Laserfiche WebLink
Board of Assessors Meeting Page <br /> Areas in Need of Assessment Changes : continued <br /> Raw Land ( continued) <br /> that Board Members are now aware that there may be a problem; if <br /> abatement applications are - filed, they can be weighed on their <br /> own merits . Leslie Greig stated that Assessing should see sales <br /> in early 1995 - this will dive sufficient indication. Discussion <br /> followed . <br /> Abatement Applications <br /> David Bailey suggested that when abatement applications <br /> are received, we should make every e f fort to have the Property <br /> owners make a good ease: when they are using sales , they should <br /> be truly comparable. He pointed out that because M shpee is in <br /> the third year of Revaluation, values are going to be off . He <br /> stated he would rather leave assessments close to where they are <br /> and have all the changes and documentation made that does along <br /> with a Revaluation next gear - - rather than lower values now and <br /> have to bounce them back up again next year - or vice versa! '. <br /> Leslie Greig made comment that values have net been raised. <br /> David Bailey in-formed The Board that next year there are <br /> properties that clearly must be valued, percentage wise., 'much <br /> higher, Mr. Greig recalled that F1 Properties had been lowered <br /> Properties seem to be fair . Mr. Bailey stated that the large <br /> bulk of Mashpee Properties will not be a problem. Mr . Greig <br /> pointed out that N2 Pre eties may have to be changed- Mr. Bailey <br /> agreed .that these will have to be chanced somewhat. Discussion <br /> followed. <br /> David Bailey informed The Board that what must happen next <br /> year, no doubt, will be different rates for vacant Lots than for <br /> developed lots , which used to be the ease before the 1990 leval. . <br /> Vice Chairman DeLory inade comment that he did remember when this <br /> was the case. Mr. Bailey stated that at present, all the site <br /> improvements are being picked up in the building value; he has <br /> never been comfortable with this method, and it is not working . <br /> He gave example: a lot sells ,for $25 ,000 ; a house is built on it <br /> for $ yet it sells for $110 ,000 ; the extra money <br /> represents the site improvements .. Robert DeLory made comment <br /> that it used to be the rule that of the price was the <br /> building and 1./4 of the price was the land. <br /> David Bailey expressed opinion that Assessing may have to <br /> start distinguishing between vacant lots with Town Water <br /> available or net available . He feels this will start showing in <br />