HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 04-1995 RESOLUTIOH N0. 4-95
WHEREAS, it appears that the railroads, gas companies, and
utilities which are assessed by the South Dakota Department of Revenue
thereinafter referred to as Centrally Assessed Properties) may have in
the past, and for the taxable year of 1994 payable in 1995, been
substantially undervalued to the detriment of the county, and;
WHEREAS, it appears to be in the best interests of the county to
appeal these assessments, and, if successful, the effect of ahich will
be to raise the assessed valuation of Centrally Assessed Properties
within the county and increase the county's tax base.
BE IT RESOLVED that the city commission hereby ratifies, approves
and joins with Brookings County in the appeal of the South Dakota
Department of Revenue's valuation of Centrally Assessed Properties.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that by adoption of this resolution, that
33 1/3 percent of the increase between the 1995 and 1996 resulting tax
revenues received by the city may be used by the county to pay costs
incurred by their attorney.
Passed and approved this 17th day of January, 1995.
OROOK�N
�,�0F .......
o�Qo�fFoc�' Mayor
AT S ��R,9��
.o
�,o.
0
° '� -
Finance Officer
,
GE�IITR�IL.LY �SSESSED U77L1TlFS o�tr«, water, cds & Pipeline Companies
1994 1993 1992
Set by State Facto�ed to Factored to Set by State Facto�ed to actored to Set by State Factore to Facfiored to
Bd of�qual Market Value Marlcet Value Bd of Equal Market Value Market Va[ue Bd of Ec�ua� Market Value fU�arket Value
C� aaa� @ �oo°,� @ �2s� @ azs°� L too�io @ 12�� @ ss.s °� @ �00% C� �2s�
Heartland
Valuation 420,�46.00 504,203.00 630,253.00 439,14200 532.293-00 665,386.00 411,254_00 439,373.00 549�217.00
Tax 10,397.32 . 12�4p.89 �5,579,85 71,751.04 14,238.83 17,798.54 11,fi34.6� 1 Z429.96 15,537.34
A�g rate 24.72 26.75 28•29
Northem Border Pi�elir�e
Valuation 2,894,55�2.00 3,474,685,Q0 d,338,3�6.00 2544,624.00 3,004,39200 3,8b5,49000 2,996,341.00 3,201,2�9.00 4.001,523.00
Tax 81,715.76 97,977.00 122,471.78 7�776_76 88,2�3.61 t10,267.01 92,8�6b1 99�14t.75 123,927.17
Avg rate 2823 28.00 30 97
Northern Nabural Gas
Valuation 1 l0,76fi.00 �32,81200 166,016.00 29Gi,69200 355,890.00 A44,9�7.Q0 110,37v.00 �18,135.00 �47,669.00
Tax 2,98b.80 3,65b.38 4,444.25 8,468.08 �0,263.00 12,829.OQ 3,549.35 3,790.95 4,738.70
Avg rate 26.77 28.83 3�2.09
Northwes�ern Pub�ic Service fNWPSI
Valuation 5,856,409.00 ?25,914.00 2,782,387.00 1,828,868.00 Z2i6,809.00 Z771,01200 1,776,461.U0 1,897,928.00 2,372,410 00
TaX 53,A94.4t 64�528.47 80,160.�v7 53,563.55 65.U41.00 81,30i.00 56,d64.33 60,316.00 75,395.00
