Laserfiche WebLink
Board of Assessors Meeting Page <br /> Board Discussion on dater Department ' s Methods of Taxing and <br /> Deferrin2 Betterments (continued) <br /> Nice Chairman DeLory expressed opinion that The Board should <br /> perhaps review some of these abatement applications there <br /> are not many of then. Mr. Baker had commented that Assessing <br /> should watch over these applications . David Bailey stated that <br /> the Nater Department is free to abate whatever is abatable; <br /> however, what It is doing now is deferring not abating. <br /> Assessing did advise quit-e some timed ago that if the Water <br /> Department has a lot that is questionable one that may be <br /> built on some time in the future 1 t has -the option to defer <br /> the tax. Along with betterment deferrals , there is a statutory <br /> interest of on any parcel devoid of structure. He read aloud <br /> from the State "Laws" . Lengthy discussion followed. <br /> David Bailey pointed out that many times abatements have <br /> core to Assessing even though the unbu ildable lots now have <br /> water; Assessing does question these abatements . He stated that <br /> the Vater Department has made many silly errors with filing and <br /> references , etc . ; this has mixed things up! ' He expressed <br /> opinion the Department should be more careful when betterments <br /> are assessed; however, Assessing cannot do anything about this <br /> method. He gave example: just last week a taxpayer had to pay a <br /> $6 ,000 water betterment on a $22 , 000 building lot because of the <br /> "po .kch " layout! ! That property is not worth a penny more than <br /> the neighboring lots ! ! Discussion followed, All. Board Member <br /> expressed agreement that the dater Department should take more <br /> care when assessing betterments . <br /> David Bailey informed that on many occasions he has advised <br /> the Vater Department that he did not feel Its assessment method <br /> was equitable, and he did not feel It was being consistent with <br /> Its abatement policies . The Water Department is trying to work <br /> things out; It may switch to a unit assessment now that it is <br /> legal . Be expressed opinion that Mr. Baker was probably 3oking <br /> when he made comment that Assessing should watch over these <br /> abatement applications. More discussion followed. <br /> Vice Chairman DeLory l estloned ghat he could do about the <br /> water pipe line that was installed in front of his buildable <br /> property but not along the unbuildable lot he owns , even though <br /> he requested the pipe and said he would pay for it, as he could <br /> use it for his marsh. There is a total of 176 feet, but the pipe <br /> was Installed only feet! ! fir .. Bailey . stated that any property <br /> owner can contest the property ' s betterments . Mr. DeLory asked <br /> ghat the recourse is when the Water Department refuses . David <br /> Bailey informed -that court action would be the next step. <br />