Town of Nottingham
Selectmen’s Meeting Minutes
May 27, 2008
6:30 PM Chair Netishen opened the meeting and asked all those present to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.
Members Present: Bill Netishen, Peter Bock, Mary Bonser, Town Administrator Charles Brown
Guests: Bill Krajeski, New England Municipal Consultants, Assessing Advisory Members Jeff Gurrier, John McSorley, Lisa Stevens, June Proko, Andrea Lewy, and Alternate Skip Seaverns
Others: Approximately 35 residents/tax payers and Traci Chauvey, Recording Secretary
ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS
Chair Netishen inquired about department reports. Mr. Brown informed the Board that much grinding had taken place during the past week on Deerfield Road and Kennard Road. Mr. Bock inquired about Mr. Bullock. Mr. Brown reported that he had returned to work this day.
The Board addressed the signature file. Chair Netishen noted that a new pole needed to be installed on Stevens Hill Road and that Mr. Brown would sign off on the pole license.
Motion: Bock, second Bonser to sign a timber tax levy for Map 4 Lot 4 in the amount of $294.47, for Map 69 Lot 4 in the amount of $953.09, for Map 40 Lot 5 in the amount of $895.50, and for Map 8 Lot 1-1 in the amount of $754.12.
Vote: All in favor. Motion passed 3-0.
Timber Tax Levies were signed.
Motion: Bonser, second Bock to sign two (2) warnings of doomage for Map 46 Lot 6 and Map 29 Lot 8 for tax year 2007.
Vote: All in favor. Motion passed 3-0.
Warnings were signed.
Mr. Bock informed Chair Netishen that in follow up to a discussion at the April 28 meeting, the Board of Selectmen needed to set up a workshop for a presentation by Mr. Terninko on communication. Mr. Terninko clarified that the presentation was on a decision making process and would take approximately 1½ hours. The Selectmen agreed to hold a workshop on Wednesday, June 18 at 8:15 AM. Mr. Terninko is to confirm that time. There was a request from the Board for Mr. Terninko to supply documentation prior to the meeting date. Mr. Terninko informed them that they could research Analytical Hierarchy Process on the internet and offered to supply a chapter from his book.
At 6:58 PM, Chair Netishen asked those present to assemble in the Multipurpose Room.
APPOINTMENTS
7:00 PM - Mr. Krajeski – New England Municipal Consultants
Chair Netishen reconvened the meeting at 7:07 PM in the Multipurpose Room and welcomed all who were in attendance for the analysis of the Pawtuckaway Lake valuations. He introduced the Recording
Secretary, the Board of Selectmen, the Town Administrator, and members of the Advisory Assessing Committee. To maintain order of the meeting, Chair Netishen announced that Mr. Krajeski would first present his analysis, then the AAC, as representatives of the community, and the Board of Selectmen would ask questions. He informed all that yelling and rudeness would not be tolerated. He further stated that the report would be placed on the website the following morning for those interested.
Chair Netishen acknowledged Mr. Jack Caldon and confirmed that the Board would not be taking public comment this evening. Mr. Caldon felt that the board needed to be more liberal since this was a public meeting open to the public. Chair Netishen thanked Mr. Caldon for his comments and informed all that that this was an informational meeting and time would be needed by all to review the information. He further stated that the board would need to obtain more input from the State and the new assessing firm, Commerford, Nieder and Perkins. Chair Netishen informed the public that the next regularly scheduled meetings for the Board of Selectmen were June 9 and 23, and that agendas would be posted. He informed all that the Selectmen were willing to hold as many meetings as it takes to resolve
questions and issues related to the revaluation. Chair Netishen acknowledged Ms. Lauren Keller. Ms. Keller asked if there would be a break for the public to address their concerns with the representatives from the AAC. Chair Netishen stated that he would consider that option and asked Mr. Krajeski to present his report. (See official file for complete report.)
Mr. Krajeski gave a brief history of his qualifications noting that he has been appraising for 30 years and primarily practices in Vermont at this time. He stated that he had been contracted by the Nottingham Board of Selectmen to 1) look at statistical analysis of sales prices, those used and not used by Avitar, and 2) review random samples to see if the model used was equally and fairly applied. He informed all that the contact had called for all sales to be reviewed and a random selection of 20% of non-sale property. He found that the random samples had to be reviewed in blocks, not individually, in order to determine if standards were applied equally and fairly. Mr. Krajeski then gave his presentation of his report. Due to the technical language and volume of information, the presentation
is not documented here. Please see the official report.
