Anonymous said...
Publius please accept this as an article submission
WHO OVERSEES THE ASSESSOR
Not the DRA! Not the ASB! It You! (and me and other taxpayers)
This should be viewed as a reason to file for abatements and appeals as the BTLA recognizes that there are "problems"
BTLA DETERMINES THAT THERE IS NO EFFECTIVE AUDITING OF ASSESSING PRACTICES IN NEW HAMPSHIRE !
The following is a statement from (two separate) decisions from the NH Board of Tax and Land Appeals (BTLA) in regard to Avitar (contract assessor) asking to be compensated by the taxpayers (retribution) for their bringing a reassessment petition action before the BTLA.
Please read carefully for the nuances and acknowledgement by the BTLA that the “State” has “no comprehensive auditing procedures in place to verify that assessments are being performed correctly and accurately at the local level. “ Additionally, the BTLA presented to the Assessing Standards Board (ASB), in 2007, several cases of poor municipal assessing in which they took action. The BTLA presented no encouraging news to the ASB as to the state of assessing in New Hampshire. The ASB response has been silence and inaction.
According to the statement that follows, the burden of auditing and providing “checks and balances” falls to the taxpayers!
Beginning BTLA quote:
“The legislature has provided this process for New Hampshire taxpayers to challenge, on a systemic basis, the need for improved assessment equity throughout a municipality in addition to appealing their individual assessments through RSA 76:16-a or 17. While certainly petitions and appeals require municipal officials and their contractors to invest significant time, they are important processes for taxpayers to audit the assessing function entrusted to municipalities in the first instance. These RSA 71-B:16, IV petitions are part of the "auditing procedures" and "enforcement measures" to ensure equitable market related assessments as discussed, in Sirrell v. State, 146 N.H. 364, 374 and 384 (2001). ("[I]n 1999, no comprehensive auditing procedures are yet in place to verify that assessments are being performed correctly and accurately at the local level." The State must implement effective enforcement measures to ensure assessments are proportional.)
Avitar may believe it to be inefficient and troublesome to have to explain and defend how assessments were derived and calculated; however, our representative form of government requires that those entrusted (either directly by statute or indirectly by contract) with the important responsibility of assessing and equitably dividing the tax burden be responsive and accountable to those who are directly and immediately impacted: the taxpayers. By its very nature, a government with built-in checks and balances may result in some inefficiency; however, that is one of the necessary costs so that no one branch of government dominates and so that its citizens have recourse. See Opinion of the Justices, 141 N.H. 562, 569 (1997); Town of Littleton v. Tavlor. 138 N.H. 4.19, 423 (1994); and Foote v. State Personnel Commission. 116 N.H, 145, 148 (1976).”
Mr. Leon Artus
In response to 2/16/08 4:43pm Candidates for the Stars
ReplyDeleteMr.Artus,
How many were over assessed 500% or more? Is over assessment the selectmans direct fault? How many homes were sold for more than the assessed value during 2004? Please provide this info. I would love to see it. Where were you then? Is Valerie pre-qualified to become a selectwoman as your last post stated because she pledges not to push your agenda? I am confused with your position! Please explain.
February 17, 2008 12:26 PM
I meant 3:57pm 2/16/08
ReplyDeleteCampaigning, could it be illegal?
Did I read that 5 Percent of the taxpayers filed for an abatement?
ReplyDeleteFive percent of 2,999 tax cards?
Isn't the state average 15 percent?
Therefore, isn't 5 percent something to be proud it?
Sometimes Leon is hard to follow because he wants taxpayers to know everything he knows, and benefit by it.
ReplyDeleteWhat I do know is that we paid Purvis Assoc. $30,000.00 + in 2006 to do our assessing and perform an evaluation and they did nothing!
Their employee Ed Elcik, designated our Assessor, insisted to me in whispers, over and over that he didn't do any assessing nor did he figure any of the formulas necessary to do an evaluation in 2006. He gave me information on paper to support his affirmations.
I continued to press this information to the selectmen and got nowhere.
Purvis fired Mr. Elcik the night that they had to come down and exlain to a large group of taxpayers at the community center about the assessing job that they did for Atkinson. (1/25/07) I have it on DVD.
When Rod Wood, Purvis VP came down, as a result of citizens like Leon forcing the issue, no one at the town hall knew who Rod Wood was. He had never been seen at town hall by anyone.
He claimed Ed Elcik did the assessing. Then he began to say that he did some of it.
In truth, whoever does the assessing initials the field (tax) card in the specialized box. Neither Ed Elcik's initials or Rod Wood's are on the tax cards in 2006as having done anything.
Only initials on the card for 2006 were the lister/measurer,(the guy who came to your property). The only thing he has a state permit to do is list and measure.
It is as plain as the nose on your face.
I was and still am angry that we paid for something in 2006 that was never done and are hailing Purvis as doing an admiral job.
That is only the begining of what upsets me.
There is an extremely important election coming up. As important as fair evaluations are, folks we have much more important fish to fry at the moment.
ReplyDeleteAll these entries regarding assessments are directing attention away from the problem at hand. The government of the town is broken. It needs to be fixed. One problem at a time please.
I think it is very telling that only one candidate has expressed their views here. The other two have apparently been unwilling to face the scrutiny Ms. Tobin has. You have to ask yourself why. No doubt, at least to me, their silence so far suggests they may be afraid of the questions that will be asked. And boy, I have a few.
We've also had one blogger attempting to suggest Mrs. Tobin is not fit to serve, because she may have some emotions. Phase it anyway you want, that is sexist and has no place here. I would think Margaret Thacher would have an opinion on that.
So, please, lets fix one problem before we go after another.