06-13-2016 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

BOARD OF REVIEW MINUTES May 23, 2016 DRAFT 2 Mayor Reinert said it sounds as if the justification for the valuation increase comes from the 37 comparables. 38 39 Ms. McNamara said she isn’t contesting what others say they sold their buildings for but, in the case 40 of her property, she cannot get the proposed market value for their buildings even though they are 41 quality properties and fully rented. The valuation is far above what they’ve been offered. 42 43 Ms. Johnson noted that Industrial Flex Values were raised overall (as outlined in the information 44 provided to the council) so these aren’t the only properties that were raised; property values on 45 industrial property were raised overall based on data. 46 47 Council Member Manthey asked about sales data in the area of Apollo Drive. Ms. Johnson noted 48 one property that sold for just over $50 per square foot. Before the adjustments proposed that would 49 reduce the valuation, these properties were valued at $48 per square foot. 50 51 Council Member Maher asked what purchase offers the McNamara did receive. Ms. McNamara said 52 below 2016 market values; she doesn’t recall the offer by square foot. 53 54 Property owner Patrick Fogerty asked if staff knows the finish of the building that was sold; a medical 55 building with high cost finishes would have more value and he thinks that may be the property that 56 sold. He added that he is concerned about a high valuation when he in fact has suffered losses on the 57 properties. 58 59 Mayor Reinert asked why the appellants didn’t contact County staff after receiving their 60 communication. Ms. McNamara said she didn’t feel the communication was a conversation opener 61 but rather a final offer. Mayor Reinert suggested that the board did anticipate some communication 62 between parties. Mr. Fogerty said he tried to call today but it was really too late. 63 64 Mayor Reinert noted that the County suggestion is a reduction of over $200,000 in value. 65 66 Council Member Kusterman suggested that the appellants could have looked for properties to 67 compare with their own and that would have been a fair argument. He reviewed the schedule and 68 wondered if the board could reconvene again. The deadline for action by the Local Board is May 29. 69 70 Ms. McNamara pointed out to Ms. Johnson that income and expense for the property is an option to 71 consider the valuation and that data would provide another view. 72 73 Ms. Johnson explained that the County uses market data. Based on what she found on leases, she 74 saw $6.00 per square foot moving up to $6.70 a square foot. They don’t use the income approach if 75 they have sufficient sales data. 76 77 Mayor Reinert asked if there were other calls from the area and Ms. Johnson said she received several 78 from industrial property owners in the county but not from Lino Lakes. 79 80