Laserfiche WebLink
Case #8: James Connolly -.16235 Kamacite <br /> <br />Mr. Connolly asked why there was a straight 8% increase across the board. <br />Council replied that that is what the State has dictated. Mr. Connolly stated <br />that his EMV went from $54,000 last year to $59,200 this year and further that <br />his valuation increase for his deck and driveway seem to be a little high. <br />Council advised him that generally he does fall right in line with the 8% <br />increase. <br /> <br />Council Action: None. <br /> <br />Case #9: Boyd Refskan - 16237 Kamacite <br /> <br />Mr. Refskan asked if EMV's were going to continue go up, that 8, 10 and 12% <br />per year were large increases for this area. Mr. Starkey replied that the <br />County is going to recommend no changes to structure valuation next year <br />and rural land value will probably stay the same also. <br /> <br />Council Action: None. <br /> <br />Case #10: Allan Heifort - 8421 167th Lane N.W. <br /> <br />Mr. Heifort stated that his EMV went from $78,700 last year to $102,300 <br />this year. He further stated that he is in the process of putting a two- <br />floor 14 x 26 addition on the home but that it is not complete yet. Mr. Wirz <br />replied that his addition was assessed at being 85% complete. Mr. Heifort <br />suggested that Government dictates assessing homes higher than their true value <br />and that the Government should stand behind what they dictate and be willing to <br />buy these homes at their EMV. Mr. Wirz stated that he may have assessed the <br />addition a little high and would be willing to reinspect the addition. <br /> <br />Council Action: None. <br /> <br />Council recessed at 8:55 P.M. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec called the Board of Review back to order at 9:10 P.M. <br /> <br />Case #11: Winslow Holesek - 1159 Andover Blvd. N.W. <br /> <br />Mr. Holesek stated that his EMV in 1979 was $46,600, $62,900 in 1980, $64,400 <br />in 1981 and $69,000 in 1982. He further stated that his property was over- <br />valued to start with and now it is like adding insult to injury. Mr. Starkey <br />stated that the State has ordered a 40% increase to farm land in Anoka, because <br />according to farm land sales in other counties, Anoka was being assessed too <br />low. Mr. Holesek feels the productivity of farm land in Anoka should be taken <br />into consideration. Mr. Holesek further stated that he can only get $10-$12/ <br />acre rent for his land, and according to the new EMV he would have to get $29/ <br />acre, which no one would pay for sandy farm land. Mr. Starkey suggested that <br />farmland owners in Anoka attend the State Board of Review in November and help <br />the County argue the case. <br /> <br />Council Action: None. <br /> <br />Case #12:A1 Pearson - 8846 HwS. 10 W. <br /> <br />Mr. Pearson stated that his EMV was raised $28,400 for the 10 parcels he owns. <br /> <br />BoR/June 1, 1982 <br /> Page 3 <br /> <br /> <br />