City of Grand Forks, North Dakota

Employment - City Directory - Contact Us


	Minutes of the Grand Forks City Council/Board of Equalization Monday, June 4, 2007 - 6:45 p.m.___________________________ The city council of the city of Grand Forks, ND was called to meet as the Board of Equalization in the council chambers on Monday, June 4, 2007 at 6:45 p.m. with Mayor Brown presiding. Present at roll call were Council Members Brooks, McNamara, Gershman, Bakken, Kreun - 6; absent: Council Member Glassheim - 1. APPROVE MINUTES OF MAY 14, 2007 It was moved by Council Member Brooks and seconded by Council Member McNamara to approve the minutes of the May 14, 2007 meeting. Carried 5 votes affirmative. RECEIVE FORMAL PROTESTS AND REFER TO FINANCE/ DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Mel Carsen, city assessor, reported that pages 2 and 3 of the handout is a listing of property owners that had officially protested the valuation, and of the 40 protests received, approx. 30 had been settled in the office, that they had looked at the evidence and evidence showed they should reduce the value or hold the value, and that those property owners are satisfied with the outcome of their office. He noted there were approx. 10 property owners that want to be heard by the committee, there was an exception to that number, the last 4 that were received late and were unable to review; and that some of the 10 may be worked out before the hearing date. He stated that at their last meeting a tentative date for hearing was set for June 14 (Thursday). The only member of the Finance Committee who was at the meeting, Council Member Brooks, stated he would not be able to meet on the 14th unless the meeting was in the a.m. and suggested referring the matter to committee with date to be determined. It was moved by Council Member Brooks and seconded by Council Member Gershman to refer this matter to the Finance/Development Committee with date to be determined. Carried 5 votes affirmative. Mr. Carsen stated that at the last meeting a motion was made to reduce the values from what they thought was 97% of market to 95%, and that would be 2% decrease; that the last page of the handout computes that level of assessment the same as the State Tax Department does for the State Board of Equalization and it indicates that on residential and commercial properties we are 95.7% and to reduce that to 95% would be a .7% decrease on residential and commercial, and noted that they have not done that yet and that would be the last step they would do before certifying the assessments. Council Member Brooks stated his only concern was that those are our boundaries and if we bring it down to 95% not leaving ourselves any leeway for any calculation change or something that could drop us out of compliance, what repercussions. Mr. Carsen stated that if there were further reductions by the City Board or the County Board that would put us below the 95%, that the State Board rounds to the nearest full percent and anything over 94.51% is rounded up to 95% for this calculation and would have almost one-half percent and would not be in danger of getting below 95% as they measure it, and if did go below 95% the State would simply move us to 97%. COUNCIL MEMBER CHRISTENSEN REPORTED PRESENT Council Member Kreun asked if the 95.7% included variances on the listing of protests. Mr. Carsen stated it includes most of them, and any changes made since last Thursday are not included but are relatively insignificant in the overall picture. He stated he thinks they could go .7% decrease and not be in danger; and that by giving a .7% decrease they would be at 95%. Mr. Carsen reported that as we plan to close the City Board of Equalization on June 18, that he will ask the County Board to keep their protest period until the 19th of June; that the reason is that after City Board's decision, that property owners have the opportunity to be able to go to the County as well. Mr. Carsen stated in answer to Council Member Gershman's question, that agricultural land involves less acreage that is assessed as agricultural land, that as agricultural land is converted to residential or commercial it comes out of the agricultural category so less acreage, the value per acre on ag land is the same as it was last year. ADJOURN It was moved by Council Member Christensen and seconded by Council Member Kreun that we adjourn to a date certain, June 18, 2007. Carried 6 votes affirmative. Respectfully submitted, John M. Schmisek City Auditor.