Loading...
05/18/1977 BOE - 00014510�, n e_ � � THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF REVIEW MEETING OF MAY 18, 1977 The annual Board of Review meeting was called to order at 7:10 p.m. on May 18, 1977, by Mayor Nee. ATTENDANCE Present were Mayor Nee; Councilwoman Kukowski, Councilman Hamern�k, Councilman Fitzpatrick, and Councilman Schneider (who arrived at 9:15 p.m.}; Nasim Qureshi, City Manager, Mervin Herrmann, City Assessor; Leon Madsen, Deputy Assessor; Walter Mulcahy, City Appraiser; Ferne Insley, Secretary to the C�ty Assessor; and Dave Anderson, representing the Anoka County Assessor's office. GENERAL DISCUSSION Mayor Nee welcomed everyone to the meeting. He then asked the assessor to exp]ain briefly to the audience the purpose of this meeting. Mr. Herrmann explained that this meeting is held to permit any property owner who so desires to review the assessed market value which the assessor's office has placed on their property, and to determine if the estimated market value Ts, �n fact, a true and reasonable figure Under the new law passed by the 1975 Legislature, each year a mintmum of one-fourth of the properties in the City are physically re-evaluated and a percentage increase is applied to the balance of the properties so that reasonable equality is retained for all properties. This percentage increase is based on an average arrived at from the values set on the properties physically appraTSed for the year, and also on the market trend as to sales. Thts year the average percentage increase was approximately ten (10) per cent on structures and twenty (20) per cent on land. Mayor Nee stated that the Council's area of discretion revolves on the question of whether the statement of estimated market value for each property reasonably reflects the true market value. A reduction can be made if it can be shown that a mistake has been made. If any property owner is not satisfied with the decision of this Board, they do have the right to appeal at the Anoka County Board of Review meeting to be heid an Juiy l, 1977, at 10•00 a.m. The Legislature has set up the procedure whereby you must first appear at the Board of Review meeting held at the City before you have the ri9ht to appeal at the Anoka County Board of Review meeting. In turn, you may appeal any decision to the State, but only after appearing at the City and County Board of Review meetings first. ITEM N0, 1--BURTON H. SCHERUEN, VACANT LOTS 2 AND 3, BLOCK 1, ALICE ADDITION, PLAT 54077, PARCELS 100 AND 200 RESPECTIVELY Mr. Scherven questioned the valuation placed on these two vacant lots as it was his understanding that the City would not ailow them to be built on. He expTained that he has kept up the lots neatly and they are buildable size. Pierce Street has never been extended in front of these properties, and the neighbors use this land for gardens antl for a play area for their children, so do not wish to have the street put in. His estimated market value for 1977 was $4,300 on Lot 3 and $4,100 on Lot 2, and the limited market value was $3,860 on Lot 3 and $3,594 on Lot Z. He explained thai he had an independent certified appraiser make an appra7sal for him on these lots as we71 as other propert�es he owns, and that he is not contesting the values set on these properties �f they are, in fact, both buildable. Mr Herrmann expiained to Mr. Scherven that Lot 3, the corner lot, is buildable because water and sewer lines are in 66th Avenue. He explained that water and sewer lines and street surfacing would have to be extended on Pierce Street �n order to allow Lot 2 to be built on. The fact was d�scussed that P7erce Street need not be constructed for its entire length if the neighbors ob�ected, because it is a dead-end street, and perhaps some sort of cul-de-sac couTd be constructed. Mayor Nee explained that Mr. Scherven only had to petition the City to put in the water, sewer, and street improvements to permit Lot 2 to be considered buildable. This answered Mr. Scherven's question, and he w�thdrew his protest against the valuations placed on these two lots, once he was satisfied that they are both buildabie. 1 ' r % BOARD OF REVIEW MEE7ING OF MAY 18, 1977 ITEM N0. 2--KENNETH PARLOUR, 7381 TERRACE. LOT l. BLOCK 2 PAGE 2 LO�Y MANOR ADDITION Mr. Parlour explained that his estimated market value for taxes payable in 1977 is $37,498 and that his new estimated market value for taxes payable in 1978 is $48,255 �He understood that the percentage increase on propert�es not physically re-evaluated was approximately ten (10) per cent, but that his increase was twenty-nine (29) per cent. He felt this was very u�fair. He stated that he has not allowed anyone from the City onto his property to make a physical re-evaluation, and feels he has been treated punitively for this. In his opim on, appraising of his home would be an invasion of his privacy and would be giving license to snoop. He deeply resents this, and feels he should not be penalized for his convictions in this matter. � � Mr. Herrmann explained that in physically appraising a property, they do not in any way