MINUTES OF MEETING
September 20, 2005
John Swindlehurst, II
Bryan Clark
Janice VandeBogart,
Secretary and Town Administrator
Meeting was called to order
at 7PM.
Appointments with taxpayers:
Joan Burnham, B3-02-04, and B3-02-02: Mrs. Burnham stated that she
and her husband owned a cottage on Town Farm Lane on a less than one acre piece
of land, B3-02-02. The appraisal from
Vision Appraisal showed one acre of land.
She showed survey that shows it to be about 1/8 of an acre. She acknowledged that this copy was not the
entire survey and did not show the surveyor’s signature. She would be glad to bring in the entire copy
for the town to change the tax map.
Note: The Dunbarton Tax Map showed one acre and Vision used the acres on
the tax map.
Regarding the farmhouse on
B3-02-04, Mrs. Burnham stated that she found numerous errors. She showed a survey of the house and parts of
the house that were torn out. Also they took off a lean-to, this was two or
more years ago. Didn’t know if VA had
picked them up or not. This will be
checked. VA put average on this house
and she felt it is below average. She
produced an appeal form, filled out, for the Board to consider.
Her third question was on
the second house on lot B3-02-04, being a newer home and her residence. She stated that it was noted that she was
being taxed for a view. She stated also
that the square footage is not correct, being higher than it should be. She said that she attended the hearings in
July and wrote a letter to Vision with her concerns.
Nancy Goldstein, D4-03-02: She presented her written
appeal form to the Board. She stated
that she did not do comparisons, only stated that she felt that her land was
incorrectly assessed. She stated that
her land is extremely wet, and when she purchased the property she could only
build in one spot because of the wet land.
She stated that it was swamp and it was the cheapest lot in that
subdivision because of the wet and sloped terrain. She also said that the house is not
done. She said that she went to the
hearings with VA and told them all this.
Karen and Scott Harrington,
E6-03-03: They wanted to know how the land was
assessed. Tim explained how Vision
arrived at the values, using a home site value of $73,200 and $4,500 for rear
acres, then applying factors to those numbers.
Mrs. Harrington inquired about the word “view” on her assessment,
stating that it appeared on the appraisal but after the hearings they agreed to
remove it. She also asked about the
current use assessment and how it was calculated. The entire lot is 17.06 acres with 1.14 acres
not in current use and 15.92 in Farm.
The Harringtons want to know how and when they could change their
current use category, explaining that part of their land was used as snowmobile
trails. John explained recreation and
current use and stated that they would have to re-apply by April 1, 2006. They were told to bring in a map to show the
areas and categories of current use and show the area that is used by the snow
mobile club.
Mrs. Harrington also stated
that the assessment on the house showed carpet on the first floor and hardwood
on the second. She had told them that
this was incorrect but it was not changed.
Should be carpet on the second floor and wood/fir on the first
floor. This will be checked.
Rodney Doucet, B4-04-01: Stated that he was disappointed
because he did not get word back from the board after his discussion with John
and Tim at the hearings in July. He
stated that he had told them that his assessment, he felt, was not accurate on
his land, saying that he has two lots, not one. They are B4-04-01 and
B4-04-01A, a total of 155.6 acres with lot 01A being restricted with a
conservation easement which was placed on the property by the previous
owner. It was noted that this condition
stays with the property. Mr. Doucet
stated that there is timber on the land but cannot be cut because of the
Conservation Easement. He is limited to
what can be done on this land. He also
noted that the town should have a copy of this easement. After discussion, it was noted by the Board
that the only benefit this part of the land would have would be to added to the
total acreage in the event of a subdivision of the entire lot, however, Mr. Doucet stated that this was not
in his future plans.
Mr. Doucet stated that the
conservation part of this land should be substantially lower than the
rest. He went on to say that he was not
talking dollars and cents, that it was the principle of the
whole thing. This land is all in current
use, at a rate of $125 per acre. It was
noted from the printout sheet of this property that a discount was given on the
one acre homesite and the easement was noted on the card. Tim asked Mr. Doucet if he felt he was paying
too much and he said yes. Mr. Doucet
stated that he felt it should be 20% of the equal value. He wanted the 52.6 acres in easement
separated out from the rest of the land and given it’s own value of $25.00 per
acre.
John noted that the board
had until March 1st to respond, however, the board will follow up on
this with VA.
Chuck Williamson, F2-03-01,
F2-03-04 and F2-03-08: Chuck stated that he wanted to start with the
Little house on lotF2-03-04. This house
started out at $148 per square foot and now is at $116. He produced some comparison with other homes
of similar size and condition in town.
These were classified as cottages.
His house was changed from a ranch to a bungalow by Vision at the
hearing. He felt that his house was no
different then the comparables in that his should also be classified as a
cottage. He was told that cottages have
to be on a lake yet there is a cottage in his neighborhood, on
John stated the one thing
that benefited the town was that we had one person go through all the houses
and there was less chance of variance.
All calculations were based on sales factors and from what he had seen,
the revaluation had been done well and fair.
Tim spoke about the cost of building a small house vs building a larger
one, saying that it would cost just as much and Chuck agreed however he went
back to his statement about the other houses being charged less than his and
being the same construction as his. He
just wanted to be treated the same as the others.
