Dascoulias willing to compromise on timing of property revaluation

Former selectman Peter Dascoulias insists that he’s not being uncompromising by demanding that town officials provide an explanation of the assessing process used by former Town Assessor Greg Heyn and Vision Appraisal Technology (Vision). “I’ve read through all the information they’ve provided and I still can’t figure out their methodology,” Dascoulias said Sunday. “They’ve had two shots at this, in 2003 and 2005, and still haven’t got it right yet.”

Accordingly, the Black Brook Road resident has asked the N.H. Board of Tax and Land Appeals (BTLA) to order a revaluation of the town’s property this year. “It is the opinion of the Petitioners that the most expeditious and thorough way to ensure that Sanbornton has achieved assessment equity and a solid platform from which to move forward with a progressive assessment program in the future is to do a town-wide assessment update in 2007,” he wrote to the BTLA in responding to its October 13 ruling that found fault with the 2003 property revaluation and subsequent update performed in 2005 by Heyn and Vision.

It its response, the town asked BTLA not to require another townwide revaluation until 2008.

“Instead of waiting until 2008, let’s do it in 2007,” Dascoulias countered. “We can’t use this (the 2005 update) as a jumping off point for a rolling revaluation.”

Troubling to the former selectman is the proposal by the town to begin a “rolling evaluation” which as planned would begin an annual update of one-fifth of the town’s properties each year, with all properties thereby reassessed every five years. “Before we begin doing that, we have to make sure the base line is accurate,” he said.

Dascoulias joined last year with 75 other town residents in filing a petition with the N.H. Board of Tax and Land Appeals (BTLA) asking that the agency review the 2005 update of the 2003 town-wide revaluation conducted by Heyn and Vision. Specifically, the petitioners sought answers as to how property appraisals were computed, and questioned the delineation of neighborhoods within the community.

Using as an example the assessment on his own .16 acre lot which had in one year risen in value from $64,000 to $200,700 for the land alone — not including his house — Dascoulias argued that something was amiss, and neither Heyn nor Vision could adequately explain or justify the increase of over 200-percent in the land value.

In seeking clarification, Dascoulias did sit down with Heyn and pore through materials provided by Vision, but still felt that answers were not forthcoming. “I never did get a straight answer,” Dascoulias said. “But I was subsequently notified that my appraisal had been reduced by $100,000.”

It was that reduction, which Dascoulias sensed was arbitrary and made largely to placate him to forestall legal action that ultimately led Dascoulias to the BTLA. “We first sought help from the Belknap Superior Court, asking that it order the town and Vision to explain their methodology,” Dascoulias recalled. “We were trying to obtain the information through RSA 91A (Right to Know law).”

The court ruled, however, that since the town had provided the raw data, even without explanation, it had met the RSA 91A requirement.

“That’s when we went to the BTLA,” Dascoulias explained, noting that a group of town residents had been successful in appealing to the BTLA to order the revaluation of town property in 2003.

In consideration of the petition, the BTLA ruled on October 13, 2006 that it too found significant problems with the methodology used in the revaluation, suggesting that Vision was tailoring adjustments to property values in order to make certain assessment ratios come out where they needed to be to meet state guidelines. But before issuing a final decision as to how to proceed, the BTLA requested that the town and Vision, along with the petitioners, respond to its finding by December 15.

In its response filed on December 14, the town through its attorney Christopher Boldt, requested that the BTLA not order a revaluation until 2008, claiming that there is “no evidence in the eyes of the vast majority of town’s taxpayers of a ‘systemic pattern of disproportionate taxation’ nor of ‘such substantial inequality that the inequality must be deemed intentional.’”

Vision offered that “It is our belief that the assessments determined for the 2005 Statistical Update do reflect market values and comply with the state’s requirements, and are further supported by (the BTLA’s own) studies, and studies conducted by the Department of Revenue Administration.”

“I don’t know how Boldt can claim that there’s no systemic pattern,” Dascoulias countered after reading the town’s and Vision’s documents. “Even Patsy Wells (current chair of the Sanbornton Board of Selectman) has said there is a systemic problem.”

“It is a systemic problem,” Wells confirmed on Sunday. “But it isn’t just Vision and Sanbornton, it’s a statewide problem.”

While Wells is not opposed to another revaluation, she’d like to delay the process for a year. “Can we tweak what we have now, and do a complete reval in 2008?” she asked rhetorically. “I’d be willing to go along with that compromise.”

One of Wells concerns is the cost of the process, which topped $200,000 in 2003. Facing tight economic constraints and significant needs for capital improvements, especially for road repairs, trying to appropriate the money in next year’s budget, she suggests, would be difficult.

“Maybe we can do 50-percent in 2007, and 50-percent in 2008,” she offered. “Then when it’s completed we can institute the rolling reval in subsequent years.”

Wells also noted that the town is set to hire a new assessor “who will be more hands on; who lives in the area.”

“People are incredibly frustrated, and there’s been no place to vent that frustration,” she acknowledged. “So we want someone who has a regular presence in the town.”

For Dascoulias, delaying the revaluation until 2008 is acceptable, “so long as it’s done properly and the assessor and the assessing firm can explain how they’ve arrived at their figures.”

“That’s all we really want,” he said. “A transparent process that is fair and understandable.”