Haines Borough BOE rejects proposal to require inspection dates for comparable properties in appeals

The Haines Borough Board of Equalization debated whether to recommend that the assembly require appellants who use comparable properties in appeals to provide the comparable properties’ last site‑visit dates and assessed values, but members voted down the recommendation.

The board — which began its meeting at 5 p.m. — considered a motion that would have asked the assembly to ensure that when appellant evidence relies on comparables, either the staff or the appellant provide the comparable properties’ last assessed values and the dates those properties were last assessed. Borough clerk Mike Denker read the proposal into the record and told the board staff could work with appellants to gather the information.

Supporters argued the dates would give the BOE context to judge comparisons. "We need to know the site inspection dates," said James Stanford, who moved the recommendation. Assessor Martin Zonskullis told the board that property cards include a field for last inspection and last valuation and that staff believe they have inspected "about 98, 99%" of properties in town, with only a handful of very remote lots possibly not inspected.

Opponents said the requirement risked creating inequity and exceeded the BOE’s adjudicatory role. "I’m not gonna support this motion because ... it sets up a potential for inequity to happen," said Brenda Josephson, who argued that differences in when neighbors were inspected should not become a basis to deny an owner an equal assessment. Other members cautioned that the BOE’s responsibility is to decide appeals based on evidence presented in the hearing, not to set evidentiary rules that could tilt the playing field.

The chair called the question and members voted; the clerk later summarized that the motion failed. The transcript records at least one vote of "aye" and multiple "nay" votes before the motion was defeated.

The debate touched on a statutory constraint cited by members: the state allows a borough of Haines’ size to operate on a six‑year rotation for routine inspections, a schedule some members said has not kept pace with recent rapid property‑value increases.

After the vote the board continued discussing the appeals process and possible next steps, including routing evidence‑requirement questions to the Property Tax Ad Hoc Committee for further review. The clerk said staff would work with the chair and with planning staff as needed to develop recommended language or to help appellants gather information.

Next steps: the BOE did not adopt a formal evidentiary rule and instead discussed referring questions about standards and procedures to the ad hoc committee and to future trainings for BOE members.