Print this story | E-mail story | This story has 13 comments Add your own | iPod friendly
County to closely monitor tax assessments
Realtor says county lacks consistency
Published Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Mosher
Otter Tail County will keep a closer eye on the assessing of properties after a Fergus Falls realtor cried foul at the county’s assessment process.
Fergus Falls realtor Tom Verhelst says Otter Tail County lacks consistency in the way it assesses properties.
Some properties are under-assessed while others are over-assessed, Verhelst told members of the Otter Tail County board of commissioners on Tuesday.
At issue, according to Verhelst, are property sales under assessed values and property sales over assessed values. Consistency should be the key factor, he said, and not a pick and choose scenario.
On Tuesday the Otter Tail County Board of Commissioners agreed to more closely monitor, through the assessor’s office, qualified and disqualified properties.
A qualified sale is one that is included in the sales study ratio which determines what property values will be in the coming year.
After hearing from Verhelst, County Commissioner Dennis Mosher said that questions raised Tuesday afternoon over qualified and disqualified properties — and how they relate to higher and lower property taxes — is something that can and should be more closely monitored at the county level.
The other four commissioners agreed.
County Assessor Robert Moe told the county board that his office works closely with townships throughout Otter Tail County to make assessments that are fair to all concerned parties.
“It (an assessment) is a judgment call,” Moe said. “Generally, only arms length sales are listed as qualified sales. Neighbor-to-neighbor sales may or may not be considered qualified sales. All sales are reviewed by the State Department of Revenue.”
Otter Tail County, and specifically the county assessor’s office, works in conjunction with the Minnesota State Department of Revenue. Attending Tuesday’s county board meeting was revenue department employee Gary Amundson.
“Every county is held to the same standards,” Amundson said. “The four general classifications are agricultural, commercial, residential and seasonal.”
In other related issues, market values and site values on lake property also were discussed Tuesday at the board meeting held at the County Government Services Center in Fergus Falls.
As for market values, a property owner who has questions can take his or her statement to the city assessor or township board. It’s here where, if they challenge the assessment, they will get a yes or no answer. An appeal can be made to the county board of equalization.
About two years ago the county established a site value on lake property assessments. As a general guideline, the properties include those with wells and septic systems.
Some people, Verhelst among them, maintain that smaller lake lots (referred to by some under the category as substandard) should not fall under the lake property site value umbrella. Those smaller lake lots, said Verhelst, generally sell for more than the assessed value.
He and others believe that smaller lake lots should have different assessment classifications. As it is, any lake lot — large or small — that exceeds minimum depth (front to back) has increased assessment.
“Mass appraisal throughout Otter Tail County isn’t easy,” Moe said. “Market value isn’t always black and white.”
Comments
The Daily Journal is happy to host community conversations about news and life in Fergus Falls and the surrounding area. As hosts, we expect guests will show respect for each other. That means we don't threaten or defame each other, and we keep conversations free of personal attacks. Witty is great. Abusive is not. If you think a post violates these standards, don't escalate the situation. Instead, flag the comment to alert us. We'll take action if necessary. It's not hard. This should be a place where people want to read and contribute -- a place for spirited exchanges of opinion. So those who persist with racist, defamatory or abusive postings risk losing the privilege to post at all.Posted by anamerican (anonymous) on September 24, 2008 at 12:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
However, when you challenge the assessment, you are put on the counties 'radar'.
Thanks to Tom Verhelst for raising this issue, it is on the minds of ALL lake shore/home owners.
The taxes are out of control.
Posted by werty (anonymous) on September 24, 2008 at 1:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Yes the assessed value is a mess and they drag feet in correcting but were quick to raise. I also think some of the practices in classification tread on thin ice and cannnot justified. For example, taxing farmers for recreational lakeshore on agricultural land because of a slough or pond that is obviously not recreational lakeshore. I say they can go take a dip in some of the so called recreational lakehshore and see how recreational it really is!
Posted by c0nc3rn3d (anonymous) on September 24, 2008 at 1:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Agree, the county's assessing has not been good to home/land owners at all. Terrible inconsistencies. I think they use a dartboard to determine your final cost.
