Winter 2022

Equal Eyes OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF THE MINNESOTA ASSOCIATION OF ASSESSING OFFICERS

MNMAAO.ORG

WINTER 2022 VOLUME 44 NUMBER 166

Global Assessment Jamaica

Mobile Device Update Demography Update

MAAO LEADERSHIP

Vision Government Solutions has maintained a reputation as an innovative provider of CAMA software and services for Assessing Departments since 1975. Vision North Star CAMA is specifically designed for Minnesota and integrates with any Tax System, providing you with the flexibility to choose a combination of best in class solutions for your community.

EDITORIAL COMMITTEE

Lori Thingvold, SAMA Wright County Managing Editor

Jason Jorgensen, SAMA Wadena County Associate Editor Committee Chair

Nancy Gunderson SAMA Jake Pidde, SAMA Stearns County Clay County

Missy Manke, CMA Wright County

2

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

Jamie Freeman, SAMA Hubbard County

Amber Swenson- Hill, SAMA Polk County

INDEX President’s Perspective

4

Commissioner’s Comments

5

MAAP Update

7

Classifieds

8

Top 10

12

What You Get For

30

Out of the Past

31

Transitions

40

Tax Court

42

SBA Minutes

57

* The statements made or opinions expressed by authors in Equal Eyes do not necessarily represent a policy position of the Minnesota Association of Assessing Officers.

Executive Officers President

Joe Udermann, SAMA 1st Vice President

Tim Bulger, SAMA 2nd Vice President

Mark Peterson, SAMA Financial Officer

Chase Peloquin, SAMA Past President

Patrick Chapman, SAMA

Regional Directors Region 1

Ryan DeCook, SAMA Region 2

Jennifer Flicek, SAMA Region 3

Tina Diedrich-VonEschen, SAMA Region 4

Amber Peratalo, SAMA Region 5

David Parsons, SAMA Region 6

Doug Bruns, SAMA Region 7

Kevin Scheidecker, SAMA Region 8

Jill Murray, SAMA Region 9 Joshua Hoogland, SAMA Committee Chairs Agricultural

GIS

Conference Content

Editorial

Mobile Device Update

14

Mark Koehn, CMA Randy Lahr, SAMA Jean Popp, SAMA Jason Jorgensen, SAMA

Information Systems

Michael Neimeyer, CMA

Legislative

Mark Peterson, SAMA

Nominating/Research/Planning

Lena Schaefer CMA

Rules and Resolutions

Sales Ratio

Scholarship

Secretary

Site Selection

Strategic Planning

Tax Court / Valuations

Treasurer

U40/10 Residential

John Conway, SAMA Mark Peterson, SAMA Ashley Gunderson, SAMA

Global Assessment Jamaica

32

Michele Gelo, SAMA Penny Vikre, SAMA Lisa Thompson-Clarke, CMA Patrick Chapman, SAMA Brett Hall/Ann Miller, SAMA Reed Heidelberger, SAMA Troy Halter, CMA

Educational Workgroups

Designation Committee

Patrick Chapman, SAMA

Conference Content Curriculum & Assessor Standards Steering Committee

Jean Popp, SAMA Jessi Glancey, SAMA/Ben Bedard, AMA

Mike Wacker, SAMA

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

3

president’s perspective

By Joe Undermann, SAMA Waseca County Assessor

MAAO President

Hello Everyone As we head into the winter season we have a few challenges ahead of us. Many of us are dealing with COVID related issues either directly or with family or friends and hoping that the new variants are weaker and we become stronger.

We are getting our staff to their AMA levels by the July 1 deadline which has been looming over us for quite some time. We are seeing some values increasing at levels we haven’t seen for quite some time.

We have learned a lot over the past few years about how we can attain education, attend meetings and communicate with each other virtually or in person. I have always been a big supporter of the virtual option for education being an outstate individual my entire career in assessing. Our superior technical support and resources have really allowed us to take advantage of the tools necessary for virtual opportunities.

I know we have a lot in front of us but we have already put so much behind.

Let’s look forward to the future and work together to stay strong and united in our mission to be the best and most ethical at what we do.

Remember, it’s almost Spring  Joe

4

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

Commissioner’s Comments

By Robert Doty MN Revenue Commissioner

Lasting partnerships for changing times Robert Doty Minnesota Revenue Commissioner

Greetings! I hope each of you enjoyed the holiday season and were able to spend some time with family, friends, or just recharging your batteries. It’s hard to imagine that we’re two years into the COVID-19 pandemic, with many of us still working remotely at least part of the time or taking extra precautions when doing business in person.

Though 2021 brought a bit more normalcy to us all, the pandemic and related public health measures continue to impact our work at the Department of Revenue and with our partners across Minnesota.

I appreciate how assessors and MAAO have risen to this unique challenge as we all find ways to work and improve together – even when we cannot be together in the same room.

Virtual Work

We’ve learned to do more of our work virtually than ever before. It remains to be seen what true “normal” will look like going forward. But at Revenue – where many of us are still working from home – we know it will include more remote work and online outreach and education.

Last fall, for example, we held several online listening sessions about state-assessed property with counties, pipeline and utility companies, and others. We’re planning additional sessions to continue the discussion about Minnesota Rule 8100 and common themes we’ve heard so far.

We hope to gather in person for at least some of these next conversations. But, if that proves impractical, we’ve seen how current technology presents a viable option in the form of online presentations, discussion, and breakout sessions.

Even before the pandemic, our Property Tax Division was seeking ways to make more training available remotely to increase flexibility and save on transportation, lodging, and other costs. For example, we changed to online courses for members of Boards of Appeal and Equalization in 2015.

Last year’s tax bill updated requirements for Professional Assessment Certification and Education (PACE) to allow remote courses and more options during each four-year licensing cycle. After those law changes, we offered several online PACE courses last year, which we plan to continue.

We’re finalizing our 2022 PACE schedule at this writing. For the latest information, check our Property Tax Education and Outreach web page. Go to www.revenue.state.mn.us/property-tax-educationoutreach, or type PACE into the Search box on any page of our site.

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

5

commissioner’s comments, continued Agency Updates

I’d like to note some changes in our agency. Jon Klockziem is our new assistant commissioner for Tax Policy and Engagement, effective January 5. Jon came to Revenue as an assistant director in our Property Tax Division in 2013, serving as director for the last four years.

Jon’s previous experience will serve him – and the rest of us – well in his new role. He’ll still be in the loop on property tax issues, as that division will be reporting to him, along with Tax Research and our Policy and Public Engagement teams.

In his time at Revenue, Jon has overseen increased outreach and collaboration with local governments, taxpayer interest groups, and legislative officials. Some examples: •

Our annual Property Tax Services report, first published in 2017

•

An improved administrative appeal process for state assessed property like utilities and railroads

•

Discussion with MAAO and others about assessment issues like short-term vacation rentals, fractional homesteads, assessor licensing levels, business production property, and low-income housing

Jon replaces Tracy Fischman, who accomplished much in the last year. We benefitted mightily from Tracy’s strong commitment to build relationships with stakeholders, increase the fairness of our tax system, and understand how it impacts Minnesotans.

Tracy helped Revenue deepen our outreach and engagement to all our customers – from individual taxpayers to Minnesota businesses, local officials, and others who interact with or shape our tax system.

Kyle Gustafson is now our acting Property Tax director. In nearly 10 years with Revenue, Kyle has specialized in property tax issues as an attorney and supervisor in our Appeals and Legal Services Division. Since 2016, Kyle has managed a team of attorneys who provide legal and legislative advice about income tax, sales tax, and property tax.

Please join me in welcoming Jon and Kyle as they settle into their new roles ahead of this year’s legislative session, which begins January 31. Though 2022 is not a budgeting year, taxes will play a prominent role in discussions at the Capitol, given the state’s strong projected budget surplus and broad desire to provide middle-class tax relief.

We look forward to working with MAAO on issues of mutual interest. Our work together helps ensure consistent administration of property taxes, which fund important local programs and services for Minnesotans.

As always, we’ll provide updates and guidance on any law or policy changes that affect your work after the legislative session ends in May. I hope to meet many of you in person this year at upcoming MAAO-Revenue events. Meanwhile, stay well and have a happy, healthy 2022!

Robert Doty is commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Revenue.

6

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

MAAP UPDATE

By Jenna Takemoto 2020-2021 MAAP President

Another year has quickly gone by during this pandemic – 2nd year. The MAAP Members have made the decision to put the 2021 Winter Conference on hold due to the areas with unable to travel & guideline during this time. As we all know, other companies are running low on staff and are having a hard time even staffing. With everything still being short notice still, we are still treading the unknown.

The MAAP Board Members will be meeting sometime after the New Year to discuss our By-Laws and seeing what needs to be changed due to the pandemic and upcoming events/roles. How we can create a smoother transition with everything in general. We are hoping to reschedule the Winter Conference on May 6th 2022.

We are working with DOR to receive Continuing Education Hours (CEH) at the winter meeting. Since we had a great turn out in 2019, we are working on getting 4 CEH credits instead of 3. Once again, we extend an invite to all MAAO members. At this time our topics for both workshops are still to be determined but gearing towards Agricultural Information.

If you or any staff are not a current MAAP member and would like to join us, the annual MAAP membership fee is $10. You may contact me for details.

I encourage MAAP participation of all administrative staff in each county. We always have topics of discussion relating to some parts of our jobs. Bonus – networking opportunity is always fun! It’s amazing to be able to speak and learn from others who do the same position. It will benefit you, your office and county!

Wishing you all the joys of the season and happiness throughout the upcoming year!

Jenna Takemoto 2020-2021 MAAP President Jenna.takemoto@co.sherburne.mn.us

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

7

Classifieds Small Town

Amber Swenson-Hill, SAMA Polk County Editorial Committee Member

11348 Itasca St, Mizpah, MN Koochiching County $100,000 Population 76 Take a peak inside the only home currently for sale in this small town! Home is a three bedroom, one bath, and has a newer furnace to get you through the cold Minnesota nights ahead.

Enjoy building a snowman in the large yard with majestic white pine. Keep your car snow free in the single detached garage. Got more than one? Store it inside the large pole building!

2020 Assessor’s Market Value: $71,400

8

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

Demography 2021

By Nancy Gunderson, SAMA, Clay County Editorial Committee Member

On December 9th, I listened to MAAO Region 9’s Winter Housing Update 2021 webinar. One of the speakers was Susan Brower of the Minnesota State Demographic Center (SDC). The SDC, part of the Minnesota Department of Administration, is the main provider of demographic data and analysis for Minnesota. Ms. Brower is the current Minnesota State Demographer. The SDC serves as an official liaison to the U. S. Census Bureau.

One of the goals for SDC is to ensure “the fullest and most accurate count of Minnesota’s population” for purposes of congressional representation and redistricting.

