Board to keep reviewing reval grievances

HENDERSON — The town Board of Assessment Review held an illegal meeting Wednesday afternoon and went into a legally questionable executive session with Town Attorney David A. Renzi.

Afterward, board Chairman Donald E. Smith said BAR will continue to review grievances "unless the town board comes to us and says 'Stop.'" The Town Council will hold a regular meeting tonight.

The meeting came in the midst of a fight between the Town Council and the Jefferson County Office of Real Property Tax Services over whether the council could throw out property revaluation figures to be used in figuring residents' 2009 taxes more than a month after the tentative tax roll was filed with the county.

Mr. Smith cited "possible litigation" as the reason for BAR's executive session, which lasted about an hour. Thomas R. Seifert, Wayne "Win" Wilson and Robert E. Ashodian attended; Francis W. "Butch" Clark was absent.

State open meetings law says a public body may call an executive session to discuss "proposed, pending or current litigation." However, when questioned whether the board was aware of any proposed litigation, Mr. Smith reiterated "possible" litigation as the reason for the closed session.

County Real Property Tax Services Director Paul J. Warneck said he believed such an executive session was improper. "Until you have a final (tax) roll, no one can file litigation against it, so you can't claim it's potential litigation," he said.

Mr. Warneck added that he has requested information from the state Office of Real Property Tax Services on how taxpayers' grievances to BAR over their assessments might be heard in the event the town BAR decides to stop the process. It appears that county officials could hear grievances in a pinch, he said.

The Henderson BAR meeting Wednesday also violated state open meetings law in failing to give notice to the public or news media in advance.

Mr. Smith said that since the board must meet as often as possible for days at a time to complete its work, he believed it was not necessary to give notice of each reconvening of the group.

However, advisory opinions available from the online files of the state's Committee on Open Government do not support that claim. In a 1997 advisory opinion, the committee's executive director, Robert J. Freeman, wrote, "From my perspective, one of the basic principles inherent in the Open Meetings Law involves the public's right to know when and where meetings of public bodies will be held. When a meeting held on a given day is concluded, whether by means of the term 'recess' or 'adjournment,' and the public body will not meet again until some day in the future, I believe that it must provide notice, and that the ensuing gathering constitutes a new meeting. Absent notice given in that circumstance, the public may have no way of knowing of the existence of a meeting, and the purposes of the law would be thwarted."

That opinion goes on to say that, "Although the Open Meetings Law does not make reference to 'special' or 'emergency' meetings, if, for example, there is a need to convene quickly, the notice requirements can generally be met by telephoning the local news media and by posting notice in one or more designated locations."

When asked earlier in the day whether a meeting was in fact planned for the afternoon, Mr. Seifert refused to comment, and Mr. Smith said the meeting would be "just between members to make a decision on something. We don't want to sit there and try to have a discussion with everyone piping in — that's the problem."

BAR will meet at 9 a.m. Friday in the town office, 12105 Town Barn Road, to complete hearing grievances from taxpayers over their new property assessments.