VALA - Vermont Assessors & Listers Association

March 04, 2009 Minutes Addendum

Waterbury Municipal Office

Waterbury, Vermont  05676

51 South Main Street   PO Box 9

(802)244-7033    (802)244-5858

FAX  (802)244-1014

                                                                                                                                            March 11, 2009 

Mr. William E. Johnson, Director

Property Valuation & Review

Vermont Tax Department

133 State Street

Montpelier, Vt.  05633-1401 

Dear Mr. Johnson, 

At the March 4, 2009 VALA Director’s Meeting, I brought up the issue of PV&R’s policy for grand list corrections in a down turning economy.  The issue being:  if a town makes a correction in its grand list (say a town wide lowering of the land schedule or the local cost multiplier to reflect the down turn in market value), will PV&R consider it as a reappraisal and change the list values in its equalization study for the year in which it is done or for all three years? 

This issue pertains to towns which have just done a reappraisal such as Waterbury where its recent reappraisal was based on sales of 2006 and 2007, but sales in 2008 show a slippage in this value base.  To correct this slippage for the 2009 grand list, I could change the local multiplier from 1.3 to 1.25 or lower the site value from $100,000 to $90,000.  Such a change would correct the 2008 sales to 100% of FMV and not 104% as the sales are showing. 

If PV&R has a policy to recognize this change as a reappraisal and changes all the list values in the 3 year equalization study (2006, 2007, & 2008 sales), the town would be penalized by an unrealistic lowering of its CLA which would adversely impact the town’s tax rate for 2010.  If PV&R recognizes this change as a correction and only changes the list values for the 2009 year (2008 sales) of the study, the study does not penalize the town but reflects accurately the downturn in the market for the time frame in which the change occurred. 

This argument goes to the State of Vermont Valuation Appeals Board’s decision in which it decided that each year of the PV&R equalization study is a different time frame due to the lack of a time adjustment used in your studies.  For corrections in a recent reappraisal to a different time frame, only the list values for that time frame of the study should be changed. 

Both Mark and Michelle attended this meeting and heard the issue as presented by me and as discussed by other Listers & Assessors.  Mark indicated that PV&R would present PV&R’s policy on this issue at the April VALA meeting.  Your policy decision is very important to Waterbury as it will determine whether any changes are made to the indicated downturn in market value for the 2009 grand list. 

Sincerely,

Thomas S. Vickery

Appraiser for the Board of Listers

51 South Main Street

Waterbury, Vt.  05676