Many government agencies use census data for funding and planning purposes too.

During the year of 2020, a nation-wide census took place. The pandemic delayed the process but total population and race-ethnicity breakdowns down to the census block level has been published for the purpose of redistricting.

Additional data is expected to be released in 2022.

The following slides were part of Ms. Brower’s presentation. The state of Minnesota grew by 7.6% over the last ten years to a 2020 population of 5,706,494. Surrounding states also saw growth in their population percentage: Iowa 4.7% North Dakota 15.8% South Dakata 8.9% Wisconsin 3.6%

Slide #2 shows the percentage of change in populations at the county level. As the map reflects, the population growth is centered in the Twin Cities regional area. This 7-county Twin Cities metro added 313,537 people, or 78% of the state’s growth. Other noted counties of growth are where mid-sized urban cities such as Mankato, Moorhead, and Rochester are located.

The I-94 corridor and lake regions support counties with growth as well. There were 51 counties that gained in population while 36 counties lost population.

The breakdown in the major race groups is detailed in this first slide. Minnesota residents belonging to the Black, Indigenous, People of Color (BIPOC) group reflect a growing share of the population.

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

9

Slide #3 displays the top 20 fastest growing cities within the state. As one can see, most are within the 7-county Twin Cities metro area.

Along with adding residents to these communities, changes in housing units need to occur. Slide #4 correlates the development of additional housing units –i.e., a single apartment unit is counted as one additional unit.

Increases in population, can bring increases to home values. With more residents seeking home ownership and possible lack of available inventory, prices tend to increase. Slide #5 reflects all states and their percentage of change.

Most of the states had either stable median home values or saw increased, especially in the western states.

10

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

Slide #6 reflects percentage changes in home values per Minnesota counties. Seven counties showed a decrease from 2014 to 2019. The remaining have had stable or growth in value. We all know that this trend will certainly increase across the state after the sales active we have seen this past year and a half.

This was a great webinar and I’m so glad I was available to attend and listen to all three speakers.

Thank you Region 9. If anyone should have follow-up questions, they can be directed to this email address: Demography.helpline@state.mn.us Website: mn.gov/demography

Created with TheTeachersCorner.net Word Search Maker

REGION 1

O

L

A

M

Z

W

E

E

T

H

P

B

K

C

S

L

U

H

W

D

X

B

Q

H

E

M

Q

O

S

N

G

F

J

P

J

C

V

U

A

T

D

V

X

G

I

E

G

P

O

Q

O

E

U

M

F

P

Y

Q

S

F

E

R

N

I

Y

R

D

T

G

A

O

O

Y

X

Y

H

O

T

E

V

L

P

M

Z

I

T

S

Y

X

A

D

W M

M

X

S

E

W

R

Y

V

M

S

C

K

U

D

M

H

X

H

T

J

O

T

E

R

K

R

K

Z

O

E

R

O

F

X

P

I

P

U

K

Z

W

L

Z

O

L

S

E

M

A

W

H

G

P

R

Q

F

U

E

J

S

E

A

G

M

L

P

G

S

C

I

J

T

E

Y

Q

B

R

D

B

O

R

P

S

L

D

D

D

T

E

N

D

R

R

T

R

X

N

I

E

L

X

F

E

L

Z

M

O

R

S

O

D

M

H

O

C

Y

B

N

U

M

J

Q

I

I

V

J

D

Q

A

N

Z

Y

E

X

L

N

Q

Z

A

S

Y

F

C

F

J

V

D

W W

A

B

A

S

H

A

Q

E

L

K

T

S

Y

R

V

V

U

I

A

Y

U

Z

C

F

D

S

J

H

X

K

E

R

E

A

A

R

R

Y

R

G

Q

F

O

U

X

C

P

N

P

V

D

E

U

A

E

K

P

O

X

L

B

K

P

Z

C

O

O

O

O

A

B

X

E

Q

F

A

M

N

U

Y

S

C

B

T

X

V

L

U

V

O

M

T

S

G

N

Y

H

Q

L

Q

Q

M

Y

B

R

P

X

V

R

D

S

V

H

F

E

O

A

S

V

E

Z

H

N

F

T

W M

N

T

C

D

E

O

O

I

F

W

Z

U

I

J

I

Q

H

A

P

B

E

S

Y

N

W

T

D

X

E

R

DODGE GOODHUE OLMSTED WABASHA

Q

FILLMORE HOUSTON RICE WASECA

FREEBORN MOWER STEELE WINONA

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

11

THE TOP 10

Average house prices by state in 2021

Jamie Freeman, SAMA Hubbard County Editorial Committee Member

The average house price has been rising rapidly throughout the United States. The Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis currently reports the median home sales price at $374,900. Which is an increase of over $50,000 from this same time last year.

When looking at the fast rise in home prices, the COVID-19 pandemic appears to have been a major contributing factor.

Mortgages rates continue to be at a historic low, driving up demand as homebuyers looked to take advantage. The pandemic also led to consumers shifting spending to their housing budget and pushed more millennials toward home ownership.

While at the same time, there is a housing shortage as many homeowners have been reluctant to list their homes. This has resulted in one of the biggest seller’s markets in history.

Where does Minnesota stand in terms of the average house price of $374,900? As of August 2021, Minnesota comes in relatively close to the average at $307,644.

This brings us to the top 10 average house prices nationwide:

12

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

Top 10, continued

State 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Hawaii California Massachusetts Washington Colorado Oregon Utah New Jersey New York Idaho

Value of a Typical Single-family Home

1-year Increase

$764,146 $708,936 $533,440 $542,012 $509,800 $468,953 $493,221 $421,124 $363,990 $427,410

14.5% 21.9% 18.5% 22.8% 20.3% 20.7% 28.5% 18.9% 14.2% 36.0%

Median Household Income $83,102 $80,440 $85,843 $78,687 $77,127 $67,058 $75,780 $85,751 $72,108 $60,999

Minnesota’s ranking is at 21 with an average house price of $307,644 with a 1-year increase of 13.4%. Considering housing prices can be contributed to supply and demand as well as what residents are willing to pay. This in turn is influenced largely by what residents can afford to pay. As such, there is a direct correlation between the average price of a house and the median income of homebuyers.

EE

Minnesota seems to be an exception, however. The median household income for Minnesota is $74,593, placing higher than #6, 9 and 10 in the above table. Minnesota’s average annual income is also $8,900 more than the national median household income of $65,712.

EE

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

13

2021 Mobile Device Update

By Markus Yager, SAMA City of Maple Grove

Why do counties and cities use mobile devices?

Over the past six years, the use of mobile devices in the assessing field has grown dramatically. The driving forces behind this trend vary from office to office, but some of the major reasons dovetail with broader trends in business and government. The once-mythical “paperless” office has become an essential reality in a world of remote and hybrid work. The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated this trend. Offices who still relied on physical files and papers faced an even more daunting challenge during this tumultuous time. In this dynamic and ever-changing world, mobile devices offer access to digital files from anywhere that can be 14

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

sorted, organized, and searched with just a click or a tap. Looking towards a post-pandemic world, having access to data in the field for taxpayers can help address issues immediately instead of waiting to get back to the office.

Along with the benefits of going paperless, some CAMA systems allow direct access to data collection in the field. When designed and implemented properly, this can provide dramatic time savings to offices that are often stretched thin. Reducing data entry by using mobile devices in the field is often a significant selling point to administration, as saving time can promise reduced costs and increased productivity.

Finally, transitioning to mobile devices can also help reconsider old, outdated processes that can be streamlined thanks to newer technology. Introducing the use of mobile devices can lead to reforming systems and processes that have not been evaluated in years. For example, appraisers at the City of Maple Grove have always used paper building permits, but now with a mobile device we are reevaluating the whole process of how we organize and review these properties.

How do we know what mobile devices are being used?

Back in 2015, the MAAO GIS Committee developed a survey on how jurisdictions across the state were using mobile devices. The goal was to get a good sample of how many assessing offices were utilizing mobile devices and in what way. Because there are many factors in mobile device usage, the survey also requested information on CAMA and sketching software. This was also done with the intent of providing a contact point at each city or county, so that we can connect jurisdictions with similar setups and crowdsource best practices. Since the initial survey, we have updated it every other year to balance up-to-date data with survey fatigue.

In the past six years, we have seen dramatic growth in mobile device use and significant change in how these devices are used. As more CAMA systems are updated to support mobile devices, we have seen a shift from simply replacing

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

15

paper out in the field with actually entering data into a CAMA system.

How many offices are using mobile devices?

Thankfully, we have consistently received a great response rate for our survey.

We have data from 99 jurisdictions, which is nearly every office in the state. Of these respondents, 68% are either fully using or testing mobile devices in the field. This is a significant increase in just six years – somewhere between 15% and 20%. The raw number of appraisers in the field are even more staggering – a jump from 215 in 2015 to 409 in 2021, or a jump of around 90%. This is due to some of the bigger cities and counties with more appraisers in the field implementing mobile devices. The interest in using mobile devices is even higher, and many of those who are not using devices are waiting on CAMA system upgrades to proceed.

How do mobile devices work with CAMA systems?

One common question that emerges is how mobile devices work with CAMA systems. The answer is complicated and dependent on each CAMA vendor.

The simplest solution some jurisdictions are using in the field is a PDF field card.

With this option, paper is replaced with a digital field card that can be written on using a finger or stylus and synced back to the office. While this does require the data to be entered in the CAMA system after field work, appraisers I have spoken with that use this method appreciate the simplified workflow.

Instead of taking a large stack of paper field cards, they simply bring their mobile device. The device often has a camera as well, eliminating another thing to carry in the field. Finally, having access to GIS/maps and other data in the field is a big benefit to using a mobile device, even if it cannot directly update CAMA data.

Direct entry and editing of CAMA data from a mobile device has grown about 10% over the last six years, from about 59% to 69% of assessing jurisdictions surveyed. For those CAMA systems that do allow for editing data while in the field, each works in a slightly different way. Some systems use a check-in/ check-out process, where an appraiser selects the properties they want to edit

16

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

in the field and check out those properties, locking them for editing until they are checked back in. This protects the data and allows data verification as the appraiser returns to the office and uploads the data. Other systems simply work live in the CAMA system, much like entering data in the CAMA system in the office.

This has the benefit of instant record changes, but it also can be more prone to mistakes being entered while in the field.

In discussing these differences with a wide variety of appraisers, it is clear there is not a unified preference. Some prefer the PDF field card route, where you can take notes, do rough sketching, and then work from the field card in the office when entering data into the CAMA system. This allows the appraiser to focus on the data collection and worry about the details later. Conversely, those who are satisfied with the direct entry into CAMA appreciate the time it saves to avoid going back and touching a property again in the office. The ability to instantly update data in the system means that data is always up to date.

What CAMA systems are jurisdictions using?