Posted by twinsgrl (anonymous) on September 24, 2008 at 2:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Just for example: there is a home on one of the Premier lakes in OTC that cost over $600,000 to build and is only assessed for a little over $300,000..hmm...makes one think...things need to change
Posted by c0nc3rn3d (anonymous) on September 24, 2008 at 2:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)
On the other end of the spectrum their have been several houses on the market that have been assessed at astronomical values and sold for 100k under tax value. This kind of inflated tax value drives down home sales in an already declining housing market. I say they get off their a** and start doing something now. The county should do everything possible to get things on track and not compound the problem.
Posted by goingfishing (anonymous) on September 24, 2008 at 3:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Regarding a property that is agricultural, a farm which also includes lakeshore that has not had any development on, why is that farmer penalized by a higher value because of the lakeshore? That makes no sense. He's paying much higher taxes on his land with the lakeshore and maybe has adjoining land which is better farm land without the lakeshore but he's paying higher taxes on the lake one. It seems that the lakeshore value could kick in when it is used as lakeshore property, not agricultural. It's no wonder that a farmer may consider selling off the lakeshore in order to lower his taxes and keep his farm as agricultural. After all, if it's not used for lakeshore, there is NO income from it and his income producing property is penalized by having the lakeshore attached. It makes no sense for the county to tax in this manner. But then, why should it make sense, aren't we actually talking about Otter Tail County where nothing has to make sense.
Posted by Stonewall (anonymous) on September 24, 2008 at 4:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)
goingfishing
That is why we fill out those "green acres" applications. I have lakeshore on my farm, but only pay tax on the ag value. Another thing to keep in mind is that by the time we recieve our valuation notices from the assessor in April, the sales they have to use as defined by the Minnesota Department of Revenue, Property Tax Division, are already a year old. For example, our 2009 estimated market value will be based on a sales ratio study of "arms length" sales that occured between Oct. 1 of 2007, and sep. 30 of 2008.
Taxes are a whole seperate issue, although related. Don't expect your taxes to go down just because values may be going down. Taxes are based on levies, not market values. Your individual market value only determines your individual share of the pie.
Posted by goingfishing (anonymous) on September 24, 2008 at 4:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Stonewall
I'm aware of the Green Acres and I will not enroll in it because of all the pitfalls and costs when/if I decide to sell. It's not a free program by any means. Well, not free unless you own it until you die and then your heirs get to deal with the mess. Just look at the new legislation regarding Green Acres and it's even worse than the old program.
Posted by Stonewall (anonymous) on September 24, 2008 at 4:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)
You only pay back the portion of the taxes that you saved, and only on the portion of the parcel you change use on. What costs?
Posted by goingfishing (anonymous) on September 24, 2008 at 4:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)
What it really amounts to is you don't have to pay the Green Acres tax portion until you change class or sell. Then you get to pay, thus it is a cost, which amouonts to no savings. Having to pay back 5 years of those taxes all at one time would not be a pleasant experience.
I feel that what it amounts to is they get you now or get you later. My point is that the taxes on a farm should not be higher just because it has some non income producing lakeshore. The value of the lakeshore should not be applied until it's actually used as lakeshore or sold as lakeshore.
Posted by number6 (anonymous) on September 24, 2008 at 5 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The sad fact in all of this is that there are banks out there that were, and still are, doing loans for property owners up to 90 percent of their assessed values. All you have to do is bring in your tax statement. When the County Assessor has a property grossly over assessed the property owner ends up being upside down on their value. When the property owner goes to sell their property, they find out that they have to come up with thousands of dollars just to sell their home and payoff their existing loans. In some cases the sellers decide just to let the bank take it in foreclosure instead.
Posted by werty (anonymous) on September 24, 2008 at 9:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
goingfishing is right and stonewall is mistaken about the greenacres program or just seriously mis-informed. Stonewall needs to realize what he enrolled in.
Posted by c0nc3rn3d (anonymous) on September 24, 2008 at 9:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I had the option of enrolling in green acres. I thought about my kids inheritance and said screw it and screw the county for extorting money for that BS program.
Post a comment
(Requires free registration.)