1969-07-09 Supplemental MeetingII
II1
I CI4IL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 9:45 P. E. by Depty Presiding Officer, Jim Barr,
in the office of the Borough Chairman.
0 4 6
1968 SUPPLEMINIAL LOAM) OF EQUALIZATION
RLCXNIAMED JULY 9, 1969
ROLL CALL
Present
Don Bullock, Presiding Officer
Letty Springhill
Dori Arndt
Jim Darr
La Naughton
Also present: Tom Harrison, Borough Assessor, Jan I Assessing Clerk, Jo hajdu,
Borough Chairman, and 'Alton rthite,
OLD BUSINESS
During the meeting on Pay 5, 1969, the eoares had requested answers to six specific
questions, reply was in the form of opinions from Attorney Roy Madsen dated July 2,
and June 12, 1969, both of which were read into the record by firs. Eetzker.
iir. White tented that Attorneys differ in their opinions and that a final deter
mination can come only from the court. his own Attorney had indicated that the
Alaska State housing Authority may not be completely invulnerable at the time of the
Urban Renewal Project, and the developers had to take the Alaska State housing
Authority at face value. hr. ':white also stated that his Attorney did not indicate
definitely in his verbal opinion whether the developer could core back at the Alaska
State housing Authority if each were charged taxes in the interim from the date of
contract to the issuance of the deer:, but had indicated that this would have to be
decided if the developer were charged for the taxes. hr. 1 vi3ite also asked if this
would be borne in mind when the Board as deciding what portion the developer should
pay.
iJirs. Metzker stated that Er. Fischer and ISr. Black had discussed this problem of
ownership with all of the people that are included on the 1968 Supplemental steal
Property roll whom they had been able to reach and had informed her the most common
feeling among these people was that 50% ownership determination was realistic. Firs.
Netzker also read a portion of a letter from Lr. Fischer regarding the people contacted
and the presentation of ownership they considered to be fair. This ranged from 20%
in the case of hr. W white to 100% in the case of two other ind ividua 1 s Er. White said
that during his discussions with ir. Fischer, it had been his understanding that it
was the 1969 taxes that were being discussed. he raid not feel that the property
should be taxed at all for 1968.
Mr. Harrison stated that Er. `:hite and Et. Berg are claiming that since they do not
own the land, they should not have to pay taxes and that the Assembly needs to
decide if they do not have the full interest, just what their interest is. i ✓ir.
Harrison also quoted portions of the legal Opinion received from the Alaska State
housing Authority Attorney in which he indicated that it was his opinion that ownership
passed to the developer at the time of the contract. iir. harrison also felt that anyone
applying for a contract and nalring even this gesture admits an interest and, therefore,
a value of some kind has been placed on the land. he did agree, however, that the
developers were restricted and felt that clue consideration should be given to these
restrictions.
Er. 1 bite stated that in his opinion that this is not a true supplemental roll. It
is not property that was missed on the original roll and the Borough always had known
that it had existed and it was a staff decision to pick up the ASrA property. he
further felt that if a policy is now set for 1968, the Borough would have to live
with in it 1969, 1970 and so forth. He thought it would be better that a policy should
be established for 1969 and the eorough could then go along with that policy. Er.
Arndt said that he would like to go on record as maybe dropping the 1968 Supplemental
Peal Property roll for 1963 and go for 100% for 1969.
hr. Harrison thought that on this property where the deed is not conveyed that 50%
is fair and that it would penalize the developers if those who still did not have a
deed in later years were taxed for 100% of the fair rarket value.
ir. barr indicated that he knows of no piece of property that was really ready when
the Alaska State mousing Authority gave the land: to the developer. he felt that in
order to be fair that some kind of waiver of tax for a certain period of time after
4t7
0 A 1 0 5 9
1968 SUPPLEMNTAL .BOARD OF EQUALIZATION
RECONVENED JULY 9, 1969
the contract was signed would be an approach.
IV ALUOUi tikE T
The meeting adjourned at 1190 P.
PAGE 2
Er. Arndt repeated that he felt that we should drop the 1968 Supplemental Real Property
roll for 1968 and go 100% for 1969. Irs. Fetzker did not agree that 100% is fair.
She suggested that we might tax these people at 50 from the time that they start
their building and 100% from the time they receive their deed. i Harrison suggested
that if the board. would like to get away from a percentage figure, the Assessor could
appraise the land at 1000 of the fair market value anu if the people did not agree
then they may appeal to the i;oard.
Aar. Bullock said that 100% for 1968 could be questioned because we are going back for
a full year and we have to face the fact chat the developers had no way of planning
for this tax since no prior policy had been established. I ors flade a motion
to cancel the 1968 Supplemental Real Property roll and to establish the policy to
tax at 100% of the fair market value at the beginning of 1969. It was seconded by
1r. Arndt. After some further discussion, the question was called. The roll call
vote was as follows: Springhill, bullock, Arndt, and Naughton ---YES Harr -4O.
The motion carried four to one.