Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Assessment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Assessment firm reports steady Haines market, warns HB 254 could limit assessment adjustments
Summary
Martin's appraisal team told Haines Borough officials that local sales and inspections largely held steady in 2024–25, outlined planned data cleanups and account splits, and said pending state House Bill 254 (as read at the meeting) — limiting annual assessment increases to 5% — could create inequities across areas with differing update cycles.
Martin Insan Schulis, the lead presenter from Martin's appraisal team, gave Haines Borough an assessment update on April 27, saying local market transactions are roughly the same as in recent years while other Alaska markets vary.
"My name is Martin Insan Schulis," he began, then walked the board through statewide and local trends, office data cleanup, field inspection status and planned valuation work. Martin said the office has finished most field inspections for the borough with about 15 properties remaining and that the assessor's office is working on deed, plat and GIS cleanups.
Why it matters: Martin said the borough will revalue land using a new land model this summer and will split some multi‑lot accounts so owners receive separate notices. "So now the same property owner is gonna receive 10 different assessment notices instead of 1 for 10 lots," he said, adding the change could add roughly 600 accounts; an additional roughly 1,000 nontaxable accounts may be added as the office updates records.
The presentation included schedule details: Martin said the next BOE exchange closes April 28 and that the first Board of Equalization hearing was scheduled for May 11. He also told the group the office received about 16–17 informal questions and three formal appeals so far, with one potentially going to the BOE.
Concern about state bill: Board member Jim Stanford asked whether House Bill 254 (referred to in the meeting as HB 254) would constrain the borough's ability to bring assessments to market value. Barb read the bill text aloud during the meeting: "The assessor may not increase the assessed value of a real property by more than 5% over the previous year's assessed value unless the increase is based on an improvement to the real property or information about the real property that the assessor did not have at the time of the previous assessment."
Martin warned that a strict 5% cap could produce inequities across areas on different inspection rotations: properties with recent documented sales would rise toward fair market value while properties not inspected for several years could be held artificially low, producing unevenness across the borough. "...this bill might create some inequalities across, across certain maybe, parts of the borough," he said during the discussion.
Other items discussed: The group also reviewed recurring problems with unrecorded or improperly recorded subdivisions and deeds; Martin explained these 'illegal subdivisions' (parcels created by meets‑and‑bounds without a recorded survey and approved plat) can create zoning, septic and access complications and require recording and survey work to correct the legal record.
Next steps: Martin confirmed appeal materials had been exchanged with borough staff and told the board that the appeal packet should be published by the next day and available in printed form for the BOE panels. The board discussed asking Martins to include rotation/inspection dates when providing comparables for appeals so members can see how recently a comparable was inspected.
The informal session closed with thanks to Martin's staff and confirmation of the upcoming BOE process. The board moved to adjourn by consensus.
