Open a meeting of way board of sensors on November 5th, 2025. First agenda item. Do we have minutes from Guess we don't have minutes from last meeting. Okay. >> Oh, I might.
>> Yeah, I don't think we got we um Yeah. I got one minute to run and get her and tell her to get agenda from last the minutes from last meeting too. >> No, it's fine.
This is I I guess routinely scheduled meetings. >> No, we've got things for us. >> Um here, wait a minute. What was the last meeting? >> Well, our last meeting was the time >> October 23rd.
>> Here, I got the agenda. >> Here's a fresh copy for you guys. >> I'm just stick two copies right here for All right. It's great. That happened the last time we met. >> Yeah. Okay. the minutes.
>> Oh, what is the agenda? >> That's the agenda. >> Uh, okay. Uh, >> okay. We'll do that next time. Okay. >> Did you take >> more than one?
>> I'll public comments. Anybody? Nobody else is here. Okay. Uh, next item the agenda is Harold Shields of >> Sh. Sh. consultant group resource group
>> to discuss a uh 10year study of what land values >> uh actually assessments >> assessments >> not specifically land value land values are always under the microscope.
>> Yeah. So um this is the time of the year that we uh are heading towards the setting of tax rates but of course on as assessors we have much that has to uh be accomplished
before we uh get to that magic tax rate. And uh typically we head off process by looking at the um current assessments, our fiscal year
2025 assessments and how they compare to sales principally sales that would have transpired in calendar year 24. Uh so um in the past uh we would have looked at
really a very small sample size. You're you'll see on the first page that I've provided uh with a value frequency chart, we have 570 single family homes. If we were to look
just at calendar 24 sales, we have seven uh valid uh arms length sales. And from those seven, we would have uh in in past practice um
made a determination about where values needed to uh land to to reflect um market appreciation and to bring our values into a closer
correlation to the market. Um I work in a number of small communities. Uh and it's not uncommon for us to see very few sales uh very small sample size to to work with to make these very
important decisions about where values need to travel within a big community. >> Yeah. So I have uh developed over the last uh year um a methodology that uh greatly enriches the number of data
points uh and looking at essentially a 10-year sales period from calendar uh 2015 to calendar 24 which you see we have in that 10-year
period 107 sales. Now, removed from before we're getting to the 107 sales, uh there would have been a few more sales, but any home that's undergone a change since it was originally sold uh
would be removed from the study. Okay. So, what do you do with us? You're >> back up on that. I'm not sure I caught that. Any home that has been >> changed So you have, for example, a property
that sold in calendar 2015, you have a sale price associated with that property. Now, if they put a big addition onto the house subsequently, >> that sale price >> isn't reflective of >> isn't isn't really my question was going to be what's a change.
>> Yeah. A significant change >> significant. So, um, by looking at properties that have not significantly changed, they're pretty much the same today as they were 10 years ago. Maybe
they've gotten a little older and dustier or whatever, but um we uh we can greatly increase the number of data points uh and in this case 107 uh over that 10-year period. And you're
going to see as we go through the packet here um how that plays out into the uh development of our assessment to sale ratio figures. Assessment to sale ratio is the current
assessed value divided by the sale price. Uh and that ratio then tells us what level of value we're at. The Department of Revenue requires our assessments to be at at least 90%.
Historically, I try to target values at about 95%. Keep them a little on the conservative side yet at 95%. We're passing muster with ER. And if I could,
where the permits fall into all this? Should there be a permit pulled on one of these sales? >> Uh, well, >> I'm just looking apologetic. >> Yeah, this would not reflect properties that have had a significant permanent.
Now there there might be a minor firm for a shed or something like that that has minimal value. Um so this chart simply uh is simply here to demonstrate that with the 10year sales
um that close to 20% of of our homes will have um a a sale that um so close to 20 will have a sale that is
>> well 20 Roughly 20% of of our 570 homes would have sold in that 10-year period. >> Okay, good. >> Yeah, good. You're 24 sales. I guess I'm a little concerned that they don't agree with
with this other sheet that that we received at our last meeting of sales for the I guess uh two year two-year period July 23 to June >> the two year period. >> Well, right. There there's there's one
here I I know in in my neighborhood that uh so it's so u so if I could when we get further into the report you're going to
see that I actually draw from 2023 and 2024. Um, >> okay. But I'm looking at one here about one of my one of my neighbors here sold in sold in August of 24 for $8.95.
>> Mhm. >> You don't show any in that price range of 24 sales. >> That's all. >> Yeah, that that is a that sale was actually coded out by somebody as an end sale. I just work with David.
>> Okay. >> N sale. >> N is no explained reason why the uh why the assessed value is so far off of the >> S. Okay. >> So,
unfortunately, I didn't have a chance to reintroduce that into this >> to Fred's point. Should you reintroduce that would these figures dramatically? >> Is not. >> No, it's not. It's valued at 867,000 now. Fred, >> say that again. I'm sorry.
>> It is now valued at 867,000. >> Yeah, it's not on there. We just >> up there. Okay. That's that is run right in line. I've been in that house. Okay. So, >> so um in our exploration of that property, it has a significant outbuilding that
has just been remarkably >> Yeah. We were capturing that simply as like a barn, uh, a studio. >> Someone lives there, right? >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> But it was significantly undervalued.
>> Um, looked at the valuation of that second building, brought that valuation up. And now the assessment, proposed assessment, >> 877, >> 867 >> and they they paid about 8.95, I think. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, it's right in line.
>> Yeah. that seems to me to mind then. >> Okay. >> So, let me >> Okay, >> let me go on my discussion here. On the next page, you'll see market and ASR trends. So, to to conduct a meaningful 10-year
study using older sales, you have to time adjust those sale prices to bring them up to um a contemporary uh sales date. Um and so uh there's a actually an
elaborate process for developing time adjustment factors. Those time adjustment factors can be played back against those earlier sale prices to give a theoretical indication of what that property uh might have sold for on
the assessment date. The assessment date being January 1, 2025. So a property that's 10 years old through adjustments should reflect somewhat current. >> Yeah. So, uh if you look at this chart,
the first quarter of 2015 >> Yeah. >> Um 2015-1, if you go over uh four columns, you'll see the TA factor. >> Yeah. >> That's the time adjustment factor. If we take a a property that sold in that
first quarter of 25, multiply that sale price times 1.53 >> should bring us back. >> We get an approximate estimate of what it might have sold for assessment. >> That that's I'm not going to get into that. That's got to be some sort of
complicated formula to come up with. >> Yeah. That that can't be just 1.5%. >> There there are more pages uh and analyses that went into that. But what I want to point out here, well, first, if you look at the time adjustment factor
column, you'll see that as we approach the assessment date that um uh that factor falls off, which stands to reason the more contemporary sale that transpired in 20 24, we would not necessarily time adjust it. So, the
factor would be 1.0. Um, in developing these time adjustment factors, I do uh look at properties that have sold and resold in that 10-year period uh to test
that those time adjustment factors. So, on the next page, we see about a dozen uh properties that sold and then resold. And if I can draw your attention then to
several columns. Well, let's just take the first property um at U >> State Road, >> uh 239 State Road, sold in the first quarter of 2015 for 254,000.
