I'll call a meeting of the board is of a national board of assessors to order at 9 a.m.

on Thursday, March 5th.

Let the record show that present from the board are Robert Early, Jay McCara, and myself Charles Dobbins.

Can I get a motion to waive the reading of the public minutes from the Board of Assessors meeting held on Thursday, February 5th, accept them and place them on file?

So moved.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Ayes have it.

Can I get a motion to waive the reading of the non-public minutes from the Board of Assessors meeting held on Thursday, February 5th, and accept them and place them on file?

We had not no that we didn't have any non-public.

That's right.

All right.

All right, now we're gonna follow the agenda here.

Um let's see.

First up.

New business.

All right, we have an abatement recommendation from where is that?

We didn't have anything on the department update.

No today.

I don't know if we do or not.

That's on the agenda.

Any Bob, do you have anything?

Yeah, uh, I would normally update you on the number of abatements we've gotten, but of course, the deadline having been this past Monday.

Uh we're waiting for the final points to come in, of course, mark, and um they have a management system yet.

Um, as per usual, we get an inputs the last week, last few days.

Um I don't have a count for you.

Um, but I will at the next meeting.

All right.

Um other updates to the report.

Okay, thank you.

Uh okay.

Do we have the old business?

See here we have none.

Anything updates since these are printed.

Nothing.

All right, so let's get into the new business.

Uh talking about 2024 settlements.

Bob, you want to start us off with um 14 Cathedral Circle?

Sure.

Um, so it's 14th Cathedral Circle at the local level when the abatement is filed.

Um the taxpayer has provided very limited information and just reminding the board that the further proof is always on the taxpayer abatement case or appeal case.

Um, because of the limited amount of data provided, um, we called it in support uh an abatement at the local level.

We denied it.

Uh Mr.

World filed an appeal with the Board of Tax and Land Appeals.

Uh the Board of Tax and Land Appeals requires us to meet with the parties to meet before they'll schedule a hearing for the purpose of tracking seven, mediate uh the situation at that time.

Mr.

World provided um way more information than he did with the original, uh including some that was in the neighborhood that was supported his claim for an abatement.

Um I did uh internal research, put together a market grid, which you should have in your packet, and we're recommending uh an abatement to a value of 730 from the original 785-500 because there's a document with the BTLA.

Um we presented this as a settlement offer to Mr.

World.

He agreed and it has signed the agreement, and um if the board uh approves this, we'll have you sign as well, and we'll report that back to the board of tax next year.

Okay.

Any uh discussion?

Now seems reasonable to me.

Bob no, it's just it's a big reduction, but no, that's that's fine.

Yeah, I would just say that this is uh kind of an unusual property for the neighborhood.

Most of the neighborhood is traditional colonial style, garrison style.

Um this is a modern contemporary style.

Um the layout is unusual.

It's kind of has the footprint is pretty big compared to how many square feet there are, and that probably had an impact on the model.

Um and we don't always have a whole lot of modern contemporary sales to set the tables.

Um natural reason why the things uh well, I guess we should say it's kind of significantly over.

But taking a look at the sales in the neighborhood uh that are similar in square footage, your bill, and that type um that type of information and reductions warranted.

Okay.

All right, can I get a motion to accept the uh recommendation of the board of the city assessors office for the abatement of 2024 and 2025 taxes for uh 14 cathedral circle?

So moved.

Second.

All those in favor, aye.

All is opposed, and the ayes have it.

All right.

Uh the next one you should have in your pack package is a 2025 local abatement request for the Chief Corp's Drive.

Taxpayer provided some information.

We reviewed that information as well as researching our own.

And concluded that an abatement is warranted.

We're recommending a reduction of value from 415 100 to 360,000.

So $55,100 reduction.

The abatement was requested we're granting it or recommending that be granted.

Okay, do we have any discussion?

No.

Jay?

Yeah.

Okay.

Can I have an uh motion to accept the recommended assess valuation by the city assessor's office for uh the two Cartez drive property?

So moved.

Second.

All those in favor?

Ayes have it.

Uh next item should be 19 Bangor Street.

Is that what you have here?

Yeah, 19 Bangor.

Robert Harris.

Okay.

This is actually a supplemental warrant for a new mobile home that we had you signed recently.

As with all newly installed mobile homes, the deed doesn't have a sale price.

And indicating what the sale price was.

So we're recommending that the value that we based the supplemental warrant be reduced from 332 to 285.

It was from part of the year since that unit has been installed, so there's a worksheet that shows the original tax that we calculated, the revised tax with the value of 285, and uh and abatement adjustment of a refund of 501 and 27 cents.

And this one recommend approval event.

This one came up before us, didn't I recognize the picture of the property?