Chuck’s second questions was
regarding the land on this lot and the adjacent lot, F2-03-01, where his barn
sets. The small house is on a ½ acre
valued at $54900. The barn is on a 9.55
acre piece and both are charged as a home site because separate lots. If the lot line is removed, the assessment
would drop because it would eliminate the second home site. John stated that this would have to go
through the planning board and Chuck agreed, saying that it would not have to
be a hearing, only a letter of request to merge the two lots. Chuck went on to ask if the town would be
willing to give him a break on this to prevent the merger. The Board indicated that it would be best
that he go through the voluntary merger of the two lots.
It was noted for the record
that Chuck Williamson’s comparables were the following: K1-04-19, K1-04-18,
K1-01-21, F2-01-03. The board gave Mr.
Williamson an appeal form to fill out and to be returned to the town office.
Carl Metzger, D3-02-04 asked if the change that was made to his property as a result of a
visit by Vision on 9/5/05 was going to be his final assessment. The board said it would. His assessment was changed from $519,000 to
$481,900.
The board went on with
regular monthly business at this point.
Minutes of the August 16,
2005 were reviewed. Motion by John
Swindlehurst to accept minutes as written.
Bryan Clark seconded the motion. It
was noted by Tim Terragni that the minutes would be accepted with no
corrections, no spelling errors, no adjustments. Vote were in favor and the minutes were
signed.
The Board reviewed and
signed a form for the Department of Revenue which verified the number of parcels
in Dunbarton.
The Board reviewed two
invoices from Vision Appraisals totaling $18,288. Invoices were approved and a letter
addressed to the Trustees of Trust Funds requesting reimbursement for the funds
was signed.
The Notice of Intent to Excavate
filed by Steve Merrill for lot H2-02-06 was reviewed and signed.
An intent to cut timber
filed by Robert R. Pike, Manager of the Dunbarton 88, LLC, (Golf Club) was
reviewed. It was the vote of the board
to have the timber tax paid in advance plus 10% due to the fact that the agent
signing this form and responsible for the timber cut is not a resident of this
town. A letter and invoice will be
forwarded to Mr. Pike. The Board will
issue the signed intent when the money is received in the town office.
The Board reviewed and
signed an abatement in the amount of $32.50 for Jeff and Marcia Trexler and
Robert & Laurie Waldron, lot #F3-01-16 due to a computer error.
Current use penalties: The board reviewed and signed the release
from Current Use form in the name of
Other current use penalties:
·
The board was advised that
three lots in the name of Wayne and Jane Chmiel have deed changes which
disqualified all three lots from current use, D6-04-08, D6-04-11 &
D6-04-09. The penalties will be
calculated by Bud Noyes and recommendation will come back to the Board next
month.
·
Richard Keefe has started to
build on his current use lot off
·
G4-03-02, N.H. Traditional
Homes: Five acres on Grapevine Road, has
a building permit and has disqualified this property. Bud will figure this one as well.
·
E2-02-11, Flagstone
Properties: This lot is being built on
and needs a penalty assessed. Bud Noyes
to calculate this one for the board.
The Board discussed
exemption forms that were mailed out to the non-profit properties in town. The First Congregation
It was noted that an appeal
had been received from Gary and Donna Duchesneau, of
Also, questions from Lou
Duval regarding the square feet on his house and other questions. The Board advised that Mr. Duval should file
an appeal. A form will be forwarded to him
by the Town Office.
The board discussed the
price per square foot for Sprinkler systems in homes. Vision gave a spread of anywhere between
$2.01 and $3.24. Vision had gone with
the high price of $3.25 per square foot and relayed to the board that the final
decision was the towns. Tim Terragni
advised that he checked with companies that installed systems and they said
that the systems at present were at $1.85 per square foot. Also, the Town of
John Turner, of 30 Moose
Point Drive, lot D4-01-23 came in to ask questions on
his assessment. John stated that he had
attended the hearings with Vision in July and they had agreed that there were
errors on his appraisal however he did not see a change in his assessment. He wanted to know what happened. He stated that they had him listed with 4
bedrooms and he had 3. The board
explained that if a house has a closet and COULD be a bedroom it was counted as
a bedroom and he said this was the case in his situation. He stated that he had an appraisal done
recently and Vision was still 20% over the new appraisal. John Swindlehurst stated that the board and
Vision does not go with outside appraisals as they are done for different
reasons other than assessment for tax purposes.
He went on to say that Vision based all their values on a sales
analysis, and all properties are done the same.
The town needed to have a standard and Vision Appraisals set that
standard. One person collected all the
data for all properties in town and it was her call. The board felt that it was totally equal and
extremely well done. Tim told Mr. Turner
that the town had a methodology book available for viewing in the town office
which explained how the company arrived at their values. In a mass appraisal a lot of factors come
into play to come up with the numbers and with individual appraisals this is
not the case. John Turner did point out
that the difference was about $70,000.
He also said that Vision had his house listed as having 7200 square feet
in the house when he has only 2352. The
board explained that if he was taking this information for the website that he
would be better off to get the complete printout from the town office. Janice will mail him a copy tomorrow. Also, the paperwork from the hearing with
Vision Appraisal and Mr. Turner will be reviewed.
It was noted that the MS-1
had been completed and mailed to Department of Revenue in anticipation of
having the tax rate set soon. The total
valuation for the town of
To recap the appointments
for this evening: Will review the
Conservation Easement in regard to the Doucet property; need to get a
clarification on “VIEW”; and will check the wetland discount on Goldstein
property.
Meeting was adjourned
at 9:30PM.
_______________________________
Timothy
Terragni, Chairman
_______________________________
John
R. Swindlehurst, II
_______________________________
Bryan
Clark
Dunbarton
Board of Assessors
Recorded by: Janice
VandeBogart