Um it's sold again 5 years later for 258. Now, if you take the time adjustment factors um that I've calculated for the the first sale price and the second sale
price, the 0.53 and the 1.41, you'll see a differential of about 1.12. Um >> negligible. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, not a whole not a whole lot of appreciation in that period. >> I have been following the market since
2015 and now those are tough years for sellers up to about 2012. >> Depends where in the state but but um uh what you'll see is of course property values exploded co and >> yes yes yes. So um the comparison we
make then uh is second to the last column is the time adjusted sale price. In this case using that time adjustment factor um I would say theoretically that earlier $254,000
sale uh that same property would sell for about 284. In fact, it sold for 258 uh for about a 9% difference. Now, that's a fairly substantial difference. However, if you look across
all the sold and resold properties, there's actually only about a 6.7% average variation between the second sale price and the time adjusted first sale price.
All this is intended to do is provide um a level of support for the time adjustments that I've derived through other processes. >> Well, that's interesting. And I might have been wrong with my last assessment
cuz I see properties in here sold in 2017 for 270 and then sold for 440 >> in 22. Well, that makes sense. In 22, like I said, up to 20 it seemed to be a
little dead. >> Yeah, I'm not sure that's accurate now that I'm looking at these numbers, though. Elder the explosion really started uh in in earnest in 21. In 22 we just saw a marked increase in property benefits.
But there's there's this assumes that there's no building permits or no major improvements in >> right >> in these two >> right >> in these houses you listed here in the 10 whatever and effective >> not not to say that there haven't been some level of
you know painting or uh customary removes or >> not total revamps >> right >> so what I really want to focus now on was um the first of three pages that looks something like this just to give you an example.
>> And can I go I just going to go back to this page again. I find this 10-year market trend very interesting because I was in Florida during CO and we shut down for two weeks and then we were we explode and that's kind of what you're
suggesting here things after CO all of a sudden people don't want to be in the cities anymore. They want to get away. So just by way of anecdote um uh we sold our family home in Ashby in 21
>> um just before well just just as things were ramping up and um big historic house, beautiful house but more than we really needed like a lot of folks decided to downsize uh and
Um, so, uh, I had done being in the appraisal business, I had looked at existing evidence of to to gauge where I thought we ought to list our
home and I came up with a value in the 375 to $400,000 range. Uh, brought in a realtor and she looked at that and said, "You're way off base." Higher. Much higher.
Much higher. So, well, what do you think we should list it at? Um, well, I'd like to start it at a conservative 525. >> Okay. >> 400 to 525. Um, >> she was seeing trends is that you may not have seen
>> to your point just almost overnight. Um, >> she saw it. She saw >> 30 buyers for every potential home. Well, lo and behold, uh, within a matter of a couple of weeks, we had three offers. One very low ball, 475,
one at 530, 5,000 over, and one at 540. >> Okay. So, we accepted the middle one because they wrote a really lovely letter about their this was going to be their dream house, the whole thing. Uh, and um, so then I'm worried, how's
this thing going to appraise out? The appraisal came in at 575 just in those couple of months. So anyway, just anecdote of just how explosive. >> Well, I I think that if you looked at
inventory at the time, I bet it was low. >> Low inventory tends to spike. >> Sure. So >> quite a big difference in the appraisal thing. >> He was looking backwards. I was looking backwards and what did what sales had transpired in the morning 20
principally small town ash is a small town like weight not uh I think we have like a thousand homes in Ashb versus >> in the same week. Um but um
yeah, appraisers typically look at historic information, >> right? >> And uh every all the evidence that I saw pointed to something around 375 to 400. >> How historic was your where you're looking? >> I I would have looked back a year or so.
>> Real use it. We would use something between three and six months. >> Yeah. And that's >> or or look at the trend and say, "Hey, this is the new number." >> Yeah. I'm seeing something happening here. Sounds like >> people people coming through my front door uh my my office uh in droves. Uh
>> it sounds like had a good realtor. >> So again, how do they come up with the 575 value? >> Uh I'd have to dig that appraisal out. I didn't do the appraisal myself. >> The appraisal based on >> comp sales going look at that, right?
Comp sales. And when you you reject something based on current sales, right? >> Three months to six months. >> Three month out. So if he was looking a year back, he was way low. >> Yeah. >> If he if if she if he was looking last
pendings, maybe you probably didn't take into account pending sales. So pending sales um and recent sales and the market conditions led her to believe. And even then she underpriced it, didn't she? She sold it within a day of the price. In any event, I understand
>> you know as well as I do that there's there's a lot of art to this science there is but it sounds like she did a good job for you. >> Um >> okay I didn't mean to >> delighted obviously at the result but >> yes
>> so uh the next three sheets represent those uh those 107 sales over the 10-year period. I just provide this to give you an indication of um okay if we go to the
first sale 54 State Street um uh sold for 160,000 apply the time adjustment factor and the second uh figure from the right the task for time adjusted sale price 20 244,700.
So again, the estimate is that if that home sold in 2015 for 160,000, uh it would have um a uh time adjusted
sale price of 244,000. So >> did you I don't see square footage on all this. That's not part of the analysis. Uh well there there are actually a number of columns that I had to condense to get this on 8 and 1 half by 11
>> between style and building value. Um there about 10 columns in there. >> So you have a square footage column. >> Yes. Be curious as to the square footage sale in 2015 versus a square. And that's
not the do all end all of it. you know to come up with something that's a good starter. So with then the the greatly enriched sales set now I begin looking at my ratios and that takes us
to this page either let me just >> those are all the sales that um that either showed up on MLS and MLS sales and or uh the deeds Well, the deeds get processed, but at
some point when we undertake take our study, we have to um look at how the clerk or assistant in the office coded the property. They try to make their best determination of whether it's arms length or not. Uh
>> well, for instance, if uh I sold my property to my wife for $2, that would be non-arms length, >> right? And that would be what we call a sale. >> A sale. Okay. Yeah, that's code for us. Um, that's not a sale we're going >> that's not a sale we're going to look at
because it's not reflective of current market conditions. >> Okay. Um so if we look at our ratios, our um fiscal year 25 values
are reflecting values that are coming in at about 86% of market value. In other words, we're about 14% low um on average.
That means um very simply that we have to lift values to get them back into airplanes. Um that lift is roughly 8% to get to a 95%
assessment level. >> Okay. Your you got 14 in there. Your first page shows only shows only 70. Why the difference? Uh because this is where uh I look at 23 and 24. >> Oh okay. Two years. So it was just one.
>> So because of the small uh number of sales that transpired in 24 do requires us to look at two years 23 and 24 >> which makes perfect sense because assessed value is always behind actual
sales value and always with few exceptions. So knowing that generally I have to lift the land and building rates the the rate tables that underly our valuation system
those rates need to be lifted on average about 8% to get us into compliance. I then look for um opportunities to help uh reduce any bias that may have emerged
in our assessments. Um, so what you'll see as I slice and dice these assessments to sale ratios, um, is that, um,
certain types of homes fall out as either overassessed or underassessed. I'm going to take you as an example uh to about um about a third way down. You see sale
price hyphen 10year quartortile statistics. >> Okay. Um what I uh what I do here is I take the the sales I sort them from low sale to
high sale price and then divide them up into roughly four equal quartiles and then I look at the median ratio. Um so quartortile one would be uh the 25 lowest
um sold properties. Uh for tile four would be the um the 25 highest sold properties. >> What port what's the highest? I'm sorry. Cortile one is the lowest.
>> Port tile one is the lowest. Cortile four is the highest. What we're looking for here is is there any uh regressivity in our assessments? In other words, are we undervaluing in this case higher in properties
relative to um to the rest? And there does appear to be a pattern um here uh of undervaluation
of the higher end. Now, that's looking at the 10-year. I'm going to take you up a few rows to the 23 and 24 sales. If I had just relied on the 23 and 24 sales, uh they would not uh of which there
would be four in that fourth quartile, they would not suggest that there is um a wholesale undervaluation of only properties. I I I'm not I'm not >> Jen does show that. Yeah. I I I'm sorry. I'm trying to follow this.
