KRT Appraisal - Why didn't the City file a lawsuit?

As with all outside contract work, the KRT Appraisal Assessment Update for Nashua was done under a contract. It appears that the City was questioning non-compliance in the KRT contract and there are murmurs that the City might sue. The decision ultimately rests with the Mayor. Taxpayers paid over $500,000 for a services that appears unfulfilled.

 What sections of the Contract are in question?

1.     Section 2.2.3  and Section 3.1.1– Sales validation.

2.     Section 2.3.3 -Return the Data Collection Manual.

3.     Section 2.2.3 and 3.7.4 – Delivery of data

4.     Section 3.1.4 – Inspection of properties

5.     Section 3.1.7 – Delivery of Data

6.     Section 3.2.1 (7) and 3.3.9 – photograph of properties and improved properties

7.     Section 3.2.1 (10) – Documentation history of property record cards

8.     Section 3.3.4 (2) - Compilation of unqualified property transfers.

9.     Section 3.6.2.5 “Company shall make available to all property owners the property record card and market analysis related to their newly established market values.”

10.  Abatements

Let’s look at the perceived major points.

1.     Sales validation. KRT was require to perform a measure & list on sales used to determine the revaluation. In the State ordered hearing last August, a board member questioned who verified the sales data. This is a critical part of the statistical model development.  In a stunning revelation, Rob Tozier, KRT Vice President revealed that his company did not perform the sales verifying claiming the City instructed him it wasn’t required. There was no written amendment to the contract. Where was the credit for work not performed for the City?

In a March 1, 2018 Board of Aldermen meeting, KRT President, Ken Rodgers, states, “We’ll be analyzing sales from April 1st of 2017 to March 31, 2018.” https://youtu.be/_DWHploH3Ng?t=2100

“We would start by measuring and listing all the residential sales from 4/1/17 to 3/31/18. On the commercials we’ll look at a two year data set.” https://youtu.be/_DWHploH3Ng?t=2330

In a March 19, 2018, Board of Assessor meeting, Rob Tozier informs the board “We are verifying and collecting data on sales, driving by the property and reviewing MLS listings.” This statement conflicts with the information given to the Board of Tax and Land Appeals.

2.     Return the Data Collection Manual.

In a citizen Right-To-Know request, Attorney Leonard responded that no such document existed. What is the significance of the data collection manual? It tells the company how the City maintains its records and how KRT updated the data on our property record cards. The method used by KRT to document our property record cards is unclear. Where was the credit for no manual created?

9.      Section 3.6.2.5 “Company shall make available to all property owners the property record card and market analysis related to their newly established market values.” Residents were allowed to address their new assessment value through an informal hearing process.

Ken Rodgers “.. They can come in. We’ll go through their property record card to make sure that there is no discrepancies with the data. We can explain how the values is arrived. If they have comparable sales or what they feel are comparable, they can bring those in and show them to us or comparable assessments. If there are neighbors that have very similar houses and their values are very different. It’s those things that we can look at. We do put together to a taxpayer a little mini manual and explains the whole process and how we develop the values. How the neighborhoods were delineated. It gets into pretty good detail.” https://youtu.be/_DWHploH3Ng?t=2880

 No printed cards, no mini-manual, no detail and no credit to the contract.

10.  Finally, KRT was given an additional contract to perform 50 abatements as the abatement load was too high for the in-house assessors to handle. KRT produced scanty single page reports with no opinion of value. Taxpayers who carried the burden of proof, even those that produced appraisals, were blatantly disregarded. The Board of Assessor’s backed KRT’s shoddy work and approved only 33% of the KRT residential reductions only based on data changes, while they approved 85% of the Nashua Assessors reductions based on sales data and data changes. Property owners were treated unfairly in the KRT process.

 Why did the City accept less than it paid for from KRT? It appears that no one was holding KRT accountable resulting in, what appears to be, an abuse of public funds. If you hired a business to mow your lawn, would you pay full price if only half the lawn were mowed? Why not get the money back for service not rendered? The Mayor seems more hell bent on going after the employee and residents who discovered these problems. After all, they are less likely to have the finances to take this to court. They hushed the 20 year veteran of assessing with $100,000 payout and then smeared a residents reputation across numerous media sources for seeking Right-To-Knows on contract compliance. In a gross overreach of power, they sicced the police on the resident to threaten arrest if they didn’t back down on their public oversight. The Mayor should direct his energy towards compensation for possible contract non-compliance.

In a property meeting with Steve Bolton in February, he stated that he did not know if KRT did a good job or a poor job. How is this possible? The City attorney should have an opinion and understand contract compliance. Taxpayers paid KRT over $500,000 for the work. Mr. Bolton’s ambivalence indicates that the work was probably questionable. In effect, it appears KRT made fools of Nashua and took our money. Why is the Mayor allowing this to go unchallenged?

Laurie OrtolanoComment