All right. Good evening everyone. I'd like to call this meeting of the Cook County Board of Appeals and Equalization uh to order on this Thursday, June 18th, 2026 at 6:04 p.m.
Um we've had um some uh signatures, but I guess we go around and say who is here. Uh, Commissioner Dave Mills, uh, District 3. >> Commissioner Deb White, District 1.
>> I'm Bob Thompson, County Assessor. >> Rachel, assistant, county assessor. Okay. >> Kristen Treble Halpersma, County Administrator. >> Gary Gamble, Cook County Commissioner, District 2. >> Ann Sullivan, Cook County Commissioner for District 4. >> Brady Powers, Cook County auditor. All
right. >> Thank you. Janna do as long as we're such a small group. >> Janna Cooker uh doing the AV the live stream. >> Thank you Lond. >> Thank you Ron. All right. Um
first thing is uh to have a little presentation here and uh pass it over to Sister Thompson and uh Brady as well. >> Thank you and commissioners. So, I do have a just a quick PowerPoint presentation with a little bit of updates on some of the assessment
statistics. Um, most of these slides you guys have kind of seen similar ones before, but they've been updated for uh the 26 assessment taxes payable 27. This we like to show just to sometimes we get people in who, you know, they're they're looking at the wrong year and they're
trying to appeal their taxes or, you know, they they they're a year late for the valuation. So we have this uh slide available to show uh the timeline of our assessment, what period we're studying those sales, what the assessment date is, which is January 2nd of each year.
This in this case it's 2026. Uh and then we have these appeals u meetings that you know for the townships occur in uh April and May and then the county board of appeal and equalization in June. The levy gets set later in November, December and then uh the tax statement
will come out in the spring of 27. So this uh slide shows just a number of sales that are in our study period. And just to clarify, our study period is October 1st of 24 to September 30th of
25. So um you know sometimes a realtor will say those numbers are different than what I'm looking at and they might be looking at January 1 to January 1. So um we had 305 sales in this study. It's uh a little more than last year. uh obviously less than in 23 and 22
studies. 21 study was the most we had at almost double of what we had this year. So the market seems to be cooling. Um I think part of that is because of the lack of inventory. At the bottom of the screen there you'll see that we have currently 110 active listings. That
excludes as of this morning that excludes anything that's under contract or pending or contingent. Um, last year in April, uh, there was only 34 active listings. So, the listings have have started to climb up, but in the springtime, we typically see a a boost
of listings. People want to market it at the right time. So, this is just broken out into a bar graph. So, you can kind of see this goes back a little further to 2016. Um, we've kind of come back to the normal level of sales in Cook County. And then this is a
>> go back just for one second. Sorry, >> trying to absorb. Okay, thank you. >> So, yeah, we had that obvious big increase. 2020 was kind of a weird year. It started out where nobody was really certain what was going to happen. I think a lot of people were nervous with the pandemic that the economy could just
completely tank and crash, but it was clear by 2021 that we were looking at a different market and a lot of people kind of trying to relocate out of the cities. And I think that's what where we saw this big push of of sales. And when people saw what was happening, they all
jumped on the bandwagon and started listing their properties. >> Mhm. >> So, this is uh our total county market value. Um, looking at going back to I think it's 2015 there. >> I can't I can hardly see
>> 2005, sorry. So yeah, it shows that first, you know, the the increase that we saw in the late 2000s and then we saw kind of that um dip after 200910. Things were relatively stable, little bit decline, but I would call it stable
all the way up until about 20145 and then things slowly started to tick up and then we really saw it take off closer to 2019 2020 and then obviously in 202122 we saw the massive increases. So, we are currently double where we
were uh I think it's back in 20 we're more than double where we were in like 2016 on the total estimated market value for the county. >> How does that compare to the state or the nation? >> I do have a couple of slides later on, but it doesn't show total estimated
market value. It breaks it down by residential, seasonal, recreational, and commercial. So, those are the three categories that I uh look back at. um Lake and St. Louis counties for comparison. >> Um yeah, >> excuse me. Would you um say out loud to
the for the listening public because this blue white on blue is really hard to see what our total um real estate market value is at this point and where we were at let's just say back at 2005.
I mean how much just just say three billion. >> Yep. So we are at 3.1 almost $3.15 billion today. That's our total estimated taxable market value. That doesn't exclude the 92% of exempt land
that we have. This is just the taxable value. Uh back in 2005 we were at just about 1.15 billion. So almost triple that. And then looking at like you know in more recent history
17 we were at 1.6 billion. So we're almost double that 2017 number. >> Thanks. >> Yeah. So this um kind of reiterates the number of sales, but I also broke out uh cuz you guys are all familiar that we
also reject sales from our study. If if a relative sells to a relative, we throw that out of the study. um parcels that have been split or combined and they sell, we have to throw those out of the study because you can't compare the before and after assessed values to the sale price. Otherwise, it looks it looks
wrong when you do a subdivision. So, we've rejected 90 sales in this study. It's about 29% of the sales. Uh we used 20 215 sales in the study, just over 70%. And again, that new the total EMV is
1.48 48 billion or three, sorry, 3.148 billion and the new construction amount of that is $35 million. So that's uh 1.1% of our total county EMV was new construction. >> And then I I did this because it it's an
interesting trend that I've been seeing is the number of rejected sales in Cook County. They've been relatively stable. They've actually declined over the years. And this next slide is just kind of looking at it uh from a different lens with using the 100% threshold
across the board. So you can see you know back in 201617 we were rejecting more sales. I don't know why that that was the case but the number of rejected sales have kind of been declining. I think that just speaks to in the market
today a lot of people are saying well I'm going to list it and get as much as I can and that's what we would call an open market transaction. there's more people pursuing the fullest potential of their real estate when they sell it rather than saying, you know, I'm going to sell it to so and so because I want
to keep it local. I, you know, whatever the case may be, but we we do see a lot of those reject sales in this county. >> And then the next slide I compare it to late >> Oh, yeah. >> Mr. Gamble. >> Yeah, Bob. whether you can address this or not, I'm just wondering if uh the uh
figures that you just talked about um that it within the industry do we see within different areas especially tourism popular areas where that figure varies with other counties within the
state and that could even be across the country. But if if there is a popular area that's attracting people, you tend to get more for your real estate than you would if it was not. So, I'm just wondering how much that might contribute to that. I think it probably definitely
has a factor um why people are are choosing to go with a sale outside of like a open market transaction. You know, we we don't always know, but you know, like estate sales, they're typically going to be rejected um depending on the case. if they market an estate sale for average marketing,
typical marketing time, it c it can be kept in the study. Um, but there's a lot of cases where, you know, we we have to reject those sales just because the way it's written into the law, like a sibling sale if I'm selling to a brother or sister, mother, mother, father, does son and daughter. But I did look at uh
Lake and St. Louis County because we are in the fiscal disparities pool with them. >> Yes. So, one of the things I was looking into was, you know, what are the reject rates in those two counties? Because, >> wow, >> if if you're rejecting sales for the wrong reasons, it can cause an
inaccurate assessment. Right. If you're if you're rejecting a sale because your assessment is only onethird of the sale price and trying to find a reason to throw it out of the study so you don't have to increase values that much, that could be a concern. So, I looked at Lake and and St. Louis County in comparison
to ours and you can see going back to 201718 we were actually kind of in a similar pattern that was obviously another assessor in Cook County at the time. Um and then you know I took over as assessor in 2019. Um you can see that the number of
rejected sales started to drop off and in comparison to Lake and St. Louis County quite a bit less. And as we've progressed up to the 2025 study St. Louis County just is doing something abnormal that none of the other counties are really doing. They're they're seeing
a significant increase in the rejected sales. Um, and I did reach out to the Department of Revenue to kind of bring this to their attention and ask them if they're watching this or if they're paying attention to it. Um, they're the ones who have a lot of the data and they can analyze it much easier than I can.
you know, they have GIS guys who can put it into a map, which you'll see later, um, of of what's going on with the sales and the trends and all of those things. And I did ask about St. Louis County, and from what I understand in the last couple of years, there's been a lot of
partial interest sales from one of the mining companies, and those partial interest sales are always rejected as well. That's something where, you know, if I'm selling 50% of equity in a parcel, that doesn't go into the study because it's not reflection of the total real estate value.
>> So, you know, I don't know. I didn't do any more checking into it. I just wanted to look at the numbers and and I did suggest to the Department of Revenue that they include this in their VAS report, which is kind of like an overview of the statewide assessment figures and the trends that's happening. So, we'll see if if they uh if they
agree that this is information that's worthwhile. uh looking into. But I mean, as far as assessors go, the Department of Revenue really watches like if we're chasing a sale, which is the term they use if if a property sells and we just set the value at the exact sale price
and we don't adjust the neighborhood up to reflect that because what you end up doing is you get an uneven assessment and then the people who didn't sell or buy are are are unequally assessed with the houses that have sold. So in addition to looking at sales chasing, I
suggested that rejecting sales is also a way that uh you know maybe could manipulate someone's assessment and and that you know it should be something that they're looking at. >> So we'll we'll keep an eye on that. >> Any discussion on in the association about that or
>> uh just a little bit. I mean I I I've I've brought it up actually with St. Louis County and I said, you know, why are all these sales getting rejected? In fact, there was one we discussed at length. There's a pizza shop that sold in Virginia for $600,000. And um >> you know which one?