Mr. Krajeski informed all that even though he did not agree with Avitar’s method of adjustments and some inconsistencies in applying them, he agreed with the overall revaluation and felt it was warranted. He made the following recommendations for moving forward:
· Town must be careful when making adjustments
· Town should keep spreadsheet of all adjustments
· Town should use deeded right value instead of a percentage of waterfront property
· Waterfront vs. access for each lot should be verified
· Beach should be looked at as dead land
In closing, Mr. Krajeski thanked Ms. Seaverns for her time and assistance.
At 8:30 PM, Chair Netishen called a break. He reconvened the meeting at 8:45 PM and invited Mr. McSorley, Advisory Assessing Committee Chair to speak.
Mr. McSorley thanked Mr. Krajeski for the work he had put into the review, noting that he had a couple of questions.
Mr. McSorley asked Mr. Krajeski if he had looked at the adjustments before or after. Mr. Krajeski responded that he had looked at them after.
Mr. McSorley asked how the residual technique differs from straight land scale. Mr. Krajeski replied that residual makes assumptions and is subjective, but noted that in absence of land sales the residual technique must be used.
Mr. Gurrier stated that there were qualified sales in 2006 that were not used and inquired why. Mr. Krajeski replied that he did not know.
Mr. McSorley asked if there is a perfect CAMA systems (Computer Assisted Mass Appraisal). Mr. Krajeski responded that there is not. He further replied that Avitar’s system is very stable and solid, noting there is no need to be concerned over validity.
Mr. McSorley asked how many errors were due to data entry. Mr. Krajeski responded that it is hard to tell. He further responded that that is not the primary issue, data was outside the schedule.
Mr. McSorley asked if the best practice was to take lessons from previous years forward. Mr. Krajeski responded affirmatively, noting that sales should teach you how to apply adjustment.
Mr. McSorley, noting that the new assessing firm would be using the same software, asked for recommendations. Mr. Krajeski replied that frontage needs to come into play – square footage of a lot – there is a difference between 50 and 300 feet.
Mr. McSorley asked if too much work and too few employees was a factor. Mr. Krajeski replied that that situation happens all the time; people must get involved by checking their info and following up.
Mr. Gurrier asked Mr. Krajeski if he had looked at the abatement requests. Mr. Krajeski stated that he had not.
Ms. Lewy asked if the overall values are appropriate. Mr. Krajeski stated that they are and that the revaluation was warranted.
Mr. Gurrier raised the issue of the difference in the appraisal amounts submitted with abatement requests. Mr. Krajeski responded that an appraiser hired by an individual under the circumstances that are present would attempt to bring the appraisal in at the amount the customer was looking for. Mr. Gurrier stated that if the appraisals are reasonable and accurate, they should be used. Mr. Krajeski replied that some could possibly be used.
Chair Netishen thanked Mr. Krajeski for his presentation and efforts, the AAC for their time and efforts, and the public for their politeness. Ms. Bonser reported that the Board of Selectmen would meet with the new assessing firm to set a plan to move forward. Mr. Bock stated he had a broader view on the nature of the community and hoped that we are on the road to recovery. He stated that there needs to be clarity of information and clear directions moving forward.
At an inquiry from Nan Vigers, Chair Netishen stated that the abatements would be reviewed by the new assessing firm.
Chair Netishen advised the public to keep their eyes on the Board of Selectmen meeting agendas, which are posted on Thursdays, for further discussion. Ms. Lewy noted that the Assessors have until July 1 to address the abatements.
Motion: Bock, to adjourn the meeting.
Ms. Bonser asked to raise another issue and stated that she had read a new government study that shows there will be a shortage of water by 2025. She inquired if the Board of Selectmen would look at putting together a letter to the State to re-look at groundwater withdrawal. Mr. Bock stated that he is willing to look at a draft letter. Chair Netishen stated that he want to read the article.
Second: Bonser, to adjourn the meeting.
Vote: All in favor. Motion passed 3-0.
Having no further business,
Meeting adjourned at 9:20 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Traci Chauvey
Recording Secretary
Approved as written on June 25, 2008
| 