attempt to "snoop," and that they have no concern outside of the physical condition of the house and any taxable improvements that have been made. He stated that when they receive perhaps ten or twelve calls from various citizens stating that a parti- cular property has numerous improvements within the house, they cannot �ust ignore these statements, although the property in question might not actually have any of these improvements. Normally, when a person refuses to allow a physical appraisal to 6e made of his property, they find that the person tends to be trying to hide something. Mr. Herrmann stated that �hey are not inferring that anyone is a liar, but in all fairness, they have to take into consideration that they are not 6eing allowed to do their ,705 as the Legislature requires it to be done Mr. Herrmann said that Mr. Parlour's home was built in 1962. According to his records, it has 1,216 square feet of living space on the main floor and a double garage 22 feet by 22 feet in size. The house was physically appraised in 1963 when it was first completed, and at that time the old records show that there was a finished recreation room 15 feet by 21 feet in the basement, a 7 foot by 6 foot porch, two baths with vanities, a built-in range, oven, and hood fan, a garbage disposal, a garage door opener, 6rick front, and central air conditioning. ��ayor Nee asked Mr. Parlour if he would at this time permit a physical re-evaluation of his property. Mr. Parlour stated that though he is strongly against this, under arotest he wtll permit a physical re-evaluation of his property. He said h�s protest is not personally against the representatives of the City assessor's office, 6ut against the idea of the invasion of his privacy Mr. Parlour questioned if this could be done on the weekend, and Mr Herrmann said that they do this only when absolutely necessary, as weekend work costs the taxpayers more. Mr. Parlour stated that he usually leaves in the morning by 7.20 a.m., and returns hetween twenty minutes to and five o'clock. He said he would make an appointment. MOTION by Councilman Hamer m k to carry over a decision on Mr. Parlour's request until a physical inspection has been made of his property by the assessor's office. Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. Mayor Nee said that this Board of Review meeting will be continued to a later date and at that time a decision will be given regarding Mr. Parlour's protest against the valuation placed on his home by the assessor's office. He suggested that the continuation of this meeting be held at 7 00 p.m. on the first Monday night in June, the 6th, prior to the regular Council meeting. IKING CHEVROLET. REPRESENTED BY MR. WYMAN SMITH. 7501 HIGHWAY N0. 65 N.E Mr. Smith stated that he had conferred with Mr. Herrmann last week regarding the problems he was presenting to the Board of Review this evening. He also stated that a representative from Viking Chevrolet had appeared before the Board of Review in a prior year asking for some reduction in the estimated market value of the structure because of the fact that this building was originally bu�lt as a repair shop for mobile homes, and was not ideally suited for a car sales business A reduction was allowed based on the fact that the building has extra high ceilings but that this extra space cannot be utilized by the present business, that the showroom floor is low and not as visible from Highway No. 65 as could be des�red, and that the doors in the shop area are not well suited for their present use. � ' ;;, BOARD OF REVIEW MEETING OF MAY 18, 1977 PAGE 3 Mr. Smith said that Parcel 4360, the parcel on which the structure is placed, had an increase of 4.8 per cent in structure value and a 45 per cent increase in land value for this year. In 1975 the estimated market value was $327,100 based on $.52 per square foot, in 1976 the estimated market value was $350,60D, and in 1977, the estrmated market value was $376,900 based on 3.75 per square foot. Mr. Smith sa�d that the valuat�on on Parcel 4350 was up 57 per cent, The estimated market value �n 1975 was $23,800 based on $.48 per square foot, in 1976 the est�mated market value was $46,101, and in 1977 the estimated market value was $75,800 based on $.75 per ' square foot Parcel 2850 has had an increase of 66-2/3 per cent. The estimated market value in 1975 was $62,800 based on $.45 per square foot, tn 1976 the estimated market value was $66,066, and in 1977 the estimated market value was $115,000, based on $ J 5 per square foot. Mr. Smith, speaking for the property owners, contends that he feels a reasonable increase has been placed on the structure, but that the other parcels which are used for vehicle stora9e are valued too greatly. The parcels are approximately 600 feet deep, and he feels a fairer way of assessing would be to assess the first one hundred and fifty feet of the property fronting on H�ghway No 65 at a higher rate, and then a lower rate should be used for the balance of the lot to the rear as it is used primarily for storage. Mr. Herrmann explained that some time back they used