Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Revaluation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Accurate reviews 2024 revaluation process after hundreds of residents question property cards
Summary
Accurate, the contract assessor, told the Whitefish Bay Village Board that 636 residents contacted the assessor after the 2024 revaluation and about 38–39% of contacts led to adjustments; the board and Accurate discussed shortening outreach materials, posting comparables online, and possible expanded property walkthroughs to fix inaccurate condition ratings.
Whitefish Bay — The village held a detailed review of its 2024 property revaluation on Jan. 6, when contractor Accurate and village officials addressed widespread resident concerns about property record cards, condition ratings and the open-book process.
Accurate representatives described changes they plan to implement after the revaluation. The firm said it will shorten the mandatory informational video from roughly three minutes to about 30 seconds, offer clearer navigation paths for routine questions versus contested values, staff phone and email lines more aggressively during open book, and post the full list of comparable sales used for valuations on the company website for each municipality.
Village staff told trustees that 636 residents contacted the assessor following the revaluation. Accurate said roughly 38–39% of those contacts resulted in some kind of adjustment to assessed data or values, and that 55 cases went to the board of review; the board adjusted about 42 of those cases (about 76%). Village officials cautioned the board that those who appeal are self-selecting and that the figures therefore do not measure error rates across all 4,800 properties.
Trustees and Accurate staff focused on problems with condition ratings (referred to in the meeting as CDU: condition, desirability and utility). Accurate said some condition ratings in existing property record cards were overstated because prior assessors had not done recent walk-throughs; when residents came in for open book or provided photos, the assessor changed cards and reduced many ratings. Accurate recommended a mix of exterior and targeted interior inspections over multiple years to reduce systemic errors and better document condition changes.
Several trustees and members of the public said mailed notices and the unbranded envelopes used by Accurate caused confusion; many residents discarded assessment mailings as junk. Both Accurate and village staff said they will use village-branded envelopes going forward and consider sending notices a second time during heavy communication periods.
Public commenters said limited scheduling for board-of-review nights and late changes to the comparables shown at hearings fueled frustration. Accurate said it adjusted its practice mid-process to provide comparables in advance for hearings after board-of-review members raised the concern.
The village manager and trustees said they will continue to work with Accurate to refine outreach and to consider whether more frequent revaluations or targeted walkthroughs would reduce future spikes and appeals. No new contract was adopted at the meeting; Accurate said it will return with proposed operational adjustments and training for board-of-review members.
