Village Focused on Addressing Valuation Error, Not Pointing Fingers

Village officials are strategizing over on a fix for the error that could see , but their plan doesn't involve going after who they see as the guilty party, Shorewood's assessor.

Village Manager Chris Swartz said Shorewood is mulling several options to fix the error that came to light after the value of the village's Tax Incremental Financing District No. 1, which blankets much of the business district, was recorded and published by the state Department of Revenue as $76.7 million too high.

If not fixed, the mistake could mean Shorewood property owners would have to fork over an estimated $2 million extra on next year’s bill, or $442 more on a home assessed at $300,000, based on this year's tax rate. The money will, however, roll over for 2013, where property owners will pay $2 million less.

The village's levy must be based on the total equalized value of property in Shorewood published by the Department of Revenue.

While village officials have some specific plans to address the error, they are highly complicated and take some time to nail down, Swartz said.

The village's obvious first option is to have the state fix the error. However, Department of Revenue Equalization Section Chief Scott Shields said previously the state's hands are tied, as state statutes require the department to wait until the following year to correct the error, at which point it will lower the tax district value by an equal amount.

Shorewood could borrow the money, but that would translate to higher taxes in the future, Swartz continued.

Swartz said he plans to bring some specifics to the Village Board at its next meeting Sept. 6, after which officials will share them with state Sen. Alberta Darling (R-River Hills), who they hope can provide some political help.

The mistake is clearly on the shoulders of the village’s assessor, Mark Brown of Associated Appraisal Consultants, Inc., Swartz said, but at this point the village is focusing on fixing it, rather than pointing fingers.

“Could we sue the assessor?" Swartz asked. "Sure, but that won’t really solve the problem. Holding them accountable is important, but shouldn't be our focus right now."

Meanwhile, the assessor says it is also working with the state to fix the problem.

Brown wouldn't say whether Associated Appraisal was responsible for the error when contacted by a Patch reporter.

“It is way too early to comment on this,” Mark Brown said. “We are working with the Department of Revenue on it.”

The state Department of Revenue says it noticed the value of the tax district was too high when it received data in an electronic file, but was reassured by the assessor that the numbers were correct.