>> I don't. >> Cuz there's one right on the corner and they I was impressed. >> They make good pizza. >> Well, it was just a production just like proposing and whatever. >> Well, anyway, so they had uh they had marked that $400,000 of that $600,000 sale was for the business value and the
equipment, personal property. And then, you know, we had a sale down at um the South of the Border Cafe. And when I called and asked them, I said, 'Well, you know, what do you think the the personal property, the equipment and stuff is worth? And they said, "Ah, that stuff's not worth anything to us. I mean, we we didn't we didn't pay any
extra for that. We're probably going to replace it all >> and the building needs a ton of work." So, they said 600,000 is what we paid for the real estate. And so, I can't reject that sale and say there was $200, $400,000 of personal property included. But to me, it's very similar to a pizza
shop. I don't know what their recipe is. >> But, you know, if if it's not a chain that has more than one location, I don't think that the brand is really what's driving the value there. >> I think it probably was the real estate. But I, you know, I don't work in St. Louis County. It was just something that I observed and I brought up with them
and I brought it up with revenue. >> Interesting. Thank you. >> So, another interesting statistic is the high-end properties. I also have this in a in a line graph, but uh with this I can show you that we we've already had nine sales over a million dollars since
October 1st, and we have one uh the $3.7 million listing that caused a lot of stir in the neighborhood. Uh that one has now gone pending, so I expect that one will close. >> Um but it's it's interesting to see that, you know, we've gone from $3
million transactions in 2019, $1 million transaction in 2020. that's explainable, but then it really starts to tick up. Uh, and then 15 just in this study. So, here's what that looks like in our in our bar graph. We we're seeing a significant increase. And in fact, when
the real when the real estate agents come in for their meeting in April, I I lay out the number of properties that are assessed over a million. And that has grown from I think it was like 60 back in 2017 or 18 to now we have over 430 properties assessed over a million
dollars in the county. So >> how many >> significant growth? Well, we have 70 8,500 taxable parcels. >> Okay. >> So there's over 430 of those over a million in the assessed value and the number of transactions you know is just
a fraction of those. >> Oh, Commissioner Gamble. >> Yeah. Yeah. Thank you. So how much of that is a reflection of the increase in cost to build as opposed to the increased demand that raises cost? I think that has a big a big factor. Um
you know from what I understand if somebody is going to a general contractor who is going to you know start to finish take a vacant lot and build them the product the the lowest I'm hearing is $400 a square foot. And that's for very basic construction. It's
not any upgrades. you know, it's going to be laminate flooring, asphalt roof. It's it's going to be like a hardy siding, something that is not an upgrade. You know, it's not going to be a cedar sighted. It's not going to be a brick house, but uh very basic
construction is starting at about $400 a square foot with a general contractor. >> Uh you can find contractors out there who will just do like the framing and it like an enclosing. So, a lot of people, they have the skills to finish an interior and they look for a contractor
who will just kind of seal a house up. Um, and some of those contractors are probably closer to 2 to 250 a square foot to do the framing and ceiling. >> So, but you know, if if that's the case, you're you're going out and hiring your own concrete worker. And that's where a
lot of people are shocked with the sticker shock of concrete these days. Um, a simple foundation can cost $100,000, $200,000 depending on the size. So, I do think the construction cost is playing into it because a lot of people probably talk to these contractors and
then they realize what it's going to cost and how long it's going to take to complete the project and that's where they say maybe we'll look for something that's already built. >> Mr. chair as a followup to that. If you look at your cost per square foot, how that compares, you know, if you were to
look at the 87 counties and and say because when we look at let's just say cost for gasoline, fuel, cost for groceries, cost for this, when you do a comparable, these are things that that tell you something about your particular
area as to how cost is affected. So if if you live very remote and it costs so much, we hear that often when we're talking about construction work and things, it costs because the cost of gasoline's going up, you got to bring all their equipment up here. So there's
an additional cost. When you look at those costs as a reality and you understand why that is, it just helps inform >> um you know the community as as well as decision makers. So you understand why is this
>> and uh so that that uh would be interesting to know how that square foot price ranges. Same way with the median price of a home in Cook County compared to you know we're comparable to Dakota County and Washington County some of these counties where homes
>> and I think you're talking about the the selling price per square foot of like the average home or whatever but construction costs I'm not familiar with what it is down in the cities. I did have a contractor call me about their assessment who they own a property up here and uh you know after I had talked
with them I I said you know you can ask around you can call a few contractors and they're going to probably tell you over $400 a square foot. They could not believe that number. So that was coming from a contractor. >> Yeah. I mean both are independent the construction relative to median price but they are still something that you're
>> you're weighing to see effect. Yeah. Within your area. >> Yeah. Oh yeah. cuz there's certainly people who will >> initially pursue new construction and then decide they're going to go a different route when they find out the costs. >> Yeah, we had that deed presentation about the costs of purchasing and
remodeling versus the cost of new construction and >> it's like a lose-lose basically. But you know, Commissioner Sman, Excuse me. >> Well, I was just going to say I just looked up and the average cost to build a home in the Twin Cities is $400 per square foot.
>> It is. So >> yeah, >> we're right there with them. >> But why this is important is that when you're you're looking for innovative ways to try to mitigate cost and still provide housing, uh there might be some ways to try to
avoid things that are negative impacts by how you approach that. Modular homing would homes would be an example >> that you could you could reduce affordability by buying volume through a provider that
isn't influenced by those factors that influence construction up here. >> Yeah. And I know in other parts of the country, I don't think we've seen it up here yet, but the 3D printed homes, it's becoming a thing. And that actually reduces construction cost >> very significantly. Yeah. >> So that could be another future
solution. >> Yeah. So, a million-doll sales. We'll move on to uh this is from our sales study, you know, September to October. Uh the median price of a home is currently 420,000 in our 25 study. That's only 1% increase over the median
home in our study last year. Uh the average price of a home is 468. That's up 6.67. You know, these numbers, it's hard to understand why one is so much different than the other, but median average homes, >> two different things, >> you know,
>> for the average for sure. >> So, those are those are pretty big numbers. I mean, that's on par with the metro, the Twin Cities, 7 uh 7ount metro area is the mid 400s, 500,000s. >> This is from the Department of Revenue, and I can send you the link. I searched
their website up and down and couldn't find it. And I actually had to I I was I reached out to one of the Department of Revenue um data analysis guys and they pointed me to the direction of the link. But you can select different property type categories. They you can't do the
entire um all county value. It it's broken out into the property types. So commercial, residential. This one here is the residential. And I added in the change since 2019 because that kind of levels the playing field because you know one year a county might go 10% and
the county next door went 5% and then the next year they're flipped around. And so it's looking back on a on a longer period it kind of shows the bigger picture. So going back post or pre- pandemic um you know Cook County in residential value has gone up 97%.
Another reason I went back to 2019 is because if I go to 2020, we have the shift of short-term rentals that went in and out of residential and commercial. So those numbers get skewed, but if you go to 2019, it's before all of that. >> Cooching surprised me quite a bit.
>> Yeah, they had a 10% increase this year in residential, but I think that they've been lighter on their increases going back. I wish if I had the data, you know, I have a spreadsheet for Lake and St. Louis County going back to 2019. I would have to recreate that for other counties if I wanted to. But, you know,
this is where I say the state has the ability to do this stuff much quicker and easier. But, um, I did add in the current increases because when you're in this application and the state's website, you can just click on the county and see the last year's percentage of increase. It doesn't go
any further back. Um but you know looking at Lake County actually had a higher increase on residential over the six sevenyear period but lower last year than we had. >> So those are just some of the things that happen uh over the course of the
years. >> So this is looking at seasonal recreational similar numbers to residential. Can't tell you why they play out this way but you know a lot of times the seasonal wreck are going to be lakeshore properties. Up here we have a lot of residential homesteads and stuff that are lakes shore, but uh that's kind
of where you get some of this variation um between the different counties. Again, Lake County had the highest uh increase since 2019. And then this is going into commercial because commercial is um obviously a topic of the evening. And
looking back to 2019, Cook County has seen a 76% increase in commercial values. um Lake County 97% and St. Louis County 50%. Uh this year we were at 6.7% increase on countywide commercial total
MV. So I can give you the link to that. You know, like I said, it's you can look at any county in the state. And in fact, when you look at rural vacant land in Cook County, I think it showed like a 2% decrease this year. And there were a lot of other counties that saw a decrease in
rural vacant land values as well. Um, I'm not sure. I'd have to talk to the revenue department to find out if they're accounting for classification shifts in those numbers because they do have the ability to pull out classification shifts because if you have a whole bunch of rural vacant land
that was now developed, it would come out of that classification and it would reduce the county's total value of that and it could skew those numbers. I mean, you might still have the value of that land is the same or higher, but it's been changed to a different classification and it it might show a
decline. >> So, now back to the um this is looking at the total estimated market value of the county again. And the reason I bring this up is because I often times hear from taxpayers, they say, well, you know, what happens if my value goes down? Are my taxes going to go down? And
I always want to bring this up and I I say if the values go down, the assessed values will follow it. That's what happened over the course of 2011, 12, 13. We saw decreasing values in the county. It doesn't always mean the taxes are going to go down. And that's where
we come into this fourhouse town. And I think this is uh important, Ron, uh to to look at if if you're not familiar with this if you've never seen these slides before. So, I'm just going to demonstrate a couple of slides about a hypothetical town that has only four
houses. And in the hypothetical town, there's a $4,000 budget. You know, that covers your police, your plowing, and everything else. So, if every house is assessed at $100,000, the taxes for each house would be $1,000. Consider assuming they're all classified as residentials,
homesteads, or something cuz different property types pay a different rate. So, if you cut that levy in half, obviously the taxes go down. the value may stay the exact same, but with the levy declining or the levy decreasing, the taxes would decrease as well. So, the
next scenario, um, let's say you double the values of these homes. If the county, if the township only needed $4,000 to operate, doubling those values doesn't change what they pay in taxes whatsoever. It's it's they're covering the levy equally because they're all
assessed equally. Now, if you cut the values in half, the taxes still don't go down. So, a lot of people have the misconception that their property value is directly linked to their taxes, which it it does play a role, and I'll show that later, but the the levy is the
bigger impact. Um, if all property values are changing equally, the levy is what's really going to be the bigger impact there. And that's what's shown in this slide. So obviously in most cases you see lakeshore homes that are worth more than non-lakes shore. So in this
example I put the lakeshore home at $200,000 and the non-lakes shore homes are at $100,000. So you can see the lakeshore home pays a higher tax bill because it has a higher value, but the county or the township is still collecting that $4,000 budget. So when
those rate those markets change at different paces, you know, the the demand for lakeshore is higher than the non-lakeshore. So the lakeshore property in this hypothetical situations goes up 20%. And the non-lake shores go up 7%.
