Selectmens
Minutes March 27th 2006 (partial)
FAYETTE
SELECT BOARD
MEETING
MINUTES
March
27, 2006
The
meeting was called to order by Chair Berndt Graf at 7:00 p.m.
Roll
Call of Members: Present, Chair Berndt Graf, Marty Rigoulot,
Joe Young, Tom Mitchell.
Absent:
Vice Chair Abby Holman
Attending
Members of the Public: Wes Hodgkins, Diane Polky, Rob Duplessie,
Ellory Bane, Matt Holland.
Pledge
of Allegiance- Stated
NEW
BUSINESS
06-30
2006 Property Tax Revaluation Discussion
Representatives
of RJD Appraisal met with the Board at the request of the Town Manager.
Bob Duplessie met with us last year to discuss doing a revalue work to
bring the Town up to 100%. His son Rob and two other assessing agents
made the presentation. Discussion as follows:
Rob
Duplessie: The scope of work we propose doing for this year is just
a market analysis the majority of the work will be done in the office.
We will not be visiting properties, leaving notices on doors, measuring
buildings etc. This is not a full-scale revaluation but is does
bring you to 100% certified parcel ratio. That work is unnecessary
because we do the quarterly review for you every year. This is just
the sales analysis piece of the reval that needs to be done. Nowadays
with the software that we have it is just a matter of changing the cost
units (from 1994 values to 2006 values) bringing up to current market
and that is pretty much it.
Mark
Robinson: Could you tell us your process, your approach to getting
this done. Rob Duplessie: All the recent sales data for the last
3 years will determine the new value. Value-wise every property will increase
in value accept for mobile homes. We are required to assess value
regardless of tax burden. I expect the waterfront to go up faster
than the non-waterfront. Beyond that can't really make any more statements
than that other than to say if your expenses stay flat and your value
increases 50% then your tax rate would decrease 50%.
Mark
Robinson: Need you to walk the Selectmen through the physical process
you will be doing when you conduct this work. Because there is great misunderstanding
in how this work is done and when people will be informed. Rob Duplessie:
The whole process will be done in the office. No site visiting except
for a few sales properties.
If
nothing is done this year, then your assessing standard ratio is reported
to be 62% which fails the assessing standard of 70% as required by the
State. When you fall below 70% the state starts taking away the
tree growth reimbursement they give to the town. Your 8% less than
the minimum translate in loss of 80% of your expected tree growth reimbursement.
Mark
Robinson: The price you are paying for this reval work and RJD's
schedule does not include or allow for a set of hearings after the new
values are defined. When they do this work in June, July and August
the taxpayer will first learn of the new value when they get their tax
bill in September, a recipe for disaster. For that reason I suggest
doing it later and having it affect the tax bills that are issued in September
2007 not this September. This accomplishes the goal of giving the
taxpayer advanced notice on new value.
Rob
Duplessie: Having done two dozen revals you'll want to keep minimal time
between the new value and committing those taxes. Otherwise people will
fester over their new value and you prolong the inevitable. We'll be done
in August you commit the taxes in September. It's not ideal but this is
the least expensive way to get your reval done. We can't do hearings this
year it is not in our timeline. It was not in the original proposal either.
It is a messier clean up if you have hearings before. The result
is going to be the same. Do it this way and the minor adjustments
are the abatements that are approved after you have committed taxes and
issued tax bills but there should only be minor adjustments. You need
to have a bigger overlay to take those abatements up.
Mark
Robinson: My point in waiting, aside from the public relations issue,
is so that you can relate the new total value in our tax equation so that
voters at town meeting in June can make an informed choice when voting
on expenditures. We are not going to have a new total value that we can
use to provide a legitimate estimate of the effect expenditures will have
on contributing to the mil rate and what it means to each tax payer in
real cost to them.
