The audio of this meeting is available at this URL:
Audio Archieve of Town Council Meetings
The agenda and backup items are available at this URL:
Agenda and Backup Materials for the Meeting
Attendance
Mayor Tarr and Town Council Members: Howard, Conklin, Richardson, Ross, Speidel, Wolffe,
Supervisor Wanda Thornton, Chincoteague Representative the Accomack County Board of Supervisors
Ray Rosenberger, Chairman of the Chincoteague Planning Commission.
Staff members present included: Town Manager Robert Ritter, Chief of Police Lewis, and Director of Public Works Michael Cosby.
Bill Coulson of Tri-County Appraiser
Joe Labuda of Harris Computer Systems
Approximately fifteen citizens attended the meeting
The meeting began at 7:30 p.m.
Presentation by Tri-County Appraisers
Supervisor Wanda Thornton arranged for Mr. Bill Coulson of Tri-County Appraisers to speak to the Council and public on the current reassessment of real estate values that Accomack County has undertaken. The County has hired Tri-County Appraisers to conduct the reassessment. What follows are highlights from Mr. Coulson’s presentation and the question and answer exchanges among Mr. Coulson, The Mayor, Town Council members and the public.
Highlights of Mr. Coulson’s Remarks
1. Virginia statutes require all counties to reassess property values at least every six years.
2. The purpose of the reassessment is to ensure that all real estate is assessed at 100% of market value.
3. The techniques used to assess properties are intended to equalize property values. This means that the same methodology to determine property values is used on similar properties within the same market.
4. Reassessment is accomplished by verifying sales prices of real estate sales that closed within the past twelve months. As the reassessment proceeds these data will be carried forward for an additional twelve months to develop a longitudinal valuation. This helps to take into account changes in the real estate market.
5. When sales are examined, the appraisers discard “bad” sales in the data. Bad sales are considered to be forced as the result of some distress such as foreclosure, divorce, business failure and other factors. Such sales are distressed sales and typically consummated at below fair market values.
6. Appraisers examine sales to understand who bought the property and for what purposes the property will be used.
7. Sales will be categorized by features that enhance or diminish property value such as the presence of bulkheads, waterfront, out buildings, piers, marshland and such. Sales will also be categorized by topographical information.
8. Accomack County has been divided into twelve different markets for the purpose of the reassessment effort.
9. Within two weeks appraisers from Tri-County Appraisers will be on Chincoteague. They will visit every house and business on the Island. They will take digital pictures, measure the houses or building dimensions, take note of property enhancements, topography, and out buildings. If no one is home, the appraisers will leave a door hanger that contains a blue card requesting the property owner to report the details of the property to the appraisers.
10. There are three avenues for disputing a real estate assessment.
a. Appeal directly to the appraiser
b. Appeal to the Board of Equity
c. Go to court
11. The average assessed value of real estate on Chincoteague Island is 33% of fair market value. The goal of the reassessment activity is to increase the average assessed value of real estate throughout the County to 100% of fair market value. Some examples of the difference between assessed value and recent property sales on the Island are:
Location Assessed Value Closed Real Estate Transaction Sale Price
Accomack Street $67,000 $180,000
Taylor Street $66,000 $193,000
Ridge Road $98,000 $255,000
Main Street $258,000 $590,000
There are currently 220 properties for sale on Chincoteague Island. Of these 50 properties are undeveloped land and 165 are houses for sale.
Question and Answers
Q: Will future sales adjust assessed values?
A: Yes. Reassessment is based on CLOSED sales, NOT asking price
Q: If an undeveloped lot is certified by the health department for septic, will this affect the assessment value?
A: Yes. In addition appraisals will examine soils maps to determine what contribution to value the soil type might make.
Q: My bulkhead is thirty years old. Will its value be depreciated?
A: Yes.
Q: Why is the reassessment being done at the peak of the real estate market?
A: The timing of the reassessment is determined by state requirements and must happen every six years. Taxes MAY go up. However, tax revenue of a county may not increase by more than 1 % as a result of reassessment. If it does increase more than 1% the county is required to hold public hearings to propose a tax increase.
Q: If assessment goes up then the tax rate has to go down to ensure that the County does not get more than 1% more revenue.
A: Yes. A public hearing would be required if revenue rises by more than 1% as a result of reassessment.
Q: What about rental properties and these door hangers, the blue cards? People don’t live in these houses. Those blue cards will advertise that the houses are vacant and this is a security risk. What are you going to do about this?
A: We have not thought about that. We will have to work out something.
Comment by Supervisor Thornton: This reassessment is being forced on Accomack County by the State. The reassessment will cost County tax payers about $1 million.
Q: Will the reassessment that drives property valuation from the current 33% of market value to 100% of market value be done in one step?
A: Yes. There will be no phase-in of the reassessed value.
Q: How does the recent down zoning of 93% of the land in the County affect the outcome of the reassessment effort?
