Assessing the Assessor
Assessing the Assessor
1 The table below is the result of a study completed by six volunteers, who analyzed approximately 1,300 sales reported sold between October 1, 2007 and August 31, 2008.
2 Assessors compare SEV values to actual sales data, within a tax district. Each municipality can have several districts made up of similar type properties.
3 Assessing techniques used by the assessors are generally the same, but can have some significant differences.
4 Because market values are always changing, the assessor is always trying to adjust to the market. The goal is to set SEV (State Equalized Value) at 50% of Market Value.
5 If sale prices, within a district, indicate that SEVs were 10% low, all of the properties in that district would be increased by 10%. Individual adjustments are generally not made.
6 It is estimated that county wide, a total of 20 to 25 people with a combined budget of approximately $1.5 Million dollars complete the assessment study.
7 Volunteers do not have the resources to do the assessment study, but we can compare sale prices to SEVs, and rank the accuracy of the assessors, and make general observations.
8 The Tax Adjustment/Municipality is only generally accurate, and is the amount of overtax. Each property would need to be individually analyzed to be precise.									Error
9 The 2009 Taxable Value is again, only generally accurate. Taxable Value for each property should be determined and then totalled for each municipality.									Margin

Rank	Municipality	Assessor	Sample	Ind SEV⁵	Tax Adjustment⁸	2008	Ind 2009 ⁹	%
Click on any municipality to see detail.			Size	Adj	Municipality	Taxable Value	Taxable Value	CHG
1	Grant	Sue Hansman	15	-10%		$ 62,892,701	$ 65,722,873	4.5%	10%
2	Casco	Paul Vincent	17	-11%	$ -	$ 154,285,193	$ 161,228,027	4.5%	11%
3	Cottrellville	Barb Schutt	21	-14%		$ 139,457,188	$ 145,732,761	4.5%	14%
4	Port Huron Twp	Terry Sargent	70	-15%	$ 593,011	$ 295,150,454	$ 277,355,935	-6.0%	15%
5	China	Mark Miano	21	-17%	-	$ 518,102,739	$ 534,562,911	3.2%	17%
6	Fort Gratiot	Mike Kavanaugh	95	-17%	$ 646,642	$ 479,591,059	$ 462,030,207	-3.7%	17%
7	Marysville	Ann Ratliff	108	-18%	$ 2,139,156	$ 434,744,258	$ 392,136,136	-9.8%	18%
8	Burtchville	Paul Vincent	23	-20%		$ 133,510,298	$ 139,518,261	4.5%	20%
9	Lynn	Tom Lupo	10	-20%	$ -	$ 80,968,906	$ 84,612,507	4.5%	20%
10	Kenockee	Paul Vincent	13	-20%		$ 43,581,774	$ 45,542,954	4.5%	20%
11	Brockway	Sue Hansman	15	-21%	$ -	$ 67,000,406	$ 70,015,424	4.5%	21%
12	Clay	Barb Schutt	83	-21%	-	$ 498,072,871	$ 505,091,082	1.4%	21%
13	Kimball	Marvin Zimmer	78	-22%	$ -	$ 267,624,071	$ 273,141,474	2.1%	22%
14	St. Clair Twp	Debbie Rickert	47	-22%	$ -	$ 309,321,509	$ 320,190,203	3.5%	22%
15	Ira	John Jones	18	-23%	$ 16,779	$ 187,638,976	$ 186,522,532	-0.6%	23%
16	Berlin	Steve Coucke	12	-24%	$ -	$ 114,905,773	$ 120,076,533	4.5%	24%
17	East China	Mark Miano	21	-24%		$ 513,783,082	$ 536,903,321	4.5%	24%
18	Algonac	Mark Miano	56	-26%	$ 685,765	$ 127,981,203	$ 110,787,102	-13.4%	26%
19	Clyde	Barb Cutcher	39	-27%	$ 52,632	$ 170,295,886	$ 168,381,326	-1.1%	27%
20	St. Clair City	Lynn Houston	71	-29%	$ 2,263,598	$ 246,506,238	$ 195,591,368	-20.7%	29%
21	Emmett	Paul Vincent	22	-30%	$ -	$ 80,188,634	$ 81,506,287	1.6%	30%
22	Riley	Paula Zegelien	22	-30%	$ 66,118	$ 122,821,552	$ 120,314,670	-2.0%	30%
23	Port Huron City	Randy Fernandez	328	-31%	$ 7,413,489	$ 794,198,375	$ 632,224,713	-20.4%	31%
24	Columbus	Sue Hansman	22	-31%	$ 1,059,580	$ 218,453,362	$ 180,428,673	-17.4%	31%
25	Marine City	SCC Equalization	53	-33%	$ 1,366,390	$ 132,154,124	$ 103,618,449	-21.6%	33%
26	Memphis	Vern Pearl	6	-33%	$ 78,327	$ 8,771,606	$ 7,052,621	-19.6%	33%
27	Mussey	Doug Okorowski	36	-34%	$ 391,140	$ 121,152,743	$ 106,495,719	-12.1%	34%
28	Greenwood	Paul Vincent	10	-35%	$ 903,729	$ 128,153,608	$ 102,269,236	-20.2%	35%
29	Yale	Tom Schlichting	10	-38%	$ 474,060	$ 40,221,721	$ 30,211,131	-24.9%	38%
30	Wales	Vern Pearl	19	-40%	$ 621,142	$ 116,805,128	$ 95,266,751	-18.4%	40%
31	Richmond					$ 340,517	$ 355,840	4.5%
	Totals		1,361	-21%	$ 18,771,558