Along with information on mobile devices, data from this survey reveals the breakdown of CAMA systems various jurisdictions are using. There are a wide variety of CAMA systems in use across the state, with the top five coming in at CPT, Vanguard, Avenu (formerly Xerox, MCIS, and Tyler. Overall, the breakdown has remained similar over the last six years, though Tyler and Vanguard have both seen user growth at the expense of the others. There are numerous smaller vendors that only serve a few cities or counties. Several jurisdictions are planning migrations in the next two years, which will continue to slightly shift the market share of these vendors. Often CAMA systems work in conjunction with tax data systems and permitting, so any change can be extremely costly, disruptive, and time consuming to implement.

What mobile devices are being used in the field?

To analyze what mobile devices are being used in the field, it is helpful to divide them into two main categories: Windows tablets and iPads. (Android tablets are used by one or two jurisdictions in the state, but the vast majority are Windows tablets or iPads. Windows tablets come in a wide variety of styles from a wide variety of vendors, such as Dell, HP, and Lenovo. They run the Windows 10 or Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

17

Windows 11 operating system. The Microsoft Surface Pro 8 is a good example of a Windows tablet. Camera quality, battery life, size, and weight can vary dramatically between devices. Often times Windows tablets often function as an appraiser’s only device. In the field, it can access CAMA software or edit PDF field cards, and in the office, it can be docked and used as a desktop computer. In 2021, 76% of assessing jurisdictions using a mobile device are using a Windows tablet, a dramatic increase from just 49% in 2015. This is in large part due to people switching to windows-based CAMA vendors. iPads, while declining in usage, are still being used by about 22% of jurisdictions.

They range in size from 7.9-12.9 inches and in price starting at $329. All iPads are made by Apple and run the iPadOS operating system. Many jurisdictions using iPads are using the 11-inch iPad Pro. iPads are thin, light, have a great selection of tablet apps, a great camera, and great battery life. Unfortunately, because nearly all CAMA software is Windows based, an iPad cannot be the single device for most appraisers. This means that in addition to an iPad, an appraiser needs a Windows laptop or desktop. This lack of compatibility with Windows-based camera software is the biggest downside to using an iPad in the assessing field and is a deal breaker for many IT departments. For those jurisdictions simply using PDF field cards, iPads can be a great mobile device.

Wrap-Up Six years of data can tell us a lot about mobile device use in the assessing field.

As more CAMA vendors update their software to support mobile devices, we have seen a significant increase in usage and interest in jurisdictions across the state.

As technology continues to change and improve, the Minnesota Assessing field is also adapting quickly to an evolving work environment, including remote work and augmenting in-person field work with technology. The MAAO GIS Committee is committed to keeping our organization current on how jurisdictions across the state are getting work done using mobile devices.

For more detailed survey results, please see our committee page on the MAAO website.

18

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

Fall 2021 Mobile Device Update

Markus Yager, SAMA

MAAO GIS Committee City of Maple Grove

Why mobile devices?  Increasing implementation

 Technology can promote work effectiveness,

productivity, accuracy, and cost savings  Avoid double data collection  “Paperless” office/field work

 Data accessible in the field

 Integrate CAMA data with mapping  Visual  Equalization

 New Ways of Doing Things

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

19

2021 Survey  Great response  Updated Data from 74 Cities/Counties (99 Total)  Strong interest

 Data that continues to change  68% of respondents are either testing or using

mobile devices in the field

 This is a SIGNIFICANT increase (15-20%)  Several respondents noted that they were still

waiting on CAMA software upgrades to proceed

How many are using mobile devices?

Mobile Device Use

2015

Not Using 49%

Using 33%

Testing 18%

20

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

How many are using mobile devices?

2021 Using 55%

Not Using 32%

Testing 13%

How many are using mobile devices?

409

2021

2015

215

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

21

CAMA systems in use

2015

Other 13.5% MCIS 13.5% Vanguard 22.5%

CPUI 27.0%

Xerox 23.6%

CAMA systems in use

2021

Other 19%

MCIS 11% Vanguard 25%

22

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

CPT 25%

Avenu 20%

What types of mobile devices are available?

Types of Mobile Devices

 Windows Tablets  Microsoft Windows 10 or 11  Wide variety of sizes (10-13 inches)

 iPads  Apple iPadOS  Multiple sizes (8.3, 10.2, 11, 12.9 inch)

 Android Tablets  Google’s Android operating system  Wide variety of sizes (7-13 inches) 

No “one size fits all” device



Constantly changing world

What type of mobile devices are being used?

2015

Android 6.7%

Windows 48.9%

iPadOS 44.4%

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

23

What type of mobile devices are being used?

2021

Android 2%

iPadOS 22%

Windows 76%

Do mobile devices input into CAMA?

Do 2015 mobile devices input into CAMA? No 2015 40.9%

24

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

Yes 59.1%

No 40.9%

Yes

Do mobile devices input into CAMA?

2021 No 31% Yes 69%

Windows: Microsoft Surface Pro 8 ($1099+)

Pros: • • • • •

Display (13”) ~16 hour battery life Performance Compatibility Pen & keyboard

Cons:

• No mobile data • Tablet apps still limited • Weight (1.96 lbs)

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

25

Windows: Dell Latitude 7320 Detachable ($1569+) Pros:

13 inches/1.7 lbs.

“All day” battery life Desktop-class performance Works w/all Windows software • Built-in mobile data • Pen & keyboard available

• • • •

Cons:

• Terrible rear camera • Tablet app store still limited

iPadOS: iPad Pro 11” ($799+) & 12.9” ($1099+) Pros:

• • • • • • •

11 in/1.03 lb or 12.9/1.5 lbs ~9 hour battery life Mobile data Best tablet app selection Great camera Infinite accessories Can use lidar for measurements

Cons:

• Expensive secondary device • Compatibility (depending on CAMA/software vendor)

26

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

iPadOS: iPad Air 11” ($599+) Pros: • • • • • •

10.9 inch/1 lb ~9 hour battery life Available with mobile data Best tablet app selection Good camera Infinite accessories

Cons:

• Less bright than iPad Pro • Compatibility (depending on CAMA/software vendor)

What is “the cloud”?

iPadOS: iPad mini & iPad 10.2 iPad mini ($499+)

• 8.3 inch screen is likely too small • Extremely portable

iPad 10.2” ($329+)

• Best “budget” iPad • Screen is less bright/more reflective • Mediocre camera

 Keeping files synced (the same) across devices  Edit a file on the computer, the changes are synced

through the internet and on all devices

 If disconnected, the changes are sent when you get

connection

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

27

Cloud services  Dropbox  Box  Google Drive  OneDrive  iCloud  Amazon Cloud Drive  Cloud Backup Services  Carbonite

 Backblaze  iDrive

Bottom line: Don’t give up!  Variety in Quality  Size/weight

Expectations

 Battery life

 Data collection

 Durability

 Direct data input

 Reparability

 GIS/mapping

 Connectivity

 Compatibility

 Accessories

 Photos

 Cost of entry  Screen readability  Camera quality 28

 Variety in

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

We’re Hiring!

Earn $200.00 for qualifying Equal Eyes articles Email editor@mnmaao.org for details

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

29

What You Get For MN Smallest towns

Amber Swenson- Hill, SAMA Polk County Editorial Committee Member

116 1st Ave, Whalan / Fillmore County Sold August 2021 for $40,000 1 bed, 1 bath, approximately 840 square feet Population 37

712 Alley Dr, Whalan Fillmore County Sold August 2021 for $133,000

2 bed, 1 bath, Approximately 1,596 SF

Population 37 408 Hoff Ave, Vining / Otter Tail County Sold October 2020 for $64,200 4 bed, 1 bath, approximately 1,352 SF Population 39

105 4th St S, McGrath Aitkin County Sold October 2021 for $120,000

4 bed, 2 bath, approximately 1,983 SF Population 32

30

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

out of the past Remembering Yesterday

5 Years Ago—2017 5 Years Ago—2016 During this year’s MN State Fair, Revenue led a campaign called #OurMN, a social media effort to highlight what we get for our tax dollars.

MAAO President Nancy Wojcik wrote on the many challenges assessment offices are facing in recruiting and retaining employees.

10 Years Ago—2011 Lane Thor, Julie Hackman, Ryan Short, and Mark Meili were awarded SAMA designations.

Judy Hahn retired from Sibley County after 23 years of service.

Member clicks just released the new iPhone and iPad app for the MAAO website.

Representative Michele Bachmann announced run for U.S. presidency

15 Years Ago—2006 Jacquelyn Betz, MDOR, was the Associate Editor for Equal Eyes.

Gloria Erickson retired from Pennington County Assessor after 30 years of service.

The “Crocodile Hunter” Steve Irwin was killed by a stingray on September 4.

20 Years Ago—2001 September 11 remembrance.

25 Years Ago – 1996 Tom May was hired as the Hennepin County Assessor.

Lorna Thomas was awarded her SAMA. Mike Sheehy was a candidate for the 2nd Vice President.

Madeleine Albright is appointed as the first female US Secretary of State.

30 Years Ago – 1991 Dorothy McClung was seated as the Commissioner of Revenue Membership for MAAO increased by 14 people raising the overall members to 494.

Roger Storey received his award for 2 years of service from MAAO. Median household income is $30,126.

A record-breaking snowstorm hits Minnesota on November 1 depositing twenty-four inches of snow in twenty-four hours.

35 Years Ago – 1986 Paul Knutson was victorious in the Championship Volleyball Playoffs, but received broken ribs in the process.

The State Board of Assessors focused on licensure levels at their meeting.

45 Years Ago – 1976 Jimmy Carter becomes the 39th president of the United States with Minnesota Senator Walter Mondale as his vice-president.

Mondale would later run for president in 1984, losing to Ronald Reagan.

70 Years Ago – 1951 Over 82% of iron ore extracted from United States mines during this year originates in Minnesota.

100 Years Ago – 1921 WLB, the first Minnesota radio station, formed at the University of Minnesota.

The $1.129 billion US Bank Stadium, new home to the Minnesota Vikings is featured.

Kyle Holmes, new Carlton County Assessor & MAAO President is quoted “Always do your best for the public, remember that no one likes to pay taxes, and take pride in your work and profession. It takes a special person to be able to do what we do”.

10 Years Ago—2012 Myron Frans was the Commissioner of Revenue.

Tom Zander retires from the City of St. Michael.

Sherri Kitchenmaster was awarded with AMA designation.

World population hits 7,021,836,29 people.

15 Years Ago—2007 Bob Hanson of Hubbard County left the Sales Ratio Committee.

Assessors recognized John Hagen for 20 years of service with the DOR. Rob Wagner is seated as the new MAAO president.

Minimum wage is increased to $5.85 an hour for the first time in ten years.

