My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
1987-12-07 Workshop Meeting and Called Regular Meeting
LaPorte
>
.Minutes
>
City Council
>
1980's
>
1987
>
1987-12-07 Workshop Meeting and Called Regular Meeting
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/2/2016 12:07:00 PM
Creation date
7/31/2025 10:41:45 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Meetings
Meeting Body
City Council
Meeting Doc Type
Minutes
Date
12/7/1987
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
165
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />....-::::: <br /> <br />.---' ' <br /> <br />HUGH L. LANDRUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. <br /> <br />V ALUATJON ENOJNEERB <br />1320 SOUTH LOOP WEST. BUITE 1B <br />PHONE 7131'79_378 _ 9379 <br /> <br />HOUSTON. TEXAS 77054 <br /> <br />October 26, 1987 <br /> <br />,l ,.~.. t:,," . <br /> <br />Ms. Charlene Eldridge <br />Ci ty of La Porte <br />POBox 1115 <br />La Porte, TX 77571 <br /> <br />Dear Charlene: <br /> <br />Knox furnished me a copy of the letter and other papers" Mr. Gordon Hay of <br />. Liquid Air had sent him regarding a refund on 1984, 1985, and 1986 taxes. <br />After reviewing the matter, I believe they were entitled to the terms of <br />an Industrial District Contract for the years 1984, 1985, and 1986. My <br />office had no prior knowledge that a Contract with Liquid Air existed and <br />therefore they were taxed as if completely annexed. . I don't know what <br />your refund policy in this case will be, but I feel Liquid Air had a <br />responsibility to ascertain that they did not overpay, .and if any refund <br />is made, certainly no penalty or interest should be due. <br /> <br />AS you requested by phone, I have prepared what their tot~l payments would <br />have been if we had known of the Contract and handled it as we do all the <br />others. The values are not exactly the same as HCAD provided you primarily <br />because of differences in land values. Also, I have used the exact tax <br />rate for 1985 and 1986 that I used on all Contracts, 7l~28~/$100 value. <br />This produces slightly different numbers than Mr. Hay calculated. <br /> <br /> City Total Total <br />Tax Assessed Payment @ Payments Amount <br />Year Value Tax Rate 45% Taxed Made Refund <br />1986 $ 2,156,590 .007128 $ 6,917.48 $ 14,609.17 $ 7,691.69 <br />1985 $ 2,156,590 .007128 $ 6,917.48 $ 14,568.14 $ 7,650.66 <br />1984 $ 2,075,390 .007100 $ 6,630.87 $ 14,876.84 $ 8,245.97 <br /> $ 20,465.83 $ 44,054.18 $ 23,588.32 <br /> <br />Charlene, the assessed values above are the ones I provided you, but <br />since we thought it was completely annexed, you used HCAD values as you <br />are required to. However, for the "in-lieu" portion, we are not required <br />to use HCAD figures. Also, the Contract states at the top of page 4 that <br />the combined payment of taxes and "in' lieu" payment will equal 45% of the <br />amount of taxes which would be payable if all the property were annexed. <br /> <br />- 1 - <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.