Laserfiche WebLink
BOARD OF REVIEW MINUTES April 25, 2011 <br /> APPROVED <br /> 1 CITY OF LINO LAKES <br /> _ 2 MINUTES <br /> 3 BOARD OF REVIEW <br /> 4 <br /> 5 DATE : April 25,2011 <br /> 6 TIME STARTED : 6:00 p.m. <br /> 7 TIME ENDED : 6:30 p.m. <br /> 8 MEMBERS PRESENT : Council Member Gallup,Roeser, O'Donnell, <br /> 9 Rafferty and Mayor Reinert <br /> 10 MEMBERS ABSENT : None <br /> 11 <br /> 12 Staff members present: City Administrator Jeff Karlson; Public Safety Director John Swenson; City <br /> 13 Clerk Julie Bartell <br /> 14 <br /> 15 Anoka County Assessor Linda Weiner explained that the Local Board of Appeal and Equalization of <br /> 16 the City of Lino Lakes is meeting for the purpose of reviewing and correcting the assessment of the <br /> 17 city for the year 2011, payable in 2012. All persons considering themselves aggrieved by said <br /> 18 assessments were given the opportunity to address the Board. She reminded those present that only <br /> 19 appeals for the current year valuation or classification could be made. Discussion of the Board is <br /> 20 limited to valuations only, not taxes. Ms. Weiner reviewed briefly the Anoka County, 2011 Board of <br /> 21 Appeal and Equalization, County Assessor's Report document and presented a brief overview of the <br /> 22 property tax process and a recap of current assessments. <br /> 23 <br /> 24 Ms. Weiner then noted that she had spoken with the council at a recent work session about a group of <br /> 25 property owners whose property is split between Anoka County and Washington County; their homes <br /> 26 are located on property in Anoka County(Lino Lakes) and another portion of their same lots <br /> 27 (lakeshore) is located in Washington County(Hugo). <br /> 28 <br /> 29 Kathy Wall, 6020 Bald Eagle Boulevard, told the board that the valuation for the Washington County <br /> 30 portion of her property and her neighbors has increased by up to 600 percent. Since Anoka County <br /> 31 takes into consideration the Washington County portion of their lots, they feel that they are being <br /> 32 double valued. She added that the portion outside of Anoka County is unbuildable. Furthermore <br /> 33 their lakeshore situation is odd because they can't even see the lake from their homes. <br /> 34 <br /> 35 John Kulas, 6110 Bald Eagle Boulevard, added that there is nothing to compare with their lots. <br /> 36 <br /> 37 The council suggested that there should be some communication with either Hugo or Washington <br /> 38 County about this situation. The city administrator will handle that communication and report back; <br /> 39 the board will be continued to May 9. <br /> 40 <br /> 41 Nancy Eliass, 6331 Cherokee Trail, noted that she had spoken with Ms. Weiner who suggested that <br /> 42 she attend this meeting to present her appeal. She refinanced her home and, as part of that process, a <br /> 43 valuation was prepared. She presented some information on comparable properties and requested that <br /> 44 the council reduce her valuation accordingly. <br /> 45 <br /> 1 <br />