Amber Swenson-Hill, SAMA Polk County Editorial Committee Member

20 Years Ago—2002 Julie Roisen took a position in Steele County.

Tine Diedric-Von Eschen started at Stearns County Stephen Baker and Lori Schwendemann reach ten years with MAAO. The U.S. population is 290 million people.

25 Years Ago – 1997 Marvin Anderson received the Zangerle Award on behalf of Equal Eyes at the October IAAO conference.

Steve Behrenbrinker was nominated for the Donehoo Essay award for his article he wrote for the Assessment Journal.

Tom May was director for Region 9 while holding the Assistant Assessor position at Hennepin County The U.S. space shuttle joins up with the Russian space station.

30 Years Ago – 1992 The Minnesota History Center near downtown Saint Paul opens.

35 Years Ago – 1987 Lloyd McCormick became a regional rep for the Department of Revenue President-elect Bill Coons was congratulated by Dan Franklin and Scott Renne was elected second VP. Roger Storey was awarded for 20 years with MAAO. Jeff Johnson, Stearns County was awarded TOP PEN for his article on poultry housing and irrigation.

The average life expectancy is 74.9.

40 Years Ago – 1982 A total of 34.3 inches of snow falls on the Twin Cities on January 20 and 22.

45 Years Ago – 1977 Rosalie Wahl becomes the first woman justice in the Minnesota Supreme Court.

135 Years Ago – 1887 St. Paul hosts the first ski tourney in the Midwest.

235 Years Ago – 1787 David Thompson, working for the North Wes Company (fur-trading) completes the first formal mapping of Minnesota.

The national unemployment rate is at 4.6%.

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

31

Global Assessment Jamaica

32

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

Written By Jason Jorgensen, SAMA Wadena County Associate Editor

Nestled in the middle of the Caribbean Sea, halfway between the Southern beaches of Florida and the northern tip of Columbia, is the tropical Island of Jamaica.

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

33

Global Assessment Jamaica

Introduction

Nestled in the middle of the Caribbean Sea, halfway between the Southern beaches of Florida and the northern tip of Columbia, is the tropical Island of Jamaica.

Population and Demographics

In 1494 Christopher Columbus made claim to the lush tropical island, and 15 years later Spanish settlers began to move and develop the island. Unfortunately, many of the island’s indigenous people were infected and died from European diseases. According to the most recent polls taken by the United Nations in July 2021, the current population of Jamaica is 2.97 million people. Over the last 50 years the island has had a fluctuating and unstable growth rate, with a large population drop throughout the 1980’s.

However, after a short population rebound in the 1990’s, the island’s population growth rate has been slowly but steadily declining, which is leading up to a negative growth rate set to start in 2030. The capital city of Kingston holds the country’s highest population at 937,000. The combined median age for men and women on the island is 26 years, with an average combined life expectancy of 74.88 years. Currently, over 70% of Jamaica’s population is over the age of 18. The island averages approximately 273 people per kilometer, which sets its global ranking at 138. In 1955, the island population was 71% rural, whereas now only 45% of the population currently lives in rural areas. Both the rural and urban areas have seen growth, but the majority of the people tend to reside in urban areas. The Island is made up of several ethnic

34

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

groups, Jamaicans of African descent represent 76.3% of the population, followed by 15.1% Afro-European, 3.4% East Indian and Afro-East Indian, 3.2% Caucasian, 1.2% Chinese and 0.8% other.

Administrative divisions

In 1758 Jamaica originally was set up with 3 main counties that divided up the island in 3 jurisdictions from east to west. These counties were set up to allow the British government to facilitate court hearing procedures in specific areas across the island. The three counties have no administrative function in the current world but are still named as Cornwall, Middlesex, and Surrey. The current government established in 1962, now free from British rule, was set up into 14 parishes, with each parish having a section of coastline.

Geography

Jamaica is a mountainous and rugged island approximately 146 miles long, and anywhere from 22 to 51 miles across at its widest point, covering an area of 4,244 square miles, which in comparison, is slightly smaller than Connecticut. It is the third largest island in the Caribbean and is located about 90 miles south of Cuba. Jamaica has 635 miles of coastline, with limestone mountains riddled throughout the center. The eastern portion of the island is home to the famous Blue Mountains, where there is a 7,401-foot peak.

Climate

Jamaica is well known for its tropical climate, with average highs in the mid 80’s and lows in the 70’s throughout most of the island. The mountain temperatures will usually be a few degrees cooler throughout the year. Rainfall typically averages around 82 inches annually for most parts of the island. However, the high mountains on the eastern side, force trade strong winds to dump more than 130 inches of rain on Portland parish. Other areas on the south and southwest of the island typically receive very little rain creating a hot and dry climate.

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

35

Economy

Fifty percent of Jamaica’s GDP and employment is derived from finance, tourism, and other services.

Foreign exchange through tourism is the country’s main source of income. Jamaica is well known in the mining industry for Bauxite, an aluminum ore found in the central regions of the island. Other minerals found on the island are gypsum, marble, limestone, silica, copper, lead and zinc. However, mining only accounts for a small percentage of the overall GDP and employment. The United States, British, and Canadian banks have influence and control over the financial region of the country. About one-quarter of the island’s GDP and one-sixth of the island’s employment is made up in the trade industry. The U.S. is Jamaica’s leading trade partner followed by Venezuela, Canada, Trinidad, and many other countries. Jamaica is one of the slowest developing countries in the world, throughout the last thirty years the GDP has only increased about one percent a year.

Agriculture

Jamaica’s ag industry accounts for about one-twentieth GDP and another one-sixth of the labor force.

The tropical climate of the island allows the growth of many important exports, which helps supply the financial needs for many of the island’s population. Sugarcane is the island’s main agricultural crop, and has been grown in Jamaica for centuries, from that cane sugar is then processed. The growth and harvest of cane also allows manufacturers to produce several varieties of rum and molasses. The island also relies on the production of oranges, bananas, coconuts, tobacco, cacao, ginger, and coffee.

The higher altitude of the Blue Mountains is the perfect temperature and climate to grow the highly sought-after Blue Mountain coffee. This coffee is grown on the slopes of the foothills at just below 5,000 feet and is harvested and prepared by exclusive Jamaican companies. The warm climate is also ideal for drug lords and their illegally grown marijuana crops.

36

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

Real estate

The current real estate market on the island continues to hold its value, even though the Covid pandemic over the past year. The NHT recently introduced housing relief efforts, to help continue and further stimulate the housing market. Vacation home property purchases ranging from $800,000 to $10 million are on the rise from out of country buyers. Homes in popular areas such as Montego Bay, Ocho Rios, and Negril are spread across both the coastline and inland areas. In the last year the average home prices have climbed 16% in the Discovery Bay area, at a price tag of $825,000.

Property Tax

Jamaica’s property tax system assesses value to only the unimproved land, with disregard to the value of any type of improvements such as buildings and crops. Land items that are taken into consideration are size, zoning, type of land, potential, topography, soil, and other characteristics. On April 1st of each year any person who owns land that is taxable must pay the tax that is due for that specific property. Non-payment of the due taxes allows the government to take revenue recapture actions to regain the lost monies, including seizure of personal property, penalties, and accrued interest. The property tax schedule is shown below: (a) For the first $400,000.00 ... ... $1,000.00 (b) For the next $400,000.00 ... ... 0.80% (c) For the next $700,000.00 ... ... 0.85% (d) For the next $1,500,000.00 ... ... 0.90% (e) For the next $1,500,000.00 ... ... 1.05% (f ) For the next $2,500,000.00 ... ... 1.10% (g) For the next $5,000,000.00 ... ... 1.15% (h) For the next $18,000,000.00 ... ... 1.25% (i) For every dollar thereafter ...

1.30%

Income Tax

Income tax on the Island is set at 30% for individuals and 25% for cooperation’s

Capital Gains

Jamaicans do not pay capital gains on real estate transactions.

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

37

Sales Tax

Jamaica administers a sales tax rate of 15% on certain consumer-based goods.

Employment

The current employment rate for islanders is 91.5 percent. Tourism tops the employment sector with 25% of the island’s workforce. Second, is the agricultural industry, with a diverse variety of exports like coffee, sugar, yams, and bananas. The beef and fish industry are also local employment opportunities but do not offer enough employment to include in the statistics. Thirdly, mining is another major employer on the island, with extensive reserves of bauxite and other minerals available for export. Last, is the manufacturing industry, textiles leads the island’s manufacturing field and is one of its largest sectors.

Tourism

Jamaica is a very popular vacation destination, the island averages over 1.5 million visitors annually.

The annual tourism growth rate is about 3.3%. Jamaica is known for its white-sand beaches, which are scattered around the island’s coastline. Some of the other popular attractions are the Blue Mountains and the John Crow Mountains. These mountains are surrounded by lush green jungles, which are protected by a 300-square mile national park that surrounds the entire region. These dense jungles are the home to many native animals including bats, mongoose, and wild boars. It is also the home to the world’s largest centipede. However, Ocho Rios with its pristine white sand beaches, is still by far the island’s most popular tourist destination. Crystal blue waters and massive porting docks protruding out into the bay, attract a variety of passenger cruise lines on a daily basis. Last year, vacationing tourists brought in over 2 billion dollars in earnings to the island.

38

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

Transportation

Jamaica has around 21,000 kilometers of roads in place, of which approximately 15,000 are paved or major highways similar to the U.S. The Jamaican Government is working on constructing connecting corridors, to and from major cities, some of which lie on the northern coastal shoreline of the island.

Jamaica’s capital has a very modern public transportation system made up of large, air-conditioned luxury coaches. The once 272-kilometer railway system has been mostly overtaken by highways, leaving only 57 kilometers still in use. Two major airports allow for easy travel in and out of the island, one in the capital city of Kingston, and the other in Montego Bay. Jamaica’s placement in the Caribbean Sea makes it a prime location for cargo ships hauling containers through the Panama Canal. The Port of Kingston handles the majority of the container shipping traffic and has recently upgraded its facilities to promote future growth. Several other ports are spread out around the island to handle mining and agricultural products. Jamaica has nine lighthouses around the island to help prevent ships running into dangerous areas.

EE

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

39

transitions Best Wishes Upon Retirement

Nancy Gunderson, SAMA, Clay County Editorial Committee Member

News from REGION 3 …

News from REGION 7 …

John Keefe retired November 1st

Doug Walvatne to retire February ‘22

John served as Chisago County Assessor for 19 years and 7 months. John also worked for the following jurisdictions during his assessing career – City of Ramsey, Becker County and Pine County.

In 1985, I was offered a job with the Otter Tail County Assessor’s Department as an office technician. I must be honest with you in that I had no clue what the Assessor Department did but was excited in the fact that it was a full-time job with benefits as that is the same year my beautiful wife Valerie and I got married.

In 1987 I began my career as a staff appraiser and worked in that capacity until I was appointed County Assessor in 2010.

