|
Contribute
| |
 |
The underlying principle of our property tax system is that all
properties are valued by the assessor so that the property tax burden
can be spread as fairly and equitably as possible. The county assessor
exists to make that happen. Assessors are elected to ensure
their accountability to the citizens who elect them and not to other
government bodies or agencies. |
|
The assessor is responsible for running the office in an economical and
efficient manner. This includes any agreements he may make pertaining to
contract work. He is spending tax payer dollars and "less than
acceptable" results are never a good buy. Spending $156,000 for a
contracted service that could have been arranged for $30,000 is not
accountability. |
Noteworthy Observations from Steve
The
assessor always has to show up, even if the meeting is with a group
gathered at
the train tracks on the east side of the courthouse with buckets of
tar and bags of feathers.
There were serious grassroots concerns expressed in 2005 over the
practices of the assessor’s office and the confusion those practices
caused among those property owners trying to correct their property
valuations. There were two public meetings organized by citizens about
those concerns, one in May, one in July. The meetings were well publicized
yet neither the assessor nor anyone from the assessor’s office attended
either meeting, even though the assessor was personally invited by the
organizers to both.
Those citizen
meetings were followed by two “administrative matters” meetings with the
county commissioners. The first administrative matters meeting on August 16th
was attended by a number of citizens, nine of whom addressed the county
commissioners about their concerns. The assessor was there, too. The meeting was
requested to enlist the commissioners’ support and participation in a
taskforce to address problems with and within the assessor’s office.
The
assessor was gung ho about the idea – if the commissioners would “partner”
with him and organize the taskforce and be a part of it.
There
are problems with inviting one constitutional office (the commissioners) to, in
effect, oversee the operations of another (the assessor). Those problems and
some compromise plans were discussed, and the assessor was asked by the
commissioners to return at a later date to make a formal proposal.
Forming a
taskforce was a good idea if for no other reason than the fact that so many
citizens wanted to participate in one. Asking the commissioners to become
involved was not such a good idea, however. The assessor really does have to be
independent.
At the
second administrative matters meeting with the county commissioners on Sept.
6th, with none of the concerned citizens in attendance, the assessor turned his
back on the project. His justification for squashing the idea was that he was
sure any taskforce or group would have to come up with the determination that
the assessor’s office is “ … doing the best we can with what we’ve got
– bottom line.” He said that, even after stating a few sentences earlier
that, “… our results are less than acceptable.”
In other
words, the assessor knows his office isn’t doing a good job, but he’s not
interested in getting any critiques on what needs to be improved or free advice
on how to fix things.
The
assessor’s solution to the problems in the office, besides more money to be
directed toward no specified purpose, was “advertising.”
I
attended both citizen meetings but not the administrative matters meetings with
the commissioners. I listened to the recordings of those meetings on the
internet.
Most of
the issues and problems discussed in the citizen meetings are not particularly
difficult to address or fix:
-
Comparable sales on the assessor website. It was my understanding
that a comparable sales system was to be ready well before the 2005
reappraisal, and that system was to be integrated with the county’s
mapping and GIS (Geographic Information System) to generate maps of subject
and comparable properties. That system would benefit property owners,
assessor staff, and real estate professionals.
-
Neighborhood numbers. Residential properties are grouped and valued
by economic areas and neighborhoods. Put the economic area and neighborhood
numbers on the property information screen.
-
Explanation of the “Model”. A valuation model is nothing more
than variables and values for those variables. Describing what variables are
used (main square footage, basement square footage, lot size, design, etc.)
is easy to do, as is describing which variables matter more than others.
Just as important, it should be clear what variables are not used in the
valuation model.
-
Where to go and what to do. A better explanation of the steps
involved in the protest process and what should happen at each step.
-
No surprise adjustments at County Board of Equalization or Board of
Assessment Appeal hearings. If a variable isn’t used in the valuation
model, it should not make a surprise appearance and assume new significance
at appeal hearings.
-
Get the story straight. Several property owners where given
conflicting information and, in some cases, information that was simply
wrong. The assessor staff, particularly the appraisers who meet with
property owners during the protest and appeal processes need a better
understanding of what the statutes are, what they mean; how the values they
are reviewing are calculated; and what evidence provided by a property owner
can and should be considered.
-
Continuing the fight. Ensure that property owners’ whose protests
are denied know their rights and what they can request and expect from the
assessor’s office at the next step in the appeal process.
-
Fix the screw-ups fast. Sometimes the valuations in certain
subdivisions or areas, or of specific types of properties are simply bad.
Correct the valuation model and mail out corrected notices of valuation to
all property owners affected as soon as the problem is known. Don’t rely
on protests alone to fix those problems. They can’t.
 
Protests,
Appeals and Abatements |
