Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Assessment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Owner of 209 Saskco Hill challenges town's $2.19M valuation, cites historic condition and noncomparable comps
Summary
At a hearing before the Board of Assessment Appeals, Vincent Lammana asked the board to cut his home's valuation from $2,189,100 to $1.3 million, arguing the assessor's exterior, comp-driven appraisal overlooks structural deterioration and noncomparable renovated sales.
Neil Frink, a member of the Board of Assessment Appeals, swore in homeowner Vincent Lammana and reviewed the town's valuation record for 209 Saskco Hill Road, which shows an assessed value based on an appraised $2,189,100.
Lammana told the board the 1809 historic home has deferred maintenance and structural issues that were not captured by the assessor's exterior-focused comparables. He said an earlier informal review by an assistant assessor had lowered the value to under $1 million after an on-site inspection, and that the new appraisal relied on nearby sales that included extensive renovations and a carriage-house remodel.
"I think what the gentleman that I had the informal hearing on decided to use this as the comp," Lammana said, arguing that the comparable at 85 Old Post Road is not like-for-like because it has a two-bedroom carriage house and documented recent renovations. He also cited a 65 Hilltop sale that he said was more similar and averaged in his comps to about $1.3 million.
Frink acknowledged both sides' materials and recorded that the board will consider the petition and the hearing record at a deliberation session. He told Lammana the board could grant a full or partial reduction and explained appeal and court-review rights.
The board concluded the hearing and said it would present Lammana's materials to a majority of members for deliberation; a decision will be mailed in the coming weeks.
Outcome/next steps: The board will review the submitted evidence at deliberations and issue a written decision; if granted a reduction, the owner cannot reappeal until the next revaluation period, and if denied the owner may pursue a court appeal.
