The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutweekly n otes - March 11th 2022 CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS – WEEKLY NOTES for: March 11, 2022 TO: City Council Members& Staff FROM: Eric Johnson, City Administrator Zoning & Development Items: No new applications have yetbeen received for the April Planning Commission meeting date. City Staff did meet with representatives from TOP TEN LIQUOR regarding their possible use of the former McCormick’s building. It would seem much of their challenge stems from how the might plan to orient their façade – to the north or south. Moreover, they do not have clear access rights to the new frontage road as the City’s easements do not abut their parcel – they will need to purchase an access from this landowner as the City did. COVID-19Matters: This is the Governor’s - PORTAL https://mn.gov/covid19 – Many documents / Exec. Orderscan be found. Washington County has initiated a County Dashboard containing more localized COVID-19 Impacts and rates LINK ->> HERE. Other Items: The City has posted it Assessment Notices for the upcoming OPEN BOOK Meetings. – See enclosed. This will also be published in the Stillwater Gazette. Seasonal Load Limits – Commence 3/14/22 – See the enclaosed notice – PW Staff will be installing signage. On Thursday, Mayor McComber did testify to the House Climate and Energy Committee regarding the merits of Rep. Shelly Christensen’s proposed bill HF-2698 – that seeks to establish into statute specific timelines for Xcel Energy to provide a decommissioning, demolishing and clean-up plan to the City by 12/31/25. The legislation appeared to be well received by the Committee. (Language Below) Ann Lenczewskifrom Lockridge -Grindal will be present at the 3/22 Council meeting for more updates on this andthe City’sother legislative actions – including the Bonding Effort, LGA and other funding for redevelopment. The City receivedthe complete 2022 Assessment Report for all municipalitiesthroughout the County- Enclosed is the report but it can also be found at : https://washington.minnesotaassessors.com/forms/washingtonmn/ASSESSMENT%20REPORT_2022-%20COMPLETE.pdf Mayor McComber Provided ththth 1.NLC Updates for March 5, 8and 9. 1 of 68 CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS ASSESSMENT NOTICE Important Information Regarding Property Assessments This may affect your 2023 property taxes. Notice is hereby given that the Open Book meetings for City of Oak Park Heights shall meet on the following dates and location. Please reference the link below for current meeting schedules and instructions: https://washington.minnesotaassessors.com/index.php. There are tentatively four Open Book meetings scheduled for property owners in open book communities if conditions allow: Cottage Grove City HallThursday, April 7, 20225:00pm–7:00pm Oakdale City HallWednesday, April 13, 20225:00pm –7:00pm Washington County Government CenterWednesday, April 20, 20222:00pm –7:00pm Woodbury City Hall Thursday, April 21, 2022 5:00pm – 7:00pm Property owners may attend any one of the four regional Open Book meetings. The purpose of thesemeetings is to determine whether property in the jurisdiction has been properly valued and classified by the assessor. If you believe the value or classification of your propertylocated in Oak Park Heights is incorrect, please contact WASHINGTON COUNTY ASSESSOR’S OFFICE -651-275-7515 to discuss your concerns. BY ORDER OF THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR th Given under my hand this 11day of March 2022 2 of 68 3 of 68 4 of 68 5 of 68 6 of 68 ASSESSMENT REPORT 2022 4§¨² ±¤¯®±³ ¨¢«´£¤² ²¯¤¢¨¥¨¢ ¨¥®±¬ ³¨® ±¤¦ ±£¨¦ ³§¤ ΑΏΑΑ assessmentǾ ² ¶¤«« ² ¦¤¤± « ¨¥®±¬ ³¨® ¡®´³ ¡®³§ ³§¤ ¯¯¤ «² £ ²²¤²²¬¤³ ¯±®¢¤²²¤²ȁ 7 of 68 4!",% /& #/.4%.43 Introduction............................................................................................................................................ Β 3 «¤² ! «¸²¨² 3¤¢³¨® .......................................................................................................................... Γ 3 «¤² ! «¸²¨² ..................................................................................................................................... Γ 3 «¤² 3³ ³¨²³¨¢² $¤¥¨¤£.................................................................................................................... Γ Arm’s-,¤¦³§ 4± ² ¢³¨®² ........................................................................................................... Ε 2¤²¨£¤³¨ « ,¤£¤±--¤£¨ ³¤£ 3 «¤²............................................................................................ Η #®´³¸ 3 «¤² 3³ ³¨²³¨¢² ¡¸ #« ²²¨¥¨¢ ³¨® ¸ΑΏΐΗ-ay2022 ................................................. 10 2¤²¨£¤³¨ « 3 «¤² 3³ ³¨²³¨¢²........................................................................................................... 11 (¨²³®±¨¢ !µ¤± ¦¤ 3 «¤ 0±¨¢¤²Ȁ 3¨¦«¤ & ¬¨«¸ ǉ 4®¶§®¬¤ȝ#®£® ............................... 12 0 ²³ ǉ #´±±¤³ 9¤ ± !£©´²³¬¤³²ȝ0 ±¢¤« #®´³ 3¤¢³¨® ...................................................... 13 !¦±¨¢´«³´± « #« ²² 3´¬¬ ±¸Ȁ #´±±¤³ 9¤ ± !£©´²³¬¤³² ................................................. 13 !¦±¨¢´«³´± « #« ²²Ȁ 0 ²³ ǉ #´±±¤³ 9¤ ± !£©´²³¬¤³² ................................................... 14 !¦±¨¢´«³´± « #« ²²Ȁ 0 ±¢¤« #®´³².......................................................................................... 15 !¯ ±³¬¤³ #« ²² 3´¬¬ ±¸Ȁ #´±±¤³ 9¤ ± !£©´²³¬¤³² ................................................... 16 !¯ ±³¬¤³ #« ²²Ȁ 0 ²³ ǉ #´±±¤³ 9¤ ± !£©´²³¬¤³² ...................................................... 17 !¯ ±³¬¤³ #« ²²Ȁ 0 ±¢¤« #®´³² ............................................................................................ 18 #®¬¬¤±¢¨ «ȝ)£´²³±¨ « #« ²² 3´¬¬ ±¸Ȁ #´±±¤³ 9¤ ± !£©´²³¬¤³² ........................... 19 #®¬¬¤±¢¨ «ȝ)£´²³±¨ « #« ²²Ȁ 0 ²³ ǉ #´±±¤³ 9¤ ± !£©´²³¬¤³² ............................. 20 #®¬¬¤±¢¨ «ȝ)£´²³±¨ « #« ²²Ȁ 0 ±¢¤« #®´³².................................................................... 21 2¤²¨£¤³¨ «ȝ322 #« ²² 3´¬¬ ±¸Ȁ #´±±¤³ 9¤ ± !£©´²³¬¤³² ........................................ 22 2¤²¨£¤³¨ «ȝ322 #« ²²Ȁ 0 ²³ ǉ #´±±¤³ 9¤ ± !£©´²³¬¤³²........................................... 23 2¤²¨£¤³¨ «ȝ322 #« ²²Ȁ 0 ±¢¤« #®´³² ................................................................................. 24 4®³ « 4 · ¡«¤ #« ²² 3´¬¬ ±¸Ȁ #´±±¤³ 9¤ ± !£©´²³¬¤³².............................................. 25 4®³ « 4 · ¡«¤ #« ²²Ȁ 0 ²³ ǉ #´±±¤³ 9¤ ± !£©´²³¬¤³² ................................................ 26 4®³ « 4 · ¡«¤ #« ²²Ȁ 0 ±¢¤« #®´³² ...................................................................................... 27 2¤²¨£¤³¨ «ȝ322 #« ²²Ȁ #´±±¤³ 9¤ ± 6 «´¤ #§ ¦¤² ..................................................... 28 - ±ª¤³ 6 «´¤ 3¤¢³¨® ......................................................................................................................... 29 $¨²³±¨¡´³¨® ®¥ - ±ª¤³ 6 «´¤ ¡¸ #« ²²¨¥¨¢ ³¨® ..................................................................... 29 Me£¨ 6 «´¤² .................................................................................................................................. 30 (¨²³®±¨¢ « -¤£¨ 2¤²¨£¤³¨ « )¬¯±®µ¤£ 6 «´¤Ȁ 2¤²¨£¤³¨ «ȝ322 ........................... 30 8 of 68 (¨²³®±¨¢ « -¤£¨ 2¤²¨£¤³¨ « )¬¯±®µ¤£ 6 «´¤Ȁ 4®¶§®¬¤²ȝ#®£®² ................... 31 (¨²³®±¨¢ « -¤£¨ 2¤²¨£¤³¨ « )¬¯±®µ¤£ 6 «´¤Ȁ 3¨¦«¤ & ¬¨«¸..................................32 3¨¦«¤ & ¬¨«¸ £ 4®¶§®¬¤ȝ#®£® ¡±¤ ªdown .......................................................... 33 (¨²³®±¨¢ « #®´³¸ -¤£¨ 2¤²¨£¤³¨ « )¬¯±®µ¤£ 6 «´¤ ................................................ 33 /³§¤± !²²¤²²¬¤³ 2¤« ³¤£ )¥®±¬ ³¨®...................................................................................... 34 .¤¶ #®²³±´¢³¨® ............................................................................................................................ 34 #´±±¤³ .¤¶ #®²³±´¢³¨® 3³ ±³²Ȁ !«« #« ²²¨¥¨¢ ³¨®² .................................................... 34 0 ²³ ǉ #´±±¤³ .¤¶ #®²³±´¢³¨® 3³ ±³²Ȁ 3¨¦«¤ & ¬¨«¸ £ 4®¶§®¬¤ȝ#®£® 35 (¨²³®±¨¢ « .¤¶ #®²³±´¢³¨® 3´¬¬ ±¸Ȁ !«« #« ²²¨¥¨¢ ³¨®² ......................................... 36 !¯¯± ¨²¤± !¢³¨µ¨³¸Ȁ 0¤±¬¨³ ǉ 1´¨³¨«¤ 2¤µ¨¤¶ #®´³² ...................................................... 37 !¯¯± ¨²¤± !¢³¨µ¨³¸Ȁ 4 · 0¤³¨³¨® 2¤« ³¤£ ............................................................................... 38 4 · 0¤³¨³¨®²Ȁ .´¬¡¤± ®¥ 0¤³¨³¨®² &¨«¤£ ¥®± 0 ¸ ¡«¤ 9¤ ±² ΑΏΐΖ-2021 ................ 39 4 · 0¤³¨³¨®²Ȁ 6 «´¤ 5£¤± 0¤³¨³¨®² ¥®± 0 ¸ ¡«¤ 9¤ ±² ΑΏΐΖ-2021 ....................... 39 !²²¤²²¬¤³ 0±®¢¤²²Ȁ 3³ ³´³®±¸ 2¤°´¨±¤¬¤³² .................................................................... 40 %·¯« ¨¨¦ ³§¤ !¯¯¤ «² 0±®¢¤²² ................................................................................................ȁ 42 !²²¤²²¬¤³ # «¤£ ± ..................................................................................................................... 44 ,®¢ « "® ±£ ǉ /¯¤ "®®ª -¤¤³¨¦ 3¢§¤£´«¤ ......................................................................... 