Jan 8, 2018 4 min read

Washington County’s answer to a recent open-records request raises questions about how much officials know about the methods a contractor used to arrive at property values during the countywide reassessment.

In a decision Monday, the state Office of Open Records ordered the county to turn over records showing how software company Tyler Technologies calculated new land values.

The ruling came in response to an appeal from city resident Mike Jones, who initially sought information from the county in early November.

“The recent assessment affects every property owner in the county, and it’s important for the county to be able to explain how those properties were assessed,” said Jones, who is regional editor of the Observer-Reporter, but is pursuing the records as a private citizen under the Right To Know Law. “If what they’re saying is they don’t have access to that or don’t know the methodology, how can they defend those values on appeal by individual property owners?”

County officials contend the information Jones is seeking isn’t part of any public record. Solicitor J. Lynn DeHaven said it also “wasn’t really clear” what Jones had requested.

DeHaven said he would review the state office’s decision, which he hadn’t seen, and “take appropriate action.”

The county entered a $6.9 million contract with Tyler in 2013 to perform the reassessment.

In his original request to county open-records officer Cynthia Griffin, Jones asked for “the formula/methodology/algorithm” Tyler “used to calculate the land values for Washington County’s property reassessment” and “any other relevant information about how the company assessed individual land values” during that process.

Griffin denied that request, saying the county didn’t have such a record. She suggested Jones contact Tyler.

In his appeal, Jones pointed to a section of the law that requires government agencies to make records related to government work accessible to the public, even if the records are in the possession of a third party, such as a contractor.

Griffin countered that by recommending Jones contact Tyler, she “was not suggesting or advising” him that Tyler had such a record, either.

“As I advised Mr. Jones, no public record exists in regard to his request,” she wrote in a filing.

The Office of Open Records, however, found the county hadn’t proved such records weren’t available.

Appeals officer Kathleen A. Higgins wrote in a decision that “based on the evidence submitted, the county has established that Tyler Technologies conducted a reassessment on behalf of the County, but has not demonstrated or addressed whether the company was contacted by the County regarding the requested records. A County property assessment relates to a government function, and thus, records in possession of Tyler Technologies related to the County reassessment are accessible …”

Griffin couldn’t be reached for comment. Chief assessor Brad Boni politely declined to answer questions, saying he thought officials should have internal discussions beforehand to gather more information.

A Tyler spokeswoman referred questions about its methods back to the county.

“Please contact the county with any questions you have related to the Washington County reassessment project,” Jennifer Kepler said in an email.

Jones questioned how property owners can plead their cases when they go before the assessments board without knowing how the county arrived at a valuation of their property.

He and his wife have a pending appeal of their property valuation in Washington County Court.

The board of assessments denied a petition contesting their new assessment in October. Through research during that process, Jones said he found “wide variations” in the new land values within the city and wanted to know how that occurred.

Valuations of land are particularly important in the city. Unlike most municipalities, Washington levies taxes on land and buildings separately.

For example, Jones’ calculations put the citywide average for parcel valuations at $1.47 a square foot. The less than quarter acre his Acheson Avenue house sits on was assessed at $4.04 a square foot. One five-acre parcel on nearby Redstone Lane is assessed at 26 cents a square foot.

“My land was assessed at twice as much as some of my immediate neighbors, 20 times as much as other properties in my neighborhood,” Jones said.