to assess somewhat in this manner, with the first hundred feet at one rate, and decreasing rates were used as the lot would extend 6ack. They have discontinued this process of assessing as they do not feel it was equitable enough, and other communities no longer use this method either. They now take an average rate over the whole parcel which they feel is the most equitable way. They also are compelled by law to estimate the fair market value of property based on what the best possible use of this land would be worth, not on how the property is actually being utilized. Mr. Smith contended that this is very unfair, in that Viking Chevrolet is using this land only for storage so it should be assessed a lawer rate. He aTso feit that using ' any "comparable" sales in arriving at this valuation is very unfair, as he stated there are actually no comparable sales. When a commercial property is sold, the type of business certainly has much to do with what they are willing to pay for the land. He stated that land purchased for mobile home sales and for ,7unk yards gets a premium price because these two particular types of businesses are very undestrab7e to the other property owners. Mr. Smith said that Mr. Isaacson, president of Viking Chevrolet, could have bought the land to the east of his site two years a90 for $14,000 an acre, but did not purchase this land because he felt even this vaas too high a cost. The rate used per square foot on this land for 1977 is $ 40. Mr. Nerrmann commented that th7s land does not front on Highway No. 65 at al] and does not have the access or is not as nice a piece of property as that now owned by Viking Chevrolet. Mr. Sm�th also brought up the point that Mr. Isaacson has a computer printout of the comparison of property taxes of nine Chevrolet dealers in the Metro Area. (He later stated that only six are involved in the survey, because the other three dealerships are not set up so they can be used in the computer survey.) They estimate the cost to Mr Isaacson for each vehicle sold is $26, and this is the h�ghest cost of any dealership, with the others ranging from $10 to $20 per car. Mr. Smith feels that Mr Isaacson is paying too much in taxes, and that is why he is showing less profit per sale. Mr. Madsen stated that using an economic type of reasoning is not really a true estimate ' of value. He said too many factors can affect this type of valuatton. For instance, some dealerships are operating on shoestrings and others have good substantial financial backing, and this would certainly affect the manrer in which the business is run. Wages, upkeep, number of employees and various other things also enter in when speaking of the profits versus the costs of each car sold. For this reason, Mr. h9adsen did not feel �t was feasible to use this survey in determining the valuation on this property. Per foot costs of various commerc�al properties, some with lots this deep and fronting on good highways, were discussed for comparison purposes. I I � � � ( -�� BOARD OF REVIEW MEETING OF MAY 18, 1977 PAGE 4 Mr. Herrmann pointed out that, regardless for what purpose this land is actually being used, when a valuation is made according to law, the best possible use for this land must be taken into consideration. MOTION by Councilwoman Kukowski when this meeting is continued to have the Assessor's office bring back any suggestions they might have as to alternative methods of arriving at an estimated market value on this property. Seconded by Councilman Hamernik Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. 4--ERNEST COOK, REPRESENTED BY MR. WYMAN SMITH, SECTION 3, PLAT nn vnrnnir i nnm This parcel is approximately 21 acres in size. Mr. Cook purchased this land about fifteen years ago with the �ntention that Hypro Engineer�ng would be building on this land. Hypro moved to New Brighton instead. He has had the land for sale ever since. In 1973 Mr. Cook, rather than coming to the City, felt his valuation was too high and brought this matter to court. The decision reduced his valuation to $84,000, but Mr. Cook was dissatisfied and felt this reduction was not sufficient. The 1977 estimated market value and limited value are the same, $120,4D0. This is zoned for heavy industrial use. The land ts rough looking but has only a few low or peaty spots. Soil tests have not been made. A railroad siding would be available �f a business going in on this property would generate enough usage to �ustify the railroad putting in the siding. At the present time there is no access to this property. Mr. Herrmann mentioned that P9r. Cook had contacted him by telephone last year complaining about the valuation on his property. There are also a number of unpaid assessments on this property. These improvements, of course, do add value to the property. After speaking to Mr. Cook, Mr. Herrmann talked to a real estate developer who promptly offered to pay Mr. Cook the valuation placed on his property at that time by the assessor, if Mr. Cook paid up the special assessments in full. Mr. Cook declined this offer. Mr. Herrmann said he was reasona6ly