##VIDEO ID:YCVs-lNar3Y## [Music] good evening all this is a meeting of the board of assessors November 6th Wednesday 4 p.m. here in a con conference room at the first floor of the uh Town Hall uh ask for a motion to open the meeting motion to open second and a second all in favor all right so moved okay first order of business this evening is just to uh approve the minutes open session meeting date October 9th 2024 I think everybody had a chance to read them back in the uh office Y is there a motion I'll make a motion to approve second motion and second all in favor I so moved um as you know we have the classification uh meeting this evening with the selectman um I'm just going to turn the Open Session over to Kelly so she can walk us through that and um go over some of these splits with us and we'll we'll move on from there okay uh just as a review in FY 2024 uh the ratified split was 35% and the tax rates were 1141 and 1631 per th000 and the total value of the town was $1.8 Million this year if we look at it parallel to um what we they ratified in 2024 if they pick a a 35% shift you're looking at the tax rates going for residential from 1141 to 1083 and the commercial industrial personal property going from 1631 to 1527 however that's the tax rates usually it's an opposite relationship when tax rates tend to go down that means there's been an increase of value and if you look at the bottom it sorts them out by class and it looks like the residential class uh went up about 9% and it holds 89% of the of the value of the town the commercial and Industrial went up 7 and8 and they hold 4% of the town's value and personal property went up 4% holding 7% of the town's value for the full value being 20 to U I'm sorry uh where am I hello I lost my close yeah it's two two million two billion of some sort I'm sorry I lost my track but anyway so that's what we're looking at I don't know what the board wants to decide in respect to giving the recommendation to the selectman um usually past practices the board of assessors tends to give the recommendation of less than 35% historically prior to 20 24 usually the uh ratification has been around 25% and the board of assessors recommend about 20 historically that's how it's been uh Through The Years however uh obviously each year is different each scenario is different um so I give it back to the board I I did say the same thing last year um you know back my first time around on the board of assessors over 20 years ago I was always a stun you know there's no reason to split the tax rate and just keep it even and everybody pays their share um when you go up on the business it's our local businesses that the same people in town use so the the cost is just carried over to them uh through expenses and another way whether you're going to a restaurant or the gas station or whatever they just mock up in order to cover for us so I never felt it was right to uh have the tax shift um in recent years where property values on homes has written risen far faster than the values on businesses um I see where the Selectmen have been you know increasing it um I I obviously my own opinion is to you know not go any higher than the the 135 I think that's Max um I think you could go all the way down to a a a flat tax rate and the rate wouldn't go up however we know that the values went up by 9 % so the bills are going to go up by 9% um so I mean again I've been to enough of these meetings with the selectman to know that they're going to do their own thing our our opinion here isn't um doesn't carry a whole lot of weight but it's up to you guys what what's the difference between 135 and 100% what's the revenue difference would be what do you mean revenue difference from business how much if they were at 100% versus the 135 would be the difference of the tax rate in dollars per th000 value we have a total like I'm not sure what you're asking what's what business how much is the business bringing in tax oh tax uh the yes we do if you look I do have that the whole thing is 10% you know between everything nonresidential correct um cuz residential is 89% the other 11% is the commercial the industrial and the personal property and is the personal property part of that tax shifts no no I think well it is because the shift does go to personal property does go to person it go to all now for your question Lee in regards to the dispersion of the levy is that what you're asking in a single rate for a levy of uh what we had determined was going to be the 22 million 858 743 uh for no shift single tax rate the um Levy amount by class for residential would be 20, 358 659 commercial 400,00 48374 for industrial 444,000 923 and for personal property 1.5 million roughly now if we compare that and we change the shift to 35 the levy amount allocation would go as follows for the 135 the residentials would have uh the burden of $1,483 631 commercial 65250 industrial 6,645 and personal property 2.1 million did is that what you were asking okay good so do we put a big of hand on the presidential Point flat rate absolutely absolutely the the allocation of of the is the burden of taxation on the class so by shifting it you're shifting it from the residential taxpayer to the other classes for years it was a flat rate then for a long time it went