Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Revaluation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents and real-estate agents press assessor after revaluation leaves some with big tax jumps
Summary
After the assessor explained a townwide effort to bring assessments toward 90% of market sale price, residents at the Finance Committee meeting reported large valuation increases — including one homeowner who said her assessed value rose by about $300,000 and her tax bill jumped to roughly $16,000 — and the assessor outlined appeal and hardship processes.
A contentious public comment period at the Finance Committee meeting focused on a recent citywide revaluation that left some homeowners with large property‑tax increases.
Assessor Larry told the committee the office’s goal this cycle is to move assessed values toward approximately 90% of market sale price by reviewing three years of sales and making interim adjustments where warranted. He said sales prices are the primary tool for mass appraisal and that listings and bank appraisals can inform adjustments.
Several residents said the new valuations produced inconsistent outcomes. Resident Melanie Fox, who identified herself as a 30‑year resident and a local business owner, said she recently finished construction on a home on Green Lake and that the assessment increased roughly $300,000. She said her tax bill rose to about $16,000 and that she lacks services (private road, no trash pickup) that would normally accompany waterfront properties. “Why do you think I can sell it for over a million dollars?” she asked the committee, adding she would follow up with the assessor for an individual review.
Real‑estate agent Rob McKinney urged the city to publish a clear, written explanation of valuation and taxation procedures. Other residents reported similar spikes — one resident said a tax bill doubled from about $17,000 to $33,000 after closing a purchase — and asked whether a mass revaluation or a targeted review was appropriate.
Larry explained appeals and remedies available to property owners: taxpayers have six months from the commitment date to appeal and may provide bank appraisals, sales data or other documentation for review. If a financial hardship exists (for example, a major illness or job loss), the council can consider a hardship abatement; staff said such requests require a substantial application and are reviewed in executive session before a public vote on the resulting action. Larry said he has historically made adjustments when supported by evidence and noted that most residential appeals have not been common in his 25 years in the office.
Council members acknowledged the public’s concern and said staff will publish explanatory materials and offer one‑on‑one meetings with the assessor to review specific cases. The meeting closed the discussion with a commitment to follow up individually and to consider whether a larger mass appraisal process is warranted if statistical evidence shows inequities across neighborhoods.
Next steps: residents who believe their assessments are incorrect are encouraged to meet with the assessor and, if needed, pursue formal appeal channels; the city will publish additional explanatory materials and consider further analysis of distributional effects from the revaluation.