sure that this particular real estate developer would still offer the same proposition based on the current valuation for 1977, if Mr. Cook would pay up the special assessments. He stated that the assessor's office felt very confident that their estimated market value on this property was fair and equitable. MOTION by Councilman Hamernik that no change be made in the estimated market value on this property for 1977. Seconded by Councilwoman Kukowski. llpon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. Mayor Nee asked if Mr. Smith had any additional comments or if he were going to appeal this decision. Mr. Smith stated that he was not going to appeal th7s decision, but he wanted the record to show that he ob�ects and challenges their decis�on. ITEM N0. 5--HANS J SONOHEIMER. 5841 SIXTN STREET NORTHEAST. LOT 7. BL�CK 6. BQNNY Mr. Sondheimer stated that his 1976 estimated market value for taxes payable in 1977 was $26,620, and his new 1977 estimated market value is $31,315. He was wondering for what he had been charged an increase, as he has no finished driveway and has made no iinprovements. Mr. Herrmann explained that Mr. Sondheimer's property was not physically re-evaluated this year, so received the average ten (10) per cent increase on the structure and twenty (20) per cent increase onthe land, and that he was not charged for any improvements. This explanation satisfied Mr. Sondheimer, and he had no further questions. ITEM N0. 6--THEODORE THEILMAN, 1540 RICE CREEK ROAD, PART OF LOT 9, AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION N0. 22, PLAT 54153, PARCEL 1660, AN� OUTLOTS A AND B, RICE CREEK ESTATES ADDITION Mr. Theilman said that his estimated market value has increased seventy (70) per cent in one year and his limited market value has increased fifty-five (55) per ceni, which he thinks is exorbitant. The value on his structure is $19,625 and on the land, $22,880 for a total of $42,505 estimated market value. His limited market value is $33,663. �i � _��� BOARD OF REVIEW MEETING OF MAY 18, 1977 PAGE 5 Mr. Herrmann explained the reason for the large increase th�s year. First of all the property is large enough for four building s;tes some day in addition to the build�ng site on which their home stands. When Briardale Addition was platted and the water and sewer and street improvements were put �n, Briardale Road made water and sewer ava�lable for two buildable lots on the rear of Mr. Theilman's property. If Woods�de Court is extended, this would provide water and sewer services and access for two additional building sites, if �1r. Theilman replatted hts property. The law requires that when the assessor's office places an estimated market value on property, it has ' to cons�der the value of the land at its best possible use After these improvements were put in in 1975, the assessor's office �n error did not add additional value to this properiy because of two additionai building sites being available, so in 1977 they had to rect7fy this error accordin9 to the laws. They still have not added any addit�onal value for the two additional lots which would be possible if Woodside Couri were extended, but simply treat the front building s�te as one very deep lot, and use a lower rate on the rear part of the lot because of the depth. The value would be much higher if the property was cons�dered to have four additional building sites. A$1,000 reduction �n the estimated market value has been allowed 6ecause the portion of the lot on Briardale Road is much higher than the road level, and fill would have to be hauled away before construction could begin if this portion of the property were platted 7nto additional 6u�lding sites. The problem with this situation is the fact that Mr. and Mrs. Theilman have not and do not at this time contemplate splitting their property in any way. They were opposed to the improvements being put in when Briardale Addition aras platted, and yet, through no fault of their own, they were forced into this situation. Their large lot has been preserved in the natural state which is the main reason why they bought thTS property. There is park land in the ad,7oining addition of Rice Creek Estates, but this park land has never been developed so all the ne7qhborhood children and dogs use the Theilman property, w�th their consent, as a play and nature area. Councilman Fitzpatr�ck concurred with Mr. The�lman's statement and said he knows that they have had no intention of seiling any of their property, and were in opposition to the new addition beinq put in. He realizes th�s situation will occur again, but � feels that maybe there should be reduction because of the fact that the Theilman's were forced into this situation and had no choice in the matter and are, �n fact, being penalized. Mr. Qureshi stated that he felt the value placed on the property was a fair value according to the laws under which the assessor's offtce has to work. Mr. Herrmann potnted out that the assessor's office has no power to lower this valuation, but that the Council can arbitrarily decide to lower the valuation if they so