47 9 of 68 INTRODUCTION The Washington County AssessorDivision has prepared this 2022 Assessment Report for use by the County Board, City Councils, Town Boards, residents, and staff. This report includes specific information regarding the 2022 assessment, as well as general information about both the appeals and assessment process. Minnesota statutes establish specific requirements for the assessment of property. The law requires that all real property be valued at market value, which is defined as the usual or most likely selling price as of the January 2nd assessment date. The estimatedmarket values established through the 2022 assessment are based upon actual real estate market trends of Washington County properties from /¢³®¡¤± ΐǾ 2020 ³§±®´¦§ 3¤¯³¤¬¡¤± ΒΏǾ 2021. From these trends, our mass appraisal system is used to determine individual property values. Detailed discussion of the sales analysis can be found in the “Sales Analysis” section of this report. The summaries breaking down the adjustments made in each community, by property use, can be found in the “Past and Present Adjustments” section of this report. Property owners who have questions or concerns regarding the market value that has been established for their property are encouraged to contact the property appraiser responsible for their area. In most cases, an interior inspection of the property will be necessary. For detailed discussion regarding the appeals period, please refer to the section of this report titled “Other Assessment Related Information.” Bruce L. Munneke, S.A.M.A. Washington County Assessor 3 | Page 10 of 68 3!,%3 !.!,93)3 SECTION 3 «¤² ! «¸²¨² The assessment function is governed by Minnesota State statute. The law requires that all real property be valued at market value, which is defined as the usual or most likely selling price as of the assessment date of January 2nd of each year. Assessors are historians and measure the market based on sales which have occurred previous to the assessment date. Assessors do not create the value or predict what the market will do; rather, the assessor’s job is to follow the patterns set by the real estate market. Information on the sales of real estate is of paramount importance to the assessors in a market-based property tax system. Sales information is required to be submitted electronically using the program developed by the Minnesota Department of Revenue. This program is known as the Electronic Certificate of Real Estate Value (eCRV).The Department of Revenue requires all County Assessors to utilize a specified time period for sales analysis. This time period of 12 months is from October 1st throughSeptember 30th preceding the assessment date. Sales within this time period will be used to determine the changes in assessed value that may be needed in each communityfor the impending assessment. For example, the sales that occurred between /¢³®¡¤± ΐǾ 2020 and 3¤¯³¤¬¡¤± ΒΏǾ 2021 are used to establish the * ´ ±¸ ΑǾ 2022 assessed values. The assessor’s office is charged with setting estimated market values for tax purposes at actual market value. The relationship between sales prices to estimated market value is called the sales ratio. The target median ratio range is set by the assessor’s office for all Washington County communities (for all classes of property); the range established for the 2022 assessment is 93%-95%. We make every effort to make certain that each municipality in Washington County falls within this range. In this way, we ensure an equitable distribution of the property tax burden for all Washington County taxpayers. 3 «¤² 3³ ³¨²³¨¢² $¤¥¨¤£ In addition to the median ratio, we have the ability to measure other statistics to test the accuracy of the assessment. Some of these are also used at the state level. The primary statistics used are: Median Ratio This is a measure of central tendency. The median of a sample is the value for which one-half (50%) of the observations (when stratified) will lie above that value and one-half will lie below that value. The median is not susceptible to extreme observations referred to as outliers. We use this ratio, much like the mean, not only to measure our assessment level, but also to analyze property values by municipality, type of dwelling and value range. These 4 | Page 11 of 68 studies enable us to track market trends in neighborhoods, popular housing types and classes of property. Within the county, we strive to achieve a ratio within the 93%-95%rangefor the median and mean. This allows us a margin to account for a fluctuating market and still maintain ratios within state mandated guidelines. Arithmetic Mean Ratio The mean is the average ratio. Unlike the median, the mean is influenced by outliers. We use this ratio not only to measure our assessment level, but also to analyze property values by municipality, type of dwelling and value range. These studies enable us to track market trends in neighborhoods, popular housing types and classes of property. Coefficient of Dispersion (COD) The COD is used to measure the accuracy of the assessment. The COD indicates the spread of the ratios from the mean or median ratio. The goal of a good assessment is a COD of ΐΏ ³® 20. A COD under 10 is considered excellent and anything over 20 will result in an assessment review by the Department of Revenue. Price-Related Differential (PRD) The PRD is used to measure value related inequities in the assessment, referred to as regressively or progressivity. Appraised values are regressive if high value properties are under appraised relative to low value properties and progressive if high value properties are over appraised relative to the low value properties. The PRD is found by taking the mean (average) ratio of the sample and dividing by the weighted (aggregate) mean ratio. The acceptable range is ȁΘΗ ³® ΐȁΏΒ. 5 | Page 12 of 68 Arm’s-,¤¦³§ 4± ² ¢³¨®² The Department of Revenue requires all County Assessors to utilize a specified time period st in their sales analysis. This time period is 12 months from October 1 through September th 30, preceding the assessment date. Sales within this time period will be used to determine the changes in the prior years assessed value in each community for the impending assessment. stth The sales that occur within this October 1through September 30time period, each year, are closely scrutinized by the appraisers within the Assessor Division. Evidence suggesting a forced sale, foreclosure, a sale to a relative, or anything other than an arm’s-length transaction requires the sales to be disqualifiedfrom the sales study. This is important, because the real estate sales information constitutes the statistical basis for determining the annual adjustments that are made to the valuation models. An arm’s-length transaction is any transaction in which buyers and sellers of a product act independently and have no relationship to each other. The concept of an arm's-length transaction is to ensure that both parties in the deal are acting in their own self-interest and are not subject to any pressure or duress from the other party. The following graphs and charts show the number of arm’s-length transactions that occurred within each sales period. 10/1/16-9/30/1710/1/17-9/30/1810/1/18-9/30/1910/1/19-9/30/2010/1/20-9/30/21 3 «¤² 0¤±¨®£ ay2018ay2019ay2020ay2021ay2022 Apartment813121010 Commercial3937514961 Residential3,9633,9074,1034,0044,341 3¨¦«¤ & ¬¨«¸2,6032,6482,8732,7192,996 4®¶§®¬¤ȝ#®£®1,3601,2591,2301,2851,345 TOTAL4,0103,9574,1664,0634,412 6 | Page 13 of 68 Residential/SRR (Seasonal Rec) sales count ay2018-ay2022 $¨¥¥¤±¤¢¤ ¥±®¬ 10/1/16-9/30/1710/1/17-9/30/1810/1/18-9/30/1910/1/19-9/30/2010/1/20-9/30/21 3 «¤² 0¤±¨®£ 0±¤µ¨®´² 9¤ ± ay2018ay2019ay2020ay2021ay2022 Afton 3135393634-2 Bayport 362942315019 Baytown 2526232320-3 Birchwood 1192012120 #®³³ ¦¤ '±®µ¤55051357752758558 Dellwood 15151212186 Denmark 191281510-5 &®±¤²³ , ª¤31325426826729023 Grant 46435045516 '±¤¸ #«®´£32543-1 Hastings 000000 Hugo 369348337323316-7 , ª¤ %«¬®1141051621661726 , ª¤ 3³ȁ #±®¨·1812131712-5 , ª¤« £ 24251922253 , ª¤« £ 3§®±¤² 126132 Landfall 000000 Mahtomedi 1041071161131174 Marine 1214171514-1 May 2640303630-6 Newport 34374643485 / ª 0 ±ª (¦³² 5965536955-14 Oakdale 43845243939140413 0¨¤ 3¯±¨¦² 46454-1 3³ȁ - ±¸͒² 0®¨³ 52265-1 3³ȁ 0 ´« 0 ±ª 518472628422 Scandia 384345526917 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 30632034334436319 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 4¶¯18161714228 7¤²³ , ª¤« £44323841443 7§¨³¤ "¤ ± , ª¤241242 Willernie 7861312-1 Woodbury 1,2401,2471,2931,2971,465168 COUNTY3,9633,9074,1034,0044,341337 7 | Page 14 of 68 2¤²¨£¤³¨ « ,ender--¤£¨ ³¤£ 3 «¤² Foreclosures Properties in which the financial institution has repossessed the home from the owner due to non-payment of mortgage obligations. Short Sales Unique arrangements where the financial institution and in-default home owner work together in an attempt to sell the home before it is foreclosed upon. In both situations, lenders are highly motivated “sellers”, which can result in discounted asking prices as they attempt to move the assets quickly from the balance sheets. Lender mediated sales are not used in the sales study. #®¬¯ ±¨²® ®¥ !±¬͒²-,¤¦³§ ǉ ,¤£¤±--¤£¨ ³¤£ 3 «¤² ay18-ay22 !