My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-11-1988 CC MIN - BOR
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Minutes
>
City Council 1974 - Present
>
1980-1989
>
1988
>
05-11-1988 CC MIN - BOR
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/21/2008 8:34:40 AM
Creation date
3/23/2005 2:34:29 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
CCM
date
5/11/1988
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />MEETING OF THE BOARD OF REVIEW <br />WEDNESDAY. MAY 11. 1988 <br />HELD AT THE SHERBURNE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Members Present: Mayor Gunkel. Councilmembers Tralle. Holmgren. and <br />Schuldt <br /> <br />Members Absent: Councilmember Dobel <br /> <br />Also Present: Ty Bischoff. County Assessor; Jerry Kritzeck. Commercial and <br />Industrial Appraiser; and John Cullen. Residential <br />Appraiser <br /> <br />Pursuant to due call and notice thereof. the meeting of the Elk River <br />Board of Review was called to order by Mayor Gunkel at 7:00 p.m. <br /> <br />Ty Bischoff explained that the City Council was present as the Board of <br />Review and would be reviewing the 1988 assessments. <br /> <br />Mr. Bischoff explained that State would give a tolerance of 90% of the market <br />value of a home. He indicated that after a study completed by the County. the <br />ratio for the assesed market value to the appraised value for homes assessed <br />in the City of Elk River was 84% to 6% under the State allowance. <br /> <br />Mr. Bischoff explained that due to the State only allowing a 10% margin in the <br />assessed valuation, 6% was added to all residential assessments. thereby <br />increasing the assessed value of all residential property by 6%. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />At this time the following people addressed the Board of Review: <br /> <br />1) David Shappell - 9325 164th Lane - 117-000-134105 <br /> <br />Mr. Shappell indicated that his property is located in an industrial <br />zoned area. He indicated the property valuation is too high because of <br />the area. He indicated that the industrial activity is not screened and <br />the area is very unsightly. John Cullen indicated that the property has <br />not been appraised since 1981 and stated that due to the environment of <br />the area. the property should be looked at. <br /> <br />COUNCILMEMBER TRALLE MOVED TO CONTINUE THE REVIEW OF THE ASSESSED <br />PROPERTY VALUATION OF 9325 164TH LANE (117-000-134105) ON JUNE 6. 1988. <br />COUNCILMEMBER HOLMGREN SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 4-0. <br /> <br />2) Dawn Perry - 19413 Lowell Avenue - 115-140-040010 <br /> <br />Ms. Perry indicated she lived in Ridgewood East and questioned the reason <br />her property value raised $2.000 last year and another $8.100 this year. <br />Jerry Kritzeck indicated that there was a personal assessment done on <br />properties in the Ridgewood East area in 1987. He indicated that the <br />raise in the assessed valuation was due to this assessment and the 6% <br />increase. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />It was the consensus of the Board of Review to take no action to lower <br />the property value of the property owned by Dawn Perry. <br /> <br />The petitioner accepted the fact that no action was taken. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.