desire. The simplest and most effective way would be to lower the value of $9,000 wh�ch was added for the physical improvements, as this would have the most direct effect on both the market and limlted value. Mr. Madsen pointed out the fact that similar situations wTll be occurring because as Fridley has become more built up, more isolated large building sites will 6e presented with this problem. If the Councii does make a decision to iower this value, they could be setting a precedent. If Mr. Theilman platted this property but did not build on it, the law provides a moratorium that tax values cannot be raised for three years on a new plat. Councilman Schneider arrived at 9 15 p.m There was further discussion, Councilman Schneider was filled in on the part�cular , problem they were working on, and maps of the area were examined. MOTION by Councilman Schne7der to arbitrarily remove two-thirds or $6,000 of the value placed on the property for phystcal improvements, due to the fact that the improvements are of no use to the owner at the present t�me. Seconded by Counc�7woman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. BOARD OF REVIEW MEETING OF MAY 18, 1977 PAGE 6 �� :TEM NO 7--ELMARS PRIEDITIS. 6031 BENJAMIN STREET THEAST, NORTH 150 FEET OF WEST Mr. Prteditis explained that he was concerned because of the amount of yearly increase in the valuation of his property. He felt that if this yearly rise continues, his property will be valued at an absolutely incredible market value w�thin the next ten-year period. He feels strongly that th�s inflationary trend must be stopped He urged the Council to take steps to help �top this inflation. Mayor Nee explained that it used to be that the ma�ority of the mo m es needed for the �City budget were obtained through the taxes. This is no longer true. The City has been constantly working to obtain the monies for the budget from other sources. He explained that the City �s doing everything in their power to help stop th�s rising trend in taxes, but the legislature is the place where the controls have to be put on. � Mr. Nerrmann expla�ned to Mr. Pr�editis that his valuation of estimated market value for 1977 was based on the average ten (10) per cent increase in structure value and twenty (20) per cent increase in land value. His property will be physically re-evaluated in 1978 for the taxes payable �n 1979. Mayor Nee potnted out that the assessor's office keeps a record of all sales so they have comparisons to work with. The figures prove that although the law says properties are to be evalua�ed based on their market value, that the assessor's estimated market values are actually running about eighty-nine (89) per cent of true market value. Mr Prieditts had no other ob�ections. EM N0. 8--MRS. LES ZIMMER, 7348 SYMPHONY STREET NORTHEAST, LOT 12, BL ninn nnnlTTnni ni nr rcono nnnrr_i �oan Mrs. Zimmer said that they felt the�r estimated market value was way too high compared to values placed on property owners in their neighborhood. Their estimated market value in 1972 was $26,260 and in 1977 is $46,310, with a 1977 limited market value of $44,777. She said they had added on and made improvements to their home, but did not feel they should be penalized for making improvements. She also sa�d that a neighbor of theirs had a valuation $10,000 higher than the value on their home at the time they purchased �t. Now their home is valued at $10,000 more than the nei9hbor's property. Mr. Herrmann explained that the new Fiscal Disparity law hit School District No. 16 very hard, and very little of this money comes back to Fridley. This is one reason for the increase. Mr Herrmann also said that it was difficult to believe that there would be such a difference in the valuation of their home and that of the ne�ghbor's to whom they were comparing. He asked if they would mind stepping back to the Assessor's office, as they would be glad to compare year-by-year to see if such a situation were possible. The Z�mmer's said they would do this, and Mayor Nee asked them to return to the meeting when they had checked thraugh the records, to see if they had resolved their complaint. After checking with the assessor's records, the Z�mmer's d�scovered that they were comparing their 1977 valuation with the 1976 valuation on the neighbor's property, which answered their questions. They had nothing further to discuss. ITEM N0. 