A First In Connecticut: Regional Revaluation

Like necessity, a bad economy is the mother of invention – especially for local government.

That’s why a dozen towns in eastern Connecticut are collaborating in the state’s first-ever regionalized approach to property revaluation, a move that will save taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars over the next few years.

After multi-town talks and negotiations with state officials, the Northeastern Connecticut Council of Governments has awarded a $1.2 million revaluation services contract to Tyler Technologies, a Dallas-based firm with regional offices in Tolland.

The multi-year deal provides for the company to inspect and revalue properties in Ashford, Brooklyn, Canterbury, Eastford, Killingly, Plainfield, Pomfret, Sterling, Thompson and Woodstock. Sprague is also negotiating to join the group.

“The monies saved for our towns and the efficiencies gained are impressive and are, we believe, a model for other regions in Connecticut and other states,” NECCOG Executive Director John Filchak said. Communities elsewhere in Connecticut, Massachusetts and New Jersey are already inquiring about the process.

State law requires towns to revalue their property every five years and to physically inspect it for revaluation every ten. But a change in state legislation and an accommodation by the state Office of Policy and Management will facilitate the NECCOG effort by enabling the member towns to be put on a rolling revaluation schedule over a number of years.

Paul Flynn, Tyler’s regional manager, said his staff will inspect in Ashford and Woodstock this year. The results of that work will be reflected on the towns’ 2012 grand lists and tax bills issued in July of that year. Inspections in the other towns will follow.

Part of the trick to making the project economically viable was to put a similar number of parcels on the inspection schedule each year, even though the member towns are of different size, Ralph Fletcher, Ashford’s first selectman, said. To help achieve that, the inspectors will only do half a town’s properties in a given round, he said.

The first selectman estimated his town would save 25 percent of its costs – in the area of $25,000 to $30,000 – by participating in the regional project. Savings in the other towns will be similar, he said.

In a state of 169 towns that value their individuality and local control, organizing a regional approach wasn’t easy or quick, Fletcher said. Northeastern Connecticut’s towns had been talking about finding regional economy in property assessments for about six years before this revaluation program was born.

Every municipality – and its lawyer -- had to sign off on the project, and enabling legislation had to be introduced and passed. Unlike some other attempts to regionalize government services, this one was successful because it was a "grassroots, bottom up" effort, Fletcher said.

A committee of town officials had originally considered hiring a NECCOG revaluation staff, Fletcher said. But local assessors involved in the discussions suggested the project be put out to bid, and that proved to be far more economical.

Lower values mean higher rates

Property revaluation, of course, is local government’s way of apportioning the property tax burden in keeping with the current value of real estate.

Both Fletcher and Flynn, who happens to be on Tolland’s board of assessors, anticipate that residential properties in the region will not be as valuable as they were in 2007 before the national economy and housing market went into a precipitous decline.

Lower home prices as manifested through sales figures throughout the region “are going to be reflected in the new assessments,” Flynn said.

“I know our grand list will not hold,” Fletcher added. Since the tax rate must increase to compensate for a shrinking grand list, the Ashford official said he expects “there will be a mill rate increase next year even if our spending goes down.”

Not all homes are likely to depreciate in value equally, however, Flynn said. His experience recently has been that “the more expensive properties [more than $350,000] took a bigger dip in value than the lesser ones.”

If that principle were to hold true throughout the revaluation process, owners of the less expensive residences would be shouldering a bigger proportion of the cost of government.