Avg rate 28.81 29.34 31.78
OtterTa�
Valuation 694.526.00 1,0720a3.00 1,340,116.00 856,t57.00 1,QCi7,766.00 1.297,207.00 873,59600 9C33,329•00 1,Ifi6.661•00
Taoc 27,551.72 33,Q31A0 41,288.00 27.824.71 33,717.00 4Z14S.00 29,395.43 3t,397.00 39.246.00
Avg rate 30.81 �� �•�
SL�BTC]TAL s,t7r�sss.00 �,sszas3.00 s,1s8,2z7.00
TDTAL TAX i�s,ta.�.ai ��4,t�.�a �.saa:� ��a,a�.�4 2t�,�ra.a� �,3as.� �sa,sso27 2o�,ars.�s 2sa,aaa.z�
�3b,030.73� � 89.857.41 � `-----� �.�� �
Schoo17096 24.52I.U0
� Camty 2�096 T.00B�00
�YlTwP�0'96 �50G100
CA�1 FACT.WQ 1
� CF�VT�4ALLY ASS�.SS�� U71L.lTifS Telephone Compani�s witr�in c�o�ote �imit5
a � 994 1993 1992
e y e ac or o ac ore �o -" e y a e ac ore o ac ore o y e ac ore o ac ore o
Bd of Equal Market Value hlarEcet Value Bd of Equal Macket Value Market Value Bd of Equal Marke2 Value Mar�cet Value
@ 83.4°k cir 100% @ i 25% @ 825% � Z 00% @ 12b'/o @ 53.6% (a� 100°,b @ 12� %
US VIleSt
V�luatio� 637,A67.00 • 764,34$.00 955,436.00 697.426_00 724,15200 905,�90.OQ 706,783.00 7�v5.088.00 9435�60.00
T�x �8,9�11.50 2.Z7a8.77 28,386 00 19.Q39.9�4 23,071.48 28,839 3b 24,673.69 26s246.85 32,808.57
N
Avg rate 29.7� 3�.86 34.76
m
'� SD $ KingsbwY
N Veluatoon 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 �i i3OCi7.00 545�979.00 692,474.00
°' T� 0 00 0.00 b.00 0.00 Q.00 0.00 16�14&77 17,2529G3 2!.86�Q.17
�
A��g rate 0 00 0.00 3t.60
PI�^��'O C � �
TQTAL TAX ta,s� �,�os.n 2a,3as.00 �9,oas.sa z3,o��.aa ^�s.3s ao,�z�.` as - a3,ass.7a ���a.7a
3,767.27 � � 8,79941 13,6b228
} chooi 709G 263'J.00
F County 2096 T53.OD
2 City(fwp 1096 377.00
�
° Telephone Companies outside Corporate Limits
�, co�nry Kee�ar rax
�
� US 1Nest VaLES 622,a75.0o 986,181.00 1,23Z726.04 784.166.00 9�0,so4.0o i,988,130.00 927,17200 990.568.00 1,238,210.00
Y
� AT�T vak�s �,a3s,asi.00 �,�a2,a�t.00 z�ss,ota.00 t,zss,��.00 �,��s,ess_oo t,ase,s�a.00 �,a2o,es�.00 t,sia,ots.00 i,ss7,5��.00
o�
S� 8 K�gsary Lt;d �3ss.00 eo7,ta�.00 �sa.s2s.00 sas,s�i.00 ss�,�a3.00 a�r,�a.00 o.00 o.00 o.00
G�ater S,U CeY�r �as,s��.00 z2�,zas.00 28a.,oa�oo o.00 0 00 0 00 0.00 o vo o.00
�Q��� 2,954,837.00 3,542,969.OQ 4,428,711.00 z583,859U4 3,�31�95U.00 3,914,936.00 2,348,033.00 �509�581.00 3,135.727.00
X 21.72 x 2205 X 23.50
64,179�06 76�95329 96,191.60 56,974_00 69,05.9.b0 $6.324.34 5b,178.78 58,951.65 73,689_58
L12,774.23� � 29,350.23 � � 18y�10.80�
CAUFACT.WQ1
a CFIVTR�4L�.Y ASSES��D UT1t�T1fS Railroads -- Sidefines On1y
1
1 �94 1993 1992
Set by Starte Factored to Factored to Set by State Factored to �artared ta Set by State Factored to Factared to