John plans to spend time with family, especially the grandchildren. Maybe do some hunting. Maybe even some traveling. Maybe do some hunting. He does plan to continue in the assessment field as a local appraiser. Along with all the that, squeeze in some time for hunting.

Here is a photo of John as he exits his office for the last time as county assessor of Chisago.

John’s pic here

After 36 ½ great years of working for the Otter Tail County Assessor’s Department, I have made the decision to retire with my last day being February 4th, 2022. I have had the privilege to work with so many quality individuals in Otter Tail County, Region VII, MAAO and the DOR. Thanks to all of you for your support and encouragement given to me through the many years as I will truly miss your friendships!

I do have immediate retirement plans where my wife and I are going to head to warmer climates with the first stop being Sun City AZ where my mother-in-law resides and then on to Marina CA where my oldest daughter and family reside (so don’t feel sorry for me).

Retirement allows me to spend more time with family and friends and more travelling, biking, camping, fishing, hiking and numerous other activities.

Doug’s family pic here

40

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

News from REGION 8 …

Bruce J. Dahlin retired November 17th Bruce started with Beltrami County as a survey technician July of 1984. One year later, he moved to the Assessor’s Office as an Appraiser. Bruce taught numerous years of the Property Valuation courses in Region 8. He also served on the CAMA committee and the MAAO Education committee.

Bruce has been married for 37 years and has two grown children – Mikayla, who is married and Brian.

Bruce and his wife will continue to live in Bemidji, while enjoying fishing, woodworking, and putzing in the garage. Bruce will also remain as an assistant Midwest Plains Regional Commissioners for Babe Ruth baseball.

After 37 plus years with Beltrami County, he stated that he really has met some great people working as an appraiser.

The membership of MAAO wish John, Doug, Bruce, and Mary Jo the best in their retirements.

Mary Jo Otten to retire January 27, 2022 I started in the Assessor’s Office in Mille Lacs County 42 years ago in October 1979. I was hired as a temporary full-time clerk hired for 6 months while one of the permanent office employees was in Texas for the winter. While she was away, she broke her hip and decided not to come back, so her position was open, and I was hired to fill it. Not intentionally but obviously meant to be that I started a long career in the Assessment Field with accepting that position. I was a clerk, technical clerk, office coordinator, appraiser, and deputy assessor while in Mille Lacs County.

I was hired as the Lake of the Woods County Assessor in July 2011, serving for 10 ½ years. I have met many interesting people in my career (both those in the profession and those who don’t like our profession very much) and feel very grateful for all the amazing people along the way. I appreciate all who have helped through the years. I couldn’t have done it without so many good people in my life along the way (both personally and professionally)! I am retiring January 27th, 2022.

My husband Jim and I have been together for 17 years. I have 4 adult children: Julie (Jeff), Dave (Megan), Chris (Carrie) and Bryan (Jen) and have been blessed with 8 amazing grandchildren: Josh, Damien, Parker, Brannen, Grayson, Jake, Emerson, and Reese.

I am looking forward to the next chapter in my life, more time with my grandchildren, family visits, traveling, fishing, cooking, hanging with my other retired friends and especially not having to be someplace by 7:30 every morning.

I love to ice fish and can’t wait until January 28th to be out in the fish house on a weekday

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

41

TAX COURT Jake Pidde, SAMA, Stearns County Editorial Committee Member

Anderson vs.

WRight County 42

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

STATE OF MINNESOTA

TAX COURT

COUNTY OF WRIGHT REGULAR DIVISION ______________________________________________________________________________ Harlan R. Anderson, Mary J. Anderson, Richard A. Anderson, and Mark W. Anderson

FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND ORDER FOR JUDGMENT

Petitioners,

File No. 86-CV-19-2167

vs.

Dated: October 29, 2021

County of Wright,

Respondent. _____________________________________________________________________________ This matter came before the Honorable Jane N. Bowman, Judge of the Minnesota Tax Court for trial.

Bretta I. Hines and Larry J. Peterson, Peterson, Logren & Kilbury, P.A., represent petitioners Harlan R. Anderson, Mary J. Anderson, Richard A. Anderson, and Mark W. Anderson.

Brian J. Asleson, Chief Deputy Wright County Attorney, represents respondent Wright County.

Trial in this matter was held on July 13, 2021, at the Minnesota Judicial Center in St. Paul.

The petitioners generally argued the court should adopt a $3,500 per acre value, which was calculated—in part—by relying on Wisconsin law. At the close of petitioners’ case-in-chief, Wright County moved to dismiss under Rule 41.02(b) of the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to overcome the statutory presumption of validity. The County then put on its case-inchief, and petitioners presented rebuttal evidence. The parties subsequently briefed the County’s motion and submitted post-trial briefs. The court now finds that petitioners did not present sufficient, credible evidence to overcome the prima facie validity of the County’s assessment.

1 Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

43

FINDINGS OF FACT 1.

Petitioners Harlan R. Anderson, Mary J. Anderson, Richard A. Anderson, and Mark

W. Anderson (the Andersons) have sufficient interest in the subject properties to bring this petition; all statutory and jurisdictional requirements have been complied with, and the court has jurisdiction over the subject properties and the parties.

2.

The subject properties constitute a fully functioning, integrated farm operated by

the Anderson family. They grow corn, wheat, soybeans, and alfalfa.

3.

The subject properties are in rural Wright County and were valued under Minnesota

Statutes section 273.111 (2020) (the “Green Acres” statute).

4.

The Andersons did not provide sufficient, credible evidence to support their claim

that the County’s Green Acres valuation of the subject properties was in error.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1.

The Andersons failed to overcome the prima facie validity of the County’s

assessment with respect to their overvaluation claim.

2.

Because the Andersons have not successfully challenged the County’s assessment,

it must be affirmed.

ORDER FOR JUDGMENT 1.

The Wright County Assessor’s estimated market value for the subject properties as

of January 2, 2018, is hereby affirmed.

2

44

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

IT IS SO ORDERED. THIS IS A FINAL ORDER. A STAY OF 30 DAYS IS HEREBY ORDERED. LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.

BY THE COURT:

signed by Jane N. Digitally Jane N. Bowman 2021.10.26 Bowman Date: 13:07:32 -05'00' Jane N. Bowman, Judge MINNESOTA TAX COURT DATED: October 29, 2021 MEMORANDUM I.

BACKGROUND Petitioners Harlan R. Anderson, Mary J. Anderson, Richard A. Anderson, and Mark W.

Anderson own and operate a fully integrated family farm in rural Wright County. See Anderson v. Cnty. of Wright, No. 86-CV-20-2479, 2021 WL 2557313, at *3 (Minn. T.C. June 18, 2021) (so holding in a separate, but related matter). The Andersons grow corn, wheat, soybeans, and alfalfa.1 The farm, comprised of the subject properties at issue here, are enrolled in and taxed under the Green Acres program authorized by Minnesota Statutes chapter 273 (2020).2 On April 23, 2019, the Andersons timely filed a property tax petition contesting the January 2, 2018 assessment. Anderson v. Cnty. of Wright, No. 86-CV-19-2167, 2021 WL 423922, at *1 (Minn. T.C. Feb. 3, 2021). The County then moved (1) to dismiss for failure to comply with an administrative rule and, in the alternative, (2) to partially dismiss the Andersons’ Green Acres

1

Trial Tr. 62 (July 13, 2021).

2

Trial Tr. 9, 10, 18. The petition included one parcel, later dismissed, that was not enrolled in the Green Acres program.

3

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

45

parcels for a failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Id. The court denied those motions and granted the Andersons leave to remedy the petition’s defect. Id. Subsequently, the Andersons retained current counsel and amended their petition accordingly. Id. The parties presented evidence at a July 13, 2021 trial at the Minnesota Judicial Center in St. Paul. At the close of the Andersons’ case-in-chief, the County moved under Rule 41.02(b) of the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure to dismiss the petition for failure to overcome the prima facie validity of the assessment.3

The parties agreed to address the County’s motion via

subsequently-filed written submissions.4 The County then presented its case-in-chief.5 At the close of trial, the Andersons—with the consent of the County—voluntarily dismissed one parcel, which was not enrolled in the Green Acres program, from their 16-parcel petition.6 In post-trial briefs, the parties disputed the value of the subject properties and the County’s motion to dismiss.

The court deemed these matters submitted as of September 7, 2021.7 II.

GOVERNING LAW A.

An Assessment’s Presumptive Validity

“[A]n appeal to the Tax Court may be taken … from … any matter over which the [tax] court is granted jurisdiction ….” Minn. Stat. § 271.06, subd. 1 (2020). However, “the order of … the appropriate unit of government in every case shall be prima facie valid.” Minn. Stat. § 271.06, subd. 6(a) (2020) (emphasis added). Minnesota Statutes section 272.06, which governs the

3

Trial Tr. 65-67.

4

Trial Tr. 68-69.

5

Trial Tr. 71-173.

6

Trial Tr. 69-70, 174. Accordingly, Parcel Number 205-000-171402 is dismissed and no longer under consideration by the court.

7

Trial Tr. 175.

4

46

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

property tax assessment at issue here, further provides that “[a]ll such assessments … shall be presumed to be legal until the contrary is affirmatively shown[.]” Minn. Stat. § 272.06 (2020) (emphasis added).

Reading these two statutes in conjunction, the Supreme Court recognizes “a presumption of validity for the county’s assessment.” Court Park Co. v. Cnty. of Hennepin, 907 N.W.2d 641, 644 (Minn. 2018) (citing S. Minn. Beet Sugar Coop v. Cnty. of Renville (SMBSC), 737 N.W.2d 545, 557 (Minn. 2007). “[T]o defeat the prima facie validity of the assessment, the taxpayer must offer evidence to invalidate the assessment.” SMBSC, 737 N.W.2d at 558; see also Conga Corp. v. Comm’r of Revenue, 868 N.W.2d 41, 53 (Minn. 2015) (“When a taxpayer presents substantial evidence that the Commissioner’s assessment order is invalid or incorrect, the presumption of validity is overcome ….”); Guardian Energy, LLC v. Cnty. of Waseca, 868 N.W.2d 253, 258 n.6 (Minn. 2015) (“A county’s presumptively valid tax assessment … may be successfully challenged with credible evidence that the assessor’s estimated market value is incorrect ….”).

Generally, a property owner’s testimony as to the valuation is admissible at trial. See Beck v. Cnty. of Todd, 824 N.W.2d 636 (Minn. 2013) (holding that, generally, the testimony of a property owner is admissible). An owner is not required to offer a written appraisal and the tax court must consider the owner’s testimony. Id. at 639-41. As always, however, the court “determines ‘the weight and credibility’” of such testimony. Id. at 639 (citing Alstores Realty, Inc. v. State, 286 Minn. 343, 353, 176 N.W.2d 112, 118 (1970)).

