If you had to “malign design” a property assessment and tax system
(i.e., one that is guaranteed to fail), where would you start?
13 Ways to Kill Your Community
My old friend, former Alberta Minister of Municipal Affairs, Doug Griffiths, wrote a book called 13 Ways to Kill Your Community. On Amazon, he writes, “Here is a handy manual, chock-full of proven ideas, for the up-and-coming town wrecker.”
You may have guessed that the book isn’t actually about killing communities – it’s about avoiding the things that will do just that. Doug made a very successful career of using this book as the basis of working with groups far and wide to implement basic community development strategies. Brilliant hook to get people interested.
So you’ll forgive me if I steal a good idea and present you with a list of things that you would definitely want to do if you were to design a property assessment and tax system that is sure to 1) anger and frustrate; 2) confuse; 3) undermine confidence in the system; and 4) cause you to question the abilities of the people in it.
What if you really wanted to seal the deal and design a system that “fails to meet the test of open and transparent property taxation,” according to the International Association of Assessing Officers? Well, look no further than New Brunswick for the perfect template. It’s all here for the taking.
Nine strategies for your "malign design"
I’m going to outline nine strategies that will ensure your success in creating this “malign design” (you could even use that as a catchphrase when presenting your findings to the powers that be). As I mentioned in last week’s column in the Northumberland Free Press, I will, over the next number of weeks, reprise and/or delve more deeply into these issues. Today, though, I’ll just hit the high points in order to whet your appetite.
After all, who wouldn’t want to design a system that’s “best in class”?
Strategy #1
Ensure that taxes always increase when assessments do, as this will create extra income that two levels of government would undoubtedly like. NEVER neutralize overall assessment increases with offsetting tax rate reductions because that will only make people think you’re not serious about surplus revenue generation. Which you, of course, are.
Strategy #2
Ensure that no one really knows how tax rates work and how residential and non-residential rates are connected. It’s best to keep a bit of mystery in your relations with members of the public, so state emphatically that you are bound by some sort of “170% limit” and send them on their merry way.
Strategy #3
Tell people that they’re welcome to submit a “Request for Assessment Review” but under no circumstances should you include anything online about how actually to go about doing that. (If only there were some sort of book written on that topic…)
Strategy #4
Employ assessment voodoo that will make people think that the government is putting a lid on tax increases while actually only spreading them out over time. Call it something like – oh, I don’t know – “Spike Protection Mechanism” so that people think that it’s actually protecting them from something. And whatever you do, don’t actually protect people from tax increases by reducing tax rates because that’s just crazy talk.
Strategy #5
This one is extremely important. Under no circumstances should you have anything in the system that requires similar properties to be treated similarly. After all, there’s no reason whatsoever why you shouldn’t be paying more tax than your neighbour on the same kind of house. You’re a good citizen who wants to do more than your part to keep the deficit and debt under control and you think your “malign design” should encourage that in others.
Strategy #6
Ensure that the system enables property owners and property tax consultants to gum up the review system with frivolous requests for assessment review. Why? Because the last thing you want is for assessors to have sufficient time to do anything else during the year. More reviews mean fewer re-inspections and that, in turn, leads to more inequities in the system. Which is what you want, no?
Strategy #7
Have assessment appeal boards composed of people who have little or no training in valuation. And then, ensure that complex cases are presented in front of such people so that the decisions reflect that limited knowledge base. What could possibly go wrong?
Strategy #8
Under no circumstances should you devise any type of public communication policy that explains things such as: why timberland is not assessed at market value; why assessments are often well below recent sales prices; why heavy industrial properties commonly appear underassessed and undertaxed. There are often good explanations for such things but it’s best to treat the public as being on a “need to know” basis. Oh, and don’t hesitate to invoke “privacy” as your inviolable reason for clamming up. Live by the motto: “No communication is the best communication”.
Strategy #9
This one is at the foundation of all the others, so don’t skip over it under any circumstances. Whatever you do, don’t consider industry best practices. Don’t dare look at how other jurisdictions have designed their systems because that’ll only cloud your judgement. Don’t listen to experts, such as those high-falutin’ International Association of Assessing Officers people. They’ll do nothing but mislead you toward designing a system that’s fair and transparent, and one in which taxpayers have some confidence and respect.
And confidence and respect for a property assessment and taxation system is the last thing you’d want in your “malign design”. Right?
Want to understand our property assessment and taxation system better and make it work to your advantage?
See my new book:
Taxing New Brunswick: An Insider’s Guide to Successfully Challenging Your NB Property Assessment (available on Amazon)