±¬͒²ȃ,¤¦³§ 3 «¤²,¤£¤±ȃ-¤£¨ ³¤£ 3 «¤² 5,000 4,341 4,500 4,103 4,004 3,963 3,907 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 236 500 179 91 54 22 0 ay2018ay2019ay2020ay2021ay2022 8 | Page 15 of 68 Residential Lender Mediated sales count ay2018-ay2022 10/1/16-9/30/1710/1/17-9/30/1810/1/18-9/30/1910/1/19-9/30/2010/1/20-9/30/21 3 «¤² 0¤±¨®£ ay2018ay2019ay2020ay2021ay2022 Afton 12300 Bayport 31121 Baytown 01000 Birchwood 12000 #®³³ ¦¤ '±®µ¤37231892 Dellwood 12000 Denmark 11000 &®±¤²³ , ª¤2924851 Grant 00332 '±¤¸ #«®´£11200 Hastings 00000 Hugo 1412422 , ª¤ %«¬®63220 , ª¤ 3³ȁ #±®¨·11101 , ª¤« £ 23100 , ª¤« £ 3§®±¤² 00000 Landfall 00000 Mahtomedi 69320 Marine 00000 May 11110 Newport 73420 / ª 0 ±ª (¦³² 15000 Oakdale 4122986 0¨¤ 3¯±¨¦² 00000 3³ȁ - ±¸͒² 0®¨³ 02000 3³ȁ 0 ´« 0 ±ª 158832 Scandia 12101 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 1611720 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 4¶¯03011 7¤²³ , ª¤« £30000 7§¨³¤ "¤ ± , ª¤01000 Willernie 02000 Woodbury 483415123 COUNTY236179915422 9 | Page 16 of 68 #®´³¸ 3 «¤² 3³ ³¨²³¨¢² by Classification ay2018-ay2022 The statistics listed for each use (classification) below are measured after the annual adjustments are applied to each classification of each property. Apartment Sales Statistics (After Annual Adjustments) 3 «¤² 0¤±¨®£10/1/16-9/30/1710/1/17-9/30/1810/1/18-9/30/1910/1/19-9/30/2010/1/20-9/30/21 ay2018ay2019ay2020ay2021ay2022 .´¬¡¤± ®¥ 3 «¤² 813121010 Median 99.1%95.7%94.3%94.9%94.5% Mean 98.9%94.6%96.3%103.0%92.0% COD 4.65.36.15.72.6 Commercial/Industrial Sales Statistics (After Annual Adjustments) 3 «¤² 0¤±¨®£10/1/16-9/30/1710/1/17-9/30/1810/1/18-9/30/1910/1/19-9/30/2010/1/20-9/30/21 ay2018ay2019ay2020ay2021ay2022 .´¬¡¤± ®¥ 3 «¤² 3937514961 Median 95.3%96.8%95.7%95.5%99.5% Mean 96.5%98.5%99.4%93.8%101.9% COD 12.021.810.08.37.4 Residential Sales Statistics (After Annual Adjustments) 3 «¤² 0¤±¨®£10/1/16-9/30/1710/1/17-9/30/1810/1/18-9/30/1910/1/19-9/30/2010/1/20-9/30/21 ay2018ay2019ay2020ay2021ay2022 .´¬¡¤± ®¥ 3 «¤² 3,9633,9074,1034,0044,341 Median 94.9%95.6%95.2%93.6%93.8% Mean 94.3%96.0%95.7%94.1%94.2% COD 6.66.56.15.88.0 10 | Page 17 of 68 2¤²¨£¤³¨ « 3 «¤² Statistics The sales statistics (Number of Sales, Low Sale Price, and High Sale Price) are based on data collected from sales that occurred between /¢³®¡¤± ΐǾ 2020 £ 3¤¯³¤¬¡¤± ΒΏǾ 2021. The remaining statistics are measured after the percent of change factor (local effort) is applied to the going-in ratio (previous year assessed value/sale price) in each community for the 2022 assessment. If there are 30 sales or less in a community,the median is the only statistic deemed reliable. ,®¶ 3 «¤ Ȩ® (¨¦§ 3 «¤ Ȩ® Ͱ ®¥ 3 «¤²MedianCODPRD ³±¤£ ¯¯«¨¤£ȩ³±¤£ ¯¯«¨¤£ȩ Afton 3493.8%10.131.021262,000$ $ 2,525,000 Bayport 5093.6%9.801.017160,000$ $ 599,900 Baytown 2094.3%..$ 370,000$ 1,563,500 Birchwood 1294.0%..$ 230,000$ 1,800,000 #®³³ ¦¤ '±®µ¤58593.7%8.051.01570,000$ $ 1,800,000 Dellwood 1893.6%..$ 462,000$ 2,675,000 Denmark 1093.2%..$ 385,000$ 965,000 &®±¤²³ , ª¤29093.7%7.671.011117,000$ $ 2,050,000 Grant 5193.4%10.311.012335,000$ $ 2,100,000 '±¤¸ #«®´£380.8%..$ 540,000$ 606,000 Hastings 00.0%$ -$ - Hugo 31693.9%4.941.004154,628$ $ 899,000 , ª¤ %«¬®17293.9%7.701.015233,000$ $ 1,850,000 , ª¤ 3³ȁ #±®¨·1293.6%..$ 199,820$ 1,200,000 , ª¤« £ 2593.6%..$ 225,000$ 3,500,000 , ª¤« £ 3§®±¤² 384.2%..$ 354,050$ 2,300,000 Landfall 00.0%$ -$ - Mahtomedi 11793.8%9.171.038189,900$ $ 3,500,000 Marine 1493.6%..$ 235,000$ 1,108,350 May 3093.5%12.591.018292,400$ $ 2,010,000 Newport 4893.8%9.341.004110,000$ $ 760,000 / ª 0 ±ª (¦³² 5593.7%8.511.00296,000$ $ 550,000 Oakdale 40493.8%6.341.00787,000$ $ 577,500 0¨¤ 3¯±¨¦² 483.1%..$ 570,000$ 707,000 3³ȁ - ±¸͒² 0®¨³ 579.9%..$ 289,900$ 950,000 3³ȁ 0 ´« 0 ±ª 8493.7%6.951.006140,000$ $ 380,000 Scandia 6993.4%12.351.025195,000$ $ 1,400,000 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 36393.8%8.601.012158,500$ $ 1,300,000 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 4¶¯2293.6%..$ 300,000$ 3,291,000 7¤²³ , ª¤« £4493.6%9.571.008315,000$ $ 2,287,500 7§¨³¤ "¤ ± , ª¤491.9%..$ 363,000$ 415,000 Willernie 1293.3%..$ 163,000$ 499,900 Woodbury 1,46593.7%6.081.006102,000$ $ 1,500,000 COUNTY4,34193.8%7.501.01566,500͡ ͡ 3,500,000 11 | Page 18 of 68 (¨²³®±¨¢ !µ¤± ¦¤ 3 «¤ 0±¨¢¤²Ȁ 3¨¦«¤ & ¬¨«¸ ǉ 4®¶§®¬¤ȝ#®£® ay2018ay2019ay2020ay2021ay2022 Afton$ 485,300 $ 555,200 $ 576,600 $ 604,345 $ 722,300 Bayport$ 312,900 $ 423,100 $ 355,800 $ 350,999 $ 361,000 Baytown$ 615,100 $ 603,200 $ 657,000 $ 687,415 $ 754,000 Birchwood$ 483,900 $ 393,700 $ 566,800 $ 384,548 $ 494,800 #®³³ ¦¤ '±®µ¤$ 252,800 $ 266,400 $ 282,100 $ 303,060 $ 344,300 Dellwood$ 574,500 $ 740,400 $ 1,215,100 $ 969,333 $ 1,100,000 Denmark$ 505,700 $ 525,300 $ 466,100 $ 875,786 $ 697,300 &®±¤²³ , ª¤$ 267,700 $ 265,400 $ 312,200 $ 294,563 $ 375,900 Grant$ 498,500 $ 619,500 $ 634,900 $ 673,901 $ 672,700 '±¤¸ #«®´£$ 240,700 $ 298,500 $ 370,800 $ 561,717 $ 564,700 Hastings$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Hugo$ 249,600 $ 254,300 $ 277,300 $ 300,311 $ 449,900 , ª¤ %«¬®$ 470,900 $ 519,300 $ 480,600 $ 537,760 $ 619,000 , ª¤ 3³ȁ #±®¨·$ 214,200 $ 215,800 $ 248,500 $ 266,870 $ 354,800 , ª¤« £ $ 288,400 $ 444,600 $ 334,900 $ 414,202 $ 571,200 , ª¤« £ 3§®±¤²$ 313,000 $ 650,000 $ 356,400 $ 1,625,000 $ 1,004,700 Landfall$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Mahtomedi$ 385,400 $ 407,900 $ 421,400 $ 409,456 $ 527,900 Marine$ 316,900 $ 511,400 $ 366,000 $ 422,754 $ 572,400 May$ 544,400 $ 474,500 $ 587,800 $ 597,749 $ 691,800 Newport$ 211,000 $ 234,300 $ 257,500 $ 294,723 $ 304,500 / ª 0 ±ª (¦³²$ 230,400 $ 229,800 $ 244,500 $ 247,558 $ 284,700 Oakdale$ 215,800 $ 231,500 $ 240,200 $ 260,361 $ 288,000 0¨¤ 3¯±¨¦²$ 434,900 $ 426,200 $ 434,100 $ 408,850 $ 663,700 3³ȁ - ±¸͒² 0®¨³$ 390,600 $ 601,000 $ 954,900 $ 968,883 $ 5 44,000 3³ȁ 0 ´« 0 ±ª$ 195,100 $ 210,700 $ 230,400 $ 234,443 $ 267,000 Scandia$ 354,600 $ 387,200 $ 376,200 $ 448,700 $ 499,100 3³¨««¶ ³¤± $ 308,100 $ 340,400 $ 343,900 $ 352,427 $ 413,300 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 4¶¯$ 488,600 $ 666,500 $ 542,500 $ 570,652 $ 802,900 7¤²³ , ª¤« £$ 512,900 $ 523,100 $ 547,700 $ 585,678 $ 695,200 7§¨³¤ "¤ ± , ª¤$ 243,000 $ 270,100 $ 279,000 $ 263,268 $ 390,600 Willernie$ 223,800 $ 236,400 $ 210,000 $ 273,820 $ 277,800 Woodbury$ 306,700 $ 317,200 $ 346,500 $ 357,373 $ 411,600 #/5.49 !6%2!'%͡ 297,000͡ 314,500͡ 337,000͡ 355,283͡ 410,300 12 | Page 19 of 68 0!34 ǉ #522%.4 9%!2 ADJUSTMENTS/0!2#%, #/5.4 3%#4)/. !¦±¨¢´«³´± « #« ²² SummaryȀ #´±±¤³ 9¤ ± !£©´²³¬¤³² ay2022.´¬¡¤± ®¥ ay2022ay2021ay2022 .¤¶ #®²³±´¢³¨® Parcels!¦±¨¢´«³´± « 6 «´¤!¦±¨¢´«³´± « 6 «´¤υ '±®¶³§ Afton$ 2,091,600173141,069,300$ $ 114,253,30021.6% Bayport$ -0$ -$ -0.0% Baytown$ -4627,196,600$ $ 23,579,900 15.3% Birchwood$ -0$ -$ -0.0% #®³³ ¦¤ '±®µ¤$ 21,400160141,379,400$ $ 119,173,60018.6% Dellwood$ -5$ 4,758,200$ 3,409,60039.6% Denmark$ 872,500333181,055,900$ $ 141,967,80026.9% &®±¤²³ , ª¤$ 141,10015374,285,000$ $ 58,547,600 26.6% Grant$ 180,000144109,729,300$ $ 84,867,100 29.1% '±¤¸ #«®´£$ -105,053,100$ $ 4,012,40025.9% Hastings$ -1$ 28,500$ 23,8000.0% Hugo$ 216,300264145,483,100$ $ 118,514,20022.6% , ª¤ %«¬®$ 143,000118104,047,600$ $ 81,085,800 28.1% , ª¤ 3³ȁ #±®¨·$ -0$ -$ -0.0% , ª¤« £ $ -4$ 1,731,000$ 1,503,10015.2% , ª¤« £ 3§®±¤²$ -0$ -$ -0.0% Landfall$ -0$ -$ -0.0% Mahtomedi$ -2$ 387,100$ 309,70025.0% Marine$ -9$ 5,863,100$ 4,294,80036.5% May$ 1,096,500312193,157,200$ $ 148,848,20029.0% Newport$ -3$ 7,023,800$ 5,807,40020.9% / ª 0 ±ª (¦³²$ -0$ -$ -0.0% Oakdale$ 2,9004$ 8,106,600$ 7,026,80015.3% 0¨¤ 3¯±¨¦²$ -0$ -$ -0.0% 3³ȁ - ±¸͒² 0®¨³$ -0$ -$ -0.0% 3³ȁ 0 ´« 0 ±ª$ 38,400584,083,200$ $ 3,200,90026.4% Scandia$ 353,600323137,539,600$ $ 105,542,70030.0% 3³¨««¶ ³¤± $ -4$ 3,427,600$ 2,945,40016.4% 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 4¶¯$ 201,10010974,121,100$ $ 60,070,800 23.1% 7¤²³ , ª¤« £$ -4631,757,500$ $ 26,705,700 18.9% 7§¨³¤ "¤ ± , ª¤$ -0$ -$ -0.0% Willernie$ -0$ -$ -0.0% Woodbury$ -97177,034,100$ $ 155,887,00013.6% COUNTY͡ 5,358,400 2,3781,578,317,900͡ ͡ 1,271,577,60023.7% 13 | Page 20 of 68 !¦±¨¢´«³´± « #« ²²Ȁ 0 ²³ ǉ Current 9¤ ± !£©´²³¬¤³s ay2018ay2019ay2020ay2021ay2022Δȃ9¤ ± #§ ¦¤ Afton 0.5%3.6%6.7%3.2%21.6%35.8% Bayport 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0% Baytown 1.6%0.7%14.4%5.7%15.3%37.6% Birchwood 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0% #®³³ ¦¤ '±®µ¤-1.2%-3.6%0.1%-3.0%18.6%10.8% Dellwood 9.6%0.4%2.7%16.8%39.6%69.1% Denmark 0.7%-1.0%6.4%3.0%26.9%36.1% &®±¤²³ , ª¤2.6%2.4%2.1%3.0%26.6%36.7% Grant 1.1%0.2%4.1%3.6%29.1%38.1% '±¤¸ #«®´£5.8%3.8%1.0%0.1%25.9%36.7% Hastings 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%19.7%19.7% Hugo-0.6%-2.4%6.3%1.9%22.6%27.7% , ª¤ %«¬®0.7%-6.6%5.8%-5.4%28.1%22.7% , ª¤ 3³ȁ #±®¨·0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0% , ª¤« £ 0.5%-45.9%-12.3%0.0%15.2%-42.5% , ª¤« £ 3§®±¤² 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0% Landfall 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0% Mahtomedi 0.0%0.0%0.0%-22.9%25.0%2.1% Marine 17.3%0.9%13.3%7.2%36.5%75.2% May 0.0%10.2%8.4%4.2%29.0%51.8% Newport-0.6%-7.7%0.2%2.1%20.9%14.9% / ª 0 ±ª (¦³² 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0% Oakdale 2.0%-25.0%0.4%-60.8%15.3%-68.1% 0¨¤ 3¯±¨¦² 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0% 3³ȁ - ±¸͒² 0®¨³ 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0% 3³ȁ 0 ´« 0 ±ª 0.0%0.2%0.1%3.8%26.4%30.4% Scandia-1.1%10.1%5.4%1.4%30.0%45.8% 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 139.3%-1.2%10.7%-78.8%16.4%86.3% 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 4¶¯0.8%4.6%5.1%-0.4%23.1%33.1% 7¤²³ , ª¤« £0.1%-4.2%2.9%0.2%18.9%17.8% 7§¨³¤ "¤ ± , ª¤0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0% Willernie 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0% Woodbury-6.0%-6.0%13.1%-11.4%13.6%3.2% COUNTY0.0%-0.3%6.3%-2.0%23.7%27.7% 14 | Page 21 of 68 !