1969-04-08 Regular Meeting1966 SUPPLLadaitI, LCOLL OF
APRIL 8, 1965
I. CAUL TO ORDLP
II. ROLL CALL
4 7 1 6
Preseiit
Lon Lullock„ Presiding Officer
betty
Don Arndt
Jim -arr
III. CAStb FOR C0i4SILLRATI0i LY
Tae meeting was called cc crder at 7.30 Phi. by the Presieing Officer, Don
in the Courtrcor State Office building, im..x.dak, Alaska.
Also preselit: iirs• Jc ha.jciu, ii,oroug.1 Chains Jan. iietzker, borough Assessor,
lir. R. L. ..A.acic., app)raisinci consultant; ;.,1r. Foy iase, orougn Attorney,
teriely Hi:6-.1e, Assessing Clerk acting as C1er, ir. di 1:(riite; Lir. itaorra
Sutliff; and Lir. R. G. serg.
km. bulloc k react the i..oard of bcivalizotion procedures ane suggested that
registered letters of notification .)e: sent to the appellants V4 iti a copy of
tne Loare of Ik procedures includec in each
41 Lr. i. G. i-erg bot 4 1oc eNi 1■0(.t.Lah. ULU.
The agenda was cerrected t react Lot 4 instead of It Tile petition
and Assessor's corments Wert: reac.. Tile appellant state that he does not
own the property because the Alaska state housing Authority has not completed
the agrc.--er to transfer title. e further stated that if ne were-:: to be
assessed for 1568, lie felt that the assessee valuation should be lower
because a contract witik A.S.:tie eoes nut give the same advantages as a deeci.
In addition he said that ii2 .1Ct not fulfilled their tens of the
contract. Tne Assessor stated that considered the contract to be
in order and that the Alaii,a State Statutes beC 16.55.620 (1) sthte that
any rc-al property widen is sole or leasee y the kJ.aska State hcusirig
Authority to a private developer 1:y contract nay 'ce picked up on the tax
roll on the actual da of contract, not necessarily the actual date of
conveyance.
Rev. Lullock asked te ii)oarci if it would like to neax all cases before any
decisions were made on then. r. Larr suggested that because tile cases
are similar, all bac cases Le ecinsieered together if there were no objections
frac, the al.pellzultz. Tne appellants did not voice any objections to this
suggestion.
C. #2 irr. i1wn iit Lot 1 block 3 i4ew Subd.
Tn peti and Assessor's cerirei-ats were: react. The appellant st.atee that
ile cid ot on the land although ne had triec: to purchase it fruu tne Alaska.
State ousing Authority and that if e were to L.e ssessed for the property,
the current assessmeilt should Le changed because a retaiii.trig wall that had
been included in the value of the ir4;rovements on the 1968 Original Real
tax roll was also in the valuation of the land on ti c-: 1963 Supp:Lertentai Real
tax roll. Urs. tz.e anti ir. ;lack agreed that had been assessed twice
for the retaining wall aiic. tilat this SLOUILi ie adjustee. iir. 411 said in
addition that he thout the ads a fill ShOLIici not increase the value
of tree lone.
CZOL; 3 iir. It 1 Llock 14 ,..JeW i■Odiak Subd.
Tne petition aut., isessor's cull were read. Tile appellant staid that
he did riot 04411 the. Ian& EMU that the purchase price and final lot size 'lad
not yet 'been determined. he has trieci to buy the lot 'but has not been able
to cto so and as yet sloes not have the advantages of an OVAILX Tile Assessor
cited the Alaska State Jtatutes Sec. 16.55.620 woicil allow taxing these
contracts and stated that a letter from gave the date of contract
for this parcel as iNiovaItber, 1967.
The Chair eeoloree a recess at 9:15 'At `.;:30 P.i the meeting was resurrect.
t
1968 bCPPLLLLIAAL uOA.I C OF PAGL
APRIL 9, 1:69
The Lcarc aru;; aL pedants i ja a Li A SSior, of rights of property ownership.
ors al>rii gnill n aL a ",uncle of rights'` theory froru a real estate appraisal
book cf I r. slack:';;. adste it this L..ieory were taeee rig hts of real
property owners- c uic to use it, sell it, lease it, enter ic, give it
away, or refuse tv exereise any of LluSt: rights. i r .tiiiitE: j oiiltC-'c1 out that
contract- iioluers co not :njuy t_ _Ose rights. i X iJlc.ci: suggesteu that tale
amount of interest that the contract-- goiters nave Le c.eterruinec uy conferriruy
with the borough Attorney. re questeu that the iJoard try to avoiu
unnecessary legal fees.
The discussion turned to retroactive taxation. Nr. r>>hite said that if there
is to be taxing on A.S.H.A. contracts, it should begin with 1969. Mr. Barr
asked how far back the Borough can go for supplemental or retroactive taxes,
and Mr. Iladsen replied that it is controlled by the Alaska State Statutes.
He added that the interest in a contract between a developer and a governmental
body is a taxable interest. Regular contracts use the buyer as having full
value of the purchase before a deed is conveyed. He pointed out that A.S.H.A.
is liable for
payment in lieu of the taxes until a contract is made. Rev.
Bullock requested a report from the Borough Chairman on payments fran A.S.H.A.
Mrs. Hajdu said that she would investigate the statute concerning payments
with the Borough Attorney.
sir. Sutliff asked the Board how development of a parking lot would affect
his assessment. The xc that the improvement of land raises property values
caused Mr. Black, Ix. White, and Nr. Sutliff to discuss the equity of
valuation of parcels in the core area with public parking and of parcels
which must supply private parking.
The Chair declared a recess at 10:35 P.IT. At 10:45 P." the meeting reconvened.
The Board discussed obtaining payments in lieu of taxes from A.S.II.A. 1•r.
Madsen said that property of the Authority may be billed for payments fran
the time it is taken from private owners.
Mr. Barr said that he would want no more than 1 year liability for retroactive
taxes. Mr. Arndt thought that the valuations for parking lots should be
adjusted. Mrs. .Barr wanted to be sure that authorizing the Assessor to negotiate
about the amount of interest ;assessed by the contract holders would be legal.
Mr. ;:lack suggested that considering that a contract decreases the market value
would allows the assessments to reflect the contract holder's interest. rir.
riadsen said that is the land is not paid for, the valuation could legally be
based on the negotiable interest.
The Board felt that the hearing should be continued when the Assessor had
conferred with the property -cwnhers on the Supplemental Real tax roll and had
further recommendations for the Board.
IV. ADJOURNMENT
A T:
e
Borough Clerk
Mrs. Springhill moved for a recess, seconded by rr. Naughton. I.1rs. Springhill
amended her motion to recess the 1968 Supplemental Board of Equalization until
clay 5, 1969, and Cr. Naughton amended his second. The motion carried by a
unanimous voice vote. The hearing was recessed at 11:15 P.N. until May 5, 1969.
�L
APPROVED:
Borough Assessor