CCP 08-28-1995 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I I. final property tax levies for the taxes payable Ye3J" 1996. They are like a preliminary tax statement for the parcel. 2. Each parcel specific notice must cle3J"ly inform the taxpayers of the years to which the I taxable market values shown on the notice apply, and that these market values are final values. Both the payable 1995 final taxable market value and the payable 1996 iinaI taxable I market value shown must be the market values after any limited market value adjustments and after any exclusions granted for improvements made to qualifying homestead property ("This Old House" adjustments) under M.S. 273.11. As such, the market values to be shown I are the market values used in determining net tax capacity for computing property taxes for the twO tax~s payable years. I , Each parcel specific notice prepared for residential property and agricultural property m US! ~. state whether the property is classified as homestead or nonhomestead. I 4. F or a parcel subj ect to contamination taxes In .1996, a note must be computer printed in the text area of the notice stating that the payable 19% property taxes shown on the notice do' not I include the contamination tax resulting from a market value reduction for contamination of the property. TIlls note must W be printed, for a parcel that is not subject to contamination taxes for the taxes payable year 1996. I 6. For Hennepin County only, the parcel specific notices prepared for the City of Minneapolis I- ~ :llN':''' 3Cp'oir.:te\i;:;.e:; of tax ;t"i,a fur ,he i.ibiiuJ' Board, the Park Board, and the remainder of the city tax. ~ The statutory deadline for mailing these parcel specific notices is after November 10, 1995 I. I but no later than November 24, 1995. I Apportioning the Costs of Parcel Specific Notices 1 The law allows a county auditor to apportion the cost of preparing and mailing parcel specific I notices (as weil as the costs of other county auditor services under the Truth in Taxation Law) to the school districts, cities, and towns within the county, and to the county I government itself. One-third of these costs mav be allocated to the cities and towns within the county. These I costs are to be apportioned among the cities and towns in 1995 based upon the number of parcels within each city and town within the county. I If an apportionment of these COSts are made to the school districts and to the cities and towns within the count:y, the school districts and cities that are partially within the county as well as those that are entirely within the county are to be included in the apportionment. I I '- 4 I -"7