Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Assessments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Supervisors ask staff to study reassessment options, including a possible in‑house assessor
Summary
Following discussion about recent commercial sales and assessment accuracy, supervisors asked staff to research two‑year reassessment cycles, in‑house assessor staffing and costs compared with contracting. No decision was made; staff will return a cost and implementation report.
Supervisors discussed the county’s real estate assessment process after members noted recent commercial sales that appear to exceed assessed values. Committee members debated a two‑year reassessment cycle, the cost of retaining an in‑house assessor team versus contracting with a single outside firm, and backup staffing needs if the assessor position becomes vacant.
Staff advised that an in‑house assessor would require ordinance changes and possibly multiple staff to ensure continuity; the county attorney (S11) noted that creating an assessor's office would require an ordinance and a clear reassessment cycle (one or two years), and staff said a memo and cost estimate could be prepared. The board requested a staff report enumerating costs, timelines and alternatives and to compare that to the cost of contracted reassessment services.
No motion was taken; staff will prepare a detailed report, including potential budgeting implications, and return to the board for further direction.