B.

Involuntary Dismissals under Rule 41.02(b)

Wright County brought its mid-trial motion to dismiss under Rule 41.02(b) of the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure which states, in relevant part: After the plaintiff has completed the presentation of evidence, the defendant, without waiving the right to offer evidence in the event the motion is not granted, 5

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

47

may move for a dismissal on the ground that upon the facts and the law, the plaintiff has shown no right to relief.

Whether a county can bring a motion to dismiss under Rule 41.02(b) of the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure at the close of a property tax petitioner’s case is an open question. Court Park Co., 907 N.W.2d at 645 n.4 (in declining to separately analyze evidence under a Rule 41.02(b) standard, the supreme court stated: “Because the tax statutes [concerning the presumptive validity of assessments] control in the event of a conflict [with the Rules of Civil Procedure], we need not separately interpret Rule 41.02(b).”).8 We note, however, that the Andersons’ statutory burden to overcome the prima facie validity of the assessment is the same even if the County is able to rely on Rule 41.02(b). See Court Park Co., 907 N.W.2d at 645. As a result, we need not separately analyze the County’s motion.9 C.

Green Acres

Generally, “all property shall be valued at its market value.” Minn. Stat. § 273.11. The legislature has provided for several exceptions to this general rule, however, allowing for a lower value to be attributed to certain types of real estate, such as the subject property—a family-operated farm.

In 1967, the legislature enacted the “Minnesota Agricultural Property Tax Law,”

colloquially known as the Green Acres statute. Minn. Stat. § 273.111, subd. 1. The problem to be solved by the Green Acres statute is as follows: With the exploding expansion and development in urban areas over the past few decades, there have been rapidly increasing land values in the periphery of 8

Where there is no conflict, the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure apply in tax court proceedings. Minn. Stat. § 271.06, subd. 6 (“the Rules of … Civil Procedure for the district court of Minnesota shall govern the procedures in the Tax Court, where practicable.”); see Bond v.

Comm’r of Rev., 691 N.W.2d 831, 836 (Minn. 2005) (“The Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure apply to tax court proceedings where they are not inconsistent with tax court procedures.”).

9

Similarly, since the Andersons’ burden under chapter 271 is the same under a Rule 41.02(b) motion to dismiss, the court also need not decide the Andersons’ argument that the motion should be denied as untimely. Pet’rs’ Resp. Br. Opp’n Mot. Dismiss 10 (filed Aug. 30, 2021).

6

48

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

metropolitan areas. Both the value of farmland located in those areas and real estate taxes based upon that value have increased accordingly. These higher property taxes, coupled with special assessments caused by sewer and water improvement projects for new development on the fringes of established urban areas which often must pass through intervening farmland, have become so great in many cases that the owner is no longer financially able to continue the agricultural use of the land.

This, in turn, has led to forced sales and other hardships to the owners of such land.

The legislature recognized this problem and, in 1967, passed the green acres legislation designed to provide property tax relief so that the land could economically be continued in use for agricultural purposes.

Elwell v. Hennepin Cnty., 221 N.W.2d 538, 541 (Minn. 1974).

Having determined that the “present general system of ad valorem property taxation … does not provide an equitable basis for the taxation of certain agricultural real property,” the legislature declared that public policy “would best be served by equalizing tax burdens upon agricultural property … through appropriate taxing measures.” Minn. Stat. § 273.111, subd. 2.

Including a directive that the Green Acres statute “shall be broadly construed to achieve its purpose,” id. § 273.111, subd. 12, the legislature found that “it is in the interest of the state to encourage and preserve farms by mitigating the property tax impact of increasing land values due to nonagricultural economic forces,” id. § 273.111, subd. 2a. See also Elwell, 221 N.W.2d at 541 (“The essence of the statute is that farmland … will be valued for tax purposes solely with reference to its agricultural use, which may not necessarily be the same value it would have if other potential uses for the land were considered by the assessor.”).

Green Acres is framed as a deferment program consisting of two steps. See Minn. Stat. § 273.111, subd. 3a; Peterson v. City of Elk River, 312 N.W.2d 243, 245 (Minn. 1981) (“When the land ceases to qualify for the Green Acres deferment, the city then collects the assessment.”). To calculate the amount of taxes deferred, the assessor must (1) determine the property’s value without “any added values resulting from nonagricultural factors,” and then (2) make a “separate determination of the market value of such real estate.” Minn. Stat. § 273.111, subd. 4-5.

For

7

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

49

qualifying property, tax is based on the value determined without “any added values resulting from nonagricultural factors.” Id. § 273.111, subd. 4. If, however, a property no longer qualifies for Green Acres, a taxpayer must pay the tax previously deferred by the statute (i.e., the difference between the tax actually paid that which would have been paid under the “separate determination of market value”) for the past three years. Id. § 273.111, subd. 3(c), 9(a). Put another way, the legislature taxed qualifying Green Acres properties as if valued for farming only, but authorized recapture of three years of deferred taxes when property ceased to qualify (including when a taxpayer benefits from nonagricultural factors when selling the property).

Relevant here, the statute outlines several steps for determining a Green Acres value. Id. § 273.111, subd. 4. First, “to account for the presence of nonagricultural influences …, the commissioner of revenue shall, in consultation with the Department of Applied Economics at the University of Minnesota, develop a fair and uniform method of determining the average value of agricultural land for each county ….” Id. The Commissioner must use “appropriate sales data” when determining the values and can “make reasonable adjustments to the values based on the most recent available county or regional data for agricultural production, commodity prices, production expenses, rent, and investment return.” Id. Then, the Commissioner must “assign the resulting countywide average value to each county.” Id. With those assigned average values in hand, the assessor determines the “relative value of agricultural land for each assessment district in comparison to the countywide average value, considering and giving recognition to appropriate agricultural market and soil data available.” Id.

8 50

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

III.

THE PARTIES’ ARGUMENTS & ANALYSIS The Andersons make several arguments to show they overcame the presumptive validity

of Wright County’s assessment.10 See Guardian Energy, LLC, 868 N.W.2d at 258 n.6 (“A county’s presumptively valid tax assessment … may be successfully challenged with credible evidence that the assessor’s estimated market value is incorrect ….”).

A.

Petitioners’ Calculations

First, the Andersons argue that they overcame the presumptive validity of the assessed values of the subject properties because Mr. Anderson testified11 to his own calculations of his desired per-acre value of farmland on the subject properties.12 See Beck, 824 N.W.2d at 639. Mr. Anderson presented the court with a spreadsheet of “Calculated Assessment Values,” 13 which

10

Pet’rs’ Post-Trial Br. 6-11 (Filed Aug. 16, 2021).

11

The Andersons opine that Mr. Anderson qualifies as an expert. Pet’rs’ Post-Trial Br. 67 (“While not an appraiser or real estate agent, Mr. Anderson’s experiences … qualify him as an expert in the area of farmland valuation.”). The County disputes the characterization of Mr. Anderson as an expert. Resp’t’s Resp. Br. to Pet’rs’ Post-Trial Br. 7-10 (filed Aug. 30, 2021).

This court need not determine whether he is an expert, as his testimony—expert or lay—did not overcome the prima facie validity of the assessment.

12

Pet’rs’ Post-Trial Br. 6-11.

13

Ex. 6.

9 Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

51

listed the appealed parcels’ USDA14 acreage multiplied by $3.50 (representing the price per bushel of corn15), multiplied by a factor of 1,000,16 resulting in a stated price per parcel.17 We conclude that Mr. Anderson’s testimony does not “invalidate the assessment.” SMBSC, 737 N.W.2d at 558. Mr. Anderson did not attack, or even address, the statutory process by which the assessor must value “Green Acres” property, aside from generally disagreeing with it.18 More importantly, Mr. Anderson’s method of calculating value (acres x $3.50 x 1,000 = parcel value) is not supported by any appraisal theory, statute, or process recognized in Minnesota. Although Mr. Anderson can testify to the value of the subject properties, Beck, 824 N.W.2d at 639, his testimony here did not amount to credible evidence to invalidate the assessment. See Johnson v. Cnty. of

14

Mr. Anderson testified he relied on the acreage set out by the United States Department of Agriculture, which may include non-tillable acres. Trial Tr. 37, 57-58; Ex. 4.

15

See Ex. 5 (showing the final market year average prices for corn ranging between $3.36 and $3.61 per bushel); Trial Tr. 11-12, 35, 39-40, 44 (testifying that Mr. Anderson averaged the price of a bushel of corn to arrive at $3.50).

16

When asked to explain what the factor of a thousand means, Mr. Anderson stated:

I went through a lot of stuff. At first I followed what Wisconsin did, and it was very complicated. And I’ve worked with legislators and writing legislation, and I knew that that was going to be a difficult one to explain. So, then I went back and looked at my records, my farming records that I’ve encountered and looked at variations that I’ve found. And based on what I told a—the Cokato Township and Wright County, it just became apparent to me that based on my calculations of my farming operation, that I just came up with a thousand as a factor. I mean if somebody else got a different factor from different experience, that’s okay. But right now, to make it simple, to make it something that I could argue with somebody, I think the thousand fit. Now, it may change, but I would not expect the thousand factor to change, but the price of corn is going to change.

Trial Tr. 44-45.

Mr. Anderson also admitted he “back[ed] into” the 1,000 number that would allow him to make a profit. Trial Tr. 55-56.

17

Ex. 6. By way of example, parcel 205-000-283300, consisting of 41.06 USDA acres, multiplied by $3.50, and multiplied again by a factor of 1,000, resulted in a parcel value of $143,710.

18

Trial Tr. 60.

10

52

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

Hennepin, 2016 WL 1399315, at *4 (Minn. T.C. Apr. 4, 2016) (the court was similarly unpersuaded that a tax petitioner’s testimony, which did not rely upon any approved method, was credible evidence to overcome the taxpayer’s burden).

The Andersons next argue they overcame their burden by showing land sales in Wright

County were impacted by nonagricultural factors, which is prohibited by an accurate Green Acres

value.24 Minn. Stat. § 273.111, subd. 4 (“[T]he assessor shall not consider any added values resulting from nonagricultural factors”). Mr. Anderson testified: (1) that Wright County has seen a decrease in tillable land; (2) that some Wright County land sales are impacted by nonagricultural

factors, such as foreclosures or the desire to own a large parcel of land to accompany one’s residence; and (3) that the comparable sales of the County’s appraisals were impacted by nonagricultural factors.25

There is no dispute that farmland in Wright County is diminishing because it is being put

to other uses, such as commercial or residential.26 This transition, however, does not invalidate Green Acres values, because the Andersons failed to show that the cited nonagricultural sales

undermined the method used to derive the subject properties’ Green Acres values. As to Mr. Anderson’s testimony that the County’s appraisals considered nonagricultural land sales, the Andersons point to evidence later put on by the County, evidence this court is not allowed to

consider. See Court Park Co., 907 N.W.2d at 645. In any event, and as mentioned previously, the County’s appraisals valued the subject properties’ market value, not its Green Acres value. As a

result, the County’s appraisals do not challenge the Green Acres methodology used to value the subject properties.

under the Green Acres statute, this shows the on-going confusion about what values the Andersons were challenging, and not bias on the part of the County.