¦±¨¢´«³´± « #« ²²Ȁ 0 ±¢¤« #®´³² ay2018ay2019ay2020ay2021ay2022 χȝȃ Ͱ 0 ±¢¤«²Ͱ 0 ±¢¤«²Ͱ 0 ±¢¤«²Ͱ 0 ±¢¤«²Ͱ 0 ±¢¤«² Afton 1601561701721731 Bayport 000000 Baytown 4443505046-4 Birchwood 000000 #®³³ ¦¤ '±®µ¤180175170165160-5 Dellwood 66665-1 Denmark 341334339338333-5 &®±¤²³ , ª¤1451451481501533 Grant 1461421421431441 '±¤¸ #«®´£10101010100 Hastings 111110 Hugo 257251258265264-1 , ª¤ %«¬®129113117122118-4 , ª¤ 3³ȁ #±®¨·000000 , ª¤« £ 444440 , ª¤« £ 3§®±¤² 000000 Landfall 000000 Mahtomedi 222220 Marine 779990 May 2752763123113121 Newport 333330 / ª 0 ±ª (¦³² 000000 Oakdale 454440 0¨¤ 3¯±¨¦² 000000 3³ȁ - ±¸͒² 0®¨³ 000000 3³ȁ 0 ´« 0 ±ª 57575757581 Scandia 322319327327323-4 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 325440 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 4¶¯1041041081081091 7¤²³ , ª¤« £4744464746-1 7§¨³¤ "¤ ± , ª¤000000 Willernie 000000 Woodbury 1019810310297-5 COUNTY2,3482,2972,3912,4002,378-22 15 | Page 22 of 68 !¯ ±³¬¤³ #« ²² 3´¬¬ ±¸Ȁ #´±±¤³ 9¤ ± !£©´²³¬¤³² ay2022.´¬¡¤± ®¥ ay2022ay2021ay2022 .¤¶ #®²³±´¢³¨® Parcels!¯ ±³¬¤³ 6 «´¤!¯ ±³¬¤³ 6 «´¤υ '±®¶³§ Afton$ 219,8002$ 1,884,100$ 1,635,1001.8% Bayport$ -2224,830,300$ $ 21,213,900 17.0% Baytown$ -1$ 745,000$ 684,8008.8% Birchwood$ -0$ -$ -0.0% #®³³ ¦¤ '±®µ¤$ 11,586,400 44200,892,300$ $ 143,823,80031.6% Dellwood$ -0$ -$ -0.0% Denmark$ -1$ 1,137,800$ 1,033,80010.1% &®±¤²³ , ª¤$ 1,176,70073259,451,400$ $ 218,336,70018.3% Grant$ -2$ 1,191,700$ 1,139,6004.6% '±¤¸ #«®´£$ -0$ -$ -0.0% Hastings$ -0$ -$ -0.0% Hugo$ 22,018,900 1151,005,500$ $ 24,656,600 17.6% , ª¤ %«¬®$ 36,252,900 1074,980,500$ $ 35,300,000 9.7% , ª¤ 3³ȁ #±®¨·$ -1$ 551,600$ 432,70027.5% , ª¤« £ $ -2$ 888,200$ 771,60015.1% , ª¤« £ 3§®±¤²$ -0$ -$ -0.0% Landfall$ -0$ -$ -0.0% Mahtomedi$ 285,1001771,452,500$ $ 63,023,900 12.9% Marine$ -2$ 481,800$ 418,20015.2% May$ -0$ -$ -0.0% Newport$ -4279,553,700$ $ 68,996,900 15.3% / ª 0 ±ª (¦³²$ -33178,372,300$ $ 153,814,60016.0% Oakdale$ -56299,796,500$ $ 233,208,60028.6% 0¨¤ 3¯±¨¦²$ -0$ -$ -0.0% 3³ȁ - ±¸͒² 0®¨³$ -0$ -$ -0.0% 3³ȁ 0 ´« 0 ±ª$ -259,411,900$ $ 7,668,60022.7% Scandia$ -3$ 612,900$ 525,20016.7% 3³¨««¶ ³¤± $ 8,386,70080168,848,800$ $ 126,339,10027.0% 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 4¶¯$ -0$ -$ -0.0% 7¤²³ , ª¤« £$ -1$ 804,100$ 708,80013.4% 7§¨³¤ "¤ ± , ª¤$ -1$ 15,699,000 $ 14,195,500 10.6% Willernie$ -1$ 1,134,200$ 1,016,00011.6% Woodbury$ 96,235,200 811,048,615,600$ $ 820,175,20016.1% COUNTY͡ 176,161,7005112,492,341,700͡ ͡ 1,939,119,20019.4% 16 | Page 23 of 68 !¯ ±³¬¤³ #« ²²Ȁ 0 ²³ ǉ Current 9¤ ± !£©´²³¬¤³² ay2018ay2019ay2020ay2021ay2022Δȃ9¤ ± #§ ¦¤ Afton 5.1%19.5%15.9%17.5%1.8%59.7% Bayport 28.4%7.2%8.1%6.0%17.0%66.7% Baytown 0.0%53.1%0.0%0.0%8.8%61.9% Birchwood 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0% #®³³ ¦¤ '±®µ¤5.0%9.1%3.7%2.8%31.6%52.3% Dellwood 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0% Denmark 3.2%7.8%1.7%-24.8%10.1%-2.1% &®±¤²³ , ª¤5.8%11.0%4.9%2.5%18.3%42.5% Grant 4.3%4.2%0.0%4.6%4.6%17.8% '±¤¸ #«®´£0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0% Hastings 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0% Hugo 17.1%10.4%2.1%13.1%17.6%60.3% , ª¤ %«¬®30.3%3.6%15.8%52.1%9.7%111.5% , ª¤ 3³ȁ #±®¨·16.7%64.9%16.7%30.7%27.5%156.4% , ª¤« £ 0.0%23.5%7.8%25.4%15.1%71.9% , ª¤« £ 3§®±¤² 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0% Landfall 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0% Mahtomedi 7.0%29.9%-10.7%2.1%12.9%41.3% Marine 0.0%49.6%1.1%7.8%15.2%73.7% May 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0% Newport 7.4%13.0%12.2%1.8%15.3%49.8% / ª 0 ±ª (¦³² 10.8%16.0%3.0%2.6%16.0%48.4% Oakdale 11.8%12.5%7.0%4.1%28.6%63.9% 0¨¤ 3¯±¨¦² 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0% 3³ȁ - ±¸͒² 0®¨³ 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0% 3³ȁ 0 ´« 0 ±ª 3.7%16.5%6.4%3.2%22.7%52.6% Scandia-0.3%6.4%5.7%3.3%16.7%31.8% 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 6.6%18.3%12.7%4.8%27.0%69.4% 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 4¶¯0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0% 7¤²³ , ª¤« £100.0%4.3%100.0%4.0%13.4%221.8% 7§¨³¤ "¤ ± , ª¤0.0%0.0%-34.5%1.7%10.6%-22.2% Willernie 0.0%28.3%5.9%1.5%11.6%47.3% Woodbury 13.1%14.6%5.3%7.6%16.1%56.7% COUNTY10.6%13.9%4.7%5.5%19.4%54.2% 17 | Page 24 of 68 !¯ ±³¬¤³ #« ²²Ȁ 0 ±¢¤« #®´³² ay2018ay2019ay2020ay2021ay2022 χȝȃ Ͱ 0 ±¢¤«²Ͱ 0 ±¢¤«²Ͱ 0 ±¢¤«²Ͱ 0 ±¢¤«²Ͱ 0 ±¢¤«² Afton 222220 Bayport 22222222220 Baytown 111110 Birchwood 000000 #®³³ ¦¤ '±®µ¤17373941443 Dellwood 000000 Denmark 222110 &®±¤²³ , ª¤67717171732 Grant 111121 '±¤¸ #«®´£000000 Hastings 000000 Hugo 5669112 , ª¤ %«¬®67710100 , ª¤ 3³ȁ #±®¨·111110 , ª¤« £ 222220 , ª¤« £ 3§®±¤² 000000 Landfall 000000 Mahtomedi 15171717170 Marine 222220 May 000000 Newport 42424242420 / ª 0 ±ª (¦³² 32353533330 Oakdale 48505151565 0¨¤ 3¯±¨¦² 000000 3³ȁ - ±¸͒² 0®¨³ 000000 3³ȁ 0 ´« 0 ±ª 23232323252 Scandia 133330 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 68737979801 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 4¶¯000000 7¤²³ , ª¤« £111110 7§¨³¤ "¤ ± , ª¤111110 Willernie 111110 Woodbury 54606675816 COUNTY41446047548951122 18 | Page 25 of 68 Commercial/Industrial Class SummaryȀ #´±±¤³ 9¤ ± !£©´²³¬¤³² ay2022.´¬¡¤± ®¥ ay2022ay2021ay2022 .¤¶ #®²³±´¢³¨® Parcels#®¬¬ȝ)£ 6 «´¤#®¬¬ȝ)£ 6 «´¤υ '±®¶³§ Afton$ -3937,363,800$ $ 32,668,00014.4% Bayport$ 600,00010743,354,500$ $ 43,076,700-0.7% Baytown$ -102,694,000$ $ 2,540,9006.0% Birchwood$ -0$ -$ -0.0% #®³³ ¦¤ '±®µ¤$ 7,580,400567434,259,400$ $ 405,841,900 5.1% Dellwood$ 20,0002818,743,500$ $ 15,821,90018.3% Denmark$ -6533,961,200$ $ 32,350,1005.0% &®±¤²³ , ª¤$ 3,446,000546297,046,200$ $ 290,765,800 1.0% Grant$ 432,8009322,166,700$ $ 22,463,400-3.2% '±¤¸ #«®´£$ -223,606,400$ $ 3,286,6009.7% Hastings$ -5$ 1,837,500$ 1,837,5000.0% Hugo$ 3,342,500195187,995,500$ $ 175,267,500 5.4% , ª¤ %«¬®$ 211,800201178,197,200$ $ 171,654,800 3.7% , ª¤ 3³ȁ #±®¨·$ -9$ 2,342,900$ 2,281,4002.7% , ª¤« £ $ -3814,275,200$ $ 14,255,1000.1% , ª¤« £ 3§®±¤²$ -9$ 2,808,200$ 2,814,000-0.2% Landfall$ -7$ 10,112,000$ 10,112,0000.0% Mahtomedi$ -7764,909,800$ $ 61,274,4005.9% Marine$ -163,545,100$ $ 3,563,500-0.5% May$ -8$ 3,155,000$ 2,851,40010.6% Newport$ 414,10019785,786,800$ $ 81,972,9004.1% / ª 0 ±ª (¦³²$ 12,720,000 220246,395,600$ $ 229,758,900 1.7% Oakdale$ 698,100393559,092,800$ $ 542,002,700 3.0% 0¨¤ 3¯±¨¦²$ -0$ -$ -0.0% 3³ȁ - ±¸͒² 0®¨³$ -0$ 100,000$ 100,0000.0% 3³ȁ 0 ´« 0 ±ª$ 88,60020059,891,100$ $ 49,037,70022.0% Scandia$ -7518,672,500$ $ 17,471,0006.9% 3³¨««¶ ³¤± $ 4,503,700394398,930,900$ $ 389,911,700 1.2% 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 4¶¯$ -6$ 2,504,300$ 2,339,7007.0% 7¤²³ , ª¤« £$ -3316,865,300$ $ 15,790,3006.8% 7§¨³¤ "¤ ± , ª¤$ -9$ 6,735,900$ 6,741,800-0.1% Willernie$ -336,371,400$ $ 6,230,2002.3% Woodbury$ 24,973,200 5741,631,524,200$ $ 1,578,349,000 1.8% COUNTY͡ 59,031,2004,176͡ 4,395,244,900͡ 4,214,432,8002.9% 19 | Page 26 of 68 #®¬¬¤±¢¨ «ȝ)£´²³±¨ « #« ²²: 0 ²³ ǉ Current 9¤ ± !£©´²³¬¤³² ay2018ay2019ay2020ay2021ay2022Δȃ9¤ ± #§ ¦¤ Afton 3.7%3.4%7.0%4.4%14.4%32.8% Bayport 1.1%1.8%8.5%4.4%-0.7%15.1% Baytown 1.7%0.0%1.1%5.8%6.0%14.6% Birchwood 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0% #®³³ ¦¤ '±®µ¤2.3%1.2%8.9%7.1%5.1%24.5% Dellwood 4.2%1.8%-0.4%10.0%18.3%34.0% Denmark 0.7%9.8%9.5%11.3%5.0%36.2% &®±¤²³ , ª¤3.0%-0.9%3.5%8.8%1.0%15.4% Grant 1.9%0.5%7.3%6.4%-3.2%12.8% '±¤¸ #«®´£1.8%5.1%15.8%-1.5%9.7%30.9% Hastings 4.0%-6.9%-4.7%10.0%0.0%2.4% Hugo 2.1%2.1%11.8%5.9%5.4%27.3% , ª¤ %«¬®4.3%2.8%0.8%7.7%3.7%19.3% , ª¤ 3³ȁ #±®¨·5.4%0.2%6.0%9.8%2.7%24.1% , ª¤« £ 3.3%0.1%0.7%4.5%0.1%8.7% , ª¤« £ 3§®±¤² 1.7%0.0%-9.2%13.3%-0.2%5.7% Landfall 3.7%17.9%0.0%10.0%0.0%31.5% Mahtomedi-0.6%3.6%10.2%5.2%5.9%24.4% Marine 3.9%-0.7%32.4%-19.0%-0.5%16.1% May 1.3%-0.5%-0.3%7.1%10.6%18.2% Newport-11.1%-0.6%7.3%5.3%4.1%5.1% / ª 0 ±ª (¦³² 2.5%-0.8%2.8%9.5%1.7%15.6% Oakdale 1.8%3.0%6.8%8.1%3.0%22.8% 0¨¤ 3¯±¨¦² 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0% 3³ȁ - ±¸͒² 0®¨³ 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0% 3³ȁ 0 ´« 0 ±ª 20.1%19.0%7.9%24.4%22.0%93.3% Scandia 5.9%-0.1%7.7%8.7%6.9%29.0% 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 3.7%0.5%6.2%9.1%1.2%20.7% 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 4¶¯-30.5%-33.2%-31.4%9.3%7.0%-78.9% 7¤²³ , ª¤« £3.6%4.7%8.7%8.2%6.8%32.0% 7§¨³¤ "¤ ± , ª¤3.6%0.7%-5.0%10.0%-0.1%9.2% Willernie 2.9%3.0%1.9%8.3%2.3%18.5% Woodbury 3.9%3.7%5.3%9.0%1.8%23.7% COUNTY3.0%2.4%5.9%8.4%2.9%22.6% 20 | Page 27 of 68 Commercial/Industrial ClassȀ 0 ±¢¤« #®´³² ay2018ay2019ay2020ay2021ay2022 χȝȃ Ͱ 0 ±¢¤«²Ͱ 0 ±¢¤«²Ͱ 0 ±¢¤«²Ͱ 0 ±¢¤«²Ͱ 0 ±¢¤«² Afton 35353736393 Bayport 1081071071071070 Baytown 10101010100 Birchwood 000000 #®³³ ¦¤ '±®µ¤4224285035675670 Dellwood 29292828280 Denmark 6565666665-1 &®±¤²³ , ª¤5625625495465460 Grant 9394949593-2 '±¤¸ #«®´£24242421221 Hastings 555550 Hugo 1841921911941951 , ª¤ %«¬®2032072012012010 , ª¤ 3³ȁ #±®¨·999990 , ª¤« £ 39393838380 , ª¤« £ 3§®±¤² 889990 Landfall 677770 Mahtomedi 7677777877-1 Marine 1516171716-1 May 888880 Newport 2212192051971970 / ª 0 ±ª (¦³² 2142232202202200 Oakdale 386399394398393-5 0¨¤ 3¯±¨¦² 100000 3³ȁ - ±¸͒² 0®¨³ 000000 3³ȁ 0 ´« 0 ±ª 206203200201200-1 Scandia 7677777775-2 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 397397408400394-6 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 4¶¯665660 7¤²³ , ª¤« £2933343433-1 7§¨³¤ "¤ ± , ª¤999990 Willernie 33333333330 Woodbury 550574577575574-1 COUNTY4,0294,0954,1424,1924,176-16 21 | Page 28 of 68 Residential/SRR #« ²² 3´¬¬ ±¸Ȁ #´±±¤³ 9¤ ± !