July 20, 1978 Shelton Mason County Journal | ![]() |
©
Shelton Mason County Journal. All rights reserved. Upgrade to access Premium Tools
PAGE 33 (33 of 36 available) PREVIOUS NEXT Jumbo Image Save To Scrapbook Set Notifiers PDF JPG
July 20, 1978 |
|
Website © 2025. All content copyrighted. Copyright Information Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Request Content Removal | About / FAQ | Get Acrobat Reader ![]() |
praisers: functionaries you love to hate
LEE (
now, a few words on
of those people you just !
to hate - the county
people see one of
working, they invariably
over and start complaining
high their taxes are,
have gotten out of
so forth.
first I tell them
talking to the wrong guy.
nothing to do with
taxes. That's up to the
themselves and their
then, I tell them I'm
in only one thing - a
Nothing more,
less."
says Bill Petersen, who as
deputy for the county
supervises the county's
ith citizens raving about
Y government and tax
filling the air, it's easy
why the county
deers are not the most
guys. But who among us
to think how they
out the situation.
it's easy to understand
catch all the flak -
visible and our work's the
in the taxation process.
Dt if you stop to think
someone getting mad at
kind of pointless, I
don't control taxes. In
don't even like to talk
taxes. Now if a person
to discuss his appraisal,
ears."
his words you get the
that Petersen is a man
satisfaction in doing
Thursday, July 20, 1978
Bill Petersen, county's chief appraiser
his job well, but a man who is
also frustrated because few
appreciate his efforts.
"It's funny in a way.
Everybody acts like they're
really mad at us, but they must
not be all that upset because we
receive what I consider few
complaints abput our work.
"If somebody doesn't like
our appraisal, it's clearcut what
they can do - appeal to the
County Board of Equalization.
Yet, considering all the appraisal
our office does, we get
surprisingly few appeals."
Over the past 12 months
Petersen's staff has evaluated, he
estimates, more than 12,000
parcels of land. Over the past
few months these owners have
been notified of these valuations.
They were also told how to
appeal their appraisal.
On Monday, the deadline for
filing those appeals passed. And
yet, out of those 12,000
evaluations, Petersen says
approximately 150 people, about
one percent, saw fit to tile
appeals.
"Personally, I think that
Section of the Shelton-Mason County Journal
shows we're doing our job right.
It also says people aren't really
mad at us, otherwise we'd be
flooded with appeals."
Doing their job right is "in
theory simple," says Petersen.
"Ideally, our goal is to assess
each parcel of land at 100
percent of its market value, and
to do it once each year.
"But in practice things don't
quite work that way.
"For one thing, we can't get
around to each piece of property
in the county, each year. We just
don't have the staff. It would
take four times the number of
appraisers we have now to do
that and it would hardly be
economically feasible."
Since the field office
currently has six appraisers, this
is how they're working at it.
"We've divided the county
into four areas that are roughly
equal in parcel count. These
areas generally cover school
district boundaries. Then we did
a sales analysis to find which
areas had the most activity and
'evaluation lag.' This helped us
decide in what order we would
concentrate on each of the four
areas. So we came up with four
areas and we set out to do area
one the first year; area two, the
second; and so on over the next
four years. Then we start the
cycle all over again."
Winner in the sales
sweepstakes, now known as area
one, covers the Pioneer and
Grapeview school districts. For
the past year Petersen's office
has been concentrating on this
area. Now they are finished,
except for the appeals.
Next up is area two, which
includes the North Mason school
district. Appraising on that
sector will begin within the next
few weeks.
Although landowners have
the right to appeal directly to
the County Board of
Equalization, Petersen says most
of the appraisal disagreements
are handled on a more informal
basis, if possible.
"If somebody has a gripe
over his appraisal, we encourage
them to contact the field office
first. Then I get together with
the particular appraiser and we
review the appraisal to make sure
we haven't made a mistake. Then
if we still think our appraisers
correct and the owner disagrees,
it goes before the board.