That shifts the the $4,000 tax burden to the property that saw a bigger increase. And actually the taxes in this scenario go down on a property that had a value increase. So that you know a lot of times when people see this slide they they then they start to understand how
that levy is allocated based on the values and the classifications and if if certain property types are changing at different rates that can fluctuate where where the money is coming from. >> Yeah, Mr. Chair. So Bob um is it not true? I mean trying to understand this
it can get complicated because of all the variables but if if you look at tax rate you can you can talk about tax rate but uh the value of the home those two are are you can't separate the two because one affects the other.
>> So my point is that you could have in St. Louis County a tax rate that's 67% but the median price of the home is 160,000 >> and you're going to end up paying less than you do when you have a high value with a low tax rate. So when we say well
we have a low tax rate here you can't separate tax rate from the value of the home >> right I and I understand what you're saying there I I I guess I will make a counterpoint that you know if you were to buy a $500,000 home in Duth and a
$500,000 home in Cook County pretty sure the tax rate is lower in Cook County even I would agree with that but but I'm saying that if you if you look at median price so when we compare here in other counties, you can't separate tax rate from value.
>> And I would agree if you got a higher tax rate and the same value, >> higher tax rates, you end up more tax. >> But my point is is that we claim we have a low tax rate, but you can't separate value in that calculation. Yeah. It's
like if you go in and you get a hotel at the same rate in some other county that doesn't have the additional tax, you're going to pay low in tax because the tax rate is lower. >> Mhm. >> So I I'm just saying when we talk about that, honestly, you cannot separate the two.
>> But I agree, a higher tax rate, I mean, it's just common sense. Higher tax rate, same value. You're going to pay more because your tax rate's higher. >> It's more than common sense. It's math. >> Pardon? >> It's more than common sense. It's math. Well, yeah. And we could talk about math
now, but >> Bob doesn't have the time. I do appreciate the fact that you represent it visually. So, >> yeah. And just one last comment on that. Um, so I I've I've had people before say, you know, I'm going to move to a different county. It's going to save me
money. And you know what I usually ask them, you know, if they say a lot of times they'll say, if I move to Silver Bay, I would save on taxes. And I asked them, I say, "Well, what's better about Silver Bay other than saving the money?" If you if you buy a $500,000 house here
and $500,000 house in Silver Bay, clearly the house in Silver Bay is going to be bigger, probably newer, nicer, because at $500,000 there, you get more for your money, but you're not considering where you want to be. That is value. The location,
>> right? I don't disagree with that. It's it's when you because as a as a director who hires people if if wage is the only thing that I evaluate when it comes to my decision, but it's not. And if you
look at across the country, what people look for, wage is one component, benefits is another component, the environment, the school, the medical provisions, you know, the amenities that exist. But you need to know yourself what you value and put a weight on those
things in making a decision. But I but I agree because often times you say, "Well, okay, go buy a" and I won't say it publicly because if I name a state, then I'll get in trouble. I won't they won't let stopping me. So >> anyway, >> right. So yeah, often times you see
people >> I will say that. >> Sorry. Often times you see people making that sacrifice and saying, "You know what? I'm going to buy something smaller in Cook County because that's where I want to be." They value the location more than the structure. >> I agree. >> Yeah.
>> So I think that's all I have on the fourhouse town. This just kind of summarizes what we talked about where you know the taxes can go down even though the value went up if you know in this scenario when you have a property type shifting more than the other
property types and no change in the levy you could have that scenario play out and and that's how it works with all of the classifications and values much more complex than a four-house town though. So, uh, the four house town takeaways, you know, the legislature
sets the classifications. They say who's eligible for exemptions, exclusions, and special programs. Uh, they determine the process and the rules for the valuation. Uh, in other states, some other states, they say value it at onethird of the value. Um, the value and classifications
determine the >> Can you say more about that? So in Iowa, I believe they actually they they tax you based on portion of the market value. >> And I think there's some other states that do that. They they establish something less than market value to to
determine the tax bills. >> Like >> and I don't know what the reasoning >> I was going to say to what end because it's if it's all >> I'll be golfing with the Iowa assessors in August and I'll ask them. >> Okay. Yeah. But I think if you have to establish one/ird of market value, you still have to establish market value,
>> right? And and then it's all shared and just like what's the difference? Huh? >> Yeah. So it's interesting. >> Yeah. >> Crop land, >> farmland. >> So, uh the value and classifications, they determine that slice of the pie. How big is that pie? Think of you're at
a buffet and you take your slice of the pie to the scale. They're going to weigh it and tell you how much you have to pay. If there's one pie and it's divvied up amongst everybody in the restaurant, the whole pie is 20 bucks. That's how a levy works. And if you got a bigger piece, you pay more.
>> Um the tax rates are calculated to ensure that the amount of money that we need is collected. So in Minnesota, a county should never collect more than what they levied. And and in other states, it's different. They use mill rates. And if if you have a value increase after the mill rate's been
established, they can end up with more money than they needed. M >> and that's how I understand Colorado works. >> They use a mill rate still. So and and and that's the reason for setting and establishing the value ahead of the levy and the budget because we can determine
how big your piece of the pie is and make sure everyone is okay with that. Sometimes they're not okay with it. Uh but after the board of appeal and equalization, the only resolve is tax court. Uh so we establish the slice, the size of the slice of the pie. Then the
county board determines the price of that pie >> and at the end of the day we send out the tax bills. >> Yeah. >> No, please. >> Price of pie. >> Um so a while back we had some uh property that uh you know an individual came in
and questioned why the value why they were being taxed at that value. and the state came back and said, "Well, we don't think that the the matrix you used in applying and determining that value is what we see it. So, we're encouraging
you, well, we're telling you, you're going to have to bump it up 10%." So when we use what they give us as as the the structure for determining value and then the state comes back and makes a decision, how how often do you think that their
their rationale is consistent with the rationale that you use? And my point is is that let's just say that a state is looking for revenue and and so they're saying let's just try to bump these things up a little bit. And my point is is that when people are asking well how
come we have we have accountability with somebody that pro provides oversight even when we you know talk about these things that are before us we can make a decision as a governing board but it'll go down to the state and it'll say yeah that we agree or we don't agree because
we have that authority over us. So, uh, as an assessor, if you think that it's fair and reasonable when they come back with those recommendations or if you scratch your head and wonder how did they come up with that based upon what we're doing
in our evaluation? >> Yeah. So, what you're talking about is a state board order. Uh, we actually just got our state board order last week, which mean it it they they came back and said, "We don't have any board orders." Every year they issue you a letter and I have all six or seven years now from my
time as assessor hanging on the wall. That's on my courtboard. It's the only thing hanging on my corkboard is that we didn't have board orders those years. And uh you know to your to your comment about the state might be looking for revenue. If they order a state board
order increase, it doesn't generate any more revenue for the county or the state. It it's just equalizing the assessments. So they might look at a district and say, "Well, your median sale is at 88%. We want you to be between 90 and 105." You know, at that
point when when that's happened, you're beyond the point where you can make those changes because letters have been out to the taxpayers. They've gotten their value notices. You can't just go change it to make it 90%. So that's when they order a state board order. They do give you an opportunity as the assessor
to explain why you didn't get into the 90% window. Um, and I actually asked because we had a meeting with the Department of Revenue last month and I was looking at uh other counties where they were outside of 90 to 105 that that's available on their prism website.