Bd of Fqual Mar[cet VaEue Market Vafue Bd of EquaE MarEcet Value Martcet Value Bd oi Equa! Maiket Va3ue Market Value
@ 834 9b @ 104°J�o @ 125°Yo �a 825% @ 100 96 @ 125% @ 9Ci.6��6 � S00°l�o @ 12v%
Outside Corporat�ons
; Valuation S,OOS.00 9,60C�00 1�OOCi.00 20,063.40 24,3SA.OU 30,398.00 22,22A.00 23,74300 2:�,679.00
� Tax 225.28 270.44 337.52 570.11 690.87 863.�0 687.38 734.13 917.67
� Avg rats 28.12 28.41 � �.�� /
� / /
44.78 293.49 �.�
i
�
i
CAUFACT.WQ1
• BRUOKINGS COUNTY 69�7397 P. 04
1994 Centrally Assessed Utilities By School �?istrict
(Used to determine'Utitity Appeal'with Meisrhanry)
Equa196 set by
Bd of Equal Prorated to
@ 83.4 96 100 9b
Brookings School5-l. a,s��,�as.00 s,ses,aio.00
�inance OfFicer: David C Peterson 2i.07 21.07
'f 03,490.95 124,089.87
` 20,598.92
Elkton School 5-3 �ss,a8a.00 9s�r,a�s.00
Flnance Officer: Joyce Kramer 18_97 18.97
15,147.24 18,162.
�,o�4.sz
Hendricks SCt1001 5-4 147,275.00 i 76,569.00 ,
Ffnance Officer: Clarice Ar� 'f 1.36 11.36
1,673.04 2,006.05
a33.01
Volga School 5-5 �s7,aos.00 ssa,182.00
Flnance Officer: Ardith VanBeek 18.42 18.42
13,583.D6 1 B, 8�
2.7Q3.58
Estel�ine School 28-2 a.00 o.00
Finance Officer: Marjorie Warborg 0.00 0.00
o.00 a.
o.00
Axlington School 38-1 ��,rrs.o� 86,061.00
�inance Offi�er: LolB,Rapp 21.24 21.24
� 1,524.50 1,827.94
303_44
Deubrook School 5-6A 155,12s.ao is6,00l.00
Finance Officer: Marge Berge 19.24 15.2�
2,984.81 3.578.66
594.05
Deubrook School 5-6B o.00 o.00
Flnance Officer: Marge Berge 0.00 0.00
0.00 •
o.00
Total All Schools s,821,s3s.00
BROOKINGS COUNTY 69�739T P. 05
�994 Centrally Assessed Utilities �y city
(Used to determine 'Utility Appeal'with Meierhenry)
Equal%set by
Bd of Equal Prorated to
Ca?83,4 9b 100 9b
Arlington City o.00 o.00
Finance Officer: M'Uss Fuhr o.00 0.00
0.00 �
o.00
Aurora Town sa,s�s.00 ��,s4s.00
Finance Offiaer: Eiaine Waples E•� 6•�
409.40 R90.89
81.49
�ruce 'X`own �2�,�2a.ao 153,1as.oa
Fin�nce Officer: Rinda Ribstein 19.35 18.3�
2,471.46 ��9�•�
491.92
Bushnell Viilage aa,2s2.00 4�,���.no
FlnanCe Officer: Alvira Anderson 10.72 10.72
367.6i 44Q•77
73.16
Elkton City sos,�4�.00 �7,7ss•oo
FinanCe Officer: Karon�urlage 9.37 9.37
2,874.16 3,44 .2-�
572.08
Sinai Town ,,449.00 1.��•�
Finance O�cer. Qail MiUer 14•75 �4•��
21.37 25.62
4.25
VOlga City a78,338.00 573,547.00
�inanc:e Officer: Marsha Thompson 5•92 �•92
2,$31.7fi 3,395.40
b63.64
White City s,s4�.00 s,sz7.00
Finas�ce Officer: Sheryl Grasiie 6.01 8.41
55.63 �• Q
11.07
�xookings City 4,481,081.00 5,372,899.00
Finance Officer. Ted Kryger 2•� 2•�
11,381.95 1 ,647.42
2,265.47
Total AII Cities s,soy,246.00
Total AJ1 Townships �,s2o,ss9.00
(not proratec�
...,,,.,......,...,,,
�
��,��1►;1��''�' . . .