9--HENRY ZIMMER, 4021 CALIFORNIA STREET NORTHEAST, LOT 3, BLOCK 1, WILSON ADDITION. PLAT 59592, PARCEL 100 Mr. Zimmer said that his estimated market value for 1977 is $33,070, wi�h a limited market value of $31,905, and he feels this is too high. He explained that he had ,suffered structural damage on his property when the Railroad was blasting when they put in their new swttching yard across the street fran his property. He had received a letter from the Ctty saying that there was nothing more they could do about it. Mr. Zirr¢ner appeared before the Board of Review last year with this complaint, and a motion was made and carried to allow him a$2,000 reduction in estimated market value. Mr. Herrmann explained that h�is year Mr. Zimmer's property received the average ten (10) per cent increase on structure and twenty (2Q) per cent increase on land �ust as three-fourths of the City did, but this increase was based on the lower market value with the $2,000 reduction. (�, /t BOAR� OF REVIEW MEETING OF MAY 18, 1977 PAGE 7 Mr. Zimmer said that he had been afra�d that though they had g�ven him the reduction last year, they had put it back on this year. The Councilmembers discussed the situation. None of the few homes involved in this situation have sold, so there are no comparable sales to refer to. Councilman Fitzpatrick said he was not trying to talk negatively about Mr. Zimmer's property, but he felt w�th the noise and smoke annoyance from the railroad yard that � it would be difficult for Mr. Zimmer to sell his home for a fair price. Mr. Zimmer answered that he likes his home and feels somewhere else his home would not be out of line as far as the present valuation, but the drawback of Tocation does affect the value. MOTION by Councilman Fitzpatrick to increase Mr. Zimmer's estimated market value for 1977 only $1,000 over what it was in 1976, because he feels this man's property has not increased in value at the same rate as everyone else's has. Seconded by Council- woman Kukowski. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unan�mously. ITEM N0. 10--GERAL➢ MOYLAN, 5237 LINCOLN STREET NORTHEAST, LOT 2, BLOCK 3, MARIAN HILLS A��ITION, PLAT 56744, PARCEL 1850 Mr. Moylan said he is petitioning for a reduction in his 1977 estimated market value. He stated that his market value rose from $33,540 in 1974 to $38,580 in 1975, a fifteen (15) per cent �ncrease; that it rose to $46,865 in 1976, a twenty-one point four (21.4) per cent increase; and that it rose to �52,105 this year, an eleven point two (11.2) per cent increase. He said this totals a forty-seven point six (47.6) per cent increase from 1974 through 1977, and that he has realized an eighty-two (82) per cent increase since 1972. The present value on the land is $11,855, and on the siructure is $40,250. Mr. Moylan was of the opinion tnat no lots in his vicinity had sold for as much as the value placed on his land. His home has 1,196 square feet on the main floor, a gravel driveway, and a double tuck-under garage, with the original plywood external finishing. Mr. Herrmann explained that part of Mr. Moylan's incrase was due to the fact that sp7it-entry homes were valued too low, as sales proved that people were paying more for this particular type of buildin9. For this reason, the Council directed the assessor's office to raise the market values on this type of home. Councilman Fitzpatrick said he could understand why Mr. Moylan questioned the percenta9e of increase, but was of the opinion that the actual market value placed on the property was a fair one, and that he could sell his house for more than this value. It was the consensus of the Board of Review that the market value placed on Mr. Moylan's property was a fair value, and they recorronended no change. The following people came to the Board of Review meeting but after discussin their questions with a representative from the Assessor's office, did not feel they wanted to present themselves before the Board of Review. Their names are included in case they do decide to petition for changes in their valuations (1) ALLEN MESSERLI, 5505 WEST DANUBE ROAD NORTHEAST, LOT 9, BLOCK 2, INNSBRUCK NORTH 2ND ADDITION, PLAT 56355, PARCEL 300 �2) Mr. Messerl� fe7t his valuation was too high PETERSDN (PROPERTY STILL RECORDE� IN NAME OF ANNA �A�IS), 6191 Mrs. Peterson felt her valuation was too high. (3) MRS. LLOY� LA POINTE, 5909 SECOND STREET NOR' HYDE PARK A ITI Mrs La Pointe's problem relaied to the fact that they had a tax freeze on their property and this year it was removed by the County. This is something which has to be taken up with the County and not the City Board of Review. ' I� I LJ � BOAR� OF REVIEW MEETING OF MAY 18, 1977 PAGE 8 (4) FRED M. LIMESAND, 1409 - 76TN AVENUE NOR7HEAST, LOT 24, BLOCK 3, MEADOWMOOR TERRACE. PLAT 56793. PARCEL 3560 After discussing his property with a representative from the Assessor's office he seemed to have no questions or complaints. (5) DENNIS PITKANEN, 6430 RIVERVIEW TERRACE, PART OF LOT 4, BLOCK 1, VEIT'S ADDITION, PLAT 59451, PARCEL 150 After discussing his property with a representative from the Assessor's office, he seemed to have no questions or complaints. (6) A. DOUGLAS STURGILL, 5331 FIFTH STREET NORTHEAST, LOTS 24 AND 25, BLOCK 15, HAMILTON'S ADDITI�N TO MECHANICSUILLE, PLAT 56159, PARCEL 4520 Mr. Sturgill felt his valuation was too high. MOTION by Councilwoman Kukowski to continue this Board of Rev�ew meeting to Monday evening June 6, 1977, at 7:00 p.m. Seconded by Councilman Schneider. Upon a vo�ce vote, all voting aye, Mayor Nee declared the motion carried unanimously. Mayor Nee declared this portion of the Board of Review meeting recessed at 10•50 p.m., May 18, 1977. Respectfully su6mitted, 11'Gi, �f.'r,,�-c-cti1 �tiJ��'-Q-' ' Patricia Sykes Approved: 6J6/77 � William J. Nee Mayor