TAX COURT, continued

3. As of the assessment date, January 2, 2019, Ms. Vasko owned the subject property.

4. As of the assessment date, Ms. Vasko was a Minnesota resident.

5. Neither Ms. Vasko, nor her son, occupied or used the subject property during 2019.

Conclusions Of Law

1. Petitioner submitted sufficient credible evidence to rebut the prima facie validity of the County’s classification as of January 2, 2019.

2. The McLeod County Assessor correctly classified petitioner’s property as residential non-homestead as of January 2, 2019.

3. Petitioner did not submit sufficient credible evidence to rebut the prima facie validity of the County’s estimated market value of the subject property as of January 2, 2019.

4. As Petitioner did not successfully challenge the County’s estimated market value assessment, it must be affirmed.

5. This court does not have subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate challenges to special assessments.

Order For Judgment

1. The classification of the subject property as of January 2, 2019, is residential non-homestead.

2. The estimated market value for the subject property as of January 2, 2019, is affirmed.

3. Any challenge to the special assessment on the subject property is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

IT IS SO ORDERED. THIS IS A FINAL ORDER. ENTRY OF JUDGMENT IS STAYED FOR 30 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS ORDER. LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY. BY THE COURT:

Jane N. Bowman

Dated: December 15, 2022

Date: 2022.12.15 11:57:58 -06'00'

Jane N. Bowman, Chief Judge MINNESOTA TAX COURT

Memorandum

I. INTRODUCTION

Petitioner, Ms. Renee Vasko, is the sole owner of a residence located in Lester Prairie, Minnesota (the “subject property”). Ms. Vasko contests the Assessor’s classification of the subject property (revoking its homestead classification), the estimated market value of the subject property, and a special assessment placed on the subject property’s tax bill. 1 A remote trial was held on August 18, 2022; the parties submitted post-trials briefs and the matter was deemed submitted on September 16, 2022.

1 Pet. (filed May 21, 2020). On the petition, Ms. Vasko also checked the “unequal assessment” box. “Unequal assessment occurs where a taxpayer’s property is valued for tax purposes at a substantially higher percentage of its market value than is other property in the taxing district.” Short v. Cnty. of Hennepin, 353 N.W.2d 525, 529 (Minn. 1984) (citing Hamm v. State, 255 Minn. 64, 69, 95 N.W.2d 649, 654 (1959)). At trial and in pretrial proceedings, Ms. Vasko did not meaningfully pursue this claim. As such, we do not address it and consider the claim waived.