�4 �
rt'��;a� .
� Danfarth,Meierhenry&Meierhenry
Attomeys � SauC:t aakOta Couaty Camoise`_ocers
�"j`v�M"�°� 315Sout&PIdII'q�Avenue ��'ty� Sou:h Dakota States At�orneys
roaav.w�sr,.t SirnuFaQs.5D511U2-0OI8 c�eo.�.J,odok■a�.h, Dece:n5er 23, �994
�� Te]ep6oa�e:60S5363Q'15 {�so¢tsn} Paqe 2
Fuc EOS33�29?3
December 23, 1944 we �ave had a c.'iance to discuss the mczits o� t� afrseal
vith many ccunties, but ro+e have not :�ad the ability ta ae�t
indivi3ua_ly mith each oE you. Nevest5e�.ess, we raust aak that
, each..covnty•and Statea Attorney.•rnaloe a lirwl detezrninazion ae,to:
To_ South Dakota County Cornmissioneze whether to.a�tnoriae••us to. go forward �rith-, the appeal• ;E}u�reby bd
South Dakota States Attorneys rabi#yiag -Lhe.arigiutal Notice of Appeal)• or�•vhe�her your�co�mGy, A
elpcte .not ta-go-�foxvard with the.appeal a:vi requAsts that_ycnn be. �
dismisaed as a pertyta the aopeal. tRhile aetion by the Boa�rd af �
Re: 1934 Centrally Asseseed Praperty Appeals County Commissioners is preferable_ States Attorneys, �s yau are ►+
aveare, have separatn authority to �ile actians on behalf of tae �
county, and that accounts £or the joint addressinq of thia N
Dear Co�mmissioners and States Attorneye: corres�ondence. It is not :tecessary that cwnties hire us ta
pursue the appeal.s, as the appeals could be handled by individual l�
As most of you are aware, a Notice of Appeal was fi?ed on States Attorneys, and we would cerCainly cooperate wi[h them if C
beY�alf of all South baf.ota countiee frorn the Department oE that if your choice. 2
Revenue•s assessment o� all properties vrhich are centzally '�
assassed by the Department, which genera3ly includea telephone IE at al� �asible, at• your firet ��ting in Jnnuary o� -C
c�mpanies, uCilities and railroads. Filioq o£ thie a�.+peal was 1995, vre woald request, it you have nat�already-dane go, Lbat a
authorized at a meeting in 8io�x Falls, 3outh Dakota, of county speciEic resolution be paesed and rnade a part- of your formal-
ofEicia3s on Septembe: 29 - 30, 1994, and by authorization From cii,r,utes to eitrer authorize or abaadon'the' appea�s. :�e er.c�ose
the Sxecu!ive Comrnittee of the So�tth Dakota CouuCy Comrnissioners two alternate Resolutions for your consider3tion. 'rI'aen ycur
Assaciation. determinatien :iae been anade, we would ask Chat yrou provicT.e to us
a certified copy �f yo�r resolution adepting or Zba�doaing tha
This somewhat uaorthodox rt�annaz of Eiling the tsotice of ' appeal, togeCher raith ar. indicat'_an of Che date of yaur meeting
Apoeal on be.half of all eouaties was neceseitated due to the Eact adopting the ree�olucion. a�
that the fi3ing deadline for any auch appcal was, by Law, oetober �
N
3, 1994, and there was inadequate opportunity for countigcs to rrie also encLose, �or yoar can�iderar_ion, a proposed �
individually consider the mattar due to the late notice frorn the ContingenC Fo� Aqreement if yo+�r county wisiLes to hire us to U!