up to like 115 and then it went to 125 and now we're at 135 so every year as the um property values on the housing Rises we shift more of the burden to the businesses so um again I I I strongly disadv it against going more than the 135 um I believe and in my thoughts that that's probably what the S are going to do is carry on and keep the 135 um I you know I'm not saying I'm dead sent against that I just don't want to see it go the other way so in my head I like to say 120 125 should be the Max and they go to 135 and it kind of stays where it is whereas if we join and say yeah 135 is fine and they say now we want 140 this year um I just no definitely definitely creeping up and it does it it puts the shift what it does when you do that and you change that small percentage is you add that 40% to only 10% of the population corre it's the the dollar amount so you're taking you know an extra 40% of the valuation and dump it in on 10% of the people it it goes up drastic backwards now you're dumping more on the resident and it makes a very a very much less burden because it spread out over 89% of the people instead of 11 but I get we don't want to go off on them either right and they they're receiving a 9% versus S so if you leave it the same or just creep down to 125% then you you didn't really hurt anybody so I'll make a recommendation 125 120 it's up to you it sounds like you have motion I'll make a motion for 12 120 do you want more input in this do you more discussion before a second or anything or I'm I'm in favor of the 120 with you while second a motion so let's vote on it y all in favor so Board of assesses unanimously voted for a tax shift of 120% okay very good a slight decrease over what we've seen in the past uh an increase or the same as pretty much where we've always stood correct as a board of assesses okay very good now uh the next uh topic is the timeline of the FY 2025 recap um the um assessor side or the value side is complete it's been complete since the beginning of October now the other piece of the puzzle is the accounting side and um we've had some um staffing issues in that department and we're really behind in our timeline as to get getting a certified tax rate uh I can't stress the importance of us of having a certified tax rate in order to get the bills out timely at least by the beginning of December that's a month away and that's really pushing the issue and I don't foresee uh nor or have I been told that this timeline is going to be kept with that being said I'm really I really don't know uh what the intent of the selectman and the finance department are but this is where we're at right now I I have a question um on that as you said we've got all of our homework done and everything we can do we still don't have a certified tax rate does it even make sense to be a you know talking about classification uh we're talking about classification it probably won't be ratified today by the board of Selectmen what I presented to you and what I'm going to present to the board of Selectmen is the worst scenario the maximum Levy so if anything if when it come said and done in all the numbers are finalized the the tax rates will actually be lessened because it'll be less of a tax to again this is the worst scenario okay got it Max leving so we are talking about tax correct amounts here tax dollars and it's not certified it can change right now you're thinking this would be the high end it is the highend it's absolutely the high this is the maximum capacity Levy that um would be allowed by the do because it's 3 and half% over last year with new growth you got it got it boed okay um how much time do you need once they get there there done well the process is that once they get a tax rate set then you got to do the process in the financials software to get the bill L there's that never goes perfect it can it can be quite um a detailed process and if there's anything that comes in that throws it into a whirlwind then it stops the production and then the the billing company needs a week to produce those paper bills so it's like we're down to the 11th hour we are definitely going to be bottlenecking I'd say with by the end of November honestly or the first week of December if the recap has been submitted it's a bad thing cuz it's going to be submitted reviewed then approved so we're in a really tight situation right now again I don't know what the intent of the town is to actually get this done timely I know they're working on it but it's a little bit late at this point in the game in my opinion but this again in my opinion so that I just wanted to make the board very clear on that on you know it wouldn't be uh for the responsibility or the lack thereof of the process getting done hopefully would not fall upon this group okay um we received a letter of resignation from the senior clerk uh Renee langy and we are now uh posting for the position again in the assessor's office uh it will go out to be advertised the internal posting deadline has already passed it will go out to be advertised and then we'll be uh contacting uh potential candidates uh who are interested to come in to be interviewed just so that the general public knows what's going on here um people probably think we just got a new one and why are we posting this