"Basically what we try to do
is weed out the mistakes so we
don't waste time at the board."
Petersen encourages anyone
who feels their appraisal to be
unfair to appeal. But he also
warns that the board retains the
power Io raise the evaluation if
it deems the amount was set too
low.
"For example, in the board
session somebody might say,
'But my basement's only half
finished.'
"Then the appraiser might
say, 'Hey, we don't have you
down for a basement at all.' So,
conceivably, the evaluation could
go up.in such a case.
"Now I'm not saying that
such a thing is common. But
people should be aware that the
board has that power. It doesn't
usually happen, but it could."
If the landowner is still
unsatisfied with the county
board's decision, Petersen says
that the State Board of Tax
Appeals is next in line.
"Once again, the landowner
should be aware of the power
retained by the appeal board to
increase the evaluation.
Especially because of the subtle,
but sometimes important,
difference between the county
and state boards.
"Whereas the county board is
concerned with assuring that the
valuations are equal to
comparable land, the state board
is interested in making sure the
valuation reflects the lO0-percent
market value for that land.
"In other words, a valuation
the county board might consider
fair because it's equal to
surrounding property values, the
state board might decide is below
market value and raise
accordingly.
"Now I'm not emphasizing
these points to scare people off,
but I'm afraid most people aren't
aware of what could happen.
And they should be, because it
has."
Another point Petersen says
should be stressed is that the
areas currently being reappraised
are suffering from an "appraising
lag."
"This means that when the
reappraisal notice arrives it's not
only going to reflect the
property's rise in value over the
past year, but for the past four.
And for people living along the
water that can be a really big
surprise."
In the sales analysis
performed last year, the
assessor's office found that on
the overall average evaluations
fell 32 percent below current
market values for area one.
"Of course this is an average,
so valuation lag for waterfront
property might work out to be
much greater, while backwoods
lots might be less."
Another popular
misconception Petersen would like
to disperse is that the appraisals
are set to anticipate future rises
in property values.
"We aim for a combination
of current market values and
equalization. Nothing more,
nothing less."
Although Petersen might not
like to discuss taxes, he points
out that three basic classes of
land qualify for property tax
relief.
Generally, these designations
are open space, farm and
agricultural land, and timberland.
Exemptions are also available
for senior citizens and disabled
persons.
But before you get your
hopes up, Petersen urges contact
with the assessor's office because
the requirements for the
exemptions are complex and
precise.
"In other words, you don't
get something for nothing. If
you're sincerely using the
exemption for what it was
designed, you can benefit. But if
you try to work your way
around it, the exemptions are set
up to penalize, especially the
land designations.
Petersen says he realizes that
appraising is not the most
glamorous of occupations.
"I think the most important
thing for people to accept about
appraisers is that they're just
doing a job that people want
done.
"If we're going to have
governmental services, then we're
going to have taxation. And with
taxation must come some system
of appraisal and valuation to at
least strive for equal taxation."
So the next time the county
appraiser comes to your house,
don't slam the door in his face,
threaten him with your
sawed-off shotgun or whine
about skyrocketing taxes.
After all, he's only human.
unt still up in air
rth Mason lowers bond i ue
meeting last Thursday
Mason School Board
to revise downward the
t the district will be
Voters to approve for a
in September.
decision came
a from the
Mason School's
Committee that the
3unt be reduced from
$2.6 million to
for the committee,
ship explained that
by the State
Ucation have brought
need for reduction.
Originally, the board
understood that the district
would have to be bonded for at
least 2.5 percent of its total
evaluation before it could qualify
for state matching funds for
construction and modernization.
But when Superintendent
Norm Sanders recently met with
board of education officials in
Olympia they informed him that
the state law has now changed.
"It's one of those good-news,
bad.news situations," says
Blankenship.
As for the good news, the
state board has amended the 2.5
percent minimum bonding
requirement to add "or such
Other amount as the .school
board deems necessary."
