Landowner Offers to Settle Tax Case

William Graham Hand Delivers Letter Asking the West Tisbury
Selectmen to Intervene with Assessors

By IAN FEIN

West Tisbury resident William W. Graham appealed to the town
selectmen this week to intervene in his costly tax case with the
assessors and help negotiate a settlement.

Mr. Graham approached selectmen at their regular meeting on
Wednesday, less than a week before attorneys and Massachusetts Appellate
Tax Board officials are scheduled to come to the Vineyard for a
three-day view and continuation of the ongoing legal hearing. He said he
came before the board in a constructive manner, and hoped a settlement
could be reached before more legal costs are incurred by either side.

"As much as I want to recover the considerable sum that I
believe is owed me, I am mindful that the people who would pay are not
those who have caused the problems," Mr. Graham wrote in a letter
that he hand-delivered to the selectmen. "I have no desire to
further add to the tax burden of West Tisbury residents. I'm still
willing to give up my claim for reimbursement if we can reach a
settlement which fixes the flaws in the mass appraisal system as it has
been implemented in West Tisbury."

Mr. Graham, who owns 235 acres at Mohu off Lambert's Cove
Road, is challenging his assessments for fiscal years 2003 and 2004,
when he paid the town more than half a million dollars in property
taxes. Attorneys for Mr. Graham charged during the tax board hearing
that the system town assessors use to determine land values and property
taxes is fundamentally flawed.

Testimony in the hearing began May 3 and ended Sept. 2, standing as
the longest residential property tax appeal in the history of the
commonwealth.

The complex and far-reaching case has depleted the town's
legal budget. The total price tag is unknown and still growing.

Mr. Graham's letter was not the only one received by West
Tisbury selectmen this week about town assessors and their decisions to
spend taxpayer money to defend their methods. Dr. Timothy and Ellen
Guiney, who own two lots abutting Mr. Graham on the north shore near
Paul's Point, wrote a letter expressing their dismay that the
assessors have forced them to hire an attorney.

Selectmen did not respond to either letter publicly at the meeting.
Both letters are published on the commentary page in today's
Gazette.

The Guineys are challenging the assessment of eight acres,
originally valued by the town last year at $11.2 million. After the
Guineys filed for an abatement, assessors lowered the value of the
property to $10 million. The Guineys believe their property is still
overvalued compared to others in the area, so they appealed to the state
tax board and requested an informal hearing, which is typically
conducted without attorneys and reduces expenses.

The Guineys learned last week from the assessors' attorney
Ellen Hutchinson that the town had exercised its right to switch the
appeal to a formal hearing.

"[W]e did not think lawyers were needed in what is not a legal
matter," the Guineys wrote in the letter this week, sent to both
the assessors and the selectmen.

The Guineys have had their property on the market for sale for more
than two years, but have not received a single offer. It is currently
listed at $10.5 million.

Reached at his Boston office this week, Dr. Guiney, a well-known
cardiologist who divides his time between the Martha's Vineyard
Hospital and Massachusetts General Hospital, said that he and his wife
plan to move to a property they purchased in the Chilmark section of
Seven Gates Farm, where taxes are markedly less.

"My view is I have been driven out of my house, quite
effectively, by the board of assessors in West Tisbury," Dr.
Guiney said.

Dr. Guiney said the assessors have been difficult and impolite
throughout the abatement process, and that the most recent decision fit
with their "usual high-handed and arrogant style." He said
he still did not understand why the assessors decided to switch the case
to a formal hearing.

There is no record in assessors minutes that shows when the
assessors made the decision.

"It's hard for me to imagine how it is that these people
can have so much to say about on the one hand raising tax money to
support the town, and on the other committing the town to a very
substantial expenditure," Dr. Guiney said. "The selectmen
ought to be deciding whether to negotiate with Bill Graham, and not
these people."

In his letter to the selectmen this week Mr. Graham expressed his
own puzzlement and frustration at the behavior of the assessors.

"I have always thought that this case could have been resolved
through negotiations," Mr. Graham wrote. "It always puzzled
me that the board of assessors seemed so disinterested in discussing a
settlement. After listening to [assessors chairman] Michael Colaneri
testify at trial, I realized it was unclear if the elected assessors
were the people deciding whether to settle the case."

Mr. Graham delivered to each selectman a black binder containing his
letter and transcripts of Mr. Colaneri's testimony from the tax
board hearing. The letter cited specific references from the transcript
when Mr. Colaneri said that, despite his 30 years on the board of
assessors, he did not know much about the assessing system used by the
town. Mr. Colaneri said he relies on the work of West Tisbury principal
assessor Jo-Ann Resendes and the town's third-party consultant
- Vision Appraisal Technology Inc. of Northboro.

The Graham case directly challenged the practices of Ms. Resendes
and Vision Appraisal officials, alleging they falsified property records
to hit predetermined values.

"[Mr. Colaneri's testimony] points to a fundamental
problem: if the chairman of the board of assessors doesn't know
how the mass appraisal system should work, it's impossible for him
to decide whether or not the system is working properly. If he
doesn't know that, he cannot say whether there should be a
settlement," Mr. Graham wrote. He also wrote:

"It is unfair for us to expect Ms. Resendes to be able to make
unbiased decisions about what to do in these circumstances, yet, by
default, she is the one who will decide whether and how the town
continues to respond to this case and other cases unless you as
selectmen decide to act."

Mr. Graham said he is willing to abandon his property tax appeals
for fiscal years 2003, 2004 and 2005 if the selectmen can help find a
way to fix the townwide assessment system going forward.

If the selectmen are willing to negotiate, Mr. Graham said he will
ask the tax board to put the upcoming views on hold. He said it was the
looming increase in legal bills - along with his reflection on the
testimony of Mr. Colaneri - that spurred him to approach the board
this week.

Prior to Mr. Graham's appearance, the selectmen had scheduled
an executive session meeting for yesterday afternoon to discuss the case
with assessors and Ms. Hutchinson. At press time yesterday, it was not
known whether there was any public outcome from the session.

If negotiations do not occur, the tax board view is set to begin on
Tuesday and last into Thursday. Another view session is expected later
in the fall.

Mr. Graham told selectmen this week that if the case reaches a
decision, an appeal from either side is inevitable.

Selectmen at a board meeting two weeks ago acknowledged they had
concerns about legal spending related to the case. A special town
meeting is expected in November to address the legal bills, among other
things, although no date has been set.

Selectmen said this week they still do not have a handle on how much
the town may owe.

According to bills obtained by the Gazette, the town has paid
roughly $11,000 for travel expenses incurred by Ms. Resendes during the
hearing and almost $12,000 in bills from the appellate tax board for the
court reporter and transcripts.

As of yesterday, Ms. Hutchinson had not billed the town for any work
she has done since May 19. Her rate to the town is $175 per hour. The
town has also not yet received bills for its two expert witnesses during
the hearing.

"All I can say is we have a lot of questions," selectman
Glenn Hearn said in response to a question about the legal bills at a
board meeting two weeks ago. "Someday we're going to have to
pay these bills, and I think people are going to want answers."