Degartment of 4,evenue of centzally aaseased valuea in each count� Qursue the aQpeal Eurther on y�our behalE. Under this Eee `b
which were noc recei�ed by most counties until approximately roiC- ayreemn_nt, attorney'e fees �re coatingent upon a aucceeefuL
�
Sept►mber of 1994_ �utcoow_.• Coats, while r.ot. conCingeat, would be at�red .by �1: ,
pazticipa=�r.g couaties. , Shw1d }�ou elsct to Qrocee�. aith thc
The apF+eala were filed with ass�'ance to each county that a aapeal, and choose to use our services under the enclosed
final dec�sion ceuld be a�ade during your re9nlar meetings, a�reernent, we wili follow up xith each participating county and
whether to go Eonvard with the appea3 or to requesc that your provic'.e a auore detailed leCcez to each af you as to o�
county be diamissed from the appeal. T'.�e appeals vere £iled by intentions, strategie. and time frames.
euz office, Spearfiah Attorneys Qlchards, Fiood, Srady & N-ca,
P.C., and He:le Fourche Attorneys Carr G Pluimer, Q.C.
�
m
T
„ ., BR4�KINVS COUNTY 6927397 p, g7
. . :.. . . . . .
RESOLUTIOPI OF Cb[T.�JTY CQMMYSSION
WHEREAS, aC the September 1994 meeting oi tha 3auth Dakota Aasociat�,on cE County
Commisaioners and a nneetiag ot the Hoard oP Directors of the Aasociation, it appsared
Chat it would ba in the beat inzere8ts of t}ae cowatiy to appeal the 3onth Dakata
Departmeat oE RevCnue's valuatioa oE �Centrally Asaessed Preperties far 1999 because of
a cubBCauCial uriC.ervaluation by the Department oP Ravenu�, and;
WFiEREAS, the county acqttiesced and agreed to alloa aa appaal to be filed ia
corijunc�ion with oCher SOuth Dakota counties in order to protect the rights o� the
Ccunty aad subdi.visione within the county, and;
WHEREA.S, the co�srity ha9 reconsidered Zcs decision to join the aforeatentioaad
apgeals;
IT Y5 HEREBY RESOI.V�D that by ado�tion of this resolutiors che county elects to
disConcinue its in�olvement and assocl.ation with �he appeal brought by other counCies
wi,thin the State of South DakoCa aud recjt:est that chis county be dismissed as a party
tc the apnesl.
Approved by the County Commisaian this day oE
, �99
Q�.�►ZR"�AN
BROOKINGS COUNTY 6y273g7 p. 0g
� RESOLUTION �F COtJN'I'Y COMMISSZON
WHEP.EAS, iC ap�eaxs that the railroads, gas companies, and util�tias which are
asseesed by che Soueh Dakota Departmenc oE Revenue (hereinafter refarrad to as
Centrally AsseBsed Properciee? m�y have in the past, and tor tha tax�.ble year a� 1994
payable in I995, been eu.bstantially unQervalued to the detrl.ment of tb.e� CCt1Y1L1/, and;
WFIE�EAS, iti appeazs co be in the �es� interests of the couaty Co appeal these
assessmenCs, ar.d, if euccessful, the ettect of which will be to rai.se the assesaed
valuation of Cenzral].y Assesaed Properetes withia the county and increase tha cour�ty�s
tax base, a�d;
WHE�EAS, at the SepCember 7.994 meetinq of tha South Dakota Associa:xon of County
Comm�ssionezs and the Board of DiXectors meeting o� the Aa+sociation, the county agreed
to Eila an anpeal in conjunctton with other South DakoCa counties in order to preserre
the zights of the County aad subdivisions within tha counej, and;
WFiEREAS, this protective 2.pneal was required 'necausz t2:e couaty commisaion did
noC have safficient time co consuit with the 3tates Attorney or eo come to a final I
conclu9ion beczuse tAe assessment notices did r.oc arrive from tha Departmenc o£ I
Revenue uritil anproximately t�+o week$ before tae deadl�r.e Eor appeal.
