3b. Abatement applications-Lynn Utke
Laserfiche
>
Public
>
County Commission
>
2008
>
07-07-2008
>
Regular agenda
>
3b. Abatement applications-Lynn Utke
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/1/2008 11:39:00 AM
Creation date
7/1/2008 11:37:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Commission
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />INVESTIGATION OF ABATEMENT APPLICATION <br /> <br />ABATEMENT NO. 4314,4315,4316,4317,4318, & 4319 <br /> <br />Following is a report on the investigation of the abatement application of: Lynn Utke <br /> <br />County Board of Commissioners and State Tax Commissioner: <br /> <br />The applicant is asking that the 2007 agricultural assessments be reduced (see Exhibit A) due to <br />the flood or flowage easements of the Maple River Dam project. Mr. Utke has listed reasons for <br />lowering the assessments (see Exhibit B). <br /> <br />The Highland Twp Board recommended denial of the abatements, due to the short history of the <br />project (see Exhibit C). <br /> <br />The upstream flood easements were obtained when the dry dam was constructed in Section 14 of <br />Highland Twp. The elevation rises as one travels southwest, upstream from the dam (see Exhibit <br />D). According to the appraisal report, during flooding, water through the dam is blocked, <br />creating a temporary reservoir on the lands upstream. The duration of the inundation will depend <br />on the elevation of the land and the extent of flooding. Based on historic data, the average <br />duration of inundation per year ranges from 23 days at the 1,000 foot level, to less than one day <br />at the 1,050 foot level. <br /> <br />It appears that the dam project appraisal reports estimated damages at 25% for pasture land and <br />50% for tillable land, subject to the flood easement area. It does not appear that any adjustments <br />were made for elevation of the land. <br /> <br />Mr. Utke is asking for a 50% reduction in part of SE4 Section 10, part of the NE4 Section 15, <br />and part of S 1 /2 Section 15. He is also asking for a 20% reduction in the NW 4 Section 15; <br />which is not as susceptible to flooding. The applicant is also asking for a 10% reduction in part <br />of the S2NE4 Section 29 and a 30% reduction in NW 4 Section 28. The lower lying elevations <br />of Sections 28 & 29 are approximately 25-30 feet higher than the lower lying areas of Sections <br />10 and IS, which are closer to the dam. Mr. Utke also owns the NE4 Section 10 and the N2N2 <br />Section 29; which are subject to flood easement areas, but has not asked for adjustment on those <br />tracts (see Exhibit E). <br /> <br />In reviewing the request, I believe that the flood easement will affect the productivity of the lands <br />through decreased production and increased expense, especially in Sections 10 & 15. It appears <br />that the legislature contemplates that assessors consider easements and use. NDCC 57-02-10 <br />exempts lands from taxation for government water or wildlife conservation easements or road <br />right of way. A special classification for inundated lands was also been created. It is standard <br />appraisal procedure to consider the affect of easements in valuation of property. <br /> <br />The water resource district is voluntarily paying taxes on the lands that they purchased outright <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.