Fairfield appeals board hears owners contest town valuations; several appellants cite recent sales, appraisals and land limitations

The Fairfield Board of Assessment Appeals heard a full docket of residential valuation appeals on March 30, 2026, with owners and representatives presenting recent sales data, realtor price opinions and independent appraisals and the board deferring final decisions until group deliberations.

Daniel Fitzgerald, an attorney for Scott and Julianne Seymour, asked the board to reduce the assessment on 368 Rolling Hills Drive. Fitzgerald highlighted a January 6, 2026 sale of 409 Rolling Hills Road — directly across the street — as a timely comparable and said the property card overstates a finished attic. He also argued the Seymour lot has a "steeply sloped front yard" that limits buildability and should lead to a lower land value; the appeal seeks roughly a six-figure reduction from the assessor's $1,437,500 figure. The board said it would review the submitted comparisons and consider adjusting the land factor after a site review.

At Appeal 21, Jonathan Goldie represented himself and said the assessed value of $1,156,100 overstated his home's worth in its current condition. "I'm innocent. Yeah. I didn't do it," Goldie told the panel as he described a leaking roof and original 1986 finishes he cannot afford to repair. Board members asked Goldie to secure a realtor price opinion to document current marketability; the board said it will review any realtor email or documentation and may drive by the property before the panel deliberates.

Dearra Campbell appealed the town value for 541 Jud Street, saying the raised ranch is small (925 square feet), on a narrow lot and has not been upgraded since she bought it. "I'm a senior," Campbell told the board, arguing the house's size, narrow frontage and traffic exposure make it less valuable than neighboring rebuilds. Board members explained how the assessor's square-foot and lot-size calculations affect per‑square‑foot pricing and said they would look for close sold comps within the review window.

Janice Hamilton, appealing a Woodland Road valuation, similarly pressed the board to account for a narrow lot and limited buildability. The board reviewed neighborhood comparables and the way lot width and highest-and-best-use are treated in the assessor's model.

The owner of the Victoria Court property presented both a broker price opinion ($790,000) and an independent appraisal ($800,000) to contest a town appraisal of $965,106. The owner emphasized proximity to the Merit Parkway as an adverse location factor and said the modest 1,378‑square‑foot house on 2.1 acres suffers from noise and reduced buyer demand. "I respectfully request that the board adjusts the appraised value to align with the demonstrated market data in the range of 790," the owner told the panel. The chair noted the two independent pricing opinions and said the evidence will be reviewed by the full nine‑member board.

At the final scheduled hearing, Dennis Kochinsky asked the board to lower a $1,383,400 estimate for his Sherwood Drive property to roughly $1,275,000, providing four nearby sales and describing condition and lot limitations. Board members questioned specific adjustments and said they would assemble the materials for the group's deliberation.

No final determinations were taken at the meeting. Board members repeatedly told appellants that the panel will review submitted documents as a group and that members commonly make site visits or pull additional comps before voting. Appellants were advised to submit realtor opinions or appraisals by email so staff can attach them to the case files.

The board is scheduled to meet as a group to deliberate and vote on appeals at a later date; appellants were reminded of the option to pursue judicial review in state court if the board does not grant an appeal.

What to watch next: the board's written decisions after the group deliberation and any downward adjustments that rely primarily on realtor opinions or independent appraisals rather than the assessor's original valuation.