My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-02-81 CCM
LakeElmo
>
City Council
>
City Council - Final Meeting Minutes
>
1980's
>
1981
>
06-02-81 CCM
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2025 8:42:51 PM
Creation date
10/1/2019 4:08:14 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
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
LAKE ELMO BOARD ply REVIEW, JUNE 39 1981 -7- <br />Julius Molnar Questioned the large inorhase in the .land value. The Assessor <br />3211 Legion Avenue noted that land on the lake went up and that both shore lots <br />)7180-.2650 were previously valued too low. <br />Valuation: $1279180 Mr.. Molnar noted that the IRS considers!.loss of trees a loss <br />and asked why the County does not follow a like policy. <br />Bob Johnson <br />Vb'W Ballfield <br />37135-14560 <br />Valuation: <br />Tax: $312, 314 <br />6/16/81 Council <br />approved changing <br />classification to <br />Residential - retro <br />active 1 yr, <br />Philip Tschumperlin <br />91149 Jane Tr, <br />37010-0855 <br />Valuation: $111, 9145 <br />6/16/81 Council <br />approved correction <br />in calculation <br />r. .acing value by <br />$7,600 <br />Tom Krueger <br />Lot 5 - DeMont. <br />Highlands 6th <br />37164 .2725 <br />Valuation: $14, 000 <br />ASSESSOR ACTION: None <br />COUNCIL ACTION : None <br />Expressed concern about the rise in tax on the ballfield. They <br />are a non-profit organization and the field is used by the <br />school district and public for youth activities. <br />The parcel is presently classed. and taxed commercial. <br />ASSESSOR ACTION: The Assessor recommended that the ballfield be <br />classified residential rather than commercial; and make the <br />residential classification retroactive one ,year. <br />COUNCIL ACTION: None <br />Question increase in valuation. The property received a blanket <br />increase. The property was revalued in 1980. Mr. Tschumperlin <br />feels the mining operation next to his property lowers his <br />value. The Assessor noted the operation next to the Tschumperlin <br />property at; the time the home was valued in 1980. <br />The Assessor noted a calculation error in the land value. The <br />land value should be $2149665 rather than $32, 175, a reduction <br />of $7, 500. Total valuation, should. be $10 4,1435. No Board <br />action is necessary to correct the error, <br />ASSESSOR ACTION: Correct land valuation. The Assessor will go <br />out and view the Techumperlin property and the mining operation. <br />and make a recommendation to the Board, <br />ASSESSOR RBC OYMi ATION: No digging was going on ,when the <br />assessor viewed the Tsohumperlin property and noted most of <br />their yard is towards the lake, He did not think the operation <br />next door 'made a significant difference in their value. <br />COUNCIL ACTION: None <br />Questioned the increase in the lot valuation. Land values on <br />platted lots automatically go up after three years. Transfer <br />of ownership and building affect the valuation of vacant lots. <br />ASSESSOR .ACTION: None <br />COUNCIL ACTION : None <br />Rudy Meyer Questioned value increase. Property was revalued. The Assessor <br />10194 Stillwater Blvd.explained the market value. <br />37011E-2600 <br />Valuation: $769515 ASSESSOR ACTION: None <br />COUNCIL ACTION : None <br />David Clayton Just bought the house and thinks the valuation is -too high, <br />8659 Stillwater Blvd. The house was revalued this year. The valuation is 93/ of the <br />37021-3050 sale price. <br />Valuation: $ 43, 850 ASSESSOR ACTION: None <br />COUNCIL ACTION : None <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.