(09/02) The Killington court ruling on Act 60 called the statistical methodology of equalizing the grand list “arbitrary and capricious” and “simply…not reliable”. [you can download the Killington Decision here]. That to me indicates Act 60 is unfair.

Equalizing the grand list means that annually, when the statewide property tax is levied, the state statistically adjusts our grand list appraisals to be equal to current market value. The basis for this change is current real estate sales. What’s happening is that many communities don’t have enough sales to statistically justify an assessment change and in some communities, sales rarely occur for all classes of property whether commercial, farms, apartments, residential, land etc.

For example, how many IBM plants are sold in Essex each year? Therefore to adjust IBM’s grand list, the state looks at current commercial property sales in the town. If a pet store and a barbershop sold, then that would be used as a basis for adjusting IBM’s assessment. Those sales are statically inadequate and using them is absurd but that’s what the state is doing in most of our communities to equalize the state grand list.

The court ruled that property values are not equal or fair between towns and the implication is massive. I believe it adds further credence that to establish fairness, we have to move away from the property tax to completely finance our schools unless we can come up with a magic formula to address this equalization flaw. Also, any funding changes should have constructive cost controls, encourage efficiencies, improve education quality and give parents a greater voice in educating their children.

Thank you for your calls and notes. I can be reached at 658-3975 (home), 228-2228 (State House) and via e-mail.

Rep. Frank Mazur
South Burlington