>> Yeah. No. Um No, this this is good. This the uh >> four years there wasn't much change, but if in 10 year period you say there was >> if I look at the 10year history, >> it reveals um
the um >> yeah the the trend of of undervaluation or >> so the 10ear shows 84.84 84 is the >> right and the 10 year 76 >> but what >> what what 10ear 76
>> oh that's the fourth quartile >> fourth quartile in the 10year band >> gotcha okay >> I see it >> during that 10 year period when were the the 25 cile fours was that early in the 10 year period later would
that make a difference >> um >> when you when that sold >> it could uh You're right, Fred. It could, but we're looking at just general trends here. >> Okay. >> Um, and >> so the general trend is undervalued,
>> but I'm asking, did it happen early in the 10 year period or later? >> No, I understand. and and maybe >> I understand >> other other values that happened later other lower valued properties
>> uh increased more in in recent years compared to the higher value. >> That's an excellent point. Right. >> What we want to make sure here is that these numbers, these statistics um are melded with some
uh reason uh on the basis of that statistic alone. I'm not going to say, okay, if you're in the upper uh 25% of homes in Weightley, we're going to whack you an additional 10%. We're not doing that. But it just tells me that um there
may be some um undervaluation. Now that would have to reveal itself in other uh in other categories. >> Again, the data is pointing to undervaluations across the board.
>> Yes. But a lot of higher end properties. >> Say that again. D. >> It's a lot more on >> Oh, I see. Okay. The high-end properties are getting whacked. No, they're they're getting a better deal. >> Yes, they're getting a better deal. >> Part of our goal as assessors is to try to
maintain value uniformity. Part of our mission is equity equity equitable amongst all factors. So this exercise is really looking to make sure that to the extent that we can and with some uh some thought behind it, not just
looking at the numbers that we're um moving towards more equitable assessments. >> If if you took the did you look at the what was the average >> the average is about 80 86% >> for the 10 year or
>> forh for the two year? >> The two year is 86. And what's the average for the tenure? >> Uh 84. >> 84. Okay. >> So call it overall we're at about 85%. >> Okay. >> Assessment level.
>> Okay. uh that upper portile if you read the statistic at 76 suggests that we're something approaching that 8 to 10% of over undervalued in that higher end category.
>> Okay. But um what we have to do then is isolate uh what types of properties is defined by style uh and other um criteria.
um are undervalued because for example our rate building rate tables uh are principally hinged on the base building rate for various styles of
buildings. So if I take you towards the bottom of this page where you see antique um well in the in the two-year sorry uh missed a two there. I saw that 2023 >> 2023 24
>> um in uh that antique category we had two sales in those two years at pointing to 0.95 uh 0.95 would on its face suggest that um
>> they're right on the money >> that that they're right on the money but relative to the other types of homes um a bit overvalued. This is where the value of the 10-year figure comes in because now with five sales all time adjusted, we're coming in at that 088.
So that would not >> that last thing again that you just said. So what I'm comparing that's if we just look at the the median ratio for antiques in the
2023 and 2024 period. >> We had two sales at a 95 or 0.95 level of value. Okay. If I were just looking at those twoear sales, I might say, well, we're not
doing anything uh to the values of antiques by introducing the 10year statistic. If you go down towards the bottom of the page, the 10-year statistic for antique takes is five sales over that 10-year
period at a 0.8. Um that would suggest to me that um that really antiques aren't uh overvalued relative >> okay to market.
>> Is there anywhere where there is a good description of style? Um >> good one. Good one. >> Because in my neighborhood there are houses that are classified as contemporary. There are houses that are classified as ranch. And I don't
understand what the difference is. And there's a big difference in your assessed value. >> Yeah. So ranches are typically one story, >> right? >> And if I have a um certain design profile, they're often
rectangular with um single uh ridge lines. Uh uniform ridge lines. >> Contemporaries typically have uh
interior spaces that take advantage of of cathedral ceiling um ceilings and uh unique floor plans that would not be uh what you would find in one of those like
1960s to 1970s era ranches. Mhm. >> Um I'd almost have to have uh >> I'd love you to come drive through my neighborhood. >> Everybody wants that. Figure out what's what. >> Because um most all of the houses are singlestory.
>> Uhhuh. >> Even the ones that are identified as contemporary. They do have the cathedral ceiling in the living room. >> Yeah. >> But you'd be hardressed >> on the outside to tell them. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Because to me, contemporary was
always like a modern design like I would see in Westchester County and New York. Um very very artsy. Um definitely stood out as different when you drove down the road. Um and there's a big difference in my neighborhood.
>> We we that was a concern to the to the board here when we were doing inspections of Pine Plains Estates. what how what type of house do we call it? And initially we looking at the outside
features and but once we went in we did change some I I guess and we we were concerned that there was differences in houses side by side and that's how we decided which one was contemporary or which was a ranch
>> and we looked at some features not just the outside and I I think the uh the analysis and I don't think why they've seen this. We had a table analog looking
at the uh the types of houses in Pine Plains. So what 41 houses or whatever pine planes looking at the the the grade of the construction, the square footage and the price per square footage. And we
could see branches were certain price per square footage. Contemporaries were a little different. I think they were less. >> They were less. >> Yeah, they were less >> whichever way they went. And there's some two stories. So, >> grouping up that way, you you could see the square footage kind of supported
this the style of the house we picked. And I think lately we we we changed some of them the range, especially in contemporary because they didn't fit the the norm for square footage costs. So,
>> yeah. And I I built my house in 2023 2024, but there's no contemporary on here. There's zero contemporary sales >> uh in the 2-year period. >> And I'm I'm pretty sure I was put down as contemporary. >> So the next page, >> you make you don't sell it. >> I didn't sell it.
>> Yeah, >> I built it. >> So the next next page >> has contemporary under the 10. >> Oh, it does. Okay, very good. >> Yeah. And before go to that page, sorry, but this is just not getting this. This chart shows that the upper end
properties are getting a deal on valuation on assessments than the lower end. I'm trying to figure out where do you >> Yeah. Only extrapolate that. >> Yeah. Only uh this band here, this white band. >> Okay. That's that's where you extrapolate that. >> Yeah.
>> Um uh that mean nicer homes are getting a better deal than the non nice. And this band uh embraces two sets of stat statistics. One for the 2023 period, right? One for the looking at the 10-year.
>> I'm with you all the way, but I'm just not figuring how that points us to the fact that high-end properties are getting a deal and low end are regarding assessments.
>> Yeah. So if if we were to look at um the first band with within the 23 24 >> Yes. >> we've got four quartiles. >> Yes. >> And in each quartile you have three or four sales
>> really statistically a very small sample size. >> Okay. And if if we were to just use the statistics for those twoear sales, >> yes, >> we would we might conclude that there is
no regressivity. >> Give me that for that. Um, regressivity uh implies that the more valuable >> the house the the um >> the better the lower the assessed value
as a percentage of sale price. >> Okay. And then you drop down you got 25 sales.76. >> Yeah study. 25 sales would indicate a hitcher of >> statistics more
>> credible >> more credible. >> Yeah, credible. >> Okay. >> Again, this is this is simply to kind of lay uh some initial >> um foundation to where we uh where and how we want to deal with uh ultimately
the land and building rates that drive our >> No, I'm okay with that. I just struggled with >> Sure. how you ascertained what you just said. >> Um I might point out too while we're on the page. Yes. >> If you look right in the middle uh land area. >> Yes.
