My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10/01/1996 BOARD OF ASSESSORS Minutes
>
10/01/1996 BOARD OF ASSESSORS Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/18/2018 5:03:07 PM
Creation date
1/18/2018 10:29:40 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
BOARD OF ASSESSORS
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
10/01/1996
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
4 <br /> Board of Assessors Meeting Page <br /> Neighborhood values (continued) <br /> [upon question from Chairman Greig, Mr. Bailey informed <br /> that he has done quite a few printouts, especially today. Upon <br /> question from slice Chairman Porter, Mr. Bailey informed that he <br /> has not made any changes to date. Next week, he will start doing <br /> sample changes on the Sales File. Assessing is - in good shape <br /> regarding the time schedule set. By October 15th, most <br /> everything will have been reviewed and -entered onto a sample <br /> system; all of the changes will have been entered onto the system <br /> . by the end of -the month. vice Chairman Porter initiated <br /> discussion concerning the high and low sales. <br /> David Bailey expressed feeling that these changes in <br /> some of the neighborhood values may cause a small tax increase. <br /> He expressed his concern over the values of the waterfront area <br /> in Monomoseoy that seem to have skyrocketed. He pointed out that <br /> the only waterfront sales Assessing has at present have been on <br /> Monomoscoy; this has caused the problem of what to do about the <br /> values of many other waterfront properties that are based by <br /> certain percentages on their relationship to Monomoseo , even <br /> though they are not identical properties . For 'example, if <br /> Monorosoy Waterfront values are increased by , then all of <br /> the other waterfront values gelated to Monomoseoy may have to be . <br /> increased by o as well . This creates a touchy situation ! ! <br /> Chairman Greig questioned if these values should, <br /> continue to be keyed together with Monomos oy. . Da ld Bailey <br /> expressed opinion ,that they should no longer be keyed together; <br /> initially, a certain relationship did exist. Chairman Greig <br /> initiated lengthy discussion- about other waterfront areas in <br /> comp rison to �onomos oy. �' ept].orial view" px`o ernes were <br /> discussed. Mr. Bailey expressed opinion that he may be able to <br /> raise the value of the "goodview" properties , leaving the other <br />` values alone or factoring them slightly . . . then see how this <br /> method works over the next twelve or so months . Be strongly <br /> pointed out that he does not rind making the changes , but he does <br /> not want to rake changes to Soo properties based on a few sales ! .' <br /> NEW BUSINESS: <br /> Due Dates on Proj2erty Tax Payments and Abatement <br /> Applications <br /> Chairman Greig introduced the Bulletin dated September <br /> 1996 from the D.O.R. regarding due dates . Copy of the Bulletin <br /> is attached to These Minutes . ) Mr. Greig pointed out that the <br /> w <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.