Residents and experts press board for transparency on appraisal methods and comparables

Multiple residents and a former state official at the Dec. 18 meeting pressed county leaders for greater transparency about how comparables and adjustments were chosen in the reassessment. Speakers asked whether sales from outside the immediate geography were used, whether bracketing and time limits on comparable sales were applied correctly, and whether automated tools such as street-view imagery or AI influenced valuations.

"That is going to destroy assessments," warned Harvey W. Mitchell, a retiree with technical experience who said automated methods (AI) and broad comps risk producing inflated values that price longtime residents out of the county. William Bracken, speaking from a technical standpoint, asked the board to publish the comp-selection rules, geographic limits and adjustment methods so residents can assess whether the reassessment followed accepted appraisal practice. County staff and the commissioner said they will assist residents in the appeals process and that some local assessors were used under the Pearson contract, but they emphasized the initial assessment process is complete and any case-specific corrections happen through appeals or Board of Equalization review.