>> Um >> if if you look at lots equal to or larger than five acres, we had eight sales over that period. And um >> lots equal to or greater than five
>> lots equal to or larger than five acres. had sales over the 10 year period at a ratio of 75. Well, >> it doesn't say five on here. That's what I'm >> Yeah. >> 75. >> Well, no. It says um >> eight sales. Yeah.
>> Where do you get five or more acres? I'm struggling with that. >> Am I looking at the wrong chart? >> Yeah, I'm looking at it. Oh, >> lots equal to >> There it is. Thank you. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Sales at 75. Thank you. I got it down.
>> Um, logic tells us that more valuable properties tend to have more ac. >> Sure. And so going back to the earlier analysis, uh
if we look at the upper end of the housing market, um where we have what appears to be um lower values >> and they should be higher. So where this
begins to paint a picture, look at maybe we need to look at that rear acreage rate that plays into the valuation of larger parcels. Maybe it's too low. >> Now, let me just before we get too
excited here, let me just say that I'll never make a a radical decision about any rate based on the study. What I want to do is year after year look at the trend. Does the trend persist with a new
uh body of sales uh new collection of sales. Does that trend persist? And then make uh incremental movement towards >> renovating that undervaluation or overvaluation. >> Yeah. Okay. Very good. >> Does that make sense? >> It does. >> Yeah.
>> I was struggling but you all. So, another anecdote if I could. I I won't name the community, but it's just outside of Boston. Um, big uproar. Um, probably about 12 to 15 years ago, I
lost track. Um, torches uh lit in front of town hall u wanting to u um burn the assessors at the stake down. >> That's always good. And there was a there was a about 900 waterfront
property >> uh owners uh that saw their assessments double overnight. >> That's a big >> that on the basis when I dug in is a select board brought me into to uh do a
study of their assessments. What uh what amazed me was on the basis of one sale of a waterfront property on that that pond um that had an assessment ratio of 50%50.
The firm that came in to do the revaluation doubled the value of all >> on that one sale >> on that one sale. >> That makes sense at all. >> Um not taking into account sample size. Sometimes you can just throw out the high and the low, go from there. >> Yeah. If you only have one sale, there's
nothing to throw away. But >> that's true. >> But in any case, we want to be smart and intentional about uh how we improve assessments. Um yeah, Jean Jane Jean um your question
about uh your street and the and the building styles >> styles. >> Um that's anecdotal information. uh that is actually very helpful because I can take my 10-year study and I can
bring up any street and see okay uh with a richer data set how does that um inform me about not only the styles but the level of of uh value on that street
>> in trying to understand my taxes that's how I got here because I don't understand how they're figured and I'm I'm I'm getting closer. But I all the houses in my neighborhood and how they were identified as ranch or contemporary. And last year the ranch
houses increased dramatically in value. They did in a much higher percentage than the houses that were classified as contemporary. And that I you know I I don't understand why. So, let's let's pick on ranches.
Uh, since I have the statistics here, >> um, bottom of this page here, >> if we look at the 23 and 24, >> um, >> in that 2-year period, we had three sales of branches pointing to an
assessment level of 75. Okay. What does the 10year study reveal? Well, 34 sales over 10 years at a 085. >> So,
I'm not seeing at this juncture any >> not interesting. That's very interesting. >> Any need to make any additional adjustments to ranches? >> Very interesting statistic. >> Ranches are going to float along with
the the average. Mhm. >> I can't speak to last year because >> yeah, >> I I I didn't look at last year's assessments, but I can say that ranches are an interesting case study for for many years, several decades, ranches
were um not a desirable housing type. >> Colonials on a value per square foot basis exceeded those of ranches. Now with the advent of downsizing, people wanting one-story living,
um the demand um for ranches, more sales is higher as has been exactly what happened. More people want them. >> Yeah. >> And that would that would account for an increase in value of ranches if more facilitated. more people wanted an
antique that would that >> all the contemporaries in our neighborhood are very similar to all the ranches. They're all on one floor and they're all within five or 600 square f feet. >> Yeah, that's a classification issue. But uh um so
>> it's an it's an it's an interesting statistic >> if you ask me. It's very interesting. So going back to the state of land areas, uh yeah, we we we assess that beyond a
prime lot size value of I don't know three or 4,000 for extra >> acreage above that footage >> 3,000 I think. >> Yeah, 3,000 which has been that way for years. said, "I don't know how we ever come up with a value of 3,000." Whether
somebody did a study one time and >> told us that was a what it should have been, but that hasn't changed in I guess I've been doing it 15 years that value hasn't changed. >> It's unused area, right? >> Yeah. >> And it's unused area. So
>> it so it's valued at a significantly lower rate than the prime build. That being said, um people like uh having acreage around them >> and >> well from from a
sales point of view, two equal properties, one with five acres, one with one identical across the board and of the one property with more than five acres, one of them is only being assessed, the other 3,000. I guess my point is I'm
going to give more value to the five acres. >> Sure. But you're not going to it's not going to be a dramatic uptake. >> You know, I'm not all that familiar with assessing here in Massachusetts as I was in Florida. But that does make sense.
>> Yeah. Um if if I as a potential buyer have two identical homes, one on a oneacre lot, one on a five, I'll pay more for the five, but it's not >> it's going to be small. That is called the principle of
substitution. >> So >> um these uh >> could you speak about the economic neighborhoods here? >> Yeah, economic neighborhoods. So >> Oh yeah. >> Very good. There are um
within the sales set three u neighborhoods. Uh as I understand this uh one on uh the EW would be on the east side of 91 >> WW would be on the west side.
>> Uh VC would be the village center. >> Yeah. Um, and so you have um statistics that are pretty close all the way around. If we look at the 2-year,
we're at 087.90. um that would tell me that we could uniformly um raise the prime site value, the land
value in in those two neighborhoods. Uh and and in fact um in the actual rate table the uh um the value per square foot is identical for those two neighborhoods.
That's interesting. But and yeah the the l the l the latest year I I could see that but we had east weightly was significantly less than westly beyond before 2023
>> you were in the 90 95 95,000 95 to 98,000 per acre value uh in East and then of course you you.
We had a a neighborhood uh factor in here for Pine Plains Estates. So, 40 houses here that sold for in uh more than than or were valued more than other properties in town because
they were selling anywhere from starting well 10 years ago at 80 95,000 up to what 120,000. He started 95 with 105 and and then he raised it to 120. Well, the resale market raised it to 120 and the recent resale market has raised that to
17 160 a lot now. 157 160, >> right? That that neighborhood is different than than what Eastley is saying. >> Yeah. And if you look at the rate, there is a bit of a premium for that, >> right?
>> But but that isn't reflected here because Wow. >> because we didn't have sales in the mix. This only reflects properties that have sold in the last 10 years. >> Well, no, there were sales in that in that neighborhood. That's the new neighborhood. It would be a 10ear sales. >> Yeah, there were sales in that neighborhood.