As for the bad news, the
state no longer provides
matching funds for
modernization. Now the funds
can only be used for new
construction and the purchasing
of collateral equipment.
In its original plans, the
board had intended to use state
matching funds to help pay for
repair, or "modernization," of
the roofs on the gymnasium,
high school, middle school and
elementary school buildings.
Rewiring the cafetorium,
Fire claims Razor Road home
Farly SUnday morning, the unoccupied Allen Davies residence located off
azor Hoed on South Shore burst into flames. Nearby neighbors spotted
nd reported the blaze. Belfair's fire department responded with three fire
rucks, one hters to contain the fir
tanker and 15 firef'g " " e to one e-, ,- *-^
hOUse. Damage estimates reach $18.000. Electrical failure is bei ---v-'`'¢
nave caused the mishap. The Davies were staying in Port Orchar(jUVn u,h °
mght of the fire. Belfair Fire Chief Barry Snover inspects. - .....
painting several buildings and
rebricking a boiler were also
planned with matching funds.
Although the board says it
agrees with the advisory
committee's recommendation, it
deferred setting the final amount
until its special meeting next
week. As board member Patrick
Ruff explained, "It's easy to
believe the bad.news parts, but
the good news seems too good
to be true."
The board says it will wait
unfil the district can check with
legal counsel to determine if the
district can, indeed, set the
minimum amount of bonding
needed to qualify for matching
funds. The district would like to
use matching funds for
construction of a new shop and
drawing classroom building on
the bond proposal.
By law, the board was
required to make public its
intention to place a bond issue
on the September 19 ballot at
the meeting last week. The board
has until August, however, to set
the final amount of the bond
request.
Board members also
indicated that they would like to
further consider the $120,000
amount estimated by the
committee for the roof repairs,
rebricking, painting and rewiring.
The board felt that the estimate
may be too low.
As set out in its report to
the board, the committee
recommended that the proposed
$597,000 bond issue be allocated
in the following priorities:
(1) $43,000 to pay the
district's promised share of
construction costs for the Kitsap
Vocational Skills Center in
Bremerton.
(2) $120,000 for roof and
other repairs including boiler
rebricking, cafetorium rewiring
and general painting.
(3) $30,000 to equip the
four-classroom elementary school
addition built with Trident
impact funds.
(4) $330,000 to construct
and equip a 4,800.square-foot
shop and drawing classroom
building.
(5) $20,000 to convert the
existing shop building into use as
a district maintenance area or
administrative office center.
(6) $60,000 to provide a
new well supply at the h!gh
school and middle school campus
area.
(7) $54,300 for 10 percent
contingency funds.
Blankenship explained that
the committee based its
$330,000 estimate for
construction of the shop building
on the recommended state
average of $63 per square foot.
He says the initial cost for
construction would be less than
for a conventional classroom
building, but equipping the shop
would drive the price back up to
the average level. .
If the district qualified for
matching funds and built the
shop area for the $330,000
estimate, then the district would
receive an additional ;133,900 in
state funds.
Blankenship said these
additional state funds were not
included in the committee's
report becaus of the doubts
surrounding the minimum
bonding requirements. He
explained that the state funds, if
received, could then be used for
other projects planned by the
district.
The committee also
recommended that the shop
building be the only construction
done by the district until an
architect is hired to complete a
master facilities plan.
Board chairman Jerry Reid
questioned the committee's
recommendation for constructing
the shop building since it also
advised continuation in the
Kitsap Vocational Skills Center.
Blankenship explained that
two programs have little overlap.
"Actually it might be more
accurate to consider North
Mason's shop building as more of
a pre.vocational skills center. The
Kitsap center enrolls only juniors
and seniors ha more technical,
specialized fields, while the
(Please turn to page four.)
Dunk
Determination and close proximity helped put dunk-tank volunteer Don
LePere in the drink during last Saturday's Belfair Summer Festival.