Well, this has come up before on a different unit in prior years, but it's kind of similar where we don't have well you you probably got a picture with the package for the supplemental warrant on this particular one.

And that was recently.

Yeah, last month, I think.

Yeah.

Um but we've had some abatements like this in the past where again we don't get the bill of sale.

And that makes it difficult when a revaluation is completed, you know.

The newly installed ones, we don't have a sale price.

Um, so we don't have a solid footing uh for those.

Um, we're using the the older units that have sold, and appreciation curve uh is is a little bit off.

That results in either a significantly higher or lower value on the new ones in this case is significantly higher value.

So it's on our radar to address uh connection update both to take a look at those depreciation tables for the existing units and to uh do a little bit better job of uh getting the sales information for the new units, even though the D doesn't have a sale price, and reaching out to the new owner, reaching out to the uh uh park who sold the unit.

Um it's just a little more difficult to get that uh where it's no tax stance on the point.

Yeah, this is the uh double web that looks like a single one.

Yeah, that's exactly yeah, you were trying to figure it out by the cleaned design here.

Yeah, yeah.

The the picture is uh this is not unusual to CESPRO.

The aspect ratio gets a little dwarfed when you import it, and that's why that picture looks so strange.

It looks like a single one in that photo, but it's not no questions.

All right, can I have a uh uh motion to accept the set city assessor's office for the abatement on 19 Bangor Street?

So moved, second.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Ayes have it.

Uh the next one in your package should be 13 Cherokee Av.

Uh this was a local abatement request, and um the request is based on the owner claiming incorrect property data.

We have this listed as four bedrooms, and the owner claimed that was three.

Um, as is our practice.

Uh, if we're gonna make any data corrections, it's always based on full inspection, so that we not only correct the errors that are in the taxpayers' favor, but those that might be in the city's favor.

Uh it did we did uh Jessica did confirm, I believe, that it had um three bedrooms rather than four, but our um tables don't add any value for that fourth bedroom.

You know, the bedroom count has an impact on value up to three, and then anything over three doesn't have any additional impact.

However, there were some other data errors that were corrected that reduced the value from 443 600 to 440.

I believe they were flooring issues.

So just I think we're correct all we're gonna do a full inspection and correct all the data, and even though the bedroom difference didn't make it uh didn't change the value, some other corrections did uh small reduction from 443 600 to 440, and we're recommending that you approve the same.

Okay, explain that bedroom issue.

I was gonna ask the same thing.

I guess so.

A four-bedroom house does not sell for more than a three-bedroom house.

No, not that we've been able to measure.

At one time it did, uh with the average family size being smaller, you know, one and a half kids.

Um, you know, uh I I think that's probably uh part of the impact.

I mean, the square footage is still assessed, obviously, because that's kind of how the tables they set the value, drive the value by price per square foot.

Um, and then there are other factors that can increase or decrease the price per square foot, and you know, the age, the grade, uh type A, BAC bedrooms up to three uh number of bathrooms, um, and then our current tables don't have an adjustment uh for bedroom count greater than three.

But that hasn't always been the case.

No.

So not that I um not that I am aware of.

But okay, so like when you started in this business 20 years ago, was it was a four-bedroom more valuable than a three-bedroom?

Um well, uh yeah, it started four years ago, yeah.

Um I was given trying to, you know, I mean I'm 72.

Yeah, look at it.

I mean, certainly at one time it made a bigger difference.

Um at one time, so the the assessing charts kind of take into consideration what's going on in society, I guess.

Yep.

Yeah, so when they when they set up their analysis, you know, they take a look at all the all the um sales for 12 months before April 1st of the reval year, um, qualify those sales, get the data correct, and then they're gonna they're gonna do an analysis in the system dozens of ways.

Um, some of it's gonna be style, some of it's gonna be um you know, amount of depreciation year built, they're gonna array the information to see.

Well, did the new homes uh is their ratio um as tight as the older homes?

Um, and then one of the things they'll do is take a look at number of bedrooms and just say, okay, one bedroom, two bedroom, three bedroom, four bedroom, you know, where are the ratios and adjust the tables for that?

So I would say it's been it's been a while since since there was a difference for uh you know the four four bedrooms in so if it has a hot tub, Jacuzzi hot tub, do you make it a negative?

No I I can't say what we do in that.

Well, I was gonna ask, is there a similar rule for uh bathrooms?

There may be, but I don't think it's two or three.

Um I'm just going back to when I was here as a deputy assessor, and I think the tables do have a cutoff on when bathrooms stop making a difference.

Um but it's not one, two, or three, I don't believe.

It's higher than that.

I don't I'd have to look at the uh difference between five and six, probably whenever mom says she's done cleaning bathrooms.

That's too many diminishing returns.

