Scuttling the present property assessment system for a total overhaul may be premature and not well thought out, critics of the new plan say.
Department of Revenue Secretary Roger Ervin touts a major reform for the way municipalities handle property assessments. Citing incompetency and inconsistency on data management throughout 1,851 assessments districts at a recent town hall meeting, Ervin says that fewer districts can do a better job with streamlined management.
According to Ervin, assessment districts will function better with enlarged boundaries and less bureaucracy. These districts would be supervised by assessment administrators and valuation disputes would be heard by a county board of review. “The new system should ensure consistent application of State standards through uniform education and certification of assessors and board of review members,” says Ervin.
City of Kenosha Assessor Michael Higgins weighs his prior experience with the failed balloon trial of county-wide assessment in Kenosha with Ervin’s optimism: “Fixing the problems does not require redoing the complete system. In this current economic time, communities can not afford the cost of this proposal.”
Higgins estimates that the cost for county assessing would double what is currently being paid for assessment services; mainly because of adding personnel needed to perform the annual revaluations that are endorsed by the DOR.
Ervin and Higgins disagree about the new program’s impact upon local government. Whereas Ervin argues, “We want you to extend what you as an individual community do well to other communities that don’t do as well.” Higgins replies, “We are giving local control to a larger bureaucracy that can not provide personal service and will not necessarily be more professional.”
Upon completing town hall discussions, the DOR is seeking legislative approval by late February. The State must authorize municipalities to consolidate resources for county-wide assessment to be effective.
“Without State support of the tools we need for county-wide assessment, we will not have standardization, we will have no accountability, and we need to get rid of the cumbersome state equalization,” says Ervin.
Higgins counters, “The rush to put this in front of the Legislature is disturbing. It is obviously to get action before we have a new Governor and administration. They need to take their time and do it right rather than do it fast.”
Comments