aE 2T RES�LVED that by adootioa of thi9 resolution, :.he county commiaeion hereby
ratafiea, apozoves and jains wi,th other South nakota coun�ies in the appeal of �he
• South Da;cota Depd�tment of Revenue's va�uat3oa of Centrally Asaessed Propertiee.
8E IT FURT:iER RESOI+V�D that by adCntion of thls resolutica, the county ratifies,
affir�ts and retroaetively approvas ita prtor agraament and acquiescence to jein the
prosecution oP this appeal.
Approved by the County Cocmaissfon this daY �f
, 199��
CriAZR.M?�c*i
CpIiTIxGEgC4 p� 11csA8�T • valuation o: alI eentrally assessed praperties lacation s�ithin
� C1ienC's county, tha allocation of the system market value to the
i�IB AcsjtSR�T, mada and entered into this day of .
State of South Dakota, the state narket valve, and the eqnalizat:on of
, 199_, by and betweet� County, Soath Dakota and
value in t'�e county. County authorizes Attorneys to com�romLse any
the public taxing dfstricts located Ch¢reix�, hereinafter raferred to i
i 3uch valuation and to use th,eir best eltorta to efCec+_ a tair a,t�d
as "Ciient", and the Lav firms ot Danforth, Meierhenry and Meierhenry, �
� reasotlable valaation of the cantraLly assessed propartics �ait'�in the
Siowc Falls, South Dakota; Richards. Hood, Hsady � Nies. Y.C., �
tounty through Litiqation, leqfslative, poLitical or adm[nistrative �
Spearfisn, Sauth Dakotd; nnd CaY� � Plumfer, p.C., SaLle Fourche, � �
means, p
south Dakota heroinatter reiarred to ae "Attore�eya". O
]►ny issues or disputms as to the manner of alI xating value am�ng �
R�LI'171L8 � �
the var#aus counties eind qovernmentai suLdiviaions vithin each co�unty Z
��s it appears taat thn zailroa.ds, gas companfes, and utilities 61
is � the eubject oi the employment urvler this Aqreement �
(all hereafter calLcd centraily asaessed proQerties or "pmpertiea")
BLCTIOII T'RO f7
onatrally assessed by the Stata Property Tax Qivision of the South �
@'a',�T81fIaE ]lYPH7►S.: This Agreemant is mada upon the assw�tion C
Dakotn Departaent o! Raver�ue may hava in the past and tor tlie ta�ble �
tt�at an appeal vill ba authorized by a sutiicient number �f counti¢s -i
year 3994 Qayahle in 2995 bean substantially undervalned to the {
within the State of South Dakota to render thia action teasible oc� a
detrinent of the Client, atyd ,
statevide basis. Failure of a sufficient t�umber of connt�es to
�8 it apQears to be i� the best interest of the Client to appeaL
apprave or appeal may reeult in the Attorneys declining z�pnesen��tion
those assessments, and if successful, raising the assessed valuation
under Seotfon Seven of this Agreemeet.