position but basically the uh new hire we had for this position uh showed up for a couple of days and then there was issues and then we got a letter of resignation so we really need haven't even filled that seat um kelly didn't even get to really train a new person yet so we're right back to square one where we were two months ago 3 months ago and uh trying to get this seat filled so we can get the job done correct um and as Kelly said we're we listed it in-house and we're back to listing it with the general public um so this is a 35 uh hour position for a senior clerk in the assessor's office and uh the the appli or the quite how to say it but the words out that we're we're looking and we're looking for applications so correct SE seeking someone to fill this position correct now this uh on the an add-on but the accessory dwelling unit we received it was part of your packets I guess is going to be a consideration of a bylaw for the accessory dwelling unit because there's new state laws this might be more into your perview and you know a lot about that Bob but um the town planner did provide this to us and would like some feedback uh after reading it uh my input is uh and in regards to the accessory dwelling units this becomes not an issue but something to think about as assessors in how we're going to how they're going to be categorized in other words if it's an in-law or an accessory dwelling unit currently I do not make it a multif family because the rule of thumb is if it is an in-law or an accessory apartment it's not supposed to be obtain rental income and one of the purposes his intent number one is is to obtain rental income now that to me changes it to a two family not that it Chang the tax rate stays the same it's still a residential class but as we tally each group it changes it and if that's the case then I think this opens the floodgates to many many more accessory dwelling units in the town basic and again they can do what they want with this bylaw but it's not an option that this state has said this is what you're going to eat swallow it I see everybody can have a 900 ft Adu period so long as they meet the rest of the requirements of zoning so you still have to be you know meet your setbacks 25 20 15 you still have to have if you're in an area with um septic you still have to meet your your bedrooms and stuff so um but basically as a town we always said we didn't want two dwellings on one property and the state has said everybody can have two dwellings on one property right that issue isn't you know so now again you still have impervious surface you still have maximum lock coverage there's a lot of laws that say you can't fill you a whole lot with homes but we had one that said one dwelling unit per property and the state has said no everybody can have two the second one can be up to 900 sare ft or 50% of the size of your home so if you have a 2500t home your Adu can be 12250 ft not 900 and can it be a separate building all separate buildings that that's the thing this is an accessory dwelling unit it doesn't have to be attached to your I see I didn't know that um it's it's an entirely different structure um it it's just on the same lot as your home um and again this has nothing to do with the cushion it this is all I think it's 252 cities and towns in the state and uh it is what it is so I think they're probably going to put this in just so it's it's written and people can understand it as part of our language versus having to go to the state but the state with this new law is saying that the towns cannot stop it I do believe that you're probably going to see lawsuits and other stuff arise from it because um it as much as I think a lot of us would like to have this it's not great for the cities and towns that's why um the BW is what it is because potentially um you'll have twice as many throwing units in the town it it has that kind of effect and it won't because again there's plenty of houses that are already oversized on you know they don't have the room for um you know to build something more um but for everything that we've done over the past 15 to 20 years changing lot sizes from 30 to 45 to 60,000 ft well now every 60,000 ft lot is automatically to 30,000 ft Lots cuz you know there's enough for septic and setbacks and all that because all the developments that are already out there with 30,000 ft there's too and the retre retreat Lots I really they can be affected but again you still have 75 ft setbacks I so most Retreat Lots they end up building the house right in the middle of the lot correct and and doesn't mean they can't build another one right next to it in the center of the lot but they can't necessarily put one in the front out of the back because of that 75 ft set back okay um but it does and and I agree with you I think it probably would be classed that that I don't I don't even think it would be a two family I think be a 109 it'd be two structures is one property right just like that's why I asked that question I was unsure I thought it would had to be attached so I I was thinking something else and I think that would be the difference in how you do it correct because people can now do the regular in-law apartments that they want corre attached they're not stuck to one quarter that's the the