The 2006 revaluation was phased in, in order not to overburden some people whose previous valuations had been low and had since risen.
The phase-in was based on 80% of the old valuation -- which, if I 'm not mistaken was basically the 1999 valuations -- plus 20% of the 10/1/2006 valuation. The correctness of the new valuation was barely considered. We stuck mostly with data we knew to be seriously out of date
The 2006 valuation had its flaws, the most prominent of which was that it undervalued commercial property. But it accounted for the huge appreciation in certain neighborhoods -- those which have access to Long Island Sound in particular -- and certain kinds of properties -- former single-family homes that have been subdivided into multifamily rentals until the owner can sell them as teardowns.
We'd already seen the 2003 valuation rejected, mostly through the efforts of the folks in waterfront neighborhoods, so we kept the 1999 valuations for another few years. One of the effects of this is that new construction since 1999, which had been given a very low valuation compared to its market value, was favored with the continuation of those generous valuations. And on the West Side, where single-family properties were replaced with townhouse condominiums, the valuations still looked pretty much like 1999.
When the 2006 revaluation came along, it was phased in so as not to burden the owners of condominiums and the owners of waterfront property. And so we are still operating -- 80% -- on 1999 valuations.
With the 10/1/2007 valuation, we got much better valuations. That is, they come closer to describing the market value of the properties, based on transactions in the neighborhoods. The valuations of commercial property are closer to the transactions we've observed. (The buildings are vastly overvalued, and the land still undervalued, but the total is moving in the right direction, particularly for the well-developed properties.) Teardowns have not been taken account of in the valuations; a neighborhood with several teardowns gives us a very reliable measure of what the land is worth there, but it isn't showing up in the valuations yet.
I've got a lot of other comments on the current valuations, some of which I've already posted at lvtfan.typepad.com and will cross-post here soon (click on "assessment" in the categories "cloud" in the left sidebar), and others which I will post here as time permits. (I've got a 6000 line spreadsheet which covers a lot of properties!)
If we phase in the 2007 revaluation, we merely perpetuate the injustices of the past valuations. We do not get our moneysworth for the 2007 work. The values become "nice to know" rather than a tool to move Stamford toward economic justice and a fair sharing of the costs of providing all the services that local propertyowners -- rightly -- pay for.
I hope that the 10/1/2007 revaluation will not be phased in. And I hope that it will become Stamford's policy to revalue all properties every year or every other year. And that maps of land values will be generated and posted online for all to see. The quality of our valuations will continue to improve -- to cluster more tightly around the real value of the land plus the depreciated value of the existing building.
Comments