Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Assessments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge review of Avatar assessor contract after alleged inconsistent valuations
Summary
Residents told the Board of Selectmen they have found repeated, systemic errors in property assessments performed by contractor Avatar and asked the board to hold the company and its representative accountable; the board agreed to meet with Avatarrepresentative Chad to seek corrections and clarify oversight roles.
Sal Harrison and other residents asked the Town of Madison Board of Selectmen on April 28 to investigate systemic problems they say persist in property assessments performed by contractor Avatar.
At the meeting Harrison said the town has seen repeated discrepancies and inconsistent corrections after individual complaints: "We've had abatement fixes on some properties, but the root causes remain," he said. Another resident pointed to two adjacent garages that were assessed at markedly different values and said a first floor on a separate house was never taxed despite being visible from the road.
The residents described a pattern in which some errors were fixed after they were pointed out, while other similar errors went uncorrected. "We were told Avatar would do checks and balances, drive through the town and equalize values, but many of those items remain," one resident said. The resident reported an abatement in 2025 but said many inconsistencies persist since 2020.
Board members said they would arrange a meeting with Avatar's representative, Chad, during his next visit to town so the company can review the examples residents have submitted. "Let's get Chad here, go through the notes and try to narrow down the issues," the presiding selectman said. The board asked staff to set up a meeting on Thursday when Chad is expected in town and requested residents bring documented comparables and tax-card notes for discussion.
Board members acknowledged state oversight exists but framed the first step as a local review. One selectman summarized the town's role: the municipality signed the contract with Avatar and will first exercise local recourse before escalating to the Department of Revenue Administration (DRA) or the Board of Tax and Land Appeals (BTLA) if necessary.
The residents requested both corrective actions (fixing specific tax-card errors) and preventive measures (a review of Avatar's processes and contract compliance). The board agreed to invite Avatar to meet with staff and residents and to produce minutes of that meeting. The hearing concluded with a plan to reconvene after the review to determine what additional steps, if any, should be taken with state oversight agencies.
The board did not take a formal vote to terminate or amend the Avatar contract at the meeting; it instead committed to a meeting with Avatar and further review.