24

Pet’rs’ Post-Trial Br. 9-11.

25

Trial Tr. 30, 31, 50.

26

Trial Tr. 30.

12

B.

Public Policy

The Andersons next argue they carried their burden by showing the “methodology used by Wright County … violated Minnesota’s statutory public policy to equalize tax burdens upon agricultural property.” 19 Specifically, the Andersons argue that Wright County’s assessments were biased and relied on nonagricultural factors.20 To show the assessments were “inherently” biased and that Wright County wanted to “achiev[e] the highest possible tax basis for the county,” the Andersons point to evidence elicited in the County’s case-in-chief, specifically the County’s appraisals and testimony of Mr. Keith Triplett, Wright County Deputy Assessor.21 At this stage, the Andersons are charged with citing to their own evidence, via their own case-in-chief, to overcome their burden.22 Court Park Co., 907 N.W.2d at 645 (“[W]hen determining whether the taxpayer has overcome the presumptive validity of the County’s assessment, the tax court must consider only the taxpayer’s evidence.”).

For this reason, the Andersons’ assertion that Mr. Triplett’s testimony shows bias does not assist the Andersons in overcoming their burden.23

19

Pet’rs’ Post-Trial Br. 7.

20

Pet’rs’ Post-Trial Br. 7-11.

21

Pet’rs’ Post-Trial Br. 8-9.

22

Resp’t’s Reply Br. Supp. Mot. Dismiss 2 (Sep. 7, 2021).

23

Even if this court could consider evidence presented during the County’s case-in-chief, we would not conclude that such evidence indicated in any way that the County was biased.

Additionally, the Andersons point to Wright County’s appraisals of the subject properties, arguing the appraisals—which conclude to market value and not Green Acres value—evidence bias. Pet’rs’ Post-Trial Br. 9. Although the County’s appraisals do not value the subject properties 11

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

53

C.

Petitioners’ Alternate Method

Finally, the Andersons argue that the presumption was overcome because Mr. Anderson presented an alternative method of valuing the subject properties—a method based on Wisconsin law—which was accepted by the Township of Cokato’s Board of Appeal and Equalization and purportedly based in accepted appraisal practice.27 Mr. Anderson testified that after the Cokato Board of Appeal and Equalization lowered the subject properties’ taxable values, the Wright County Commissioners raised it again.28 Neither Mr. Anderson’s alternative method, nor a local Board of Appeal and Equalization’s adoption of his position, carries the Andersons’ burden to show their Green Acres value is inaccurate.

The Andersons argue the court should use the agricultural land valuation formula adopted

by Wisconsin, which is “based partially on the ‘5-year cornmarket price per unit of output’ and partially on the landowner’s average gross income.” 29 The Andersons point to the supreme court’s decision in Cnty. of Aitkin v. Blandin Paper Co., 883 N.W.2d 803, 810 (Minn. 2016), to support the proposition that if a petitioner presents “evidence that is ‘generally accepted in the relevant field,’” then the presumption has been overcome.30 Here, however, the legislature has mandated county assessors follow Minnesota’s statutory scheme for determining Green Acres values, which includes “consult[ing] with the Department of Revenue [to] determine the relative value of agricultural land for each assessment district in comparison to the countywide average value, considering and giving recognition to appropriate agricultural market and soil data available.”

27

Pet’rs’ Post-Trial Br. 12-13 (citing Trial Tr. 28-29).

28

Trial Tr. 28. The Wright County Board of Appeal and Equalization later raised the value.

Trial. Tr. 52-53, 87-88.

29

Pet’rs’ Post-Trial Br. 13 (citing Wis. Admin. Code Tax § 18(1)(b) (2018)); Ex. 2.

30

Pet’rs’ Post-Trial Br. 12.

13

54

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

Minn. Stat. § 273.111, subd. 4(a). Partially relying on Wisconsin’s parallel statute concerning family farmland does not call into question the Wright County Assessor’s assessment of the subject properties, because it does not show that the Assessor incorrectly consulted with the Department of Revenue or otherwise relied upon inappropriate nonagricultural factors. See Guardian Energy, 868 N.W.2d at 258 n.6 (“A county’s presumptively valid tax assessment … may be successfully challenged with credible evidence that the assessor’s estimated market value is incorrect ….”).

Moreover, Minnesota assessors are bound by Minnesota law, not Wisconsin law, just like the court is obligated to uphold Minnesota law and not value property under another state’s assessment scheme. Minn. Stat. § 271.01, subd. 5 (“[T]he Tax Court shall be the sole, exclusive, and final authority for the hearing and determination of all questions of law and fact arising under the tax laws of the state.” (emphasis added)).31 Moreover, the Cokato Board of Appeal and Equalization’s purported decision to adopt Mr. Anderson’s values does not overcome the presumption of validity.32 The Andersons offered no evidence demonstrating why the Cokato Board of Appeal and Equalization adopted Mr. Anderson’s proposed per-acre number.

Additionally, the Cokato Board of Appeal and

Equalization’s decision was ultimately overturned.33 The Andersons’ proposed per acre value of $3,500, without being rooted in appraisal theory or specifically tied to the subject properties, is not

31

To the extent the Andersons are arguing the court should resolve a conflict of laws in favor of Wisconsin law, they are missing an essential element of a conflict of laws analysis— contact with Wisconsin. See Myers v. Gov’t Emp. Ins. Co., 225 N.W.2d 238, 242 (Minn. 1974) (“[W]hen two states with differing relevant laws have contacts with a set of facts …, [t]he conclusion is that the law of the state with the greater ‘interest’ will prevail.” (emphasis added)).

Here, there is no assertion that Wisconsin has any requisite “contact” with the facts in this case.

32

Pet’rs’ Post-Trial Br. 12-13 (citing Trial Tr. 28-29).

33

Trial Tr. 29, 52-53.

14 Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

55

sufficient or credible evidence to overcome the Assessor’s presumptive values.34 As a result, the Wright County Assessor’s assessments as of January 2, 2018, of the subject properties are affirmed.

J.N.B.H.

34

Additionally, because the court finds the Andersons failed to present credible evidence calling into question the County’s assessment on all remaining parcels, the court need not decide whether the Andersons’ failure to address building value on some of their parcels similarly fails to overcome their burden. See Resp’t’s Post-Trial Br. 2-3, Pet’rs’ Post-Trial Resp. Br. 2-3.

15

56

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

State Board of Assessors Meeting Minutes St. Michael City Center Tuesday, September 21, 2021 Vice Chairperson Joy Kanne convened the meeting at 8:57am.

Board members in attendance: Charlie Blekre Andrea Fish Matt Gersemehl

Jane Grossinger Joy Kanne Lori Schwendemann

Gary Amundson joined the meeting virtually.

Gregg Larson & Mike Reed were unable to attend.

Agenda for the September 21, 2021 meeting was reviewed. Jane Grossinger moved to approve the agenda. Andrea Fish seconded the motion. The motion carried.

Minutes of the July 13, 2021 meeting were reviewed. Andrea Fish made a motion to amend the minutes to remove the ethics provision of the reinstatement policy in the July meeting minutes that will be reconsidered at the September meeting. Matt Gersemehl seconded the motion. The motion carried.

Matt Gersemehl made a motion to approve the amended July 2021 minutes. Jane Grossinger seconded the motion. The motion carried.

Updates •

Form Report Update Submitted Reports

Approved Reports

Rejected Reports

July 1, 2013 – December 31, 2013 January 1, 2014 – December 31, 2014 January 1, 2015 – December 31, 2015

6 24 27

6 24 27

0 0 0

January 1, 2016 – December 31, 2016 January 1, 2017 – December 31, 2017 January 1, 2018 – December 31, 2018 January 1, 2019 – December 31, 2019 January 1, 2020 – December 31, 2020 January 1, 2021 – September 21, 2021

57 26 24 28 41 62

57 26 24 28 41 52

0 0 0 0 0 5

Passed Reports (7/1/2013 – 9/21/2021)

Received AMA

Received SAMA

Received CMAS

286

201

14

5

Dates

Reports being Graded 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 Have not applied for AMA 68

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

57

Board of Assessors September 21, 2021

Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 6

Updates (cont.)

•

PACE Courses Update: Reviewed the Department of Revenue’s announcement about future PACE courses.

•

Continuing Education Policies: The update sent out to all AMAs & SAMAs from Department of Revenue in regard to the 30-hour course requirement stated the course will be titled “PACE Courses”. The board’s policy document and affected areas on the board’s website have been updated to read “PACE Courses”.

•

Online Course Development Checklist: The final version of the online course development checklist, is now located in the Resource section, on the Board of Assessors website. A copy of the checklist was sent to Patrick Chapman and Jessi Glancey.

•

AMA Deadline Date – One Year Notice: On July 15, 2021, an email was sent out by the board, to all official County & City Assessors, with a list of names who will be required to get their AMA by July 1, 2022. The email included a detailed explanation of what will happen to the CMA & CMAS licensed assessors who do not achieve the AMA license by their deadline date. There are 151 assessors’ that will need to meet the July 1, 2022 AMA deadline date.

•

MAAO Executive Board Meeting Update: Jane Grossinger virtually attended the August 9-10, 2021 meeting and spoke briefly about the July 2022 AMA deadline (similar to earlier discussions that everyone needs to be aware of the deadline and that the last Board meeting to receive the AMA license will be in May 2022).

•

MAAO Region Meetings: Matt Gersemehl suggested that the assessor board members Matt Gersemehl, Jane Grossinger, Joy Kanne, and Lori Schwendemann attend region meetings where no board members are represented. They will do a meet and greet and answer questions. Bobbi Spencer reached out to regions 2, 4, 5, 7 & 8 to schedule their visits. The regions were very open and enthusiastic to have these board members attend their meetings. Matt and Joy will be attending Region 2 and Region 5 in October. Lori and Jane will be attending Region 8 in October and Region 7 in November.

•

MAAP Conference: Andrea Fish attended the MAAP conference, where she went over the AMA requirement and explained what will happen to a CMA license after the 5-year timeline expires.

The board will continue to discuss future problem solving to change things if necessary. Would like to see more education offered for the office administration.

•

Complaint Summary: Since July 2021, the Department of Revenue has received one homestead complaint. At this time, all investigations have been closed, and no new cases have been opened.

•

Assessor Licensure Standards: Gary Amundson reported that the CMA standards are virtually done, they are working on the leadership standards for SAMA.