And I said, you know, what does it take to get a state board order? It obviously isn't just being outside of 90 to 105. And he said, "If the assessor can give us a good reason why they didn't go to the number, and sometimes, you know, you might be at like say you're at 106% on
the median sale, if the market's increasing and you say to revenue, we're just going to let the market catch up to where we're at on those sales, they might accept that and not order a board order where they decline the value, you know, reduce the value by 5%." But I've only ever seen them go by five or 10%
increments. It's never It's a 5% increment typically. They don't just say 1 or 2%. And they don't specifically say, you know, on twostory homes in this district, we want you to apply 10%. That's something I have the ability to do. I can say twotory homes that are red
are going up. You know, I I can be that specific. Whereas when they come in, they say everything that's classified as residential and seasonal wreck in this district must go up 5 or 10%. And you don't get to you you don't get to fight that. >> Yeah. So would it be correct just for
public information that you referenced six, seven years that you have those documents that are on your wall? Is it correct for us to understand that that means the state is affirming that your evaluations are done correctly? >> So we haven't always been in that
position and we've been threatened by the state if we don't get our act together, they'll come up and do it for us. So they did it once. The point is is that that um it it it affirms from my perspective it affirms your competency
and stewardship of the responsibility you're entrusted with. It's like an audit. >> If you not have an audit and says you're following best practices, you're doing this and everything else, you walk away and pat yourself on the back. If you don't, >> then you got to change things because we
have an expectation you're going to meet this requirement. So kudos to you and your staff. Thank you. >> Yeah, and the state board orders are tough. I know we did have one, I don't know, probably 10 or 12 years ago. It wasn't that long before I started here. And um you know, that was just, hey, add
10 or 5% to this district. But there is another thing that they can order a state ordered reassessment, and that's when the state brings their own appraisers up here, and they do every single property in the county in one year. It's a it's the entire county gets reviewed in one year by an appraiser,
and they charge you per parcel. And that is the worst thing that can happen for a county assessor's office. >> I think we were close. >> Yeah, I think it actually happened. I do think it happened in the 70s or ' 80s. That's when So, we have these photos from down in the vault. I'm almost
certain all of these photos were taken by the Department of Revenue and that's when they assigned parcel numbers to them. They put a little box in the in the picture that they it was like they wrote on a chalkboard and then took a picture of the house with the chalkboard and assigned a parcel number to them. I was going to say I know Department of
Revenue photos and that's definitely one. >> Yeah. >> Started that out as a kid. >> So just uh two more slides I think here. Um so for appeals you can't appeal a percentage of increase. You have to focus on the end result. If the new uh
value is not accurate then you have a grounds for an appeal. The process takes on for for my office more of a fee appraisal approach where we review the property information for accuracy. We review uh similar sales, recently sold properties and then uh we offer the
taxpayers the opportunity to provide input. And this is the appeals um from front to back. You can informally talk to the assessor's office. Uh if that doesn't work, you can either go to the local boards if you're in a township with one a meeting or go to the open
book meeting if you're outside of a organized township. And then from there, if you still don't get a resolve, you can go to the county board, which is where we're at today. And if the county board doesn't feel like there's enough information to make a decision and the taxpayer is still uh un unhappy or not
satisfied with the outcome, they can go to tax court. But the taxpayer can also skip everything and just go to tax court. Um they can file. So for the 26 assessment, they have all the way up until the end of April in 2027 to file a tax court petition. So you know, they
would have time to get an appraisal done and see, you know, what the appraisal says compared to the assessment. Uh the the fee for filing in tax court, they they've intentionally kept it really low. So it it promotes people to pursue these when they think that it's it's
necessary. So the tax court is the end all and the the final decision maker in in property valuations when there's disagreement between the county and the taxpayer. >> And that's all I have for the PowerPoint. >> Okay. >> It took a lot longer than I thought it
was going to. >> Well, thank you. Um yeah, so uh going on in the agenda, we have um uh two cases. Uh we have both uh Ron Lond who is here this evening and also Matt and Kim
Kramer. Uh if it's all right with you, Mr. Lond, I would I would like to take a small break before we get to your case. Um and >> tell you what, >> yes, >> it's going to be really quick. >> Let's do it. >> Yeah. The reason I'm here, and I appreciate
the the everything, the complexity of it and all that, and I'm sure Bob is doing his job. We've had a little round and round, but that's nothing personal. Um, there's only two things you you have read, I assume, my letters and stuff.
>> The um the one that um well, last year on the fireplaces, it it seems such a small thing and I was just amazed that after I had these things for 30 years that they would pop up and be an issue. I bought two of them from Ellen Hedstrom
because he had ordered them for somebody and then they had not decided not to have them and so that's how I found them. And the other two I got after that. I don't remember where but anyway. So I could have put them in where the small
little antiquated heaters were and put them on the little piece of metal that has some asbestous in them and let them sit like that. But for two pieces of plywood and some fake brick, it made them look nice.
>> They always were the heater for the cabin that I didn't buy them for anything else. I bought them to replace the heaters that were in the cabins. So, we had an issue in that. He calls them a fireplace. I have the book.
They're not You've seen this. I have that in the packet. They're so they're a stove propane room heater. So that that's that issue. And so whatever you decide on that, that's it. That's that's my case on that. >> Okay. Thank you. >> The other one is I just got a little
concerned of course when I saw the the amount of um the the valuation went up by about 416,000. And then in that these little cabins were built
in the late 30s, early 40s. Not really much has changed in them except two of them maybe are had a little more done uh in one in the 70s and one in the early 80s. Um but when I got these looking at
these here that that from 26 to 27 now it's going to be a on number one cabin 134% increase in valuation. Number two is 143%
of increase. Number three is 155% increase. Number six etc. They go through about 155, 156, 100, and last one, number eight, is 162. Um, now you probably know who my uh
consultant is. I don't know if you know his name or not. I didn't mention it, but um he he's from Duth and he's also retired. He's an appraiser did for the state and the county here and all over
the place. And he sits on the board of the um equalization board for St. Louis County. In fact, he's on there tonight. >> But when I ran this by him just to get his opinion because I realize I don't know
the complexities of what you guys are talking about. This is just to get information. >> Yep. And his take on it was he agreed with me on the heaters. He said, "If they're only if they're only for the heat of the cabin, if it's all
you got, and that's what I put them in there for, then you probably shouldn't have to pay on those." The other thing he said was these increases didn't mean that much to him except he took issue with the
comparison of the 80s. He thought these cabins that I have should more be compared to the 60s, which makes sense. They have the same old wiring for the most part they ever had from 1940. same
little fuse boxes, little 15 couple of them have I've put electric water heaters in two of them that are upgraded a little bit, but for the most part they still have a mix of the old wiring. >> Um,
the interiors are maybe there's some paneling from the 60s or 50s that were put in. Number seven has the same old 1940s plywood in it. >> Oh.
>> Um all of them have issues of um underneath the cabinets or just on blocks. Two of them, number eight especially floats around. So every so often I have to I should I show you a picture of that.
>> And then number four that has some issues just deterioration. And number three, I didn't include that one, but that in the bedroom, you walk in there and you can tell the f floor is pro plopping up and stuff. So looking at
this amount of of um increase on those just kind of surprised me. >> Now that's all I really have. And I can't really because I'm not doing the job you do. I can't tell you what's correct or not. But I listened to my
guy. That was his suggestion. And so that's about all I have. >> Yeah. >> And I'll let it go and you can make your decision and I'll still be a taxpayer. >> Thank you. And thank you for making your case there.
>> Um uh any any response, Bob, that you you want to give? Uh or do you have questions? Well, I just want to say about the uh >> the little fireplaces like we have a lowi and it you see the flame but it is a heat source.
>> Yeah, it's sit around the cabin. It happened it happened to be there. >> Alan Hstrom had them. That was it. I said, "Oh, that's cute." I didn't specifically put them in there to to draw anybody. is an addition to the cabin and I the little
>> little fake brick things they sit on rather than you know that's the only >> it's an amenity. >> It's the only thing I can speak to with confidence because I have one and it's not a fireplace. >> Yeah. No, >> it's my heat source >> which you can back up to like a real
wood stove and feel warmer >> but I don't think of it as a fire >> and I don't per se. I mean, people have commented, "Oh, they're cute, but they're not something they sit around and and you know, spend family time or
throw logs on them or, you know, anyway, that's my take." So, >> Mr. Chair, before >> Commissioner Gamble, please. >> Bob responds. Thank you. >> So, my question would be the criteria that is used to differentiate between what is the fireplace and what is a
heating device. That would be one question. The other is that we've seen in the past that we were so tardy on our you know going around and meeting our quartile requirements that um sometimes because it's been so
long since there's been an evaluation that that is a significant jump. So I don't know how those two things are are things I guess I would like addressed. How what determs the fireplace and when was the last time the appraisal was done?
