into the system, the valuation was established at $124,700 for land and building (land at $40,600, $13,798 for pole building, $8,711 for attached garage and $61,636 for the house).  Then after talking with the property owner, the Assessor went out to the property. The house is a 2006 double wide manufactured home and was rated D45 in the County building schedule.  CAMA dropped the home value but left the rest of the buildings and land value the same).  The Property owner did not dispute the land value, but the value of the home.  He stated that the double wide is a low quality model home and new, it had good value but over time, it now has condition issues due to the low quality of the building in the first place.  The Assessor in reviewing the CRV stated that the purchase was through an estate sale which generally sells for less and that the CRV does not show personnel property as being part of the purchase price, noting this could have been an oversight by the person completing the form.  The Assessor is at 104% sale ratio.  The Board members in review of the building class schedule and the fact that modular homes have different quality ratings questioned whether the D45 class was high for this quality of manufactured home as described by the property owner.  The Assessor stated that based on low quality and condition issues, he would recommend a drop in the building class to D40 which adjusts the building value down from $61,636 to $55,171 and overall value to $118,280, 99% sale ratio.  The Board agreed that the adjustment made to the home value based on quality and condition issues is justified and will support the adjustment.  

With no other appointments, walk ins or written appeals, the County Board of Equalization concluded business.

BOE2012/02  Motion by Pavleck, seconded Adee that in reviewing the appeals presented to the County Board of Equalization, the Board unanimously supported the County Assessor’s recommendations and approved the Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Record for 2012 as submitted by the County Assessor with one adjustment of valuation.  Voting yes:  McBride, Adee, Hanson, Pavleck, Peterson.  Motion carried.

BOE/2012-03  Motion by Peterson, seconded by Adee to adjourn the 2012 County Board of Equalization at 7:45 p.m. Voting yes:  McBride, Adee, Hanson, Pavleck, Peterson.  Motion carried.

The Journal

July 21, 2012