My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1999-04-28
Centerville
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1996-2022
>
1999
>
1999-04-28
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/18/2011 2:27:12 PM
Creation date
12/21/2009 2:01:42 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
141
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
03/18/1994 22:43 6512286241 FIRE PREVENTION PAGE 02 <br /> 4 -22 -99 <br /> Honorable Mayor and City Council <br /> City of Centerville <br /> 1880 Main St. <br /> Centerville e* 55038 <br /> On April 8, 1999 I appeared at the City Council hearing to appeal <br /> what I thought was an extraordinary increase in the estimated value of <br /> my home for year 2000. On April 12 Mt. Smith the Appraiser cams to the <br /> house to re- evaluate the Lot, as we were told at the meeting that the <br /> increase waa due to the lot valuation. Mr. Smith told me that it was <br /> necessary to look through the entire house, which he then did. and then <br /> informed as that although I would be receiving an adjustmsat to the lot <br /> valuation along with the other 5 homeowner* on the west and of the block. <br /> he could not adjust the original structure valuation because as he stated <br /> "The house was clean, well maintained and vary saleable ". <br /> I offer the following reasons why I differ with Mr. Smith's opinion: <br /> 1) I purchased the property in 1988 for $100,000, filed a Certificate <br /> of Beal Estate Value for the purchase price. and the value and taxes <br /> were adjusted accordingly. <br /> 2) Every area in the house, let and 2nd floor that are finished now were <br /> finished at the time of purchase, and although I have redecorated. updated, <br /> replaced windows and doors, etc., the only addition I have made was the <br /> porch. <br /> 3) I contacted Mr. Smith prior to the decision to add the porch to explain <br /> that I was replacing a deck because the ground water had destroyed the footings, <br /> and that I would be filing an application for This Old House tax deferment. <br /> I was told that the value increase would be 50% of the porch value, less the <br /> value of the deck which was removed. Usually a porch addition would not add <br /> the full dollar value of the permit price to the value of the house. <br /> 4) I received an increased market value of $37,000 and an increased taxable <br /> value of 20,400. After Mr. Smith's reevaluation I now have an increase of <br /> $31,300 taxable value and the same increase of $20,400 in taxable value <br /> because that figure was not reduced. This compares to what I had anticipated <br /> 7,600 plus a reasonable increase in land value. <br /> I agree that real estate values are on an economic whirlwind but I cannot <br /> agree that a 1961 ramblefon a 75' lot with a tandem garage adjacent to the <br /> softball field and 4 houses from the noise and traffic of County Rd. 14 can <br /> increase in value by $31,300 in one year..' <br /> I ask that the Council consider the increased value of my home compared to much <br /> newer hones around mine.I believe chat This Old House tax deferment was intended <br /> to encourage people with older homes to maintain and improve them, and do so by <br /> • pulling permits to see that the work is done Safely and correctly. With examples <br /> like my experience homeowners will certainly be discouraged from doing this. <br /> Thank you for your consideration. <br /> / S <br /> t <br /> • <br /> • <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.