>> Yes. Uh so um commissioners I do have these uh are on the records as wood stoves. It's in the line item under the fireplace section. So our we have several options. If I'm in a a property record and I'm adding a fireplace to the
record, I would click into that fireplace line and prompt it and it would say, you know, wood stove $500, wood stove $1,000, wood stove $1,500, and it goes all the way up to a $30,000, you know, brick or or rock fireplace, Florida ceiling, fireplace. So, we have
several different levels of what we add value for for that amenity. Um, every every property in the county that we're aware of that having a wood stove, whether it be propane or actual wood burning, we do add it to the record
because we see it as an amenity. Um, you know, I I can't speak to what you have in your place. I don't know what it looks like, but there's a viewing window. It provides heat and a visual ambiance. And in fact, in some of the advertisements, I don't know if you guys saw those,
>> uh it was advertising that four of the cabins have fireplaces. >> And then in one of the Google reviews, which unfortunately it wouldn't upload to the packet today, but one of the Google reviews I found said the fireplace and our cabin didn't work. Ron jumped over and helped us light it right away. So, I mean, I I think that
>> in general, people view these as an amenity. And in fact, I was just looking at booking a a place down at Craig's and if you want to I mean, obviously they're different. They're not wood stoves, but when you get that fireplace, it is an extra charge for the room. So, we we've
been adding wood stoves since I started here. Uh and something like this is just a little $500 addition. Uh I do know, and Ron pointed this out, that some of our cabin the cabin records, they'll still say under our heating source, it says space heater. And then we also have
the wood stove. But the space heater doesn't add value. That was just, you know, back in the older records. And in fact, I have the stuff going back to the 70s here. Um, saying that they were space heaters. And then I think these four or five cabins, they were added in
the 90. Four cabins. >> You had five on there. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I don't know if you took that one off yet or not, but I don't I don't have four. I mean, I don't have five. I have four cabins with five. You did have five on there. Yeah, >> I think it was number five cabin you had on.
>> Yeah. >> The other thing is I've never charged more for that unit that has that. That was the heater. It wasn't wasn't even thought of. >> So in and sounds like in the 90 about what 95 they were added >> 959 >> replace the wood 30 years ago.
>> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> So you know whenever the the I don't know who put the wood saws on it. It it may have been before me. It may have been when I was in the office, but I as far as I know, the first time I did a full inspection on your property was just this last this last summer. I did
come out and visit with Ron in 2024 after the 2024 assessment went out. Uh, and at that time, you know, I showed up on the property and I said, "Ron, there's a lot of things wrong with this record. The building is not graded correctly. It's overdepreciated.
And if I start going through and correcting the wood stoves, I have to correct everything." I said, "If you want to pursue an appeal, we got to look through every cabin and we got to update everything." >> How come I don't remember that? >> I don't know, Ron, but that was the conversation we had and that was why I left your property.
>> 24. >> Yep. It was 2024. And that's the field card you have with the notes is from 2024. The spring of 24. And I told you that at that time, >> when I showed you number two, I opened the door. Was that 24 or 25? >> We went into that was last year.
>> It was in 24. I have pictures of it. June 24th. >> That's when I opened the door. Okay. >> Yep. >> Well, whatever. It seems >> I have a picture of the wood stove. >> It's okay. I I'm not It seems like last year to me. So,
>> yeah. So, I at that time >> I can relate. >> Yeah. At that time, I did, you know, we we had the conversation. And I said, "Ron, our quintile," so our quintile for Gramaray was supposed to be 2023, >> and we pushed it back because we were doing the flyover in a way that Grand
Marray was going to be the last of the 5-year cycle and not, you know, the third year of the 5year cycle. So, at that time, I told Ron, I said, "I'm I'll I'll I'll leave here and not do a full review on this property and come back during the normal quintile and and we
can just treat it as you get updated as when at the same time that all the other resorts on the block are going to get updated." >> What? Okay. I don't I don't remember all that conversation. was at the Was that the time when I came in your office and was
when I first brought that issue >> and I I just and I was talking to one of the g or I don't remember who it was. >> That's what I was in there to talk about and you came over and you said, "Let's go have a let's go have a look at the property." And I said, "That's not what
I'm here for." And you you insisted, >> so I went with you. >> Yeah, I do remember that. But I thought that was last year. No, it was June 24. Yeah, you you no more. >> So, that is our standard procedure when when when a taxpayer comes to appeal, we
do ask to see the inside of the of the units, especially when they're saying, "I don't have a fireplace." And you know, I drove down there and as soon as the door opened up, I said, "Ron, that's what we add $500 for." >> That's But see, that's semantics. You You call it a fireplace and I don't a
wood. >> That's the issue, Bob. >> Yeah. You you can call it whatever you want to, but this is what they're going to decide. >> Yeah. Yeah. Well, absolutely. >> But that goes back to the question, what defines a fireplace? So, so let's just
say that sometimes I don't have analogy. Surprise, surprise, that comes off my head. But uh the uh if if somebody says you know I've got this and you say actually you don't because uh under the criteria that defines something it has
to that and yours doesn't. So that's what I'm saying. If if anything is a heat device that exists other than you know whatever the heating element is and it just automatically goes in it. It doesn't fine-tune that evaluation then it's pretty much cut and dry. But you think that there would be something that
would would say because let's just say that if I'm going to remodel or I'm going to build, I want to know what my tax exposure is. So I might not put in a swimming pool. I might put a hot tub in or I might not put fireplaces in for multiple reasons. But I need to know
your criteria so I can make an informed decision on what I'm going to do based upon the impact on me financially. So that that's why I is there no criteria. It's just the fact that it's another heating device. So therefore it all falls pot belly, you know, anything box
stove, it all falls under fireplace. >> So no, this this is very different. This has a vent to the outside of the house. You can go buy like an electric with it has like a little decorative fire that's not real flame. >> That wouldn't be counted as a fireplace because it is not a place where fire happens.
>> Okay. >> So you're having a fire in a structure, it's in a fireplace. >> Okay. Commissioner Svin, please. >> And I was just going to say I have looked at the advertisements and they are they are advertised as having fireplaces >> are advertised as what?
>> It it shows here that there are fireplaces in the ad. >> What ad? >> This is uh Northshore Visitor L Motel and Cottages. >> Yeah, that's that's not mine. >> It's this one right here. >> Or which one? Yeah, that's
>> it. Looks like the same. Well, what uh what value difference are we talking about here? >> It's minimal. >> So, the the fireplaces, if brand new, would be valued by the the wood stoves, the propane wood stoves, direct vent wood stoves would be $500, but because
of the depreciation that's applied, they actually come to $425 and our system rounds down. So, they're $400 a piece. So, it's it's $2,000 on the overall assessment. Um, and I'll tell you this much. If you're going to remove them from Ron's record, we need to recess and
reconvene this meeting so that I can find every property in the county that has this on the record and we got to take them all off and we got to send out letters to everyone. So, I would imagine there's probably a couple thousand people that we would have to do the same thing for. >> And so, what you're telling us, Bob, is
that this is equal application >> of how we evaluate? Yeah, >> it is. Yes. And, uh, I was actually I don't know if you guys know Stacy Hammer. She did my hair today. She has a little electric fake fireplace in her office and I took a picture of it
because that is exactly what I would not put on the assessment record. This just plugs into the wall and it has like a image. It's like lights that light up a fan, you know, like a a paper or whatever, like a like a just like a little streamer that flies up in the fan
and it's lit up and it looks like a fire and I think it blows out little electric heat, but that is not built in with venting. She actually said her husband is a chimney cleaner. >> Yeah. She said, "I can send James over there to find out if they're fireplaces." And do they require the
cleaning of the direct vent sto, you know, the the the piping the vent out? >> They're not supposed to. No. >> So, my when when I put my first one in that number two that you saw, it went up like this >> and it was poor venting and it got all
up the side of the cabin >> and people would say, "Did you have a fire in that place?" So, I had to take that out. In fact, I hung a picture over the hole and it's still there. And I put a one straight up to the top
and went through the attic and up to the top and that vented correctly. >> But they're a they're a direct vent because the d the air comes down the chimney. >> Mhm. >> Goes into the stove, it burns and goes up the small pipe inside that chimney.
>> Mhm. So, it's a direct vent gas propane room heater. >> Built in it says right on it. >> Yeah. I mean, it's built in. You put a hole through the wall, you run a gas line to it. It's not just sitting on the floor. >> Any heat >> like the one I said before, the one I replaced went through a chimney. There's
a chimney in that cabin when it was built and that's what was in there. My dad built the cabin in 1938. It had a a a propane heater sitting there and and I replaced that and it was a
direct fence so I didn't need to put it in that chimney. I put it in the wall. It didn't vent well so I ran the chimney up through the ceiling. >> Mhm. >> There, you know. >> Yeah. And can I ask is there any difference in valuation between a woodf
fired fireplace wood stove versus a propane fired fireplace? >> Yeah, I mean we like I said for the wood stove we have three levels of value. It might even be four levels. I would have to go in. They're actually kicking us out of our assessment software right now because they're doing an update. I emailed them not to do that.
>> But I just got a notice. >> They probably did it especially cuz you emailed >> Yeah. Well, they I got a notice that said we're we're closing the system down at 700 p.m. and I emailed them and said, "Please don't do that." Yeah. >> Yeah. It's it they logged us off now. >> But, uh, >> but there is a differentiation.
