My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
AG19810921
CabarrusCountyDocuments
>
Public Meetings
>
Agendas
>
BOC
>
1981
>
AG19810921
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/28/2003 9:13:40 AM
Creation date
11/27/2017 12:15:50 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meeting Minutes
Doc Type
Agenda
Meeting Minutes - Date
9/21/1981
Board
Board of Commissioners
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
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
I <br /> <br /> workshop. It is imperative that the tax supervisor or some <br /> other designated person be present at that meeting in order to <br /> get prepared to testify. <br /> <br /> (9) In our memorandum dated August 5, we requested each county to <br /> determine the assessed valuation for commercial and industrial <br /> real property and personal property for 1980, and to give that <br /> information to Doug |lolbrook's office. As a result of a limited <br /> response to that request , we now find that as to those count <br /> which will not testify there needs to be a valuaLion put before <br /> the Court to which the ratio can he applied. 'l~m Railroads have <br /> stipulated that the total valuation of real and personal pro- <br /> percy as reported by each county to tile State Departtaent of <br /> Revenue will be admissible as evidence and that tile ratios can <br /> be applied Lo those values in determining the overall level of <br /> assessment. This is a trade-off because it would be more bene- <br /> ficial for tile connties to have a lower real estate and personal <br /> property value against which to apply the ratio. The Railroads <br /> would no~, understandably, stipulate to a lower value because it <br /> has been their position all along that in North Carolina the <br /> commercial and industrial property is not susceptible to being <br /> separated from all property. The net effect of the stipulation <br /> is that those counties listed in Exhibit D will not have to pre- <br /> sent any evidence in the case and yet will be protected in <br /> having some valuations before the Court. <br /> <br /> (10) We will have no difficulty in getting into evidence the utility <br /> allocations to each county. ~is is a mathmatical process which <br /> can be placed into evidence either by the Property Tax Division <br /> or by stipulation. The Railroads will contend that the uti- <br /> lilies (other than the Railroads) are valued at less than market <br /> by tile Property Tax Division, and we will present evidence that <br /> they are at market value through Bob Underhil[. <br /> <br /> In summary, we are getting the case into a manageable position <br />whereby all affected counties are having a measure of protection. Lest it <br />go unsaid at a later date, I could eot have received more c~loperation from <br />Doug Itolbrook's office and Ron Aycock's office, and the counties owe them <br />a debt of gratitude for their fine work. <br /> <br /> Sincere fy, <br /> <br /> ltam[in L. Wade <br /> <br />HLW/pm <br /> <br />Enclosures <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.