big difference in what we've all we've always had accessory apartments in town but the limit is 25% of the original house and now it's 50 so it it it does lead people you know that want to have an in-law apartment A lot of people want an inlaw apartment around 7 800 FT 900 ft and they couldn't do it because they only had, 1500 square ft to begin with or even if they had 2,000 they could only do 500 right now they can they can easily you know put the inlaw Apartments they want so I do think you're going to see more attached but I also think on all of the 30 and especially the 45 and 60,000 foot lots a lot of people coming in to put homes in their backyards for their kids kids and parents you know and rentals I'm yeah uh with the rental see the litmus test for accessors is if it can be rented for profit it's a multi yeah so that's where I'll really have to uh you know know the use of that accessory but that it's a multi if it's a single unit if it's a if it's a rental but it's a separate unit then it's it's two dwellings yeah exact one two dwellings one parcel you only allowed one bedroom for a unit correct that's what that's what says I just wanted she she had provided to us I know you're very vers in this Bob so I was I wanted to let the assessors know if he want to give some feedback I I actually sat down with the building inspector last week to try to find out if we were on the same page okay um because I had someone approach me and they already have an existing foundation so they just put a a two-story on it and it was 1,100 squ ft and I said I believe your house is only around 14500 ft so you can't have 11 you can only have nine and um he did say that that's the way he sees it as well okay and that there is a little discrepancy on whether this is absolute today or if this comes into effect in like February um the state said that it was official the day she signed it oh okay cities and towns are saying well you can't do that it has to go to the next like I don't know exactly what it is Administration or something or or whatever so um I guess there's questions on whether or not these are out now or that but I have heard that premit are already being issued for them okay and other cities and towns okay but that being said I'm curious why they would need a local bylaw then I I I don't think they do I think they just trying to put it in our bylaw so that it's easy for everyone to understand and okay we we're following the state guidelin saying we'll do what you say but we're putting it in our book so that way when people so people know what they can and can't do right without having to look up state laws I understand okay thank you that clarified it for me a little bit too all right so basically I will let Victoria the planner know that it's been discussed and uh that you've actually touched base with Andy as well so the assessors are well aware of what's going to be going on moving forward um also there is I didn't want to make a copy of all this but this is a site plan for a special permit for a solar uh project at 211 Middle Road um this project is going to Encompass uh land in a cushion in Andy Bedford it's just in the special permit phase that has not been issued yet well than glad to go through this happy reading if you'd like but I just wanted to throw it out there to you um um because the again the planning board was looking for some input if we had it I I think leave it in the office for everybody to read at their Leisure absolutely and um we I I respect the planning board and we can we can give them our personal thoughts on it but we don't really have a we can't we don't have I mean it's an opinion that's all it is it doesn't it can't change anym um okay and of course I don't have my phone but the next meeting date do anyone for I'm looking for the first uh Wednesday in December if everybody's is all right with that or yes yes Fresh So that would be December 4th sounds good at 4m. are you is everyone all right with that okay we do um now we do have some personal exemptions and some uh chapter applications to go through so we do have to go into executive session to discuss that so well if there's no more regular uh business I don't have business in regular session then I would entertain a motion tojn regular session and go into exe executive session we will re convenient regular session to accept the vote on these personal exemptions and the other applications I'll make that motion motion and a second all in favor okay now an executive session we have concluded our uh business in executive session and have reopened the meeting in Open Session and uh just to go over what we've voted on I'm going to turn the floor back over to Celly to read through it uh for the FY 2025 personal exemptions Clause 41 C1 Clause 17 D1 Clause 22 lowercase A1 uh for fiscal 2026 chapter 61a or 61b applications 61a we had none 61b there were four and there were two rights of refusal recommendations for chapter properties one is a portion of map 3 lot 16d map 3 lot one and the board of assessors is going to recommend to the selectman to forgo their right of First Option that's it all I that okay without any further business I'll entertain a motion to adjourn I'll that motion second have a motion a second all in favor I so moved we arej [Music] you