>> There is a differentiation. We have different levels of value. So, if it is an actual wood burning wood stove, it it could bring a higher number. If it's a very small I mean, there's wood stoves that you can disassemble and put in your ice shanty. And that if that was in someone's house that would probably have
a $500 value. But >> um >> it was fascinating. I just never knew there was a difference between the different >> Would that be the heater for the house then too? >> Would that be just a uh some kind of a >> So I I think and and it seemed like you know from what John Began and what you
had put in the writing was since it's the only heat source for these cabins, it shouldn't be valued. >> But we we we have a quality grading for each building. So, you know, like I if you had in flooror heating, like a a hot water radiant heat, that's going to be a
lot more expensive and it's going to bump the quality of the construction, the grading we put on that property. If if you don't have any heat at all, it's going to lower the grade. But this is not like a wallmounted just a heater that just the only thing it does is
blows out hot air. It has a couple of knobs to turn hot air on. There is a viewing window. It takes up space on the floor in a 300 foot cabin. I mean, to make a decision to use that floor space instead of just doing a wall-mounted heater to save space or a radiant baseboard. To me, there was a decision
that this adds something to the cabin. The advertisements and the reviews. >> I don't know if there was a decision. It was it was a convenience thing, but the fact that it does add value, I can see that, you know. So >> Mhm. >> But it is and again going back to it is
all about being consistent in how we apply the assessment. >> No, I hear you. Yep. >> So you know when we when we start talking about the effective age and saying that it should be 1970 versus 1980 >> well there's we have notes in here and I
I think you know you you had even put in your notes that like there was plumbing replaced in the 80s in May of 1980. In fact, the notes from our old, >> but the city ran sewer and water by >> those the like porches or decks, they weren't on our records back in the 80s.
The the motel portion was built in the 80s. Right. >> Right. >> And if you're standing there looking at the motel and the cabins, do they look much different in the amount of deferred maintenance from the outside? >> Well, they do now. Yeah, absolutely. >> I I know some of the cabins could use
paint. The only reason um that four of them are painted was last spring was really good and I painted every cabin on the sunny side. If you go around to the backside and some are still sanded and not painted, but we haven't had cleaning
help since co. So Reena and I are doing all the cleaning, renting, maintenance, everything. And then you come along with this little thing and it's kind of like >> so just to finish up what I was what I was going with the the effective age
comments. But so in the assessment the effective age is is established as a year but really what it is is the the number of years. So it's 46. We have your effective ages 46 years. That means that if if they
were brand new and depreciated as the improvements continue to happen. So, the when when were the roofs done? >> The roofs at least uh the the newest roof that I have would probably be number seven and that is is at least um
well, it's at least 20 and the others are like there's two two cabins that the insurance company has said they won't cover any damage to the roofs because they need new roofs. All of them need new roofs. Number one is really old.
Number three is medium old. Number seven is probably 20 years old. All of them are 20 to 30 years old on the roof, which is by insurance standards. It's uh you should put new roofs on. Same there's no insulation in them. We don't stay open in the winter.
>> Like I said before, old wiring. >> Mhm. >> And they're really 90y old cabins. >> They're not 40. >> Right. Well, I know that the the actual age is 90. So, the effective age I mean, I think we all know that a roof isn't going to typically last 46 years. We
have an effective age of 46 years. I mean, the 46 years is accounting for everything in the whole structure. The fireplaces are not 46 years old. The roofs are not 46 years old. The paint's not 46 years old. The decks are not 46 years old. >> No. >> So, there's a lot of things there that
have happened in the last 46 years. >> Yeah. And I did everything. I hired very min once in a while I would have a helper helping me roof some. >> Sure. >> Number seven I roof myself. Um I did I
did everything at that place. >> Yeah. >> And now I'm 81 years old. It's getting a little tiresome. >> Yeah. >> But I love the place. I grew up there, you know, and and >> it's kind of historic. I I'm in a book uh on the historic places in the
Northshore and I kind of like that. It's iconic >> and uh you know it's my my folks place. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> So that's that's my case. So I'll let you guys >> Yeah. >> Do what you do. >> So just to finish up what I was saying
about effective age. So I set the depreciation scale. >> Yeah. >> You know if I change these to 1970 effective age >> the percentage of depreciation is something that I also set in another part of the CAMA system. But doing doing
that changing what a 1970 depreciation percentage is would affect everything that has a 1970 effective age in the county. >> So, you know, I know John Vegan had had kind of pointed to and said, you know, I think if you just change the effective age from 80 to 70, it would probably be
more reflective, but John doesn't understand where the depreciation breakdown is. And that's something I said as well. So what I responded to John on that comment was that the quality is where we factor in the age of construction. You know, back in the 30s,
the construction was different. >> So a a home built in the 30s is never going to have the highest quality grading we have. Uh, I mean, I suppose it could if it was brick and a lot of updates and stuff, but >> um th those are all things that are
adjusted or changed by the assessor. >> And so, you know, at 1970 I may have 49% depreciation and at 1980 43% depreciation. It is not going to exactly do what he thinks it's going to do by
just changing that effective age. So, you know, I when I look at this, a lot of the a lot of what I've heard from Mr. Lond was the percentage of the increase and how much the cabins went up. >> But if you look at the cabins going back to the 26 assessment,
>> we have cabins that are renting for $120 to $190 a night >> that are valued at $9,000, $7,000, $13,000. I mean, those are that's just way too low. And
>> I think if you look at some of the information I provided on some of the other resorts and how much their property values had increased, I mean, we're looking at 140, 120, 150% on those resorts from 2019 going back that far.
>> So, it's consistently happening. And, you know, I didn't have this conversation, but someone in my office had a conversation with one of the other resort owners across the street from Ron. And you know, he said, "Well, I I saw the new number on my assessment, but I can't disagree with it because I've
had several people reach out and say they want to buy it for a lot more than that." >> And that property value from 2019 went up 150%. >> That's crazy. >> But there's demand. I mean, the demand is there for downtown Gram commercially zoned. I mean, that property could be
used for many different things with the zoning. And some people might see that. >> Absolutely. Absolutely. I don't disagree with that. But what you're assessing is my cabins and what I have now. And like I said, nobody could pay a million dollars for
that place and do what I have done there and operate those cabins to pay for that. That's just not realistic. No, it's >> so that that's uh what you're assessing. you you can assess it, but you're it's John Vegan years ago told me that's what
you call a blue sky sale, you know. Sure, maybe. >> But anyway, >> yeah, it's crazy. >> So, just clarification that if you have electric baseboard heaters and you take them out and put in a direct vent
>> gas stove. Yeah. I mean, >> or stove. >> Yeah. I wouldn't wood or not a wood stove >> but you see the so that >> wood stove yeah >> even though that is still the primary heat source >> I mean >> value
>> it's >> yeah I mean >> because the baseboard didn't work >> the presence of the wood stove is where we are adding the value >> huh in and interestingly though you might be paying less for electricity than you would be for the propane >> sure
>> so but they're they're just looking at the item Yeah, >> it's the it's the aesthetic. >> It's the aesthetic. >> Oh, Commissioner Gamble, I'm sorry. >> Yeah. No, that's all right. So, um there can be a lot of nuance that you can you
can discuss. One, I would say is when we look at a at a property and we evaluate it, we evaluate it based upon the criteria that we have to use. whether you paid when we talked about construction prices whether you paid somebody you did it yourself you made an
improvement that brought it to this >> um I think I mean our charge stewardship responsibility is to make sure that our assessor is applying equally the the standards for evaluation >> and and um
uh we can say uh well you're my next door neighbor and and we've got a great relationship can't we had a little slack kind of thing. But as soon as we do that, >> now we got a real problem. So I think our responsibility is is out of respect to every individual is to say we need to
look at the criteria making sure that our assessors is applying it correctly >> and and then understanding um developers will come in and say depending upon the marketplace do I want to add this or do I not want to add this
because I might end up incurring a cost that I don't see I can get my return on that investment because of how I'm going to be assessed. So um I through the discussion is is just wanting to understand that everything
has been fair and equally applied because you're longstanding citizen and your parents operate at that when change take place we scratch our head >> that I mean yes I mean that that but um
it's just a different category of of business like John Vegan and said it my place is more like a lifestyle than than a real business. And that that was his
quote to me. And that makes sense because that's like I say, a lifestyle like that, you're not going to find anybody that can pay off a million dollars on that place if they're running it like I did.