of the "propertiea" vithin the Caunty snd ther�by broadeninq the
sHCTIOlP TARBE �
Clients tax baseS �P
a�R'18i�e P,�88: Recoqnizing that the desired result maq arise N
��9�� fram, either litiqation, campromise, leqislative action, �Iitieal or �j
88CPI011 0118 �
administrative chanqe, or a combination thereot, and any poaitive �1
p�g�NT 7►Np E9LJyCT pg E1IpLO�z The turegoinq recitals are
results nay rwt beneiit the Clisnt tor sevaral yeers, iC ls agreed the
nade a cantractua2 part of this Aqraement. Clfent hereby retains and
CLient shall pay to thg Attorneys as attorney lees for s�ch
enploys Attarneys to represent Client as laqal counssel for the pnrpose �
representation tor the sazvices d@scribed abova as follovs:
of prosecutf.ng an appQal of the South Dakota Department aL Revenue's
a ice based upon a caiculation equalinq 33 1/] percer►t of the
assessments for I994. Incladed in this appeal are issv�s reqaraina
increase between the "1995 and 199b Resulting Tax Reveruue's raceived
tbe South dakota DepaitIDent ot Revenue's determination of uni*
�
m
�0
j ,
I
�
' ( .
� 8EC1'Z68 FOQA
by the Client (and tha public taxinq district 2ocated therein) Lrom �
�
centrally assessed utilities, reaqardless of vhen received, over and I COSTs ufD aZPBA�: Cost, sales tax, (if applicableJ. necessary
above the •1995 Basa Tax Revenue.° "I995 Hase Tax Revenue" is the : travel expenses, filiaq Lees. fees Por servien of process, fees for
totat taxes vhich the Client rould have recaived ealculateA upon the witnesses, exQenses of discrn�ery proceedi:�qs, costs oE depo�sitions
1994 assrsse3 valuation of centrally assessed util.ities established Dy '� incurred by Attoreveya in advancing Clie�t's cause arc to be born by
the SWte of SoutD Dakota prior to the appeal talcen under this Client. Sn the event costs are advanced by Attorneys. reimburseano�t
Agreeanent. "1995 and 1996 Resulting Tax Revenues• are the total � ' shall be aade iron the gross proceeds of a� reeovery, vhich
bd
reimbursement aha21 be in addition to the pQrcentaqe fe,n. A
taxes, interest and get►alties calculated upon t►se 1994 assessed � O
valuatian of centrally assessed utilities to be payable to the C1£ent Client agrees upoa the signfng of this Agreeme� to fo�rrard �
t
Richards, Hood, Brad i Niea, P.C., as agent for khe Attorneps the '''
in 1495 and in I996 at the same tax rate as used to calculate the 1995 Y� _
' sum of $2,0OO.OU as advanoe payment 2oT the above deacribed costs. N
Base TaY Rate.
The followidg is an iLlustration o! the Pea calculation in e � Tl�Ls sum shall be co�mbined vitt� the sums advaticed by other cliQnts in n
O
hypotheticnl county: , this action. In the event the advance payment is insnfficLent to C
2
The Department of Revenue's 1994 assessed valuation oL County A's ' caver the costs provided for in thfs paraqraph any addltional sums ..�
utflities before appeal is 51,000.000.00. Using a z.sk tax rate, {
County A and its public taxinq districts would re�ive $25,OOO.Uo in necessary to cover the costs of this action ehall be appoiirted betveen
tax zevenue in L945 (thie ie the "1995 Base Tax Revenue^}. Atter the
appeal, the 1994 assessed valuation o: County A�s utilities is raised all clients based upon the valuation af utilities location in their
to $1,3oQ,o00.00. Using the same tax rate o[ 2.5$, �e taxes payable
to County �1 � its public taXinq distriCts in 1945 are S32,506.0o county tor the year i994.