>> That's what the 60 is for East, but you know, 40 of them. I don't know how they're coded then unless they were changed um from whatever special designation to EW or WW or >> Well, we had the neighborhood tractor
and and somehow the the property record cards never showed that or never picked up that we had a neighborhood for Pine Plains Estates >> and the latest came through is all Pine Plains Estates was called Eastley >> and their 40 houses were were added to
the 200 00 houses that are in East Wley and they they affected all the 200 houses that were in East >> and I'm one of the 200 I mean my value went up from 95 to 116 20,000 increased land value in one year
and every 200 houses in East Whale went up their land value went up 15 to 20,000 in one year planes estate say the Okay. Well, Fred, I think as I remember this conversation,
under East Wley on our property card is a subsection called Pine Plains, but it was never used to my knowledge through RRG as a separate economic location. They kept it as East Waitley, Westley,
Village Center. It wasn't used by RG, but it was it was used in in coming up with assessed values of parcels. >> Well, when you were with Cynthia, did you use fine place estates as a economic location? >> Yes. >> Okay.
>> It was identified on the property charts. >> So, >> I mean, you can see the change in value. If there if there is a um if there is a premium for that subdivision, how do you code
that under the I think it's an SB neighborhood? >> Um because there is a a premium to that rate over and above um the
EW and WWDs, >> right? So, how is that any different Fred than the houses up on Masterson Hill >> that are huge and >> twice way more than my house and they
have a great view. I mean, I feel like >> a view the viewax. So, there's there's an extension to this 10-year study that um and it it takes some time to implement, but I can actually look street by street, development by
development at the 10-year sales time adjusted to discern those patterns. Um, and if there's a street or an area that needs to be um
brought into its own neighborhood, economic neighborhood category, uh, that's something we can certainly have enough statist, >> but because people have big expensive houses and they want to downsize and
they're offering way more than what you think a house on your street would sell for because they want this single floor contemporary slash ranch house, but it doesn't feel like it's a true reflection
of the value of the house. when the owner itself says my house sold for way more than what I thought it was going to sell for kind of like what you were saying about your your family house sold is there a way that that gets figured
into what the true value is because when the bubble bursts this >> so so we can only respond to actual data in the form of sales Okay.
>> Um I've had any number of property owners across the state who said co effect. People were crazy. They were coming out from New York and Boston and paying crazy prices. Well, >> unfortunately they that's the market. >> They established the market for
>> Thank you. >> What's your question? >> What? >> What's your address? >> My address >> for Grao? >> No. For Francis >> six. plans. >> Yeah. Before you say something, before you say something, red, there are 40
homes and time plans estates. There are 570 residents in town. You're talking less than a percent. >> East compared to East Wley. >> Oh, compared to East >> Eastley, it's like over 200. >> Well, I don't know the number, but >> yeah, >> if you're talking 200 now, you're
looking at a bigger percentage. How do you you know that number? and I looked at kind of a little bit. It's everything >> from east of State Road. State Road and east is what these way. >> Which leads me to the question, you're
only looking at 200. >> All of them. >> There's not enough stats there to make the the argument you're trying to make. >> Well, no, there isn't enough stat to say they should all be the all the same. >> It's it's a it's a good one. I I don't
see it. I I'd like to Well, what's your answer to that? >> So, in the mass appraisal world, we're looking for patterns. Um, and one of the extensions and I was going to say with the classification
classification hearings scheduled, I think Dave said next week, we don't have time to go back to the drawing board uh and take some of these concerns tonight. However, with a 10-year study, I can come back
with a street by street analysis, um, a profile of the types of homes that exist on that street. from that information what they've sold for, >> what their assessments are relative to those sale prices. And from that, we can
say, okay, uh, on such and such street over the 10-year period, we had 15 sales and they're all consistently undervalued, >> right? >> That would come uh, in my mind, that would land as a pattern that needs to be
investigated. Okay. So, so why is that? Okay, >> these are unique homes. They're in a unique part of town. We need to break these out into their own. >> Even if there's only 40, is that enough to break out and >> well, that's one of the questions you
have to ask. >> Is that enough to determine an economic location? Because on the in the certification year when do comes in, >> they say you have uh four neighborhoods. You've got to have sufficient sales to support
your rates for those four neighborhoods. I I hear what you're saying and I think that would be a good analysis and I recollect that David Metzel said that that RG could do that kind of analysis
because I brought up this question last year when we were we were at looking at the values and stuff and he kind of agreed yeah we could do that analysis because >> uh >> that was last February March when we talked to him. So >> well
what my politics year so >> wasn't part of those discussions I don't know when your last meeting was but I got a call probably a week or two ago from David uh can you do one of your 10ear studies for weight >> yeah and I thought this study what you
did here is good for values but but I guess my major concern was the land values why they increase so much and David kind of said okay we'll do the 10ear study or a study and show you that.
And that's what we've been waiting for. >> Well, and and to further I I guess go back to Jane's concern, you know, we have one one area West that has
>> higher val higher value higher value higher says values uh because of the view. the the land the land uh is is on a on a ridge and and they have a view. So we have a we assess a view tax to it because they paid more
for the the lot to begin with >> up 150. >> Yeah. So we we assess a view tax for that to to bring that value up on the land not the total house but just on the land value. >> And if those have been implemented we would not have removed those. No, no,
they stay and it's not only that neighborhood, but in the center of town, the village center has some like there too as well that have a few tax. >> So, uh that's how we that's how we were dealing with the the uh
higher value higher so higher price sold houses, higher price sold lots. How do how did we compensate for them? They weren't going to be the 95,000 like everybody else was. That's when they went up to the 140 or 150 cuz that's what they paid. >> That's what they paid. Oh, why can't we
just say got six houses in Westley? They're on Matthews Road. Let's let's call that location. They're they're about a million dollars for that or more easy one. So that to your earlier point >> not enough is six enough is 40 enough. What?
>> This is one of the dilemmas of working in a small community. >> Yeah. Yeah. So when I look at the 10-year statistics by building style and over on the last page and it shows that contemporaries are at
79 >> and conventional.95. So is that saying that the contemporaries are the most out of line? >> Is that what it's not?
>> Yeah. So, it's suggesting we had no sales in the two-year period, 15 over the 10-year period. This is suggesting that the contemporaries are a bit undervalued relative to based on >> in fact when I change the rates, I'm
giving contemporaries a small lift. I I don't try to remedy the whole statistical. >> And so, anything that's under 95 would get somewhat of a lift. Is that am I understanding that right or no?
>> Um so generally all rates are going up about 8%. that that that I figured. Yeah. >> And that to get us to 95 then >> because of pass >> I may back off that percentage. Uh in in
the case of properties like uh if we look at conventionals um both in the two years and in the uh and in the >> right they were both >> 10 year
>> they were 95. >> So those those building rates are not going to go up that 8%. but a little bit less. >> And when you think about it, you say, "Well, you know, uh, we're a little contemporaries are a little undervalued." I don't know about you
guys, I'm paying 11,200 a year in taxes on my contemporary. That doesn't sound undervalued to me. Not at all. >> What's your square footage? >> 2,200. I pay more per square foot than anybody else. And that mean $4.15 a square. Some
people are down to $137 a square. I didn't complain about it because that's about what I had to do it. But I looked up the numbers. I said, "Okay, I got about this much into it." And they're below what I got into it. And there it is. But that number for 2200 squares does not feel undervalued.
That's all I'm saying. >> So I'm going to leave it at that. >> What if you if you calculated a square footage cost for each of these? Would that >> I did do that actually. if you did a square footage
>> cost for each one for these two the two year and a 10 year study to see >> so so what what I'm going to recommend is that we have a project moving forward with the homework that I've done >> yes >> let's let's stay >> to build out uh to your point Fred u
some additional statistics that look street by street >> yeah okay >> right >> you know there's a >> there's a method to his madness >> you have some streets where the houses just vary from property to property. The older streets, those are a bit of a
challenge. But off of those, you have developments that are where the homes are pretty much in the same um maybe built in the same era or uh of the same general quality or size.