A: The amount by which total property value will change is unknown. This is something that we have to work through. We cannot speculate on the effects.
Q: If the general value of County properties has gone down and we know that Chincoteague property values have gone up a lot, doesn’t this mean that Chincoteague will bear a disproportionate amount of the allowed 1% of revenue increase? That means property taxes on Chincoteague will increase much more than the rest of the county?
A: We will value all property at 100% of market value.
Q: You spoke about “equalization” in assessment. What areas are used for equalization?
A: The County has been divided into twelve market areas. Equalization will occur only within each of these twelve market areas.
Q: If the value of property in the County has gone up only a little or even gone down some and property values on Chincoteague have gone up by 67%, does this mean that the County can raise property taxes on Chincoteague a lot?
A: An appraiser cannot answer that question except to point to the state prohibition against total county revenue increasing by more than 1% as a result of property reassessment. Property taxation is in the hands of the County Board of Supervisors.
Q: Marshland and bulkheads are common features on Chincoteague, but not on every property. How are different areas assessed for such features?
A: Every property has a value. Marshland, piers, bulkheads, tidal marshes affect property values differently. We look for closed sales of comparable properties. When we do not find comparables, we have more work to do to arrive at the fair market value of a specific piece of property.
Q: If property has increased by 30% in value in the County but by 70% on Chincoteague, will this be taken into consideration when taxes are computed?
A: The appraisers will determine fair market property value. The Board of Supervisors will determine real estate taxes.
Q: What percentage of property sales in the County are on Chincoteague Island.
A: About 15% of all property sales in the County are on Chincoteague Island. The largest number of property sales in the County occurs in Captain’s Cove. Sales there represent 35% of all property sales in Accomack County.
Q: How will real estate assessments change for Captain’s Cove?
A: Within Captain’s Cove valuations differ based upon whether the property is waterfront, or adjacent to the golf course or an interior lot or whether it can be permitted for a septic system. But currently property within Captain’s Cove is assessed at 30% of fair Market value. The community closest to fair market value is Tangier Island where values are at 62% of fair market value. Onancock is at 32% of fair market value. Chincoteague is at 33% of fair market value.
Comment by Supervisor Thornton: Since the down zoning of 93% of the land in the County, very little land is being sold. In addition since wetlands are of nil value and appraisals are based on actual sales, there will likely be no growth in the assessment of farm land. That means that the incorporated towns and people who own homes in the county are going to pay more in real estate taxes.
Q: Do you value a farm as a farm or as its potential use as the result of subdivision?
A: We are required to value a property at its highest and best use. But if the land is used as a farm, it will be valued as a farm.
Q: So what effect does the down zoning have on property values?
A: It’s a challenge to determine this. All we can do is to rely upon comparable sales. If no such sales exist, this gets very hard to do.
Mr. Coulson’s Comments on “Trending”
* 1980 County creates the Department of Assessments
* 1982 new assessments of real estate are completed
*1983 – 2003 no physical reassessment of real estate is done in the County. Assessment is done by “trending.” Periodically the County looked at sales and determined value. Because physical reassessment is too expensive to accomplish each year, trending will be used in the the years following the current effort to maintain property values near fair market value. Some type of schedule has to be developed to determine when physical reassessment is to be done.
* 2003 A complete reassessment was done of county real estate. However, this effort returned property values that were only 70% of fair market value. The State of Virginia requires counties to maintain its real estate assessments at 70% or greater of fair market value. Because Accomack County was at the minimum of 70% of fair market value and the real estate market was increasing it was determined that a physical reassessment was necessary.
Q: I own two acres of property on Chincoteague. But, like much property here it is a mix of alternating pine ridges and glades. How do you determine the value of glades and marshlands?
A: Topography is considered in the assessment process. Those two acres would not be valued in the same way that two acres of buildable land would be.
Committee Reports
Recreation & Community Enhancement Committee – Vice Mayor Speidel reported on the September 13, 2006 meeting of the Committee. She indicated that the scheduling of the Chincoteague Elementary School Gym was working well. She also advised that the Committee is working on a revision to the Weed Ordinance of the Town and anticipates sending proposed new wording to the Ordinance Committee in the near future.
Chincoteague Convention Center Authority Report – Councilwoman Conklin reported on the September 24, 2006 meeting of the Authority. Six citizens attended the meeting. Some expressed concern that the Community Center was not doing enough to encourage tourism. She further reported that the recent craft show had been a success and returned approximately $7,000 to the Center. This infusion of funds has allowed the Center to pay off some bills that had been in arrears. The interior of the building has been repainted, the moveable walls have been repaired, the septic system has been successfully upgraded to permit cooking on site, Verizon DSL has been installed, and new gravel has been added to the driveway. The recent audit report was favorable for the Center. Mayor Tarr expressed his thanks to Supervisor Thornton for her significant role in getting approval for the upgrade to the Center’s septic system.
