Earlier this year, Rochester conducted a townwide property revaluation that led residents to fear their property values would increase dramatically. Public comment periods during the process were marked by tension, with several community members storming out of meetings and engaging in heated debates.

Although the revaluation is over and all deadlines to grieve assessments have passed, the Oct. 8 Rochester Town Board meeting reignited the conversation just a month before the town’s elections.

“There was a problem with the assessor in the sense that the outside contractor had sent these assessments [that] were based on drones or pictures and things like that,” DeVon Nolt, a community member who attended and spoke at the Oct. 8 meeting, said. “The understanding was that the assessor was going to review their initial assessments and make any changes, which it seems like he didn't do.”

Nolt challenged his own reassessment and saw his property’s assessed value reduced. He said he and other community members formed the Rochester Citizens Group to help other property owners challenge their assessments. Nolt said it took him more than 20 hours to gather the information needed to contest his assessment.

In addition to the Rochester Citizens Group, a website called Rochester Tax Truth was created during the revaluation. The site criticized assessed values and published a newsletter with information and updates about the process, including how property owners could challenge their assessments. The identity of the website’s creator is unknown.

“There's been a serious erosion of trust because of the lack of transparency, lack of oversight, lack of leadership surrounding the town assessor, and the changes to the land zoning designations,” Clayton Haugen, a Rochester resident who has repeatedly criticized the revaluation process, said. “These are family properties that have worked for decades and generations to maintain. And when assessment of those properties can change dramatically, taxpayers have every right to expect their elected officials to be paying attention.”

Haugen criticized the board for insufficient outreach and education about the revaluation, saying “ordinary citizens had to step forward and do the job,” becoming the “adults in the room.” He said Rochester residents identified a $31.7 million discrepancy between assessed and actual property values and argued that the board should be “embarrassed” that residents had to identify the issue and help others challenge their assessments.

After Haugen reached his three-minute speaking limit before completing his statement, another member of the public finished reading it for him. The statement included a message to the board: “I pray you don't get elected, not because of the political revenge, but because this town cannot afford leadership that refuses to recognize the seriousness of what happened here.”

Board member Michael Coleman thanked residents for their feedback, saying he did not believe “anyone on the board has said that there were no issues around communication or that we couldn't have done things differently.” Coleman said the board had discussed budgeting for advance notifications from the assessor’s office and ensuring the process was equitable for groups such as older adults and low-income residents.

“I do think that a lot of people at this table did make an effort – once we were receiving that feedback – to make ourselves available,” Coleman said. “I know multiple people at this table went to some of these sessions, met with people, talked to people individually. For me, that is kind of the fundamental concern when you talk about tax assessments is it's supposed to be equitable.”

Coleman said he believed the town assessor “approached the process that way” and that the $31.7 million figure was “part of New York State’s process that they force us all to adhere to.” Town Supervisor Erin Enouen said that the number was only 1.3% of the $2.4 billion total value and “doesn’t mean that there was something negligent happening.”

Haugen left the meeting at that point, prompting a back-and-forth among attendees. He later returned to the room.

“I have to say this. If I get in trouble, so be it,” Haugen said. “I stood at those tables with those people. I watched elderly people bawling their eyes out.”

For residents such as Nolt, the revaluation will “definitely” affect his vote, even though the process has concluded.

“I talked about the consequences that [the board] could face if the issues weren't faced. I didn't mention political ramifications, but I did say, ‘In the interest of furthering your own political career, you might be interested.’ And none of that was effective,” Nolt said. “The only recourse that we have at this point seems to be a political response. It will definitely affect who I vote for because, as I said in my statement or the statement from the group, we were looking for leadership.”

Also at the meeting, a public speaker criticized the board over the Rochester Democrat’s tent at Heritage Day, which she said listed national issues such as the LGBTQ+ community and reproductive rights that she felt were out of the control of a local government. Enouen responded to this directly.

“To know how we respond to issues and what our priorities are, all you have to do is look at our agendas, listen to our meetings,” Enouen said. “We have addressed many of these concerns and are here to work to serve the town and to do the best we can.”