Richmond assessor outlines mass-appraisal rules, flags potentially undervalued vacant lot

Richard McKeith, Richmond city assessor, told the City Council during a presentation that state law requires annual reassessments at 100% of market value and described the three standard appraisal approaches used in mass appraisal work.

McKeith said the assessor’s office values roughly 75,000 parcels in Richmond and follows industry standards set by the International Association of Assessing Officers (IAAO). He also identified a specific vacant parcel—referenced in the meeting as 2001 Findlay Avenue (the transcript also contains alternate references to the same parcel as “2001 Bridal” and variations of “Fendell”)—that is currently assessed at $80,000 and which councilmembers said appears to be worth substantially more.

The assessment briefing and ensuing council questions mattered because the parcel is included in a biannual surplus-property list the city is considering for disposition. If assessments are too low, councilmembers said, the city could undervalue surplus property when considering sales or transfers that could affect affordable-housing opportunities and tax equity.

McKeith explained the legal and technical framework his office follows. “Section 58.1 dash 3,201 states that all real estate, except that which is exempted by law, shall have an annual taxation as prescribed by law,” he said. He added that Richmond is designated a class 1 city and therefore has annual reassessments: “I don't get to say that it's not gonna be done at 100% of market value. I have to do them at 100% of market value. That's nothing that I can subjectively decide to do. That's state law.”

McKeith summarized the three principal mass-appraisal approaches the office uses: the sales-comparison approach (commonly used for single-family residential parcels), the cost approach (estimating replacement cost new less depreciation), and the income approach (used for income-producing properties such as apartments and offices). He said which approach is used depends on property type, highest-and-best-use, zoning and location.

On the parcel discussed in the meeting, McKeith said the lot “contains about 21,436 square feet” and is “currently assessed for $80,000.” He said his staff has found a demolition permit from about 2007 and noted that some third-party web sites may still list older building data for the site. McKeith said the office will reexamine the parcel and related factors such as floodplain mapping and GIS data ahead of the next assessment cycle: “But there'll be more to come possibly on this by the time we get done, you know, looking at all of the factors that are involved.”

Councilmember Gibson pressed the point that statutory language and external valuation tools can yield differing results. Gibson noted that the word “shall” in the statute has been the subject of legal debate and said the council should consider how that plays into policy choices. Gibson also compared the assessed value to neighboring lots and public web listings, saying the parcel “would be more accurately assessed anywhere from $320,000 to $400,000” under the comparisons she described.

Deputy Assessor Charles Evans was introduced during the presentation and was scheduled to provide an update on the office’s new assessment system. Interim Chief Administrative Officer Sabrina Joyhogg told the council she had not been notified of any problems caused by the continuance of related papers and would report back if a scheduling cancellation created issues for individual items.

Procedural note: Council staff indicated that resolution 2024 R-040 was continued because council rules forbid acting on a paper the same evening as its presentation. A clerk stated the council “will adhere to the rules” and the item was continued to a later date.

The assessor’s office and councilmembers said they expect additional follow-up from the assessor’s staff as the office completes its GIS and valuation checks ahead of the next assessment release in September, and councilmembers indicated they may revisit the valuations for other surplus properties as a group.