We'll be able to look at those statistics and start looking at after some >> discussion about what what we need to do to introduce neighborhood changes that are going to >> Yeah, I think that would that would be
great. Yeah, because you'd have the 40 that were all built within it 10 year period. you could more more newer so more characteristic more more typical of new houses in of the 40 dealers in town are scattered the
new ones are scattered here and there so you can't say on one street you have enough new ones built >> I would I would agree with statistics to back up what you're trying to say >> but any statistics that back up what you're trying to do >> I'm a statistician by training and
education I've learned over the years that there's nothing like on the street level common sense and knowledge that has to be married to the statistics. I would never want to introduce any sort of a even radical change without
>> can be banished about and and understood to let common sense have its day as well. And and and my last point is the last sales fine frames the the the lots are now selling for 160 150 somewhere. There's only one one or two lots left.
>> I'd be curious if your value for your lot to stay the same, but the lots and pine lines that are going to get that >> I don't know. >> That would make sense, wouldn't it? >> I got a Well, that possibly, but I have a question. Yeah, >> you were saying that that PP code had
always an effect on the properties. >> Yeah. >> Not not as far back as 2020. I just went >> Well, it shows a PP, but there's no factor for it. >> It just designates where in West Wakefield is East Wait.
>> Okay. But but then on a property card you you show uh a land values of like 116 or 115 for pine planes for the P for for some houses and other ones you show 95,000
>> on pine plans. >> Not in pine planes. >> Not in pine planes. And this past year they were all 115 116 115. They're all 116. So you had to do something to change all
the property cards to make them all the same land value, right? >> Well, you fac whatever factor on the land on the whole >> whatever land was didn't go by neighborhood. >> But that PP doesn't affect them. That's all I'm saying. Yeah. >> But you didn't change the pine planes once because they were already at 116.
It was the other two urgent change. Maybe we check and see. >> No, we I'd like to if I could get back to your presentation. >> Yeah. I think we're David I think we're pretty well >> all right >> there. I so
>> and then then we can discuss more. >> Yeah. Okay. >> So to my last point, all of this culminates in decisions I have to make around basically three sets of tables
that drive our assessment system. land table, our building base rate table and the table for miscellaneous structures that be out buildings and pools and that got
uh those have generally been those rates have been um increased by about 8% all that resulting in roughly an 8% uh increase on average uh to the uh single
family homeowner across the board. 80% increase. >> Yeah. I mean, it's gonna there's going to be some variance there depending on assess assessed values will go up about 8% >> on average. >> On average, >> not not your taxes. >> No, no, assessed value. So with that
then let me say that um there are certain categories of property and you alluded to them um where um I did move the rates up a little bit more
to and respond to um to to these statistics. um uh contemporaries for example um those uh those are going to go up a few percentage points more than the average.
So um with that then um >> you'll see the LA4 this is the tabulation of values by class. Um, I think David and I had a change or two
that's going to slightly modify these numbers. Um, and uh, but if I take you to the very last page, >> but I leave that page. Where the the 103's and 109? I mean, they grouped under miscellaneous.
>> Are you on the LA4? Correct. >> The LA4. >> LA4. Um, >> the 103s and 109. The 103s come under miscellaneous res. >> Same with the 109's. >> Yes. >> Was on your other on your other page. Well,
>> this is what this is a print out straight out of Patriot. >> Sure. Yeah. Okay. That's where you can Okay. >> Yeah. Um and then the last page uh is what we
call the LA15. This is a do report. Um and it shows uh principally here on this last page you'll see column 101. >> Yeah. >> Uh 569 properties
um we're coming in at a 0.95 assessment level. That's right where we want to be. The miscellaneous 103s 109's at 98. >> Okay. Um uh and then we had one sale of an
industrial property that's coming in at 0.98. >> Well, where's the 0.95? Am I missing it? >> First columns. >> First column. Gotcha. Um 569 vols. Am I missing the 0.95
>> in the What am I missing? right there. >> Port line. >> Oh god, I need glasses. Oh no, >> I got to upgrade my glasses. I'm sorry. >> So out of the 569 in the 2-year time
period, we're having because of sample size, we have to report 2023 and 2024. >> We have um 13 sales. Uh >> yeah. And that sample represents 2.28%
of all single families. >> And um of those 13 sales, our median assessment level was coming in at 0.95 or 95%. >> Which is what we are. >> Yes.
>> Up from 0.88% 88 8% where there's going to be therefore there's going to be new >> well not not in revenues taxes because as you know we raise values 8%
um if the budget holds the same tax rate would go down 8% and everybody would be roughly uh all day long You're an important person. >> No, it's spam. >> Spam. No, I I I follow you for the most
part. >> I do follow how it is because if what he said, if I heard him right, if values go up, tax rate goes down. That's an odd >> if the budget holds, >> if the budget holds, if the budget goes up, >> then then that doesn't work. So,
>> okay. um >> budget goes up say 3% >> um 2 and a half% or whatever >> um you can expect the average tax bill to go up by uh something in that >> because the the I think we're at like
$1369 >> if that could go down if the budget stays the same but if the budget goes up then that might become $14 in a quarter >> and At an 8% increase, I can almost guarantee that the rate's going to go
down. Even if budget goes low. >> Even if the budget goes up. >> As long as you don't override. >> I'm sorry. >> As long as there's no override, it was pass. >> Yeah. >> That's just so interesting how we got to 0.95.
That was on past sales. So the bottom line is past sales have increased and by default assessed values will have to increase and by default more than likely but not always people
will pay more taxes. >> Well, people will pay more taxes no matter how >> that's the way of the world. I get it. But even if the the rate comes down, what rate do I want? What's that called? the tax rate comes down from 13.79 to 13.0,
it may cushion the increase that people have to accept with the overall prices going up. Yes. No. It may >> well great change
>> is if if the tax rate comes down because values have gone up then instead of paying for easy figuring $14 for the tax rate it drops to 13. Well part of that increase will be um hello
>> is there any assessor here? >> All of us are here. >> Well this lady said that she received a receipt. Come on. >> Yeah. She received receive from 4:30. Excuse me. Oh, it says your request open till 4:30.
>> Oh, gotcha. Gotcha. Gotcha. David, can you handle that? >> Yeah. Thursday. >> Yeah. It says it right on here. >> Today's Wednesday. No. What is today? Thursday. >> Wednesday. >> What's Today's Wednesday? >> You know, I have the same >> Monday to Tuesday.
>> I'm trying to make this too simple. So the question if the tax rate were to go down values >> values go up tax rate goes down if you spend more money >> you know tax >> might not be as severe it might not be an 80% increase
>> it's not going to be there >> you did a really nice job explaining this >> yes this is this is >> oh thank you >> this is good stuff >> um let me point you to another resource too um it's not a Hollywood production by any stretch, but
uh I have on our RG website a um series of six videos. Uh to get through all six would take about an hour and a half. I don't know if you have interest, but I put this out here
for taxpayers that had a question, how's my valuation derived? and it goes uh through a fairly uh um >> hopefully not too intense. >> So that's how it's titled how tax values derive.
