Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 5 · column 4 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
appeals by landowners from their assessments. They noted that they are not allowed to consider recent sales in making their decisions since the assessment was based on 1989 and 1990 sales. Nevertheless, recent sales for 1992 have averaged fairly close to the assessments. However some sales have been considerably higher than assessments and others have been considerably lower.
Of the 102 cases the Board of Equalization has considered, the assessment was unchanged in 69 cases. It was increased in nine cases and decreased in 24 cases.
Equalization Board Chairman E. Franklin Warner said at the Monday meeting he expected to explain to the attorney and Board of Supervisors the process his board had gone through in deciding to increase the assessment on the Eastham properties. He denied that the board had been “arbitrary or capricious” in reaching its decisions.
He thanked his fellow board members, Eileen Day, John Ralph and Henry Hudson for their cooperation and hard work and also thanked the staff of the Commissioner of Revenue’s office, particularly Frances Dodson, for her work with the board.
“In every action we have been very careful to take into account the things we can take into account,” he said. “We cannot take into account inheritance taxes, land use, or the other responsibilities of landowners. Those things the statute says we should do, we did. Those things it says we cannot do, we didn’t. We have been diligent, and I hope the Board of Supervisors will support the actions we took.”
94.2%