Read back through the article:
There's three board members and three alternate board members.
Two board members felt the values were too low.
One board member felt the values were acceptable but quit to essentially "send a message".
Problem #1: If property is assessed too low and the city has budgeted for x-amount of dollars, then the tax rate needs to be raised to compensate; however, because the tax rate was already set before the bills went out to property owners, the city could now be under-funded.
Problem #2: If they members of the board do not sign the tax warrant, the city has no legal means for collecting taxes at all. Being under-funded wouldn't be a problem - the city would have NO funds at all.
Problem #3: Where's the transparency of these three board members who resigned? They turned in a letter to the City Manager, but obviously had made a decision before the meeting! That decision should have been made in a public meeting. Perhaps there's a piece of the story missing here? I don't know... but it doesn't sound right to me.
Problem #4: None of the three board members could give Visions an example of one of the 528 properties that were used in the statistics modeling for the reassessment that they felt were under valued. Not one. Assessments can be done a number of ways - for a city like Laconia, assessments are done based on the value (selling price) if properties. Small towns may do it by a more hands-on approach; by going to each house, each property, etc., and walking the property, talking to the owner about improvements (or depreciations) etc.
Problem #5: The article doesn't go into what exactly the board members and Visions talked about that night. The board members claim they did not get answers from Visions; Visions is disputing that. I don't doubt that the board members aren't highly qualified or professionals, but it sounds like they got answers from Visions; just not the answer they liked...
Finally - Problem #6: There's a problem with the tax process (timing) if a board can't get the answers they want or need on an assessment or reassessment and yet tax bills have to go out. Period. I can't imagine being one of the alternates on that board who HAD to sign the tax warrant. It's too bad, really, that the board members' backs were put up against the wall in this way.
|