•

MAAO Curriculum & Assessor Standards Committee: o Mass Appraisal was reformatted and improved; the content has not changed. Committee members also created a glossary of common terms that students should know and developed a more robust case study for students to work through. o The committee will be touching base with the Mass Appraisal instructors after the course is offered in September to do an after-action review to discuss future changes/updates to the course. o Advanced Ag has been successfully taught for the first time. o The new Basic Income course was offered in August.

2

58

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

Board of Assessors September 21, 2021

Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 6

Discussion Items •

Accredited Minnesota Assessor Policy: The board reviewed the policy and will not make any changes at this time.

•

Inactive Licenses: The board will discuss options for defining “inactive” at their November meeting.

•

Board Bylaws: Matt Gersemehl reviewed with the board the final changes to the board’s bylaws. Jane Grossinger made the motion to approve the bylaws as rewritten. Andrea Fish seconded the motion. The motion carried. The board members agreed that Gregg Larson did a great job putting the bylaws together.

•

Assessment Personnel Training and Education Practices Survey o Survey Notification: On August 5, 2021 an email was sent out to all official county and city assessors requesting them to take the survey. There were 98 responses out of 103 that were sent the survey. o Review Survey Results: The board discussed the survey results and decided they needed more time to go over all of the data. The board will review them further at their November meeting. o Fall Conference: Matt Gersemehl and Lori Schwendemann decided it was too soon to present the results at the conference.

•

Commercial Course Options: Matt Gersemehl requested an extension to have more time to put everything together. He will bring his findings to the November board meeting.

•

IAAO Course Review: Matt Gersemehl requested an extension to have more time to put everything together. He will bring his findings to the November board meeting.

•

Application Process & License Approval: The board reviewed the findings from the research completed to see if assessors’ applications needed to be approved at a board meeting. Andrea Fish made a motion that the board’s Administrator may make decisions to approve or deny all CMA, CMAS, and AMA licenses based on Rule requirements. Gary Amundson seconded the motion. The motion carried. The board agreed that a notice will be put in MAAO’s monthly newsletter with this change. The board members will bring this change to their Region meetings.

•

Reinstatement Policy: Andrea Fish and Bobbi Spencer presented the options for the revised reinstatement policies. Jane Grossinger made a motion to approve the reinstatement policies and strike the reinstatement experience language. Lori Schwendemann seconded the motion.

The motion carried.

Approved Continuing Education Hours Requests •

2021 MAAP Summer Workshop: Jessi Glancey requested the board review this workshop, sponsored by Minnesota Association of Assessment Personnel (MAAP), that was held on August 19-20, 2021 in St. Cloud, MN for continuing education. The board’s continuing education committee approved this workshop for 9.5 continuing education hours.

•

2021 Vanguard User Group Meeting: Teresa Ellerby requested the board review this meeting, sponsored by Vanguard Appraisals, Inc, that was held on October 6-7, 2021 in St. Cloud, MN for continuing education. The board’s continuing education committee approved this meeting for 7 continuing education hours.

3

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

59

Board of Assessors September 21, 2021

Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 6

Approved Continuing Education Hours Requests (cont.)

•

22nd Annual Real Estate Trends Seminar (Residential/General Session): Christine Mackaman requested the board review this seminar, sponsored by North Star Chapter of the Appraisal Institute, that was held on August 4, 2021 in St Paul, MN for continuing education. The board’s continuing education committee approved this seminar for 7 continuing education hours.

•

Appraisal of Medical Office Buildings: Molly Johnson-Marion requested the board review this online seminar, sponsored by Appraisal Institute, for continuing education. The board’s continuing education committee approved this seminar for 7 continuing education hours.

•

Assessing the Person: Jean Popp requested the board review this seminar, sponsored by MAAO, that will be held at MAAO’s Fall Conference on September 26-29, 2021 in Breezy Point, MN for continuing education. The board’s continuing education committee approved this seminar for 4 continuing education hours.

•

Evolution of Management, Design & Modular Construction: Jon Ulman requested the board review this online seminar, sponsored by MN Real Estate Journal, for continuing education. The board’s continuing education committee approved this seminar for 4 continuing education hours.

•

Reading and Understanding Leases: Molly Johnson-Marion requested the board review this online seminar, sponsored by IAAO, for continuing education. The board’s continuing education committee approved this seminar for 7.5 continuing education hours.

•

Solving Land Puzzles: Shelagh Stoerzinger requested the board review this seminar, sponsored

by Appraisal Institute, for continuing education. The board’s continuing education committee approved this seminar for 7 continuing education hours.

•

Understanding Luxury Home Features: Stephanie Nyhus requested the board review this online seminar, sponsored by McKissock, for continuing education. The board’s continuing education committee approved this seminar for 7 continuing education hours.

•

Wichita Property Tax Virtual Conference: Holly Soderbeck requested the board review this conference, sponsored by Wichita State University, that was held on July 27-28, 2021 for continuing education. The board’s continuing education committee approved this seminar for 6 continuing education hours.

Denied Continuing Education Hours Requests •

2021 MACATFO Summer Drainage Conference: Mark Manderfeld requested the board review this conference sponsored by MACO for continuing education. The board’s continuing education committee denied this conference for 9.5 continuing education hours. The consensus of the CEH committee was that this conference did not have enough hours of assessment related education to consider it for continuing education.

Request for Licensure Course • Leading Sibley Together – Leadership Program: Samantha Kral requested the board review this

course, sponsored by the University of Minnesota, to be considered as management & leadership course and 15 continuing education hours. Matt Gersemehl made a motion to approve. Gary Amundson seconded the motion. The motion carried.

60

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

Board of Assessors September 21, 2021

Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 6

Applications for Certified Minnesota Assessor Jane Grossinger made a motion to award the Certified Minnesota Assessor license to the following individuals.

Board of Assessors July 13, 2021

Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 6

Approved Licensure Course Request • Practical Applications in Appraising Green Commercial Buildings: Lisa Olmen requested the board review this virtual course, sponsored by Appraisal Institute, to be considered as equivalent to a Property Type Specific course and 15 continuing education hours. The course was offered on June 23-24, 2021, prior to the board’s July 13, 2021 board meeting. The board members reviewed the course materials via email, and communicated that they all approved this course, as equivalent to a Property Type Specific course and 15 continuing education hours.

Request for Continuing Education • An Introduction the Theory & Practice of Regulation Seminars: Holly Soderbeck requested the

board review these online seminars, sponsored by National Regulatory Research Institute, for 8 continuing education hours. Jane Grossinger made a motion to approve the seminars. Matt Gersemehl seconded the motion. The motion carried.

Request for Licensure Course • Basic Income Approach: Amanda Dutcher, MAAO Education Coordinator, requested the board review this course, sponsored by MAAO, to be considered as an income course and 30 continuing education hours. Matt Gersemehl made a motion to approve this course. Mike Reed seconded the motion. The motion carried

Application for Certified Minnesota Assessor

Andrea Fish made a motion to award the Certified Minnesota Assessor license to the following individuals.

• • • •

McKenna Cech, Freeborn County Dan Cook, Mahnomen County Emily Nelson, Meeker County James Warden, Isanti County

•

Andrea Wellnitz, Watonwan County

•

Eric Wuotila, Chisago County

Gary Amundson seconded the motion. The motion carried.

Application for Temporary Minnesota Assessor

Andrea Fish made a motion to award the Temporary Minnesota Assessor license to the following individual.

• Alex Oldefendt, City of Eden Prairie

Lori Schwendemann seconded the motion. The motion carried.

4

•

Scarlet Bennett, Cass County

•

Lynette Gaustad, Otter Tail County

•

Adam Heuton, Cass County

•

William Johnson, Blue Earth County

•

Nathan Kirchner, Dakota County

•

Cullen Navratil, Cass County

•

Kelly Petersen, Houston County

•

Ryan Robinson, Anoka County

•

Sarah Roers, Hennepin County

Andrea Fish seconded the motion. The motion carried.

Applications for Certified Minnesota Assessor Specialist Andrea Fish made a motion to award the Certified Minnesota Assessor Specialist license to the following individuals.

•

David Grev, Cottonwood County

•

Benjamin Hansen, Anoka County

Lori Schwendemann seconded the motion. The motion carried.

Applications for Accredited Minnesota Assessor Charlie Blekre made a motion to award the Accredited Minnesota Assessor license to the following individuals.

•

Brian Anderson, Steele County

•

Theodore Anderson, Anoka County

•

Daren Belfiori, Dakota County

•

Molly Benoit, Pine County

•

Shannon Cairns, St Louis County

•

Dan Cusick, Ramsey County

•

John Denney, Chisago County

•

Mitch Determan, Stearns County

•

Amy Ebnet, Todd County

•

Connie Ferguson, City of Minneapolis

•

Kathryn Frette, Olmsted County

•

Jean Grahek, Ramsey County

•

Jessica Harty, Wilkin County

•

Spencer Henle, Lyon County

•

Michelle Hinnenkamp, Stearns County 5

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

61

Board of Assessors September 21, 2021

Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 6

Applications for Accredited Minnesota Assessor (cont.)

•

William Hulst, Roseau County

•

Alisa Jacobsen, Lake of the Woods County

•

Erin Kastner, City of Minnetonka

•

Kayla Kleindl, Traverse County

•

Jennifer Koskela, Kittson County

•

Samantha Kral, Sibley County

•

Kelly Lemke, Pope County

•

Lisa Marschall, Local Assessor in Becker County

•

Carissa McIlwain, Itasca County

•

Andrea Nadeau, Pope County

•

Brock Nelson, Steele County

•

Andrew Olson, St Louis County

•

Matthew Sapola, Olmsted County

•

Lena Schaefer, Dakota County

•

Tammy Schumacher, Hennepin County

•

Eric Schutz, Washington County

•

Adam Spah, Stearns County

Andrea Fish seconded the motion. The motion carried.

Application for Senior Accredited Minnesota Assessor Jane Grossinger made a motion to award the Senior Accredited Minnesota Assessor license to the following individual.

•

Elisha Long, Isanti County

Gary Amundson seconded the motion. The motion carried.

The vice chairperson set the next meeting date as November 16, 2021, at the St. Michael City Center in St. Michael, MN at 8:30 am.

Andrea Fish made a motion to pay the expenses for the meeting. Lori Schwendemann seconded the motion. The motion carried.

Andrea Fish made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Matt Gersemehl seconded the motion. The motion carried.

62

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

Partner with a pioneer in the industry – a company who has supported appraisal and tax professionals for more than 80 years. We connect communities by empowering your organization to achieve increased efficiency, productivity, and accuracy. Take ownership of your future and succeed in delivering fair, equitable, and defendable taxation with Tyler.

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes

63

Official Publication of the Minnesota Association of Assessing Officers mnmaao.org

64

Winter 2022 / Equal Eyes