£©´²³¬¤³² ay2022.´¬¡¤± ®¥ ay2022ay2021ay2022 .¤¶ #®²³±´¢³¨® Parcels2¤²ȝ322 6 «´¤2¤²ȝ322 6 «´¤υ '±®¶³§ Afton$ 10,128,800 1,266732,195,000$ $ 606,098,30019.1% Bayport$ 3,669,5001,026375,555,900$ $ 321,632,20015.6% Baytown$ 8,734,500856535,898,000$ $ 446,362,60018.1% Birchwood$ 1,861,700413217,024,100$ $ 170,804,60026.0% #®³³ ¦¤ '±®µ¤$ 156,968,50013,8754,698,653,800$ $ 3,715,898,10022.2% Dellwood$ 3,430,800509457,092,400$ $ 370,376,40022.5% Denmark$ 7,026,700742412,675,300$ $ 323,485,70025.4% &®±¤²³ , ª¤$ 14,142,400 7,3862,629,037,900$ $ 2,057,859,10027.1% Grant$ 13,341,500 1,7531,041,029,000$ $ 845,009,00021.6% '±¤¸ #«®´£$ 140,30015154,451,100$ $ 42,694,600 27.2% Hastings$ -3$ 758,800$ 633,30019.8% Hugo$ 75,187,500 6,4252,428,118,800$ $ 1,945,365,20021.0% , ª¤ %«¬®$ 137,629,0004,8722,567,004,100$ $ 1,989,131,60022.1% , ª¤ 3³ȁ #±®¨·$ 615,800714158,613,300$ $ 134,701,70017.3% , ª¤« £ $ 648,200788312,716,800$ $ 266,501,00017.1% , ª¤« £ 3§®±¤²$ 81,60014474,503,700$ $ 63,445,300 17.3% Landfall$ -1$ 172,200$ 166,0003.7% Mahtomedi$ 5,959,0003,0101,396,646,100$ $ 1,110,385,30025.2% Marine$ 1,681,300510186,028,900$ $ 138,845,00032.8% May$ 3,955,8001,429763,627,700$ $ 613,789,10023.8% Newport$ 26,830,200 1,424420,628,500$ $ 325,671,20020.9% / ª 0 ±ª (¦³²$ 2,957,5001,558404,045,000$ $ 334,244,00020.0% Oakdale$ 6,090,6009,6332,837,360,900$ $ 2,397,938,10018.1% 0¨¤ 3¯±¨¦²$ 35,80016478,509,400$ $ 62,530,900 25.5% 3³ȁ - ±¸͒² 0®¨³$ 220,200307109,354,000$ $ 90,807,600 20.2% 3³ȁ 0 ´« 0 ±ª$ 702,8002,000490,890,500$ $ 408,989,50019.9% Scandia$ 8,845,0002,226855,329,000$ $ 679,166,40024.6% 3³¨««¶ ³¤± $ 24,398,100 7,5022,873,388,900$ $ 2,401,031,20018.7% 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 4¶¯$ 4,920,000812496,842,200$ $ 407,889,80020.6% 7¤²³ , ª¤« £$ 14,573,000 1,438894,207,800$ $ 735,845,00019.5% 7§¨³¤ "¤ ± , ª¤$ 83,5009933,572,100$ $ 26,826,500 24.8% Willernie$ 83,70031161,083,500$ $ 51,870,600 17.6% Woodbury$ 212,361,30025,27010,650,967,900$ $ 8,803,748,30018.6% COUNTY͡ 747, 304,60098,61739,247,982,600͡ ͡ 31,889,743,200 20.7% 22 | Page 29 of 68 Residentialȝ322 ClassȀ 0 ²³ ǉ Current 9¤ ± !£©´²³¬¤³² ay2018ay2019ay2020ay2021ay2022Δȃ9¤ ± #§ ¦¤ Afton 1.2%11.4%-1.5%1.6%19.1%31.7% Bayport 7.8%9.8%1.9%4.3%15.6%39.5% Baytown-0.2%4.1%3.0%3.2%18.1%28.2% Birchwood 10.1%9.1%0.4%1.5%26.0%47.1% #®³³ ¦¤ '±®µ¤7.1%5.6%5.4%2.6%22.2%42.9% Dellwood 1.0%-0.2%8.1%1.8%22.5%33.1% Denmark 5.0%8.8%4.2%2.7%25.4%46.1% &®±¤²³ , ª¤7.5%3.9%1.2%3.6%27.1%43.2% Grant 2.8%10.1%-2.0%1.9%21.6%34.5% '±¤¸ #«®´£1.9%4.2%4.0%3.1%27.2%40.3% Hastings 2.5%5.2%5.5%1.2%19.8%34.2% Hugo 4.7%7.8%2.8%4.8%21.0%41.0% , ª¤ %«¬®7.7%9.8%0.6%5.4%22.1%45.6% , ª¤ 3³ȁ #±®¨·13.4%7.7%4.2%3.1%17.3%45.7% , ª¤« £ 12.8%0.9%4.8%3.6%17.1%39.3% , ª¤« £ 3§®±¤² 8.6%3.8%0.6%3.2%17.3%33.5% Landfall 4.0%0.5%0.0%12.1%3.7%20.4% Mahtomedi 1.6%5.0%4.8%-2.6%25.2%34.1% Marine 1.3%10.0%-3.5%-1.6%32.8%38.9% May 1.8%8.6%0.3%0.0%23.8%34.5% Newport 4.8%11.0%9.5%2.4%20.9%48.7% / ª 0 ±ª (¦³² 8.6%9.3%2.5%2.7%20.0%43.1% Oakdale 7.2%8.0%2.3%2.6%18.1%38.1% 0¨¤ 3¯±¨¦² 2.9%-0.5%0.0%3.5%25.5%31.5% 3³ȁ - ±¸͒² 0®¨³-1.4%4.4%0.5%11.4%20.2%35.0% 3³ȁ 0 ´« 0 ±ª 3.2%15.0%3.2%1.3%20.0%42.7% Scandia 7.2%11.3%2.7%1.7%24.6%47.6% 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 5.1%7.9%1.3%5.6%18.7%38.5% 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 4¶¯1.1%14.6%-1.9%3.6%20.6%37.9% 7¤²³ , ª¤« £1.3%7.7%0.3%4.5%19.5%33.4% 7§¨³¤ "¤ ± , ª¤7.5%4.1%2.5%2.0%24.8%40.9% Willernie 11.8%16.8%2.7%6.1%17.6%55.0% Woodbury 5.4%5.0%2.7%3.4%18.6%35.0% COUNTY5.4%6.9%2.4%3.2%20.7%38.6% 23 | Page 30 of 68 Residential/SRR ClassȀ 0 ±¢¤« #®´³² ay2018ay2019ay2020ay2021ay2022 χȝȃ Ͱ 0 ±¢¤«²Ͱ 0 ±¢¤«²Ͱ 0 ±¢¤«²Ͱ 0 ±¢¤«²Ͱ 0 ±¢¤«² Afton 1,2831,2751,2761,2751,266-9 Bayport 9791,0031,0301,0301,026-4 Baytown 80681580580585651 Birchwood 415414414414413-1 #®³³ ¦¤ '±®µ¤11,89712,27712,60713,07813,875797 Dellwood 517515513513509-4 Denmark 7177447407377425 &®±¤²³ , ª¤7,3527,3697,3697,3697,38617 Grant 1,7331,7461,7571,7521,7531 '±¤¸ #«®´£172171148152151-1 Hastings 333330 Hugo 5,9056,0676,1326,2866,425139 , ª¤ %«¬®3,9714,3064,4104,5794,872293 , ª¤ 3³ȁ #±®¨·722721717717714-3 , ª¤« £ 788785791791788-3 , ª¤« £ 3§®±¤² 1451451441441440 Landfall 111110 Mahtomedi 2,9993,0013,0033,0033,0107 Marine 528526523518510-8 May 1,4761,4701,4341,4301,429-1 Newport 1,2371,2891,3881,4241,4240 / ª 0 ±ª (¦³² 1,5511,5601,5581,5641,558-6 Oakdale 9,5159,5279,5279,5249,633109 0¨¤ 3¯±¨¦² 1631641641641640 3³ȁ - ±¸͒² 0®¨³ 3163163123053072 3³ȁ 0 ´« 0 ±ª 1,9891,9842,0072,0052,000-5 Scandia 2,2382,2402,2322,2262,2260 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 7,4317,4907,4777,4877,50215 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 4¶¯815816815814812-2 7¤²³ , ª¤« £1,4311,4371,4351,4371,4381 7§¨³¤ "¤ ± , ª¤99999999990 Willernie 313313313312311-1 Woodbury 23,62424,20624,50024,98125,270289 COUNTY93,13194,79595,64496,93998,6171,678 24 | Page 31 of 68 4®³ « T · ¡«¤ C« ²² 3´¬¬ ±¸Ȁ #´±±¤³ 9¤ ± !£©´²³¬¤³² ay2022.´¬¡¤± ®¥ ay2022ay2021ay2022 .¤¶ #®²³±´¢³¨® Parcels4®³ « 6 «´¤4®³ « 6 «´¤υ '±®¶³§ Afton$ 12,440,200 1,480912,512,200$ $ 754,654,70019.3% Bayport$ 4,269,5001,155443,740,700$ $ 385,922,80013.9% Baytown$ 8,734,500913566,533,600$ $ 473,168,20017.9% Birchwood$ 1,861,700413217,024,100$ $ 170,804,60026.0% #®³³ ¦¤ '±®µ¤$ 176,156,70014,6465,475,184,900$ $ 4,384,737,40020.9% Dellwood$ 3,450,800542480,594,100$ $ 389,607,90022.5% Denmark$ 7,899,2001,141628,830,200$ $ 498,837,40024.5% &®±¤²³ , ª¤$ 18,906,200 8,1583,259,820,500$ $ 2,625,509,20023.4% Grant$ 13,954,300 1,9921,174,116,700$ $ 953,479,10021.7% '±¤¸ #«®´£$ 140,30018363,110,600$ $ 49,993,600 26.0% Hastings$ -9$ 2,624,800$ 2,494,6005.2% Hugo$ 100,765,2006,8952,812,602,900$ $ 2,263,803,50019.8% , ª¤ %«¬®$ 174,236,7005,2012,924,229,400$ $ 2,277,172,20020.8% , ª¤ 3³ȁ #±®¨·$ 615,800724161,507,800$ $ 137,415,80017.1% , ª¤« £ $ 648,200832329,611,200$ $ 283,030,80016.2% , ª¤« £ 3§®±¤²$ 81,60015377,311,900$ $ 66,259,300 16.6% Landfall$ -8$ 10,284,200 $ 10,278,000 0.1% Mahtomedi$ 6,244,1003,1061,533,395,500$ $ 1,234,993,30023.7% Marine$ 1,681,300537195,918,900$ $ 147,121,50032.0% May$ 5,052,3001,749959,939,900$ $ 765,488,70024.7% Newport$ 27,244,300 1,666592,992,800$ $ 482,448,40017.3% / ª 0 ±ª (¦³²$ 15,677,500 1,811828,812,900$ $ 717,817,50013.3% Oakdale$ 6,791,60010,0863,704,356,800$ $ 3,180,176,20016.3% 0¨¤ 3¯±¨¦²$ 35,80016478,509,400$ $ 62,530,900 25.5% 3³ȁ - ±¸͒² 0®¨³$ 220,200307109,454,000$ $ 90,907,600 20.2% 3³ȁ 0 ´« 0 ±ª$ 829,8002,283564,276,700$ $ 468,896,70020.2% Scandia$ 9,198,6002,6271,012,154,000$ $ 802,705,30024.9% 3³¨««¶ ³¤± $ 37,288,500 7,9803,444,596,200$ $ 2,920,227,40016.7% 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 4¶¯$ 5,121,100927573,467,600$ $ 470,300,30020.8% 7¤²³ , ª¤« £$ 14,573,000 1,518943,634,700$ $ 779,049,80019.3% 7§¨³¤ "¤ ± , ª¤$ 83,50010956,007,000$ $ 47,763,800 17.1% Willernie$ 83,70034568,589,100$ $ 59,116,800 15.9% Woodbury$ 333,569,70026,02213,508,141,800$ $ 11,358,159,50016.0% COUNTY͡ 987,855,900105,68247,713,887,100͡ ͡ 39,314,872,800 18.9% 25 | Page 32 of 68 4®³ « T · ¡«¤ ClassȀ 0 ²³ ǉ Current 9¤ ± !