>> Yeah. If you go to the www rrrgsystems.com website, you'll see uh something that the web master called uh assessors 101. Uh if you click on that, it's not the assessors 101 that deal off authors, but
um there's a six-part series there. Um roughly about uh 15 to 20 minutes each segment where I >> uh lay out I I mentioned this for the public as well because anybody in the public that wants to better understand
the process uh I laid at >> that's very valuable. That would be something that might be good to have the town of Wley put on >> exactly where a link that takes people right there. There you go. Very good. >> Because I think that's a common question
of a lot of people. >> They may not question the bottom line, but how do you get to the bottom line? >> It's not a simple formula. That's for sure. What I'll find in all frankness is that there are um folks who
after the first video say whoa this is my head hurts. I've tried to knock this down to a simple process with lots of illustrations but for some folks it's just not their their
bailey weight. for those that are in intent on really understanding at a at a fundamental level what we do as assessors and especially in this valuation process. Um it can be really helpful. >> Thank you. >> Oh, I like it. I'm with you, James. Put it on the website.
>> Yeah, where that was on there. I didn't take the time to >> Well, it was on the website. >> Yeah, somewhere. >> It's on the RG or the weight leaf. >> RG. Yeah. Yeah. So, no, that's >> just a simple link that automatically to that. Actually, I wanted to compliment you guys on our website because it looks so much more
informative, at least since I've been here. >> So, if have you done the uh comparison on LA4 comparison report? This is just proposed to LA4. >> Oh, yes. >> This is what you're proposing. Have you
looked at last year to see the changes? >> There you go. half you should receive Fred. >> Thank you Fred. >> LA for comparison. Let's take it from the top. 101 single families
uh going up uh 7.3%. Uh no condos uh miscellaneous 103 109s. Uh those are going up a little under 4%. >> Okay. >> Uh two families right at that uh 7.9
um 305. We have to be careful here because uh when I asked David about this, there was a a property that was completely relisted. Um >> that one on remember the one you talked to me about Fred the three family on
Saturday. Yeah. Yeah. >> Iron go out and redid it and that's caused that to change. >> They want like a big number for that. >> 8.95 I think. >> Yeah. >> But the measurements are totally screwed up. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Yeah. I know the one you're talking about. I spoke to the agent.
>> Okay. And then in the apartment class 111 um two fewer properties. Uh I don't know if that's due to the reclassification. There's no difference. >> Wait a second. Oh, wait a second. Apartments. Am I reading the wrong?
>> Yeah. >> Yeah. Still two. >> That was that was the school where we getting reboot models. The apartment on the end of the street here. >> Oh, is that the school? Yeah, >> that's a school. Okay.
>> Yeah, makes sense. >> They're not they're not completely. >> So, vacant land going up about 6.4%. >> Yep. Right, >> that makes sense. Um, no open space commercial
um those are going up uh 9.2% still kind of in that 8% range. >> Um there's scant evidence uh in the way of sales and and have
nothing. Um but um >> I I guess I would have I would have expected the commercial or I don't know industrial what Norse farms is that commercial >> yeah but that's that's falling under the
we're going to get into agriculture where that one falls under right I picked million dollar value >> it's going to get picked up >> you're going to see a huge one gets far enough and they have the the chapter land values to change it around a bit and I'll explain then what's happened at point.
>> Yeah. So if we go go right there uh 61 61 and 61B David >> Yeah. We uh last year if you remember we had a lot of problems with the open space. >> Yeah. >> Which so what we did was we changed the
open space into the um uh chapter land and that's what's causing the swing and the higher value in the chapter land. Plus on 40 river road uh North Farms >> I picked up nearly $2 million of growth. >> Okay. >> Okay. So then that's falling there as
well. >> Okay. >> And the uh the other new growth major one would have been on the >> spaces. >> Yes. >> Uh storage facility on State Road. Yes. Yeah.
Okay. Okay. And so um we've got um the mixed use 012 through 043 in four different categories. Um but this is kind of wrapped up in
what you were just explaining. >> Let's just basically a shift in in values. >> The do was aware of this. We talked about it last year. You have a big comment. >> Yeah. They don't like surprises.
>> Okay. Um and then personal property. Uh no involved with personal property. >> I think we are here. >> We stopped counting. >> Would that be Jenny that worked on that?
That was Oh, Karen. Okay. So, we >> Well, there was quite a bit of I forget it was for So, any questions about the comparisons?
>> Um, just this would exclude permits and improvements. >> No, this includes per includes permits and Okay. And I'm assuming you get a report from the permit department as to who did what. >> Say that again.
>> You get a you get some sort of notification from the permit department when told >> we want the Franklin County res. Okay. >> To get it to our service. >> Okay. That's good. So that's interesting. I could go to per
I've seen a lot of properties up my way with some improvements. garage, second story, stuff like that. So, I could check that address off of >> Yeah. As long as it's took a permit. >> Wondering if they pulled a permit. Yes, exactly. >> Well, that that points to a real
problem. >> Yeah. We don't have to go there. Even in exploring um certain sales, you go to MLS or even Zillow or and you see a home go into the system, no record of a permit, but certainly it's been
completely >> redone and I I'm with you. We could talk permits all day and say it needs to be done. >> It's one of our biggest challenges is uh dealing and addressing >> improvements improvements that are made
without benefit of the building permit. And that's cheating the system. >> Yeah. So, what's interesting, I learned recently in in Vermont, u as part of the sale, you have to um
close all >> the the uh I think it's the I hope I'm not wrong here, but I think the fire chief goes in and uh evaluates the home, make sure there's smoke detectors and fire detectors, but will also take note
of improvements have been made and whether or not >> they've been >> it's been under they do that. We don't do that here. I'm positive. >> No, we gain we when we were getting ready to sell our house, we used the same real estate agent that we had built it with. >> Yeah. >> And we had finished the room in the
basement. The contractor did. And it happened really quickly in the winter. He had couple of downings and we hadn't pulled a permit and we didn't realize it. We we thought he had. So the real estate agent went back and worked for the town because he said when you finally put your house on the market,
you want this all taken care of. So he helped us. We had done something we didn't realize that we had done it. So I don't know if that's typical here the real estate agents >> would because he was with us when we built the house. So he he knew the house pretty intimately.
>> Um but we were glad that he pointed that out. So then when we did put it on the market like three months later, everything was >> to to my understanding, not to my understanding, I can tell you for for sure, >> Florida, if you pulled a permit, didn't close it, you weren't closing your
house. That permit had to be closed. So we were go back 20 years to a business that put up shutters who want to bankrupt and trying to convince that guy to run all over town, do all this work for $200 so we could sell this property. >> Yeah. You can bet we reached into our
pocket, but still without closing a permit in Florida, you were not going to close. If there was an open permit there, so you not only do you have to open, it had to be officially closed. That's interesting. >> Yeah. I don't know who closes them up here. Probably the whoever
>> the builders have to go in and close. >> Okay. Okay. >> That doesn't always happen. No, they tend to on major um new homes and additions, but decks and 101 other improvements, they don't typically.
>> I would like to thank RRG for providing this regional um I'm sorry, this calendar of events. I know we had asked for it and Derek put it in our box, but I find this very helpful so that I can sit down and go,
okay, we're in November. what's done, what's not done, what has to be done, and we can look at October and say, has all that been done? >> Well, if we're talking about that, >> that leads us to our next thing. >> Yes.
>> Uh, we have completed the LA3, 154, and 13. >> Okay. >> All in the gateway. >> Yeah, >> we need at least one signature on all of them. And we need two signatures on the LA4. >> So, preferably three. >> Well, preferably three on all of them. So, you've already done them.