(this is the L995 part of the "1995 and t996 Resulting Tax ltevenues"}. B�I�� pI�
The diLfarence between the "1995 Base Tax Rgvepue" ($25,000.00} add
the 1995 part of the •1995 and 1996 Resvltinq Tax Revenues ��x,r �= B ?g_ Attorne s in their discretioe, may
($32.500.00) is S7,540.00, and Attorneys are entitled to one third oP �L- �---' y f [n
that sum (or 52,500.00) plus one thira of the interest and penaLties �D
for 1995, regardless o[ vhen actually paid to County A and its public employ experts xhose examination miqht furtaar the prosecutfon of �
taxing districts. The 3tate's 1995 assessed vatuatfon of County A's ,1
utilities is 51,400,600.00, and using a 2.5k tnx rate, County A and Client's claim. 1111 such experte sball report exclusively to ��
its public taxinq districts o�auLd reCeive $35,600.00 in tax revepue 3n `D
i99b (this is tha 2996 part ef tlie ^1995 and 1996 Resulting Tax Attorneys. Fees chafqed by snch expert witnesses may be pAid from �
Revennes^). The "difiei"ec1C�""be�titeetl'�ho •1995' Pase Tax Revenu�C"
r525,OOt1.Oc!} �nd the 1996 part--�of•�- •1995-'a7nd"-2996 Resultitw �ir.x% Clfent's advance payment or from subseguent biilinga mnde to client
� ritl�POUC.4� (SSS�OCO:o�� � -and Attorneps "�Y�"�Entitl¢d to
�one thirrl oi that svm (or $3,333.33)"�tns"�^'tnitcl ot the`�Lnler�sst Lrom time to time.
and.ga�ai.t;es for-2�96;-teqaret�ess-at xhen actually�pbid to County ":
�-#� pub]'��°'CKX. , .
�
r
m
.
. • �
i
S�CTIODT eZI , to presarve the Client's riqht to appeal the assessment af central2y
MgpCia?1C CUpNgg1,- Attorneys maY, in their discretion, employ assessed utilities lxation in Client�s county, the aclrnwledges they
associat.e. counscl to assist them in prosecnting Client's claim, at have consuited with Client's States Attorney regas�ciinq this Agree�ment.
• Dated this day of , 19
?,ttorney's expense. �
BLCTIOIt SE4EN � ��
; Cttazrman of tkve County Comaiss oness
vr*rrgyquD�L OF ATTORI�B=: Attorneys may withdtav ftrom Client•s of countp pursuant
; to resolut on passe3 day o�
representation in this clai.m aL any time on r�aBanable notica to � ' , 19
i A
Client pt^ovided that in the avent oi such withdrawal, Attorneys shal.l ' $Y: O
I for �
be entitled to no fee pursuant to SecCion Three. p�y�pgTg, KgxggggNRy i ?�ISRBZliRY �
B�=O� �Z� ( 315 South Phillipe Avez�ue Z
Siovx Pa1Ls Sauth Da+kota 5�LD2 �
1AWR=BI3 00'1�1� 110? 11��= 1►ttort�Yg m�a no arartCanties or Rj�g�gflg� gppD, HRADY F �TSES, P.C. N
represerrtations concerning tha successful datermination of Client's 109 Main SLraet - F.O. 8ax 726 n
Spearfish, South Uakota 57783 p
clain, the favorab�e outcome oP any legaL action that may be filed, or C
ClLRR i PLIIIMBR, p.C. 2
of any administrative, political or legisLative actions that may be . 907 State Street - P.o. eox 589 -�
Belle Fou�rche, Soukh Daloota 5712?-0580 -{
taken. ;
SBC?I�M hTllls �
isnRva Tp CLIgNT CO]N'li1PG81l� �8 RZCG�Bs Tn the eveet Attorneys �
are unable to raisa the assessed valuation oP the utilitiee Location I
in Client's county, Attorneys will malcn no chasges tor their tima and i U+
�D
services. Client s2+a11, hovavex� reimburse Attomeys Yor costs and N
I �
other expenses that they may have advancmd, ebove the advance payment � ��
�
r@ceived under this Agreement, as ptwided for in section Four oi thig �
Agreement.
S�CTIOR 'ls1T
aiR2rlplSio� � Colt8VLT7�T2_�� Sy the execution of this
ligreement, Client ratities the actioa takse by the attorneys in the
2ilinq on October 3, 3994 a tiotice oP Appeal Purs�nt to SDCL 10-38-30
�
r
. r