£©´²³¬¤³² ay2018ay2019ay2020ay2021ay2022Δȃ9¤ ± #§ ¦¤ Afton 1.2%9.8%0.0%2.0%19.3%32.3% Bayport 8.1%8.7%3.0%4.4%13.9%38.1% Baytown-0.1%4.0%3.5%3.3%17.9%28.6% Birchwood 10.1%9.1%0.4%1.5%26.0%47.1% #®³³ ¦¤ '±®µ¤6.3%5.0%5.4%2.8%20.9%40.4% Dellwood 1.2%-0.1%7.7%2.3%22.5%33.5% Denmark 3.3%5.7%5.2%3.2%24.5%41.8% &®±¤²³ , ª¤6.7%3.8%1.7%4.0%23.4%39.7% Grant 2.6%8.9%-1.3%2.2%21.7%34.1% '±¤¸ #«®´£2.2%4.2%4.4%2.5%26.0%39.3% Hastings 2.6%-4.3%-2.2%7.6%5.2%8.9% Hugo 4.3%6.7%3.6%4.8%19.8%39.2% , ª¤ %«¬®7.0%8.3%1.0%5.4%20.8%42.4% , ª¤ 3³ȁ #±®¨·13.2%7.7%4.2%3.3%17.1%45.6% , ª¤« £ 12.2%0.4%4.5%3.7%16.2%37.0% , ª¤« £ 3§®±¤² 8.4%3.7%0.3%3.6%16.6%32.4% Landfall 3.7%17.5%0.0%10.0%0.1%31.3% Mahtomedi 1.7%6.0%4.2%-2.0%23.7%33.6% Marine 1.8%9.5%-2.3%-1.9%32.0%39.2% May 1.5%8.9%1.8%0.8%24.7%37.7% Newport 1.5%8.6%9.2%2.9%17.3%39.4% / ª 0 ±ª (¦³² 7.0%7.3%2.7%4.8%13.3%35.0% Oakdale 6.5%7.2%3.4%3.2%16.3%36.6% 0¨¤ 3¯±¨¦² 2.9%-0.5%0.0%3.5%25.5%31.5% 3³ȁ - ±¸͒² 0®¨³-1.4%4.4%0.5%11.3%20.2%35.0% 3³ȁ 0 ´« 0 ±ª 5.1%15.3%3.7%3.6%20.3%48.1% Scandia 6.0%10.9%3.2%1.8%24.9%46.8% 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 5.3%7.2%2.4%5.6%16.7%37.1% 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 4¶¯0.8%12.9%-1.1%3.0%20.8%36.5% 7¤²³ , ª¤« £1.4%7.2%0.6%4.4%19.3%32.8% 7§¨³¤ "¤ ± , ª¤3.8%2.0%-13.2%2.9%17.1%12.7% Willernie 10.4%15.4%2.6%6.2%15.9%50.6% Woodbury 5.4%5.2%3.4%4.2%16.0%34.1% COUNTY5.1%6.4%3.0%3.6%18.9%37.0% 26 | Page 33 of 68 4®³ « T · ¡«¤ ClassȀ 0 ±¢¤« #®´³² ay2018ay2019ay2020ay2021ay2022 χȝȃ Ͱ 0 ±¢¤«²Ͱ 0 ±¢¤«²Ͱ 0 ±¢¤«²Ͱ 0 ±¢¤«²Ͱ 0 ±¢¤«² Afton 1,4801,4681,4851,4851,480-5 Bayport 1,1091,1321,1591,1591,155-4 Baytown 86186986686691347 Birchwood 415414414414413-1 #®³³ ¦¤ '±®µ¤12,51612,91713,31913,85114,646795 Dellwood 552550547547542-5 Denmark 1,1251,1451,1471,1421,141-1 &®±¤²³ , ª¤8,1268,1478,1378,1368,15822 Grant 1,9731,9831,9941,9911,9921 '±¤¸ #«®´£2062051821831830 Hastings 999990 Hugo 6,3516,5166,5876,7546,895141 , ª¤ %«¬®4,3094,6334,7354,9125,201289 , ª¤ 3³ȁ #±®¨·732731727727724-3 , ª¤« £ 833830835835832-3 , ª¤« £ 3§®±¤² 1531531531531530 Landfall 788880 Mahtomedi 3,0923,0973,0993,1003,1066 Marine 552551551546537-9 May 1,7591,7541,7541,7491,7490 Newport 1,5031,5531,6381,6661,6660 / ª 0 ±ª (¦³² 1,7971,8181,8131,8171,811-6 Oakdale 9,9539,9819,9769,97710,086109 0¨¤ 3¯±¨¦² 1641641641641640 3³ȁ - ±¸͒² 0®¨³ 3163163123053072 3³ȁ 0 ´« 0 ±ª 2,2752,2672,2872,2862,283-3 Scandia 2,6372,6392,6392,6332,627-6 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 7,8997,9627,9697,9707,98010 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 4¶¯925926928928927-1 7¤²³ , ª¤« £1,5081,5151,5161,5191,518-1 7§¨³¤ "¤ ± , ª¤1091091091091090 Willernie 347347347346345-1 Woodbury 24,32924,93825,24625,73326,022289 COUNTY99,922101,647102,652104,020105,6821,662 27 | Page 34 of 68 2¤²¨£¤³¨ «ȝ322 #« ²²Ȁ #´±±¤³ 9¤ ± 6 «´¤ Changes This table lists a breakdown of the number of value changes by percent change the residential and seasonal recreational properties in each community received for the ay2022 assessment. The percent change groupings are listed across the top row of the table. For the 2022 assessment 99.4% are receiving a valuation notice indicating an increase in their property value. Afton - - - 2 35 1 1 5 1,222 1,266 37 1,229 Bayport 3 - - - 5 - 3 247 768 1,026 8 1,018 Baytown - - - - 19 - 3 14 820 856 19 837 Birchwood - - - - - - 2 1 410 413 - 413 #®³³ ¦¤ '±®µ¤ 7 - 1 11 38 12 91 237 13,478 13,875 57 13,818 Dellwood - - 1 - 9 1 - 4 494 509 10 499 Denmark 1 1 - - 8 - 1 1 730 742 10 732 &®±¤²³ , ª¤ 1 - 3 4 84 4 4 37 7,249 7,386 92 7,294 Grant 9 1 - - 30 1 1 1 1,710 1,753 40 1,713 '±¤¸ #«®´£ 1 - - - - - 11 - 139 151 1 150 Hastings - - - - - - - - 3 3 - 3 Hugo - - - 1 22 1 3 7 6,391 6,425 23 6,402 , ª¤ %«¬® 2 - 1 - 14 6 4 218 4,627 4,872 17 4,855 , ª¤ 3³ȁ #±®¨· - - - 1 29 - 4 33 647 714 30 684 , ª¤« £ - - - 2 - - 6 6 774 788 2 786 , ª¤« £ 3§®±¤² - - - - - - - - 144 144 - 144 Landfall - - - - - 1 - - - 1 - 1 Mahtomedi 5 1 - - 3 1 3 16 2,981 3,010 9 3,001 Marine - - 3 3 4 3 1 1 495 510 10 500 May 1 - - 1 39 2 6 11 1,369 1,429 41 1,388 Newport 2 - - 4 12 1 3 9 1,393 1,424 18 1,406 / ª 0 ±ª (¦³² - - - 1 - 2 3 281 1,271 1,558 1 1,557 Oakdale 2 - - 1 46 3 12 2,821 6,748 9,633 49 9,584 0¨¤ 3¯±¨¦² - - - - 3 - - - 161 164 3 161 3³ȁ - ±¸͒² 0®¨³ - - 1 - 8 - 1 2 295 307 9 298 3³ȁ 0 ´« 0 ±ª 3 - - - 10 3 4 2 1,978 2,000 13 1,987 Scandia 5 - - - 67 3 2 1 2,148 2,226 72 2,154 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 2 1 2 3 - - 10 1,515 5,969 7,502 8 7,494 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 4¶¯ - - - - 9 - 1 2 800 812 9 803 7¤²³ , ª¤« £ - - - - 7 1 4 4 1,422 1,438 7 1,431 7§¨³¤ "¤ ± , ª¤ - - - - - - - - 99 99 - 99 Willernie - 1 - 10 - 2 15 41 242 311 11 300 Woodbury 4 - 1 2 - 240 18 7,565 17,440 25,270 7 25,263 48 Δ 13 46 501 288 217 13,082 84,417 98,617 613 98,004 COUNTY 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.5%0.3%0.2%13.3%85.6%100.0%0.6%99.4% 28 | Page 35 of 68 -!2+%4 6!,5%SECTION $¨²³±¨¡´³¨® ®¥ - ±ª¤³ 6 «´¤ ¡¸ #« ²²¨¥¨¢ ³¨® With new construction included, the pattern of change in the county’s total value and classification value distribution can be seen in the following list of past assessment year data. Estimated Market Value (EMV) by Classification & Percentage of Total %-6 Ȩ¨¢«´£¤² ¤¶ ¢®²³±´¢³¨®ȩ ay2018ay2019ay2020ay2021ay2022 4®³ « %-6$ 32,894,024,500$ 35,654,881,200$ 37,326,145,800$ 39,314,872,800$ 47,713,887,100 !¦±¨¢´«³´±¤ %-6$ 1,263,774,600$ 1,250,153,700$ 1,315,056,100$ 1,271,577,600$ 1,578,317,900 !¦±¨¢´«³´±¤ υ ®¥ 4®³ «3.8%3.5%3.5%3.2%3.3% !¯ ±³¬¤³ %-6$ 1,322,514,400$ 1,600,537,000$ 1,743,006,000$ 1,939,119,200$ 2,492,341,700 !¯ ±³¬¤³ υ ®¥ 4®³ «4.0%4.5%4.7%4.9%5.2% #®¬¬¤±¢¨ «ȝ)£´²³±¨ « %-6$ 3,445,552,500$ 3,607,962,900$ 3,884,295,400$ 4,214,432,800$ 4,395,244,900 #®¬¬ȝ)£´²³±¨ « υ ®¥ 4®³ «10.5%10.1%10.4%10.7%9.2% 2¤²¨£¤³¨ «ȝ322 %-6$ 26,862,183,000$ 29,196,227,600$ 30,383,788,300$ 31,889,743,200$ 39,247,982,600 2¤²¨£¤³¨ «ȝ322 υ ®¥ 4®³ «81.7%81.9%81.4%81.1%82.3% ΑΏΑΑ %-6 $¨²³±¨¡´³´¨® ¡¸ #« ²²¨¥¨¢ ³¨® 3.3% 5.2% 9.2% Agriculture Apartment Commercial/Industrial 82.3% Residential 29| Page 36 of 68 -¤£¨ 6 «´¤² Historical Median Residential Improved Value: Residential/SRR Median%Median%Median%Median%Median% ay2018Changeay2019Changeay2020Changeay2021Changeay2022Change Afton$ 443,8004.7%497,000$ 12.0%484,600$ -2.5%489,100$ -1.6%597,000$ 22.1% Bayport$ 232,0008.9%262,900$ 13.3%267,200$ 1.6%288,200$ 9.6%336,400$ 16.7% Baytown$ 516,2002.6%540,600$ 4.7%573,700$ 6.1%589,500$ 9.0%691,900$ 17.4% Birchwood$ 331,10011.4%358,500$ 8.3%346,100$ -3.5%354,800$ -1.0%435,400$ 22.7% #®³³ ¦¤ '±®µ¤$ 238,9006.7%253,800$ 6.2%266,900$ 5.2%270,700$ 6.7%328,600$ 21.4% Dellwood$ 567,4003.9%553,000$ -2.5%637,600$ 15.3%688,100$ 24.4%804,900$ 17.0% Denmark$ 414,4008.7%439,900$ 6.2%456,500$ 3.8%467,400$ 6.3%612,100$ 31.0% &®±¤²³ , ª¤$ 254,6009.2%270,700$ 6.3%274,500$ 1.4%281,400$ 4.0%361,000$ 28.3% Grant$ 453,3006.0%507,800$ 12.0%487,000$ -4.1%503,400$ -0.9%618,400$ 22.8% '±¤¸ #«®´£$ 324,7005.0%344,300$ 6.0%359,000$ 4.3%371,400$ 7.9%480,500$ 29.4% Hastings Hugo$ 260,5004.4%278,500$ 6.9%290,000$ 4.1%309,800$ 11.2%379,300$ 22.4% , ª¤ %«¬®$ 401,6004.8%430,600$ 7.2%434,800$ 1.0%458,700$ 6.5%553,800$ 20.7% , ª¤ 3³ȁ #±®¨·$ 209,90015.5%230,900$ 10.0%242,400$ 5.0%250,000$ 8.3%293,700$ 17.5% , ª¤« £ $ 269,80017.7%269,100$ -0.3%283,800$ 5.5%297,000$ 10.4%349,000$ 17.5% , ª¤« £ 3§®±¤²$ 325,30012.1%341,000$ 4.8%343,900$ 0.9%358,500$ 5.1%418,300$ 16.7% Landfall Mahtomedi$ 324,9003.2%342,800$ 5.5%360,100$ 5.0%351,200$ 2.5%435,800$ 24.1% Marine$ 342,3003.0%386,700$ 13.0%373,300$ -3.5%379,900$ -1.8%499,600$ 31.5% May$ 420,5004.7%454,600$ 8.1%458,800$ 0.9%452,100$ -0.5%567,200$ 25.5% Newport$ 195,4005.5%216,100$ 10.6%226,600$ 4.9%229,600$ 6.2%285,700$ 24.4% / ª 0 ±ª (¦³²$ 215,5006.5%236,700$ 9.8%240,300$ 1.5%251,000$ 6.0%294,600$ 17.4% Oakdale$ 231,7007.1%252,800$ 9.1%259,000$ 2.5%264,300$ 4.5%315,000$ 19.2% 0¨¤ 3¯±¨¦²$ 413,7003.6%412,100$ -0.4%412,300$ 0.0%429,200$ 4.1%538,900$ 25.6% 3³ȁ - ±¸͒² 0®¨³$ 296,000-0.7%317,900$ 7.4%318,400$ 0.2%335,000$ 5.4%402,900$ 20.3% 3³ȁ 0 ´« 0 ±ª$ 180,1002.4%211,100$ 17.2%220,200$ 4.3%221,600$ 5.0%266,600$ 20.3% Scandia$ 331,3009.8%365,500$ 10.3%376,500$ 3.0%375,500$ 2.7%476,800$ 27.0% 3³¨««¶ ³¤± $ 268,3007.1%289,300$ 7.8%294,700$ 1.9%313,400$ 8.3%373,800$ 19.3% 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 4¶¯$ 437,3002.8%505,700$ 15.6%487,200$ -3.7%499,700$ -1.2%612,400$ 22.6% 7¤²³ , ª¤« £$ 438,5003.0%476,000$ 8.6%479,500$ 0.7%503,300$ 5.7%606,500$ 20.5% 7§¨³¤ "¤ ± , ª¤$ 252,10010.0%264,400$ 4.9%269,500$ 1.9%276,500$ 4.6%345,500$ 25.0% Willernie$ 172,50013.6%202,500$ 17.4%211,700$ 4.5%226,300$ 11.8%266,200$ 17.6% Woodbury$ 312,6005.4%327,400$ 4.7%341,200$ 4.2%351,100$ 7.2%419,000$ 19.3% #/5.49 -%$)!.͡ 277,10012.6%296,700͡ 7.1%306,600͡ 3.3%316,800͡ 6.8%384,200͡ 21.3% 30 | Page 37 of 68 Historical Median Residential Improved Value: Townhomes/Condos Median%Median%Median%Median%Median% ay2018Changeay2019Changeay2020Changeay2021Changeay2022Change Bayport$ 286,500-3.8%310,200$ 8.3%352,100$ 13.5%364,600$ 17.5%418,700$ 14.8% #®³³ ¦¤ '±®µ¤$ 169,80013.4%178,400$ 5.1%190,700$ 6.9%199,000$ 11.5%236,300$ 18.7% &®±¤²³ , ª¤$ 180,1008.0%189,600$ 5.3%190,800$ 0.6%196,800$ 3.8%246,300$ 25.2% Hugo$ 179,8009.0%195,600$ 8.8%199,800$ 2.1%212,000$ 8.4%254,800$ 20.2% , ª¤ %«¬®$ 230,900-6.8%285,500$ 23.6%283,700$ -0.6%309,700$ 8.5%341,800$ 10.4% Mahtomedi$ 264,50012.8%277,400$ 4.9%289,300$ 4.3%281,500$ 1.5%340,600$ 21.0% Marine$ 192,200-3.0%211,000$ 9.8%211,000$ 0.0%219,900$ 4.2%291,200$ 32.4% Newport$ 149,1000.3%165,300$ 10.9%170,000$ 2.8%174,400$ 5.5%212,300$ 21.7% / ª 0 ±ª (¦³²$ 161,7006.0%181,500$ 12.2%197,900$ 9.0%202,300$ 11.5%270,200$ 33.6% Oakdale$ 163,90010.1%180,900$ 10.4%185,500$ 2.5%194,600$ 7.6%220,000$ 13.1% 3³ȁ 0 ´« 0 ±ª$ 169,7003.2%205,100$ 20.9%205,100$ 0.0%199,800$ -2.6%241,100$ 20.7% Stillwater$ 224,0009.9%249,100$ 11.2%249,300$ 0.1%262,800$ 5.5%299,400$ 13.9% Woodbury$ 192,5007.5%207,800$ 7.9%220,700$ 6.2%231,700$ 11.5%261,900$ 13.0% #/5.49 -%$)!.