>> Yeah. I I I would just say that the >> I mean some of the subjective things it makes it very difficult. That's why I'm saying in your experience because it's longstanding >> that the change that is like wo >> we've been here forever and >> I know in Minnesota used to offer
actually I could do ebikes at my place because I'm right in front of the Kitchami trail >> ends at 8th 8th Avenue >> and I could do ebikes and provide a service there and get my taxes cut in about half because Minnesota has a mom
and pop law resort law >> that if you do that, it used to not require that the others I we think we years ago used to get a break just because we're mom and pop, >> but that's true. I could I don't know how many ebikes I'd have to buy,
>> but uh I'm not really interested in running ebikes anymore. I understand, but as as things change over time, that's why I referenced the longstanding because as things change, I mean, we as commissioners >> and I I just came from a meeting today and there's multiple changes that are
taking place. Now, I we have to interpret that in our in the context of our budget. We look for resourceful, creative ways to try to mitigate increases in overhead and cost and hope that we can remain competitive and still make a livelihood. So, >> yeah,
>> bananas. Yeah, it's all broken, but >> Okay. >> appreciate your time here and your case and your service. I mean, your family's been there forever, as you said. It's iconic. >> It It is what it is. Whatever you decide. >> I would say, Ron, that could probably
about 30 years ago or so, and I stopped into your place and you had this really neat map that was illustrated of the the community. And uh we weren't living here at the at the time. And that's why I say it could be 30, 40 years ago. But you
you had that when we stopped in and that always impressed me because it it was done so artfully and very >> um reflective of all of the things that Cook County provides to people that who choose to visit us. So >> yeah. >> Yeah. >> Well, thanks for your time anyway. Thank
you. >> Thank you, Ron. >> Well, I lied because I mean there's no one else showing up and we do have multiples beyond the two here. Um, so now now there is no one else and we have
also uh Judy Hamilton and Ann Dayton and Lori Hansen and then also um RJ Murphy or EJ Cook, something like that. So is there anything with those
that we should uh discuss? So, uh, the Judy Hamilton property is the only one that is still in disagreement with us. So, she did want me to submit those those comments and emails. And there's a letter from Virginia Palmer. >> Did you guys get to read all of that
stuff? So, the the property is about 75 acres roughly on Lon Lake. Um, it's it's it doesn't necessarily stretch east to west along the lake shore on the south side. It kind of is a north south parcel. It's
got a lot of north south um distance and it is an interesting property with the terrain. I mean Lon Lake is that way. There's a lot of really on the south side of Lon. It's really steep everywhere. Uh there is an old road I would estimate uh probably has they
stopped maintaining that road maybe 20 years ago, 15 years ago cuz there's you know trees that are three maybe 4 in in some spots that have grown through the roaded. But uh I did walk up there. I walked all the way to the end. It's about a half mile in and I mean it was
serious bushwhacking. I had wood ticks for 3 days on me and I fell down. >> Three days is one day is the max. >> We should go. >> I found one wood tick on me and then I went and completely like stripped down and searched and made sure there was no more. But for the last two days we found
wood ticks in the house. But we do have a dog. >> Well, okay. Well, never mind though. >> Yeah. kind of fell and hit my knee. >> Fell and hit my knee on a rock, but I was able to make it out of there and uh almost got lost on the way out because of the the overgrowth. But, you
know, there is a a road a raised roaded has ditch on both sides and it has these big boulders. There's a part of the road where there's a steep drop off on the one side and they put boulders, you know, to kind of prevent a car maybe on the slippery road or something going over the edge. But, uh, there was a lot
of work and excavation done to put that road in. And it would be, I think, a lot easier to open that road back up if somebody, you know, wanted to go in and develop or, um, put a house site back in there. And, uh, it's zoned in the F3
zoning. So, you know, given the zoning, the old road that's exist that's in there. There is a section of the property where they, you know, they cleared out and they stacked up a whole bunch of cinder blocks and there's an old concrete septic tank sitting there. So, you know, at some point they were
thinking about developing, >> but um it looks like it sat dormant for at least 15 years. >> And uh we were looking at a recent sale on Lon where they sold 115 acres, I think it was, and 3,000 ft of shoreline.
That one was an estate sale. And you know, I did call the seller and the buyer on that one because it became a a point of contention in our um tax court case that we had on Leo and and uh Hungry Jack Lakes. And you know, the the seller said, "Yep, it was an estate
sale." Um you know, was it was kind of something that a windfall, if you will, for an inheritance. Um and the property just isn't the same. It it's similar in that it is very steep along the shoreline,
>> but uh it has wetlands between the shore and the roadway and there is no road cut into that property. So, you know, with the motivation of the seller, that seller actually listed at 1.4 or 1.3 million and they did $400,000 in price
reductions and ended up taking $900,000 on it. >> Uh and that was listed in November and closed in like February. I talked to land services about that property back when it was back when it was a tax court issue and um they said well we had so
many people calling and we just you know there was there was nothing you could do in the debt of winter to see what kind of potential it had. So you know when I talked to the buyer he actually provided me with an appraisal that was done and it was uh 15% above what he paid for the property and you know I said I think you
got a really good deal on that for 900,000. So he agreed. He said, "Yeah, I think that there was a atypically motivated seller there and you know, the appraisal speaks for itself. It it was worth more than what they paid for it." So, um, I did respond to Judy and you know, you've probably read the email
that she said, "Well, you know, I'm not obviously she's in Montana, I think, but she wasn't going to make the meeting. She asked me to present the information that she had provided and the Virginia Palmer um broker's opinion of price, which, you know, Virginia didn't address
that road. And I do think that that road adds a significant >> Mhm. work done. >> It's a component that any developer would >> especially if there was septic at the end. I mean there was heavy heavy machinery going down. >> There was no septic at the end. >> I mean the the tank >> Yeah. No, the tank was >> at the beginning
>> maybe. Yeah. Maybe. Yeah. A couple hundred yards in. But >> and the the first maybe 300 yards of the driveway you could still drive a car in and turn around. But after that, where the septic site was or where the where the stuff was stacked up, it was pretty
overgrown. And >> that was where the tick started. >> Yeah. >> Okay. I think another way of looking at that is when we looked at the sheath property and we walked that and we talked about what it would take to construct a road to get in there.
>> And so to discount the value of that, it would be contradictory to much of the discussion relative to the sheath property. Yeah. >> Mhm. >> Yeah. >> Mr. Chair, >> yes, please. >> One of the things I found really interesting about the property is also
that there is access to Lon Lake on two sides of the property. So, it's just not lakeshore. I can pass this if people have not seen this. >> Um, but there's, you know, an opportunity to, um, get a view of the
lake off to the east and, um, you know, you could have a canoe, kayak, whatever. But then there's also a little bay that is off to the south of that property. And that's an unbelievable feature >> that's magic >> that really many properties do not have.
I kind of looked at it and thought that, you know, that might be an area where if you did create parcels on the south side of the Gunland Trail that are non-lakes shore, you could maybe do like an HOA common element dock where, you know, you have a couple of docks available down there to the non-lakes shore parcels,
which would bring the sale prices of those up. >> Um, I didn't, you know, go through a whole exercise of, you know, this is what every parcel would sell for and this is what they would look like. But with the 5 acre minimums, I figured you could probably and I did look for building sites based on the
elevographies and you know, I think on the lakeshore part of it, I found six good building sites which would actually have larger than 5 acre parcels. But um you know, I I looked at it and I thought I think this property is more valuable than the
estate sale one because of the road going into it. And there was a a lot that just sold on the south side of the Gunflint Trail. I mean, it's literally 100 yards from the edge of her property that's pending at $109,000 for a vacant
lot and that's no lake shore. So, >> yeah, >> the land up there is still in high demand. I the people want to be up the gunf >> and so I don't know if there's any other questions on that one. the Matt and Kim Kramer parcel. That one is a property
that had recently sold. They the assessed value was way over what they paid for it. It's one of those houses that, you know, it it until you get inside, you don't know everything that's going on. And, you know, it was just part of our normal quintile inspection. It ended up being assessed at 250,000.
They paid 179,000 after it was on the market for a long time. Um Rachel went out to look at it and made some quality or condition adjustments for you know there was siding missing when they bought it and it needed extensive amount
of work. So we lowered the value on that one um based on the sale price and the condition and we put it into our rotation of permits because we expect usually when people buy something like that they're going to immediately start improving it. So, at the end of the year, we'll go and see, you know, is it
now a $260,000 cabin? But that's typically what we do when we see these these sales of properties that need extensive amounts of work like that. >> Mhm. >> Um, and >> there was a few corrections that I made to that one.
>> Yeah. Corrections to the assessment record. >> Yeah. >> Yep. So there there that one we are making a recommendation to reduce as an assessor recommendation and uh the property owners spoke with Rachel. They agree with that. That's why they're not here appealing that. >> Mhm. >> And last but not least, the Dayton
property. That appeal came in at like 3:30 yesterday. Uh it's all the way up on Anagon Lake and they had just built a new garage up there. Uh Jay was able to make it up there today and inspect the house in the garage. >> Wow. had a conversation with the property owner and told her that uh you
know this year we're inspecting the west end, next year we're up the gunflint trail. Um he he was looking at it and he said the house is probably undergraded, the garage may be overgraded, but if we balance those out, it's probably going to be about the same number at the end of the day. And so she agreed that for
this year they would we would just leave it at the 985. Um, but we did put it on this just because it it may have been different and we typed this up in the morning. So, >> yeah. >> So, really we have one assessor recommendation and everything else would
be a board action if there's any other changes. >> Do you have any other I mean, yeah, >> I'm pretty >> impressed with the analysis that you've done and and your staff and I don't have any changes. Does anyone else? >> No, I I would just say that I would I
would agree. I mean, the work that's done, uh, the empathy and the fairness and the commitment to understand, >> all those things are good quality. We we are >> entrusted with, you know, applying the rule of law fairly and and uh, as we've
said here, there's a lot of things that happened to us we don't like, but the only thing we can do is go down and get the legislature to change. We have to do it then. Mhm. >> So I I would uh however you want to handle it, I I think we just move forward and affirm your recommendations
to us. That's would be my position. >> Yeah. >> What what uh formality do we need for a motion there? >> It it would be a a motion to approve the assessor recommendation and then everything else without action would just stay the same. >> Yeah. So, I'll make a motion to approve the
assessor recommendations um for our appeals and equalization meeting. >> Thank you, Commissioner Sullivan. We have a motion. Is there support? >> I support that. >> Thank you, Commissioner Gamble. We have a motion and support. Any further discussion? >> No, just I think it's important it it isn't going to be reflected in the
motion, but I I appreciate the discussion and back to the comments that were made that um uh I just appreciate all the work that you put into it. Absolutely. >> Yeah. Yeah. Outstanding work and every year
>> I learn something every year and so I just really appreciate the work that >> if there's anything you guys want next year like as far as the PowerPoint or information that you'd like to see, I' I'd be happy to >> I think the power point is great. I just think the popcorn's missing.