Hypothetically,
if we were not going through a reval then I would take our current total
value $70 million add 1.5 million in new value (average annual increase)
and base our mil rate estimate on a new total of 71.5 million. We
will know very soon all of our proposed expenditures and what we need
to raise locally for Town and School. We already know the County
then we plug in costs for School and Town and show the taxpayer when they
go to town meeting a legitimate effect on what they'll pay in September
if they approve expenditures as proposed on June 17. Doing it the
other way puts my office and the Selectmen in the difficult position of
having to recommend proposed expenditures in the absence of knowing the
net affect it will have on the tax bills issued in September.
Rob
Duplessie: That is indicative of any reval year. If you choose the
unorthodox approach then there are two sides: the people who get the increase
will stew and fester over the new value and those who actually see a reduction
in their tax bill are going to be upset because you waited an additional
year. If you go with this idea we will need to plan on an additional few
days and higher cost. Mark Robinson: Could you work up an estimate?
Marty Rigoulot: Savings in the quarter review since you are scheduled
to do the quarter. Take the extra cost and use the savings.
Use the money to do hearings if we wait. In 94 we had a lot of arguments.
Rob Duplessie: People are not going to be happy no matter what you do.
Any appreciation in market may not be reflected because we are dragging
it out 12 months. Mark Robinson: We need to weigh the sacrifice
compared to what we are trying to prevent. Rob Duplessie: If you were
to prolong it then why don't you do it after you commit taxes in September?
Marty Rigoulot: Meaning if you were to do the reval in October-November.
Joe Young: Suggested the idea of a public hearing. Rob Duplessie:
Not in favor of a public forum. Joe Young: Then why should we wait? Mark
Robinson: If the reval is postponed and work done in October November
then you can incorporate the new value into the tax rate calculations
with proposed expenses and tell the people how proposed expenses for the
07-08 budget will affect the tax bill they receive in September of 07.
Joe Young: Understand it but don't think it is important the values are
going to change for everybody. The relationship is going to change
and the mil rate is meaningless. Mark Robinson not if it is done
later in the year. We need to identify the tax consequence of those expenditures.
Berndt Graf : Come this time in 2007 will be in the same position so we
will know and will have a good estimate on mil rate. Joe Young: You can
base it on this years numbers. Rob Duplessie: The burden shift is
unknown. Berndt Graf: Can we postpone? Rob Duplessie: Yes lets find out
how much we are on the hook for penalty's by not doing the reval
and it effect 06/07 tax year.
Diane
Polky: We on the budget committee have been asking for a sales analysis
for years with the idea a sales analysis would get us closer to 100%.
Hallowell did a reval in 2001 and in 2006 we were down 80% that was unacceptable
to them. So they divided the town into sections and did a sales
analysis either 20,30,40,45 % every property by hand had to write down
the % and notified each property owner what their new valuation would
be because they were not getting their exemption their $13,000.
As a taxpayer in Fayette my tax bill goes up even though the mil rate
goes down because my exemptions are going down. Is it possible to do this
as a cushion? My neighbors who live on the lake are just scared to death.
Rob
Duplessie: We know everyone needs to go up at least 20% in value
but that does nothing to shift burden. It would help the exemption part
but the burden is the same. We do the sales analysis but it is too arbitrary
to do a 20,30, 40 example mentioned.
Diane
Polky: You can't create a base we are so far behind. Everyone understands
the Town has to grow in value because the State says we have so much more
value than what we collect taxes for. Everybody understands that.
The disparity between the value the State has and what the Town has is
too far. I have advocated for years that it's too far.
Rob
Duplessie: The waterfront owners are not paying their fair share.
If
one property on the water is valued at $100,000 this year and one property
off the water valued also at $100,000.
The
property on the water will increase to $300,000 in value and the property
off the water will increase to $175,000.
So
as group the on the water properties are not paying their fair share of
the burden. Right now.
ADJOURN
MEETING
Motion
to Adjourn: Joe
Young Seconded: Marty Rigoulot Vote (3in favor - 1 opposed) 9:38
p.m.
Respectfully
prepared and submitted by:
Mark
Robinson, Town Manager
|