͡ 182,7008.7%197,100͡ 7.9%206,700͡ 4.9%216,900͡ 10.0%251,500͡ 16.0% 31 | Page 38 of 68 Historical Median Residential Improved Value: Single Family -¤£¨ % -¤£¨ % -¤£¨ % -¤£¨ % -¤£¨ % ¸ΑΏΐΗ Change ¸ΑΏΐΘ Change ¸ΑΏΑΏ Change ¸ΑΏΑΐ Change ¸ΑΏΑΑChange Afton$ 443,8004.7%497,000$ 12.0%484,600$ -2.5%489,100$ -1.6%597,000$ 22.1% Bayport$ 227,0009.5%256,200$ 12.9%260,800$ 1.8%283,200$ 10.5%332,300$ 17.3% Baytown$ 516,2002.6%540,600$ 4.7%573,700$ 6.1%589,500$ 9.0%691,900$ 17.4% Birchwood$ 331,10011.4%358,500$ 8.3%346,100$ -3.5%354,800$ -1.0%435,400$ 22.7% #®³³ ¦¤ '±®µ¤$ 245,6006.8%260,700$ 6.1%274,700$ 5.4%279,000$ 7.0%339,100$ 21.5% Dellwood$ 567,4003.9%553,000$ -2.5%637,600$ 15.3%688,100$ 24.4%804,900$ 17.0% Denmark$ 414,4008.7%439,900$ 6.2%456,500$ 3.8%467,400$ 6.3%612,100$ 31.0% &®±¤²³ , ª¤$ 274,6008.8%290,800$ 5.9%296,000$ 1.8%302,800$ 4.1%389,800$ 28.7% Grant$ 453,3006.0%507,800$ 12.0%487,000$ -4.1%503,400$ -0.9%618,400$ 22.8% '±¤¸ #«®´£$ 324,7005.0%344,300$ 6.0%359,000$ 4.3%371,400$ 7.9%480,500$ 29.4% Hastings Hugo$ 326,0004.1%348,400$ 6.9%358,400$ 2.9%372,100$ 6.8%450,200$ 21.0% , ª¤ %«¬®$ 408,7004.8%438,800$ 7.4%441,400$ 0.6%464,600$ 5.9%563,500$ 21.3% , ª¤ 3³ȁ #±®¨·$ 209,90016.7%230,900$ 10.0%242,400$ 5.0%250,000$ 8.3%293,700$ 17.5% , ª¤« £ $ 269,80017.4%269,100$ -0.3%283,800$ 5.5%297,000$ 10.4%349,000$ 17.5% , ª¤« £ 3§®±¤²$ 325,30012.1%341,000$ 4.8%343,900$ 0.9%358,500$ 5.1%418,300$ 16.7% Landfall Mahtomedi$ 334,1002.6%351,600$ 5.2%370,600$ 5.4%361,600$ 2.8%451,300$ 24.8% Marine$ 342,300-1.1%386,700$ 13.0%373,300$ -3.5%379,900$ -1.8%513,900$ 35.3% May$ 420,5004.7%454,600$ 8.1%458,800$ 0.9%452,100$ -0.5%567,200$ 25.5% Newport$ 195,4004.4%216,100$ 10.6%226,600$ 4.9%229,600$ 6.2%289,400$ 26.0% / ª 0 ±ª (¦³²$ 234,0006.9%257,900$ 10.2%260,300$ 0.9%270,600$ 4.9%314,500$ 16.2% Oakdale$ 248,5007.7%270,700$ 8.9%276,800$ 2.3%284,600$ 5.1%340,900$ 19.8% 0¨¤ 3¯±¨¦²$ 413,7003.6%412,100$ -0.4%412,300$ 0.0%429,200$ 4.1%538,900$ 25.6% 3³ȁ - ±¸͒² 0®¨³$ 296,000-0.7%317,900$ 7.4%318,400$ 0.2%335,000$ 5.4%402,900$ 20.3% 3³ȁ 0 ´« 0 ±ª$ 180,1002.0%211,100$ 17.2%220,200$ 4.3%221,600$ 5.0%268,900$ 21.3% Scandia$ 331,30010.1%365,500$ 10.3%376,500$ 3.0%375,500$ 2.7%476,800$ 27.0% 3³¨««¶ ³¤± $ 276,8006.4%297,000$ 7.3%301,500$ 1.5%321,800$ 8.4%387,600$ 20.4% 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 4¶¯$ 437,3002.8%505,700$ 15.6%487,200$ -3.7%499,700$ -1.2%612,400$ 22.6% 7¤²³ , ª¤« £$ 438,5003.0%476,000$ 8.6%479,500$ 0.7%503,300$ 5.7%606,500$ 20.5% 7§¨³¤ "¤ ± , ª¤$ 252,10010.0%264,400$ 4.9%269,500$ 1.9%276,500$ 4.6%345,500$ 25.0% Willernie$ 172,50014.7%202,500$ 17.4%211,700$ 4.5%226,300$ 11.8%266,200$ 17.6% Woodbury$ 358,1005.4%371,300$ 3.7%382,800$ 3.1%395,400$ 6.5%476,100$ 20.4% #/5.49 -%$)!.͡ 307,900 6.7%327,900͡ 6.5%337,400͡ 2.9%348,000͡ 6.1%425,900͡ 22.4% 32 | Page 39 of 68 Single Family and Townhome/Condo breakdown -¤£¨ 2¤²¨£¤³¨ « 6 «´¤ ¡¸ $¶¤««¨¦ 4¸¯¤ Townhome/Condo3¨¦«¤ & ¬¨«¸ $251,500 AY2022 $425,900 $216,900 AY2021 $348,000 $206,700 AY2020 $337,400 $197,100 AY2019 $327,900 $182,700 AY2018 $307,900 Historical County Median Residential Improved Value Ȩ)¢«´£¤² ¡®³§ 3¨¦«¤ & ¬¨«¸ £ 4®¶§®¬¤ȝ#®£® ¶¨³§ ¨¬¯±®µ¤¬¤³value #®´³¸ -¤£¨ 2¤²¨£¤³¨ « )¬¯±®µ¤£ 6 «´¤ AY2022 $384,200 AY2021 $316,800 AY2020 $306,600 AY2019 $296,700 AY2018 $277,100 33| Page 40 of 68 /4(%2 !33%33-%.4 2%,!4%$ ).&/2-!4)/. .¤¶ #®²³±´¢³¨® Current New Construction Starts: All Classifications SFRTH/CondoComm/IndApartmentExemptTotal 202120212021202120212021 # «¤£ ± ¸¤ ± .¤¶ 3³ ±³².¤¶ 3³ ±³².¤¶ 3³ ±³².¤¶ 3³ ±³².¤¶ 3³ ±³².¤¶ 3³ ±³² Afton 190000 19 Bayport 80000 8 Baytown 90000 9 Birchwood 10000 1 #®³³ ¦¤ '±®µ¤372164301 540 Dellwood 20000 2 Denmark 150000 15 &®±¤²³ , ª¤2912111 44 Grant 190000 19 '±¤¸ #«®´£00000 0 Hastings 00000 0 Hugo 1970203 202 , ª¤ %«¬®27155000 326 , ª¤ 3³ȁ #±®¨· "¤ ¢§00000 0 , ª¤« £ 10000 1 , ª¤« £ 3§®±¤² 00000 0 Landfall 00000 0 Mahtomedi 60000 6 Marine 50000 5 May 30000 3 Newport 700101 72 / ª 0 ±ª (¦³² 50100 6 Oakdale 420102 27 0¨¤ 3¯±¨¦² 00000 0 3³ȁ - ±¸͒² 0®¨³ 20000 2 3³ȁ 0 ´« 0 ±ª 10000 1 Scandia 200000 20 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 390110 41 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 4¶¯60000 6 7¤²³ , ª¤« £180000 18 7§¨³¤ "¤ ± , ª¤00000 0 Willernie 20000 2 Woodbury 46865820 543 COUNTY1,59231618481,938 34 | Page 41 of 68 Past & Current New Construction Starts: Single Family and Townhome/Condo # «¤£ ± ¸¤ ±20172018201920202021 .¤¶ 3³ ±³².¤¶ 3³ ±³².¤¶ 3³ ±³².¤¶ 3³ ±³².¤¶ 3³ ±³² Afton 135118 19 Bayport 26342628 8 Baytown 2015711 9 Birchwood 0002 1 #®³³ ¦¤ '±®µ¤118181249359 536 Dellwood 3214 2 Denmark 89913 15 &®±¤²³ , ª¤53555352 41 Grant 451016 19 '±¤¸ #«®´£1000 0 Hastings 0000 0 Hugo 81124101161 197 , ª¤ %«¬®283280228282 326 , ª¤ 3³ȁ #±®¨· "¤ ¢§3301 0 , ª¤« £ 0032 1 , ª¤« £ 3§®±¤² 0000 0 Landfall 0000 0 Mahtomedi 1111913 6 Marine 0100 5 May 10883 3 Newport 7204667 70 / ª 0 ±ª (¦³² 0046 5 Oakdale 4234 24 0¨¤ 3¯±¨¦² 0010 0 3³ȁ - ±¸͒² 0®¨³ 1100 2 3³ȁ 0 ´« 0 ±ª 7390 1 Scandia 2216117 20 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 42385033 39 3³¨««¶ ³¤± 4¶¯3651 6 7¤²³ , ª¤« £5648 18 7§¨³¤ "¤ ± , ª¤0000 0 Willernie 3002 2 Woodbury 326445454383 533 COUNTY1,0541,2701,3021,4661,908 35 | Page 42 of 68 Historical New Construction Summary: All Classifications 20172018201920202021 ay2018ay2019ay2020ay2021ay2022 3¨¦«¤ & ¬¨«¸9161,0621,1441,247 1,592 Townhome/Condo 138208158219 316 Apartment 11131610 4 Commercial/Industrial 23331414 18 -¨²¢ 0¤±¬¨³² 2,3772,8302,6903,250 3,527 4/4!, 3,4654,1464,0224,740 5,457 4 · ¡«¤ 6 «´¤ !££¤£$ 537,246,400$ 661,822,400$ 620,711,300$ 703,302,300͡ 987,855,900 Historical Comparison of New Construction: ay18–ay22 .¤¶ #®²³±´¢³¨® 2¤µ¨¤¶² Ȩ.¤¶ 3³ ±³² ǉ -¨²¢ȁ 0¤±¬¨³ȩ AY2022 5,457 AY2021 4,740 AY2020 4,022 AY2019 4,146 AY2018 3,465 36| Page 43 of 68 !¯¯± ¨²¤± ActivityȀ 0¤±¬¨³ ǉ 1´¨³¨«¤ 2¤µ¨¤¶ Counts Current state law mandates that all property must be re-assessed each year and reviewed once every five years(aka quintile). Staff also inspects properties that have taken out a construction permit during the course of the year. During 2021 (for the 2022 assessment), the Assessor Division appraisers and locally hired assessors, reviewed 30,458 properties. The breakdown of the properties that were reviewed over the last five years. 20172018201920202021 ay2018ay2019ay2020ay2021ay2022 2¤²¨£¤³¨ « 1´¨³¨«¤19,37719,72721,40024,160 23,008 !¯³ȝ#) 2¤µ¨¤¶² 6761,1909701,191 499 .¤¶ #®²³±´¢³¨® 2¤µ¨¤¶² 3,4654,1464,0224,740 5,457 -¨²¢ 2¤µ¨¤¶² 00280 1,494 4/4!, 23,51825,06326,42030,09130,458 37 | Page 44 of 68 !¯¯± ¨²¤± !¢³¨µ¨³¸Ȁ T · Petition 2elated Minnesota Tax Court has been established by the Minnesota Legislature for the purpose of hearing only tax related cases. The Court’s judges have expertise in tax laws and apply that knowledge in a manner to ensure that taxpayers are assessed in a fair and equitable way. The tax petition process is a complicated and ever-changing part of our business. The entire process continues to consume a large amount of our Commercial/Industrial/Apartment appraiser workload. The table below provides a summary of the petition filings in Washington County over the last five payable years. Petitions related to taxes payable 2021 increased in the ´¬¡¤± ®¥ ¯¤³¨³¨®² ¥¨«¤£by 7.5% or 14 petitions. The only property use that showed an increase was the commercial/industrial class. Total µ «´¤ ´£¤± ¯¤³¨³¨®s for pay2021 declined roughly 2% when compared to the previous year. The section titled ¯¤³¨³¨® µ «´¤ ¡¸ ¢« ²²ification indicates that the residential value under petition declined significantly while apartments, that have experienced substantial increases over the last several years, the value under petition declined by nearly 18%. .´¬¡¤± ®¥ 0¤³¨³¨®² &¨«¤£ 0 ¸ ¡«¤ 9¤ ±20172018201920202021 Residential 121716125 Commercial/Industrial 9394123156179 Apartment 518221917 4/4!, 110129161187201 6 «´¤ 5£¤± 0¤³¨³¨®² Ȩ!«« #« ²²¨¥¨¢ ³¨®²ȩ 0 ¸ ¡«¤ 9¤ ±20172018201920202021 $ 779,084,100 $ 967,278,300 $ 1,297,975,600 $ 1,719,577,900 $ 1,686,979,000 0¤³¨³¨® 6 «´¤ ¡¸ #« ²²¨¥¨¢ ³¨® 0 ¸ ¡«¤ 9¤ ±20172018201920202021 Residential$ 20,168,200$ 30,299,900$ 18,568,700$ 18,685,600$ 4,333,700 Commercial/Industrial$ 602,423,800 $ 660,500,500 $ 846,459,300 $ 1,281,098,600 $ 1,336,984,000 Apartment$ 156,492,100 $ 276,477,900 $ 432,947,600 $ 419,793,700 $ 345,661,300 4/4!, ͡ 779,084,100͡ 967,278,300͡ 1,297,975,600͡ 1,719,577,900͡ 1,686,979,000 38 | Page 45 of 68 4 · 0¤³¨³¨®²Ȁ .´¬¡¤± ®¥ 0¤³¨³¨®² &¨«¤£ ¥®±0 ¸ ¡«¤ 9¤ ±² Α017-20Αΐ .´¬¡¤± ®¥ 0¤³¨³¨®² &¨«¤£ ¡¸ #« ²²¨¥¨¢ ³¨® 179 156 123 94 93 22 19 1718 17 16 1212 5 5 0!9 ΑΏΐΖ0!9 ΑΏΐΗ0!9 ΑΏΐΘ0!9 ΑΏΑΏ0!9 ΑΏΑΐ ResidentialCommercial/IndustrialApartment 4 · 0¤³¨³¨®²Ȁ 6 «´¤ 5£¤± 0¤³¨³¨®² ¥®±0 ¸ ¡«¤ 9¤ ±²2017-2021 6 «´¤ 5£¤± 0¤³¨³¨®² Ȩ!«« #« ²²¨¥¨¢ ³¨®²ȩ 0!9 ΑΏΑΐ ͡ΐǾΕΗΕǾΘΖΘǾΏΏΏ 0!9 ΑΏΑΏ ͡ΐǾΖΐΘǾΔΖΖǾΘΏΏ 0!9 ΑΏΐΘ ͡ΐǾΑΘΖǾΘΖΔǾΕΏΏ 0!9 ΑΏΐΗ ͡ΘΕΖǾΑΖΗǾΒΏΏ 0!9 ΑΏΐΖ ͡ΖΖΘǾΏΗΓǾΐΏΏ 39| Page 46 of 68 !²²¤²²¬¤³ 0±®¢¤²²Ȁ 3³ ³´³®±¸ 2¤°´¨±¤¬¤³² Minnesota law establishes specific requirements for the entire property tax system, including the assessment of property (M.S. Chapter 273). These requirements have not changed during the past year.The laws require the following: 1.All real property is to be valued at market value, which is defined as the usual or most likely selling price at the time of assessment. Special qualified exclusions such as the Veterans’ Exclusion are subtracted from the market value to arrive at the taxable value. 2.Property is classified according to state law, and the tax capacity is calculated. 