And I don't know if the tables get sophisticated enough to say, well, if you only have two bedrooms, five bathrooms really doesn't is you know doesn't make sense.

But if you have eight bedrooms, do four bathrooms make a difference, and they probably do.

So just thinking about it.

But I I can't tell you what the fit.

Those ratios probably don't come up very often.

No, yeah.

Okay, do I have a motion to accept the city's uh reval reassessment or abatement recommendation for 13 charky Av.

So moved.

Second.

All those in favor?

I have it.

All right, and uh I believe last or well, uh actually there's a couple of those fire provision as well.

Um three mystic court um taxpayer filed and abatement uh arguing over assessment, provided information about recent sales within a subdivision between the ones provided and the ones we looked at.

And um I believe you've got uh a sheet that shows three sales, and then it's the title the title of it is three mystic court comp sales.

Um so if you take a look at uh the three sales and then the subject property listed below, um the subject assessment per square foot is outside the range of this ops.

However, the subject has greater a greater amount of finished basement area than any of the sales, and uh the subject also has an extra half bath that none of the sales has.

Uh so we felt that with those um additional items that contribute value, um the assessed value is reasonable, and we recommend denying the submit request.

This is all because of the finished basement, right?

Yeah, which is probably in the finished basement.

Um, yeah, likely.

Yeah.

So any discussion, gentlemen?

No.

A motion to uh deny the abatement request of uh the Sunny's for three mystic court.

Do I have a motion?

So moved.

Second.

All those in favor, aye, aye opposed, nay, no it nays.

The ayes have it.

No.

And the last one, this section of the proceedings here today is uh fire pro ration on uh 108 11 half street.

And this was uh inner city fire that actually took out public buildings.

Um I believe the fire started with this property.

Uh for a fire proration, um it needs to have not been arsoned committed by the owner, so we always look to the fire report to support that.

And there was the the cause of the fire was undetermined, but based on um the uh interviews with the tenants and uh review of the site, it they're pretty sure that it was an issue with the smoker out on the back porch uh not putting out the uh materials properly and caused the fire.

Uh no indication that this fire was arsoned, uh let alone by the owner.

So we believe the fire prohibition request is uh is valid from that standpoint.

Uh the days, the days of uh where where the property couldn't be used for its intended use is 119.

So the pro raction abatement amount is 2,794 and 12 cents.

Any discussion?

No.

Can I have a motion to accept the city's recommendation to abate uh for fire pro ration um the property located at 108 to 11 Ash Street?

So moved.

Second.

All those in favor?

Aye.

No ayes have it.

I suspect we'll see this one again.

No, I don't have any complaints, but after he's done the uh the rehab.

Um all right, so we are now going to well, Jessica.

Where's my thing?

There it is.

Uh public, no public comments.

Obviously.

Comments by the board.

Okay.

Uh I just got one thing.

I notice on this calendar for June.

We have two meetings in June.

June 4th meeting, I cannot make it.

And I will not be making the June 25th.

So we should be good.

I know I I haven't set up my calendar yet.

I know that I go to Canada the first day of July, so uh that's all that I got on my calendar now.

So I'll be here.

As a refresher, uh, we schedule two meetings in June because July 1st is our deadline to reply in writing on uh abatements.

Um I don't believe we always need both meetings.

Um we're not sure how it's gonna play out this year again.

I don't have a count yet.

Um obviously uh given what was presented in your package today, uh, we're dealing with these as soon as they come in.

It uh you know if we can um so we expect to have a big backup uh for that July 1st deadline, but so long as we have two of you here for one of both of those, we should be good.

And the June 25th is a mandate.

I mean, we have to have that June 25th because of the July 1st deadline.

Um yeah, so it's to accommodate the deadlines, but um certainly if we don't have anything to present, we could cancel that meeting.

Okay.

I'm I'm guessing that we will just be uh package and saying you know, these we haven't taken action on these intercomending or whatever.

Okay.

All right, so now we're going to move into non-public session.

Can I get a motion to go into non-public session for two reasons?

First, to discuss matters which, if discussed in public, would likely affect adversely the reputation of any person other than a member of this board, unless such person requests an open meeting.

This exemption shall extend to include any application for assistance or tax abatement or waiver of a fee, fine, or other levy if based on inability to pay or poverty of the applicant pursuant to RSA 91-3 colon 3 subsection 2C.

Second under 91A3 subsection 2L for the consideration of legal advice provided by legal counsel either in writing or orally to one or more members of the public body, even where legal counsel is not present.

Do I have a motion?

So moved.

Second.

We're going to do a roll call.

Mr.

Early.

Yes.

Mr.

McCarrah.

Yes.

Mr.

Dobbins, yes.

And the board entered non-public session at 9.20 a.m.

on March 5th.

And now we just have to wait for uh.