From Marylanders for Fair Property Taxation:
Chairman Kasemeyer and Committee Members
Here we go again?? Yesterday at the hearing on SB 215 Internet Access to Worksheets, SDAT, in the person of Director Robert E. Young, we again saw the difficulty SDAT people have in telling the whole truth.
Director Young testified that the Department opposed Internet Access to Worksheets on two grounds. One, a 40 year old law requires that these records remain private and must be protected except in the case of a taxpayer filing an appeal at which time the taxpayer upon payment of a fee can obtain copies of any comparable worksheet desired. The second
objection was that Towson University that developed and maintains SDAT’s website estimates a cost of $200,000 to implement this action with a searchable database on the Internet.
We find several “errors” in this testimony. If Mr. Young is so zealous about protecting our 2 million property worksheets how is it that said records are already in the possession of several private companies. One major source, SpecPrints (www.specprint.com/state_prc.htm) has all 24 jurisdictions available in a searchable data base for about $115.00 to $225.00 per jurisdiction. They list over 13 million records for sale?? That really protects our so-called privacy?? The raw data format can easily be made searchable with key word software at costs far less than the grossly exaggerated $200,000 figure. It is ludicrous for anyone to think that SDAT does not already have a searchable regime to access any of its 2 million properties and that said database could not be easily adapted for Internet access just as their existing “Real Property Search” database already has in place. Let us assure you that as a retired Professional Engineer and former IT Administrator for our 12 office 800 man organization, we know our programmers could adapt their system to anyone’s use in a heartbeat at far less than a $200,000 cost.
Incidentally, our information from Senator Glassman is that Towson estimated the cost of the conversion at $10,000. That’s a considerable cost discrepancy that needs to be verified by each of us.
We fail to understand why Lobbyist Craig Biggs and Director Robert Young, public servants, who should be trying to help the State and its taxpayers, continually fights to keep an outdated failing system in a status quo mode instead of trying to work with us and others to bring SDAT into the 21st century with proper technology to relieve the overstressed 158 assessors (down from 280). Mr. Young is quoted in the Sunpapers on January 20, 2012 saying his staff is incapable of making field inspections and maintaining records, causing undue delays and backlogs in the assessment appeals system and causing monumental “errors” in assessments that are costing all 24 jurisdictions millions of dollars
in tax assessment base.
Respectfully, we ask you to pass this SB 215 and also support our companion Task Force HB 881 to study the whole assessment and appeals system to improve this archaic system and its like minded staff by bringing it into line with current technology.
Roy Whiteley, Founder
Are you proposing that the state spend more money to make it easier for you to dispute you tax assessment? What private company would give you expanded reasons to get a discount on their product? Yes, the law needs to be changed to allow at large public information to be available past the current factual and descriptive information. The ability of private companies to provide the same service exists for sure and you as a disputing party can use their data to contest or appeal your assessment. now the state has to give you the information too. That’s like saying the IRS should also make sure you pay the lowest tax even if you didn’t claim a tax credit, they should give it to you. I think if you want a fairer system to dispute you property assessment, I would be for that, but not for the state to also provide you the tools, expertise and data to appeal it too?
Yes, we are advocating that the SDAT spend a SMALL amount of money to save alot of taxpayer personal and State dollars. Director Young says he cannot keep up with manadated site inspections, updating of physical records and maintenance of assessment values. The workload of assessors by his quotes in the SUN are causing errors, causing undue appeals delays and in general costing you and I money. Look at the Sun articles in December and January to see the hundreds of millions of dollars being lost due to those errors. A recent analyses by one of the commercial outfits that performs appeals documentation showed in 8100 properties studied 20% were overassessed; 20% were underassessed and many were off the charts in wrong values!!! If you are in that overassessed group wouldn’t you want convenient access to public records to check out comparable data. Doing so properly depending on what you find might convince you NOT to file an appeal. This is where the savings come in. SDAT processes unnecesary paper because we must file an appeal BEFORE you can have access to comparable worksheets. They send you a letter achnowledging your appeal request. Later in separate correspondence they schedule a hearing. You may then requset comp worksheets. The assesor digs them out, reviews them, sometimes editing data unfavorable to them and mails out the requetsed data. ALL of that might be eliminated if you have worksheet access and find that maybe you are OK. We have a case with nearly identical properties one half mile apart, same age same size, same everything on the exterior. Identical assessment. After filing an appeal and obtaining the assssor identified comp we discoverd the comp has $55,000 in amenities in their home not in ours. We appealed and won a reduction. If we had prefiling access and saw the exact opposite in the two properties we would never have filed an appeal and that’s where the savings come in. The cost is minimal not the $200,000 the state claims and the savings would allow assessors to do the job they are paid to do– like updating assessments in concert with actual market conditions. Note some updates have not been made for over six months. Thanks for your interest Support our efforts in Delegate Glass’ HB 881 to create a Task Force to study and improve an unfair flawed system. heraing 3/2 at Ways % Means 1:00 PM Roy Whiteley
This is public information that should be made reasonably available to the public.
Roy, the taxpayer should have access to the worksheets the state used to determine an appealed assessment however I don’t know that this information needs to be open to the public, but only if you have an appeal. The state can offer this at a rather minimal cost if the savings from less appeals and it would add greater transparency to the process so that the property assessment is fair to the market, area and amenities in the property. At the same time, I have appealed my assessment several times over the years and I found it to be fast, convenient and didn’t feel like the assessor used a faulty process, data or method. Everyone feels like they are getting over appraised in a down or up market. Yearly determinations would be more effective, or a prorated system in which older properties have a depreciation factor to account for usage, wear and tear and replacement. Of course, this would have builders and developers in a fit that it would be unfair to newer properties.