3.The tax capacity is multiplied by the tax rate (the total of county, school, city, and miscellaneous levies) to determine the amount of property tax. The annual property assessment focuses on the very first step of this process—establishing an estimated market value for each parcel of property. Market values are assessed locally by either a county employed appraiser or a locally hired assessor. The work of both county and local assessors is monitored by the County Assessor, whose work is in turn monitored by the Minnesota Department of Revenue. The monitoring agency is authorized by law to adjust the property assessment to help ensure county-wide and state-wide equalization of property assessments. The County Assessorhas established the standard that all Washington County communities, with at least six (6) sales in their sales study, has a community median ratio in the range of 93%-95% of actual market values in relationship to time-adjusted sales prices. At times, local assessment levels have been adjusted by the County Assessor or the State of Minnesota. State law also requires that each individual property be reviewedby the assessor at least once every five years. Each community has a rotating revaluation schedule to ensure that this requirement is met. What is market value? Minnesota Statue 273.03 defines market value as “… the usual selling price at the time of assessment.” The Assessor’s Office works throughout the year to estimate market values of each property for the following January 2 assessment date. 40 | Page 47 of 68 How is market value determined? Review Property: Approximately every fifth year, an appraiser working under the supervision of the County Assessor will review the property. Any property that had a building permit issued in a given year is reviewed and the new value is calculated as of January 2nd following the construction. Gather Information: The appraiser gathers information on all characteristics of the property that affect market value, such as size, age, quality of construction, basement finish, and extra features, such as fireplaces, walk-out basements, et cetera. Compute Value: The characteristics are entered into a computerized system (CAMA). Information on actual market sales are used to establish the building and component rates used to calculate the property’s value. The market value estimated by the appraiser in this way should be very close to the amount the property would sell for, if placed on the open market. Why may market value change from year to year? Property values change continuously depending on the economic conditions affecting the local market. In addition to market changes, physical changes made to a property can also affect its market value. All factors are considered in estimating the value of property. 41 | Page 48 of 68 Explaining ³§¤ !¯¯¤ «² 0±®¢¤²² In Minnesota, property tax laws provide the legal parameters that govern the work of assessors. These statutes lay down a cycle of assessment activities that are conducted on an annual basis. Each year, assessors are required to work on a number of tasks that include: listing, valuing, and classifying all taxable properties; processing both real and personal property transfers; analyzing market data; monitoring assessment levels for several different classes of property; and arranging and conducting an appeals process. The latter of these activities is a key part of the assessment cycle that provides property owners with an opportunity to review and, if necessary, challenge their estimate of market value and/or classification that will be used for taxation purposes in the following year. At what point in the assessment cycle does the appeals process begin? The appeals process begins in March and extends through June. When property owners receive their Valuation Notices during the month of March, they should read them carefully for instructions about deadlines, filing procedures, meeting dates and times. If they are not clear, they should call the assessor’s office for clarification and additional information because a missed deadline, an incorrect filing, or the failure to attend a scheduled meeting can cause an appeal to be dismissed. What steps should property owners take to appeal their assessments? There are two avenues of appeal that property owners may take to challenge their assessments. The first route is referred to as the three-step appeal and the second is known as the one-step appeal. These steps are illustrated in the flow chart on the following page. How should property owners begin their appeal? Property owners are encouragedto contact their appraiser to discuss their property assessment concerns. An informal meeting can be scheduled to review the property, examine market data, answer questions, and clarify the valuation and classification practices used. This discussion can also be handled by telephone, mail, or e-mail during regular business hours. 42 | Page 49 of 68 Appeals Process: What are the options? First Contact the County Assessor’s Office or your Local Assessor 651-430-6175. Discuss your concerns with the assessor or an appraiser. Compare values of neighboring or similar properties. Review local comparable sales information. If you and your assessor or the County staff do not agree, continue below: Appeal to your Local Board of Appeal & Equalization (LBAE) or attend one of four regional Open Book meetings (meeting times & locations are listed on your valuation notice). Appeal in person, by letter, or by designated representative. If your appeal is not addressed to your satisfaction, or you and the County staff cannot agree to a change in valuation or classification, continue to the next step. Appeal to the Washington County Board of Appeal & Equalization (CBAE). You must have first appealed to your LBAE (unless your property is in an Open Book community) Check your valuation notice to verify. The CBAE meets in June - Call the Assessor’s Office at 651-430-6175 by May 5, 2022 to make an appointment. If you still do not feel your concerns have been addressed to your satisfaction, you may next appeal to the Minnesota Tax Court. Appeal in the Minnesota Tax Court th Appeals may be filed up until April 30of the year when the taxesare due. The Tax Court can be contacted at 651-539-3260 for more information on procedures, forms, and filing fees. Regular DivisionSmall Claims Division Can be used for any property type All homestead property 1 unit/parcel/petition Must be used for property assessed > $300,000Homestead classifications Can be appealed to the Supreme CourtAssessed < $300,000 All decisions are final 43| Page 50 of 68 !²²¤²²¬¤³ # «¤£ ± 44| Page 51 of 68 45| Page 52 of 68 46| Page 53 of 68 L®¢ « "® ±£ ǉ /¯¤ "®®ª -¤¤³¨¦ 3¢§¤£´«¤ ΑΏΑΑ -¤¤³¨¦ 3¢§¤£´«¤ City/TownshipFormatDateTimeLocation Marine on St Croix City Hall Marine on St CroixLocal BoardTuesday, April 5, 20229:00-10:00 am121 Judd St Mahtomedi City Hall MahtomediLocal BoardWednesday, April 6, 20225:00-6:00 pm600 Stillwater Rd Hugo City Hall HugoLocal BoardThursday, April 7, 20225:30-7:00 pm14669 Fitzgerald Ave N Baytown Community Center BaytownLocal BoardMonday, April 11, 20224:00-5:00 pm4020 McDonald Dr N Forest Lake City Hall Forest LakeLocal BoardMonday, April 11, 20225:30-6:30 pm1408 Lake St S Call the Dellwood City Clerk at 651.429.1356 or visit Dellwood - VirtualLocal BoardMonday, April 11, 20225:00-5:30 pmwww.dellwood.us for more details. Birchwood Village City Hall Birchwood Local BoardTuesday, April 12, 20226:00-6:30 pm 207 Birchwood Ave Denmark Town Hall DenmarkLocal BoardTuesday, April 12, 20224:30-5:30 pm14008 90th St S Grey Cloud Island Town Hall Grey Cloud IslandLocal BoardThursday, April 14, 20226:00-7:00 pm9910 Grey Cloud Island Dr S Scandia Community Center ScandiaLocal BoardMonday, April 18, 20225:00-6:00 pm14727 209th St N Lake Elmo City Hall Lake ElmoLocal BoardWednesday, April 20, 20225:00-7:00 pm3800 Laverne Ave N Call May Town Hall at 651.491.1706 prior to the scheduled meeting or visit May - VirtualLocal BoardWednesday, April 20, 20229:00-9:30 amwww.townofmay.org for more details. Willernie City Hall WillernieLocal BoardMonday, April 25, 20225:30-6:30 pm111 Wildwood Rd AftonOpen Book BayportOpen Book- ¸ ³³¤£ ¸ ®¤ ®¥ ¥®´± 2¤¦¨® « /¯¤ "®®ª ¬¤¤³¨¦² Cottage GroveOpen Book GrantOpen Book HastingsOpen Book 2¤¦¨® « /¯¤ "®®ªȃ#®³³ ¦¤ '±®µ¤Cottage Grove City Hall Lake St Croix Beach Open BookThursday, April 7, 20225:00-7:00 pm12800 Ravine Pkwy S LakelandOpen Book Lakeland ShoresOpen Book LandfallOpen Book 2¤¦¨® « /¯¤ "®®ªȃ/ ª£ «¤Oakdale City Hall NewportOpen BookWednesday, April 13, 20225:00-7:00 pm1584 Hadley Ave N Oak Park HeightsOpen Book OakdaleOpen Book Pine SpringsOpen Book 2¤¦¨® « /¯¤ "®®ªȃ3³¨««¶ ³¤±Washington Cty Govt Center St Mary's PointOpen BookWednesday, April 20, 20222:00-7:00 pm14949 62nd St N St Paul ParkOpen Book Stillwater CityOpen Book Stillwater TownshipOpen Book 2¤¦¨® « /¯¤ "®®ªȃ7®®£¡´±¸Woodbury City Hall West LakelandOpen BookThursday, April 21, 20225:00-7:00 pm8301 Valley Creek Rd White Bear LakeOpen Book Woodbury Open Book #®´³¸ "® ±£ -¤¤³¨¦4´¤²£ ¸Ǿ *´¤ ΐΓǾ ΑΏΑΑΔȀΏΏ ¯¬ȴȴ"¸ !¯¯®¨³¬¤³ '®µ¤±¬¤³ #¤³¤± ȃ 3³¨««¶ ³¤±4´¤²£ ¸Ǿ *´¤ ΑΐǾ ΑΏΑΑΐΐȀΏΏ ¬(times subject to change) ȴȴ!¯¯®¨³¬¤³ £¤ £«¨¤ ³® ²¨¦ ´¯ ¥®± #®´³¸ "® ±£ ¬¤¤³¨¦ ¨² 7¤£¤²£ ¸Ǿ - ¸ ΓǾ ΑΏΑΑ 47 | Page 54 of 68 55 of 68 56 of 68 57 of 68 58 of 68 59 of 68 60 of 68 61 of 68 62 of 68 63 of 68 64 of 68 65 of 68 66 of 68 67 of 68 68 of 68