Ordinance Committee – Councilman Ross reported on meetings of the Committee which occurred on September 13 and 18, 2006. During these meetings the Committee adopted and sent to Town Council a new Flood Plain Ordinance. Council adopted the new ordinance during its October 2, 2006 meeting.
Safety Advisory & Transportation Committee – Mayor Tarr reported that the October 5 meeting of the Committee focused on evaluating the Town’s performance during the storm event known as Ernesto. The Mayor indicated that during the storm the Town made its first use of the reverse-911 system of the County to call citizens and advise of the closing of the causeway. He said that the system worked, but that the public needed to be informed about what to expect and how to make use of it. Other discussions of the Committee included training and planning for future storm events.
Software Purchase
Mr. Ritter reviewed the proposal to upgrade the Town’s computer system. The agenda backup materials showed that two competing bids were received for a new computing system. Harris Computer Systems bid $38,135 plus travel and lodging expenses. Southern Software bid $49.142.80 plus travel and lodging expenses. A motion was offered and seconded to accept the Harris proposal and instruct the Town Manager to execute all required contract documents.
Mr. Ritter provided the Town Council with answers to the questions raised during the Council’s October 2 meeting. The topics of these questions were: 1) The exact components of the software package the Town would receive, 2) The services and costs of providing, 3) Annual maintenance costs, 4) Travel and lodging costs, 5) Additional training and 6) a comparison of the bid proposals.
Mr. Joe Labuda of Harris Computer Systems addressed two questions at the beginning of his remarks.
1. What are the advantages of awarding the bid to Harris Computer Systems?
Harris acquired the company and staff of the company who developed the software the Town currently uses. Thus Harris has staff who know the software as well as the Town’s processes. There is virtually no learning curve to work through with Harris.
2. What about converting the data from the current system to the new system?
The staff of Harris created both the current software system and the new system. We have detailed knowledge of how to move the data from one system to the other and are confident that we offer the most efficient cost effective option to achieve this successful migration of data. The new system has the capacity to store all of the existing data and accommodate new data for the next ten to fifteen years.
Mr. Labuda answered many questions from Council about the details of the new system and costs. Much attention was given to the value and cost of implementing eCommerce on the Town’s website. Mr. Ritter expressed the hope that this feature of the software package would be implemented during the next two or three years. Council also focused attention on training of staff on the new system. Harris will provide 20 days of training for staff.
At the conclusion of the discussion the Town Council voted unanimously to award the software contract to Harris Computer Systems at a price of $38,135 plus travel and lodging costs.
Resolution for T-21 Grant Assistance for Property Acquisition
The Town Council unanimously passed a continuing Resolution for T-21 Grant Assistance for Property Acquisition.
Announcements and Comments
Councilwoman Richardson reported that the next meeting of the Planning Commission will occur on Tuesday October 24 at 7:00 p.m.
Councilman Ross asked Chief Lewis how complaints about barking dogs were handled and whether such complaints had recently increased. Chief Lewis responded that the most recent citation of someone for a barking dog had not been well received by the Court. Judge Philips had stated that “Dogs bark. If the town doesn’t want dogs to bark, get rid of the dogs.” The Judge told Lewis and all other law enforcement agencies of incorporated towns in the county to not bring barking dog cases into the court. A discussion ensued about whether the issue was ineffective language in the Town’s noise ordinance or a lack of interest by the court in dealing with such cases. The conclusion was that lack of interest was the issue. Chief Lewis said he did not have a count of complaints about barking dogs, but he knew these had increase a great deal during the previous summer. Mr. Ritter said that he and the Chief were working on an update of the Town’s noise ordinance and would soon present proposed revisions to the Ordinance Committee. Mayor Tarr noted that Judge Philips had recently retired and that perhaps the Town should renew enforcement of the noise ordinance and find out if the court had experienced a change of attitude toward barking dogs.
Councilman Wolffe complimented Karen Hipple and the staff for the multi-year effort to plan the computer upgrade that was approved during the meeting. He observed that her patience paid off in the selection of an affordable, appropriate and technologically up-to-date system for the Town.
Councilman Howard expressed concern about the condition of public roads after work had been completed to install a water line or other utility. He observed that the patching done after the work had been completed created a rough road surface. He asked if the Town could not purchase a compactor that would more effectively complete such repairs to the road surfaced. Mayor Tarr agreed and Mr. Crosby said that he would investigate options.
The Meeting Adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
Notes by Bill Troxler
N.B. These notes do not constitute the public record of this meeting. The information contained herein is offered in good faith, is presented as accurately as possible, is thought to be a complete account of the proceedings. These notes are intended to be a public service devoid of political commentary for those who are interested in following the civic affairs of Chincoteague Island. Notes of the meeting are recorded, transcribed and distributed by volunteers who receive no financial compensation for their efforts.