A critical discussion unfolded regarding the current state of property valuations, particularly addressing community concerns about potential inaccuracies. The director of assessing clarified misconceptions that had been circulating, notably correcting an assertion that a drastic 50% of property values were under review. Instead, it was reported that 35.69% of single-family properties had been reviewed, with about 80% of those seeing increases of 20% or less. The average increase was approximately $34,500, based on a review of 383 properties. This effort was part of a quality study conducted by the Department of Revenue, which involved sampling properties to ensure valuation accuracy.

Emphasizing transparency, the director underscored the importance of public disclosure during the revaluation year, ensuring that data would be accessible for a minimum of five business days, ideally extending to ten. Locations for accessing this data included the assessor’s office, the senior center, the library, and online platforms. Homeowners were encouraged to review their property values during this period and file for abatements if discrepancies were identified, with the abatement period running from January 1 to February 3.

Additionally, the board proposed hosting an “Ask the Assessor Night,” offering the public an opportunity to inquire about their concerns. Suggestions were made to hold this event before the Christmas holiday, allowing homeowners to address issues earlier.

In another significant topic, the board engaged in a analysis of the real estate market, highlighting the robust number of single-family home sales, with 74 sales cited as a basis for determining property values. The board emphasized compliance with regulations requiring a minimum of 2% of property class sales for accurate assessments.

One specific abatement request drew discussion, involving a property on College Highway, owned by Shepard. The board evaluated whether the appraisal process suggested by an external consultant was appropriate. Discussion revealed a sense of urgency, as the board had 90 days to respond to the abatement request before it would be deemed denied unless an extension was requested.

The assessors expressed confidence in the existing property values, emphasizing that Shepard would bear the burden of proof if the case progressed to the appellate tax board. They maintained that the values assigned to the property were sound and addressed Shepard’s specific concerns, including issues related to land use codes and the value per square foot of storage units.

Shepard’s contention that the land value assigned to his property was higher than comparable properties was discussed, with figures cited as $66,000 per acre compared to $19,000 per acre for other parcels. The assessors reiterated that ongoing construction would be taxed according to assessed completion percentages as of January 1.

After thorough deliberation, a motion was made to officially deny Shepard’s abatement application while committing to address his questions within ten days. This motion was seconded and approved unanimously.

Aside from these discussions, the board attended to several financial matters, beginning with the approval of September motor vehicle abatements. This was followed by unanimous approvals for motor vehicle warrant and commitment number five, a quarterly invoice for CI Technologies, an HHCAA seminar invoice, and office supplies from WB Mason. Each item received a motion and a second before passing without opposition.