|
Property value debate heats up
BY CHARLES GARRATT • STAFF WRITER
WARM SPRINGS - There was little doubt what was on the minds of most of the standing room only crowd in the circuit courtroom Tuesday night at the monthly meeting of the Bath County supervisors- property values.
After David Hickey of Blue Ridge Mass Appraisal gave his brief update on the re- assessment of Bath County properties, 45 citizens offered up their comments and questions, ranging from humorous to loud to personal stabs at Hickey, in the course of more than two hours.
Most of those speaking were outraged by the average 300-400 percent increase in the value of land, and they wanted to know exactly how Hickey's firm came up with its numbers.
The reassessment notices mailed to citizens on Feb. 27 sparked anger among most that their new property values would result in hefty tax increases. Many blamed the Homestead Preserve development for the huge increase in land values.
Hickey explained how his firm calculated the fair market values and listed many of the 17 sales used to set land values. All of these sales were outside the Homestead Preserve development, he said.
Property sold between January 2004 and this week, he said, ranged in price from $2,000 an acre to $10,600 per acre. Two sales had been brought to his attention during the ongoing hearings, he said.
In one of those sales, the land sold for $6,500 per acre. The new assessment had valued the land at $6,000 per acre.
"The hearings (with property owners) are part of the process," Hickey said. People bring transactions and other information to the appraisers' attention "which may lead us to reconsider" all or part of the appraisal, he said.
The weighted average for land sold in the county was $3,800 per acre. Hickey said that number was consistent with land and property currently advertised for sale in the county.
"If we find a wide ranging adjustment is necessary," after the hearings, "we will apply it to all properties," Hickey said. Ninety-five percent of the complaints his firm has heard have been over the values placed on acreage, not structures or improvements.
"I know you are upset with assessed values. But they are in line with what property is being bought and sold on the open market," Hickey told the crowd.
Comments from citizens echoed Hickey's statement that most people were surprised and upset about the value placed on the land. Even modest lots and steep woodland went up in value as much as 700 percent.
Kay Hicklin told the board, "You are looking at the newest millionaire in Bath County." She said, "I sat on my deck looking at my million dollar view." Now, her property assessed three years ago at $198,000 is valued at $663,000, a 235 percent increase.
Hicklin has taken the time to meet with the appraisers, a move supervisors encouraged property owners to take (see sidebar for extended hearing dates). She said the person she met with was "very polite, very congenial."
An old farmhouse on the Hicklin property was valued at $100,000 in the new appraisal. The appraiser suggested she tear it down to reduce the value of the property. Hicklin laughed that the old house was worth that much, but said if it was, "Who in their right mind would want to demolish it?"
John White, well known to the board from the years he served as VDOT resident engineer, said, "I've finally lived long enough that Carl Chestnut and I are both on the same side." White's 1/10 of an acre increase in value 671 percent. "I expected my value to go up. I didn't expect to win the lottery," White said. He added that even if the county is restricted to tax increase of only 1 percent, those whose properties increased the most will bear the brunt of the increase.
Hickey said state law restricted the board to an average increase in taxes from a reassessment to 1 percent. That percentage would be spread across all property owners with some having little or no increase in taxes if their property value changed little or went down, to those at the top end who could see a much higher percentage increase.
On Wednesday, supervisor Percy Nowlin explained the rules are more complex than the simple 1 percent limit. If the reassessment would result in an overall increase of taxes greater than 1 percent, the county must advertise the fact and show what the "neutral" tax rate would be - the neutral rate being the tax rate that would not bring in any additional revenue based on the new assessment. The board must also show how much each additional in penny in tax rate would bring into the county. It can then, after public hearing, raise the tax rate.
Cedar Creek resident Raymond Holloway asked, "Have you people heard of location, location, location?" Like many others, Holloway wondered how someone could spend 15 minutes on his property and fairly appraise his entire 175 acres.
While his house went up only 12 percent, Holloway said, his land went up 413 percent. His land won't perk; he has three steep hollows and three power line rights of way.
Ellen Andrews, who lives near Bacova Junction, amused those at the meeting with her large printout of a screw and surprised many with her eloquent plea to have assessment thrown out. She suggested, "Dismiss the assessment on any property not improved, developed or transferred" in the past three years.
"Something is wrong with this picture," Andrews added. "The national economy is in the pits." She didn't feel the assessment took into consideration the economic situation. Her modest property tripled in value to $185,000.
Chairman Jon Trees had to interrupt a number of times and probably held his gavel longer for a couple of speakers than most people were comfortable with. "We're all upset. Please refrain from derogatory attacks on anybody," he said about half way through.
In his report to the board two weeks ago, Hickey said the average property value went up 33 percent. He clarified that statement Tuesday saying the average residential property in the low end residential market went up 33 percent. County-wide, including the Homestead Preserve, property values went up 91 percent, he said.
Supervisor Stuart Hall said when he heard the average increase in values was 33 percent, he was "fairly satisfied." But he when he started receiving calls from people with increases ranging from 100 percent to 671 percent, he grew concerned.
Trees reminded those at the meeting they needed to take their "own individual cases to him (Hickey and his staff)."I have not heard anybody who left your meeting dissatisfied," Trees added.
Richard Madlener, an absentee landowner, wrote to The Recorder before the board meeting to express his concern with the assessment. Madlener had used the Vamanet.com Web site to look at the values of neighboring properties. All property in the assessment can be searched at Vamanet.com website by owner name, lot number or street address.
"There is concern that the Preserve caused the inflated land assessments, but that's not the case," he said. However, he did note a number of errors were made that might affect his assessment. "It seems that the assessors had too much to do in their allotted time to insure the accuracy of their work."
On Tuesday, Madlener followed up, saying he had spoken with BRMA. He was pleased with the response he received and "wanted you to know that I was able to easily complete the appraisal review from a distance."
As Hickey and the supervisors pointed out numerous times, the reassessment process is still under way. Hall noted, "Once we hire (an assessment firm), we have not authority to interfere." Like the other supervisors, Hall "urges everyone here to go see the fellows."
Following the close of the reassessment by BRMA on March 31, the county will convene a board of equalization. Hall noted these five people are all local residents appointed by the circuit court judge.
"To say we don't care, don't know is wrong," Hall said. "I do know, it hurts me to raise a nickel, a penny, to have a reassessment." With county revenue down $2.5 million from public corporations, the county faced little choice, he said.
Nowlin echoed the need for the reassessment to catch property values up with fair market and recover the lost taxes from Virginia Power. Wednesday, he added that the county also needs to get the correct values for the Homestead Preserve lots on the tax rolls.
Those lots sold for up to $1 million, he said. Nowlin doesn't think the county could legally throw out the assessment or refuse to pay BRMA. While individual taxpayers are upset, the results might be a lot worse if the county is forced to raise taxes to make up for those lost from Virginia Power and not paid on the Homestead Preserve land.
| 
