Scarborough board adopts findings, votes 3–0 to deny consolidated 2012 revaluation appeal

The Scarborough Board of Assessment Review voted 3–0 on Dec. 17, 2013 to adopt a written set of findings and deny a consolidated appeal by 43 property owners challenging the town’s 2012 revaluation.

Board counsel presented a draft set of findings prepared at the board’s request and asked members to review the wording carefully during deliberations. “Before you is a draft set of findings of facts that I prepared at your request,” counsel said, asking the board to treat the draft as the starting point for the board’s findings.

The board’s adopted findings describe the consolidated appeal as covering 43 properties, 30 of which are in the Pine Point and Pillsbury Shores neighborhoods; 11 of those properties front directly on the ocean and the remainder are interior lots near the shoreline. The draft records that the last townwide revaluation had been in 2005 and that the 2012 revaluation reappraised waterfront properties in Higgins Beach, Pine Point and portions of Pillsbury Shores.

Counsel recounted testimony that the assessor’s office tracks roughly 300 sales and transfers each year and produces sales-price ratio studies both townwide and by neighborhood to keep assessment ratios close to market value. The draft also notes that Maine Revenue Services reviewed the town’s 2012 assessments and assigned a favorable quality rating (coefficient of dispersion), a statistical check the state uses to evaluate local assessments.

The board recorded that testimony from the assessor — including sales-data summaries and adjustments that excluded questionable sales — supported the increased values for waterfront properties. The draft likewise records that the board did not find the appellants’ expert, George Kakas, persuasive enough to rebut the assessor’s analysis because his testimony omitted certain relevant factors and comparable sales without full explanation.

On the key legal question, the board concluded the appellants did not meet the high burden of proof required to establish discriminatory assessments and that any errors in the assessment process were isolated and did not undermine overall equity. The board voted to accept the final block of findings that concluded the assessments were equitable and authorized Chairman Alan Peoples to sign the notice of decision.

After adopting the findings, a member moved to deny the consolidated appeals; the motion was seconded and the board voted three to zero to deny the appeals. The board directed counsel to finalize the document for printing and distribution to staff, and confirmed upcoming meeting dates in January.

The decision resolves the consolidated challenge but does not alter that appellants may have recourse available through any further procedures allowed under statute; counsel noted the board had extended the statutory decision deadline by agreement with the appellants to avoid a default denial and said the final stipulated date would be inserted into the written decision.

Next procedural steps: the chair was authorized to sign the notice of decision and counsel will provide finalized copies to staff for distribution. The board adjourned following the administrative items.