>> That's only if there's a room full. You didn't see the propane burning in your direct vent thing, then is it still a fireplace? >> No, it's a low lower value than it's that visual that Yeah, there's
>> Yeah, I mean the the visual I I don't know what you were what you're talking about if I've never seen >> it exists. It's just blah. I mean, it's basically like a direct vent wall heater basically. >> Yeah, it's what it is. >> Yeah. I mean, I've seen wood stoves, I guess, that don't have a viewing window. >> Yeah.
Yeah, this is >> a whole scale. Whole scale of >> Wow. >> What's the highest is that you said >> fireplace wise? I think the highest is probably 40 or 50,000. >> You know, you get a stone fireplace that goes floor to ceiling and two sides or
you know, I mean, >> think about like nanu some doublesided or they have corner ones or Yeah. Yeah. >> And that's the, you know, replacement cost. You know, it could be depreciated from that number. >> It might be helpful, Bob, if next year's, if you wanted to give some
examples that tied to what you're saying verbally, >> you know what I'm saying? Fireplace. Here's an example of da da da. >> And you can look at something that seems very >> organic and very simple, whatever, but if that's what it is, >> all the way to and here's what we're
talking about. like if it's nana baju whatever made of stone and handl laid up and huge >> but um I think people that are in in the business of trying to make profit and
know what their margins are they they look at these things and make a determination based upon how they know they're going to that evaluation is going to be effective when you have somebody with the longevity that run his head he's these things have changed over
time for him. So it is sort of disillusioning but >> and and he's at the mercy of market >> right >> of the market and there are people that are willing to spend >> whole lot of money more than the structures might actually be worth but
>> one question I get um you know you're looking at you know a wood stove this that the actual quality of the construction how how is that Can it be determined? You know, they somebody can put in >> or
>> Well, anything certainly. Yeah. >> Yeah. You can you can kind of slap something together. >> Yeah. >> And it's got it's the same wood that was used, same materials, and one's going to fall apart because they didn't cut it
very tightly. they didn't nail it very well or screw it >> or things like I mean that can be enormously different. >> John Elias said that John Henry would nail >> two nails in and pull one out just to
save on nails. You know, and I just I've always been curious if you know, you can't how much time would you have to spend to even understand that whether all holes uh to the outside were that you can't
see necessarily whether how well it was done something is going to last >> same con same exact materials, you know, let's say theoretically one's going to last 50 years, the other one's going to last 150 years. Yeah,
>> with the quality of the workmanship. >> How can you tell that? >> Well, craftsmanship is something that we we look for and usually it becomes evident, you know, on an older structure if there's poor craftsmanship because, you know, you can see it when you walk up that things are falling off or
>> loose or, you know, you can tell there's a draft coming through somewhere. um new construction, the qu construction quality, it factors in the materials, you know, everything from what kind of foundation is it, what type of heating system is it. Sure. >> And then, you know, like you might have
a house that has cedar siding and then you have a house where they did it like in the Lindy style and the siding is angled in in each different um section above, you know, like they'll have in the in the gables they'll have angled cedar. So that's a craftsmanship thing
where they're spending more time and making more cuts and and that's where it it ups that level of quality in just the craftsmanship. >> Do you you rate craftsmanship in different uh building? It is part of >> it is part of what we're factoring in.
So, in fact, we had an appeal on Tate Lake earlier in this in the appeal season and uh you know, I I described to her. I said, you know, when when when they did that angled cedar in all of your gables, that was more work than just running a sheet of something up there, which you know, that would be common in a lot of
>> But you could do that in a poor way. >> Mhm. >> You could do the angle in a poor way that starts falling apart in a number of years. Well, you know, we we see it that there are certain builders that, you know, they'll build a house and then the next thing you know, the windows are
leaking on one side of the house or, you know, in a driving rain, the all the windows >> I've always wondered if that's how well that's factored in. that will always be called out to us when when a when a property owner So there there's a new construction I'm not going to pinpoint it but a new construction in the west
end that has had some issues and trust me they've let us know >> that yeah it may be a brand new house but every time the wind blows we feel like it's going to tip over >> you know the the windows leak and those things so >> is that I mean that fall in that category like curb appeal
>> well yeah I mean you like you can't tell a Like with this particular house I'm talking about, you can't tell by looking at it unless you know you get in and really are looking around the windows. You could maybe see some evidence of moisture coming in. So that's where like a home inspection comes in.
>> But from the assessment perspective, we're going to have to see evidence of it. You know, we're going to have to be called out and they have to point it out to us. >> When do you think the assessors are going to use blower doors? >> Yeah. Wow. >> And you how much how many let's say are
all houses evaluated for craftsmanship to the same degree? >> If you can walk into a house or not, you know, >> I think so. I mean, if you're looking at our assessment records >> and you're talking about a house that has heat and plumbing, they're typically
going to be between like a 6 and 1/2, six, six grading up to maybe like an eight and a half. And if you get over eight and a half, it's really high high quality. I mean, it's getting up there in high quality construction. So, it's a pretty tight range, but the value between a six and an 8 and a half is
significantly different. >> Um, so, you know, like I say, if we're going out and looking at a new construction, that's where we're setting a grading. Um, we're going to look for that craftsmanship and, you know, we kind of are familiar with the builders. specific builders build a much more
quality product than other builders. And we we kind of know that stuff. Um, from the average buyer's perspective, especially if you're coming from outside of Cook County and you're looking at something to buy, you you may not know those things. And that's where I, you know, people really should be cautious
and get home inspection >> um to find to see if there are those issues. you know, the home inspector will plug in in each outlet to make sure that the wiring was done correctly and to make sure that you have GFI trips on the water, you know, in the kitchens and bathrooms. And those are things that
most people don't know to look for, but >> when you're when you're, you know, an assessor, a real estate professional, or a home inspector, you're going to find and see those things. We don't go in and plug into the outlets, but >> yeah. >> Well, and Bob knows if it's a Dave Mills paint job.
>> Way down. >> So Ron Lun's place fairly good craftsmanship. >> Well, yeah. I mean, the house, everything was built in the 30s. I don't know. I got I would have to look at what the house was built, but yeah. I mean, it's lasted the test of time. The
average house, you know, I think we say lasts about 100 years. If there if you were to build that house and not touch it for 100 years by 100 by year 100, it would have no value. That's kind of theoretically how it works. >> And I've I've been in both the motel and
in one of the cabins. And I would say it's really good work. >> Yeah. And in a couple of the advertisements I've found, you know, they say, "Oh, these cottages have been updated." And those advertisements are from when the pool was still across the street. >> Oh, right. So in around that time frame
they were updated >> according to the advertisement. >> Okay. Well, this has been excellent discussion. >> So we have a >> we have a motion and support. >> It's probably enough discussion. >> Yeah. >> Discussion.
>> All those in favor? >> Those opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Thank you very much. Um the last item is for um Brady to move on. Um
>> what's he going to do? >> He's not often a voting member. >> He's voting me. >> He is a voting member. >> He's not often a voting member. So >> Oh yeah. Oh yeah. So he has to make the motion to adjourn. >> Oh. >> Did we do anything on one? >> Yes.
>> All everything else is not >> everything. There was no motion. >> Okay. What do we need to sign? >> You have to sign your affidavit that you were here, that you were present. >> Does that happen before? >> Just throw that in here. >> Okay. >> So, we're just waiting.
>> We're just waiting for Brady. >> Yes. >> I'd like to make a motion to adjourn. >> Excellent. We have a motion. Is there support? >> I'll support that. >> Excellent. Thank you, Commissioner Svin. Any further discussion? >> No. Thank you. >> Other than say thank you for waiting patiently for me. That was kind.
>> Of course. Oh, I know. >> Yeah. Hey. Yeah. All good. >> Thank you, Bob. >> All right. Uh, all those in favor? I. Those opposed. All right. Motion passes unanimously. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Yeah. One year I had to go chase Bobby Desamp down because he forgot to sign it before he left.
>> Yeah. >> And he's not a slow driver. >> Yeah.