>> There's they're set up and they're ready to go. I would ask you to go and put them up there, but do not submit them. Save them, but do not submit until I see what the deal. >> So, we can go on to the website and electronically. Yes. >> But don't submit it. >> Do not submit. >> Sign and then save because if you don't
click save, it may not save. >> Sign right here without >> sign. Do you all have your gateway? Uh, >> I do. I haven't finished the 101 course. I think I have three or four more sections. I've done the classification
and one one beyond that just three. >> I'm not sure if I can >> Jane. I don't believe you can. Right. >> Yeah. >> I think >> they only came on in April. >> So, >> well, >> congratulations. Glad to have you. >> Thank you. What we've done in the past to sign I don't know if I have my the
gateway account to get on is we sat with the assistant assessor and they had the screen up and okay we looked at it and she put in sign. >> I wouldn't mind doing that. >> So when you get your signatures >> I need your give to do that folks. >> Well doesn't Derek have that?
>> I have no idea. >> I will give you my password and then you can sign from Debbie. >> All right. I'll ask Derek. I'll contact Derek. I'll contact you all tomorrow. Yes. >> Before we finish, I have some more questions on >> the sales here. The last four the
comparison. So, so the the the key thing I take away from here is residential is going up like 7.4% total residential and then you got your your commercial.4
and 13 the bottom right. Right. >> What what was just good what was the residential last year? 8% something. increase again. I don't know how much >> um I don't either. Uh it could well have been seems like it was >> I don't think
>> minimal >> commercial went industrial went up that is great last year as compared here itself. Okay. So this kind of please me if our select board is looking at at the
percent increase commercial and industrial increase so much that they should retain more. Well, they're gonna say that isn't anymore because the assess value is up, but the the rate is not changed. >> So, I don't know what the sense is of
this board in the past or even rate. >> Thank you. >> But because I I think um >> sorry, go ahead. that when they look at the numbers, it's it would take a significant
uh bump in commercial uh the commercial tax rate to yield a a minuscule >> Yeah. >> uh reduction on the residential, >> right? >> We've told we've told >> told that every year every year >> they're saying the higher commercial
properties can afford that. >> Say bye-bye to your commercials. >> I was just going to say those people can't steal from the rich. They don't need the money. They could pull up out of town in a heartbeat. >> No. >> Uh but but I mean what major industry do you have? >> Navy candle.
>> That's the big one. >> Okay. Normustial park. There's some here. >> Yeah. Bure gas. >> They have some good commercials. >> I would I did the numbers. I would say if those three, Berkshire Gas, Yankee Candle, and Basco
I I can't pronounce those three accumulate $300,000 in taxes. We get each year. 300,000. >> Yeah. >> So, if one of those three says, "You know what? I'm a billionaire 15 times over at Yankee Candle. I don't need this." >> I don't care if it's a $2 increase. And besides, I'll go get an attorney and
I'll keep you guys locked in court for 22 years. >> Okay. I'm just talking and that's a that's an upand cominging subject. So, >> we were gang before my time. >> Yeah. >> And it was a big issue. So, just
>> it was Yeah. They're not afraid of us. >> They're not afraid of it. No, they're not. That's what I'm saying. Plus, they they employ people in town. >> Look at what they're doing in here. >> Well, they're closing that one. >> You
don't want a split, right? Right. You want >> Okay. >> So, the data doesn't show that. >> Yeah. I like a split rate to reduce my personal my property, my residential property. Sure, we all would, but >> at the expense of commercial >> done for the benefit of the town, I
guess. So, >> well, it's it's if we're here to be equitable in our assessed assessments, then wouldn't it be unequitable to increase >> decrease taxes on residential at the
expense of commercial? Isn't that by definition on that? Very sweet. I talked to David earlier. He said that split rates start to become important and or considered when you have like a 6040 split 60% res.
>> Yeah. >> Burlington Burlington Mall historically was like 35 to 40%. >> What are we 80? So >> let's let's another subject. >> Let's not get into that. >> No dive into that. Let's keep going. >> We may be looking later on here to see
what we're saying. I need to hit the road. I thought >> it's been a pleasure and >> yeah I >> Okay. So >> very perfection preventive. >> You understand what we're looking at for
the land sales. I guess you know uh but >> yeah like I said the name of the game is to >> that's what you really march down the path towards annual improvement. >> Yeah. Okay. Yeah. and just somehow support whatever decisions are made
statistically. >> Well, this has been our big dilemma in the past. It's why I came up with a 10-year study because small what do you what do you begin with seven sales? It's not credible. >> It just doesn't tell you anything.
>> It's not credible unless those seven sales unless the entire town of Wakeley's three-bedroom, two bath homes with a pool had seven sales. Right now, it's credible. >> But it's not. >> Okay. Uh continue with the agenda up other items. >> So we're good with Arrol.
>> Yes. Any other items you talk about? >> Pleasure. Okay. What do we have now? >> Any other items and old business? >> Oh, yes. There is an item I'd like to bring up real quick. Um we have been tasked with trying to figure out if the
work for tax would work. >> Yeah. >> And u Derek says what? He wasn't sure. He says, "We just saying yay or nay." And I talked to Peter says, "No, you're not saying yay or nay. You're trying to figure out how many people this would affect."
>> And what's the dollar figure you would pay them? Probably minimum wage or more. >> Uh, and how long could they work for? They're asking us for that in Peter says this board select board needs that data. They don't just want you to say, "Yeah, good idea." They want us to go deeper.
according to Peter. >> And now that's from Peter. But what is uh Derek found out? We asked Derek to give us more information. >> Peter says he's explained this to Derek twice and he's not quite getting it. So can uh either way, we can't just go back
and say, "Yeah, it's a good idea." >> We have to go back with more data. >> But but they need this by what? By annual town meeting. It has to come up to town vote. Oh, >> I think >> I believe so. Yeah. >> To do that. >> We have to do it soon. Well, they want a special town meeting is like two weeks
or something. We have two weeks. We're not prepared for next week. >> No. Well, basically we they know our RG knows the amount of people who are interested in this program. >> Our RG knows how many people are. >> Yes. >> At least according to Derek last week,
he says that I know how many are five or six. But there are people interested. The question is if they're interested would we approve it, set a rate and they would do white collar work and for how long would they work? I mean how how
the select board wants to know what is the impact to the average taxpayer if we approved parameters this program. It sounds like we have to set it up. >> You said Derek knows how many or they
>> he didn't mention. Yeah, he mentioned he has five or six. Oh, okay. >> I don't know if that came through an application >> or how it So, so bottom line is we're out of time on that. >> Yeah, >> they're looking for us for how to proceed. >> Well, it won't happen in by next week.
So, we've got until town meeting, I guess. No town meeting till next April. Uh >> well, I didn't know it was that far away. >> I I'm not sure if it if it has to go to town meeting to approve that or not. >> Well, let's get an answer from RG. I can just ask Ask Peter if he has to go to
town meeting. >> Okay, I'll do it. >> And how do we find that information, Mike? That that they're asking. >> Pardon me. >> How do we find out those people who are >> Well, you you said I think that Derek said that our RG knows the people, but
how do we find out? I think you said something about the number of hours and the and the salary per hour. >> I I I hear I have some comments and stuff. Let's let's uh let's adjourn the meeting. We can talk some more about this. I don't want to bring this up
right now. >> Very good. >> Okay. Uh anything anything else? >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Our next meeting is going to be November 20th >> in 3 o'clock. At >> 3:00. Okay. Motion to adjurnn. Uh
>> agreed. All those in favor? Bye.