By Diana Ginsberg
Helen Nixon is frustrated.
Last month, the 80-year-old McLeod Street resident received her 2005 property value assessment from the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC), the agency responsible for residential property assessments in Ontario.
MPAC placed a value of $397,000 on her home as of Jan. 1, 2005, up from $349,000 the previous year.
“How could MPAC’s assessment be accurate?” asks Nixon incredulously.
“I don’t understand anybody making a tax assessment without telling the people that they have assessed their means of arriving at the sum.”
Centretown News hired Donald McCallum of Affiliated Real Estate Group to conduct an independent assessment of Nixon’s home.
McCallum arrived at a value of $330,000 as of Jan.1, 2005.
Nixon says she doesn’t believe that MPAC’s calculations are arbitrary. But she would like to have received detailed notification of how her assessment by MPAC was calculated.
“MPAC doesn’t tell us anything and therefore they’re secretive and that’s not the way to run any kind of arrangement with anybody,” says Nixon
“I’ve lived in this home for 30 years. I want an accurate assessment and I want the sources made public.”
However, Mike Contant, a representative of MPAC, says that the assessments are not pulled out of thin air.
Contant says MPAC’s assessment values are determined on sales of similar properties that have recently been sold in the vicinity and then adjustments are made for the differences between homes.
“Our focus is to make sure that the assessments are accurate and if this is the case, that we are off by more than $60,000, then there appear to be some issues that need to be rectified.”
No one from MPAC physically came to her house, which McCallum points out, is probably one of the factors for the discrepancy between assessments.
In the early 1990s, Nixon had a similar experience.
She felt at the time that her home was overvalued.
She asked for a personal re-assessment resulting in a reduction of $65,000.
“It makes quite a difference in the taxation rates,” says Nixon.
“Any increase in the assessment is going to lead to an increase in tax. That’s the point.”
McCallum conducted his on-the-spot assessment, basing the appraisal on the Jan.1, 2005, market value so that there could be a direct comparison between his assessment and MPAC’s.
For the independent assessment, McCallum started in Nixon’s basement.
He checked the material of her foundation and determined that her home was built in 1902.
Then he checked the hydro service, plumbing, heating and any finished areas of her basement to determine whether updates have been made to the breaker panel, drains, hot water tank and furnace.
Next, McCallum measured the main floor of Nixon’s home using a measuring tape and noted that there is likely hardwood flooring underneath the carpets.
The wood framing of her home, the living room, dining room, entrance hall, aluminum storm windows, fireplace, den, kitchen with linoleum tiles, a two-piece bathroom and a washer/dryer — all went into the book.
On the second floor, McCallum measured the three bedrooms, a former nanny’s quarters, and a four-piece bathroom.
The last step to McCallum’s assessment was outside of Nixon’s home.
He measured her lot and noticed an addition to the house she made in 1981, as well as changes to the roof made in the late 1990s.
McCallum says that all of these details affect his estimate of market value.
“Most of the things I was looking at were just areas in the report that we have to fill out,” he says.
“When you’re doing your analysis to estimate market value, the emphasis is on the comparable sales section by evaluating houses on the same street”
At the end of his assessment, McCallum says that he takes all of his measurements and plugs them into a software program called CRAL which appraisers use to record accurate assessments based on measurements and market values.
He logged all of the information into the computer program and pulled out the $330,000 assessment — $67,000 less than MPAC’s assessment.
As opposed to MPAC’s calculations, McCallum says that he takes the whole property and estimated market value for sales purposes as a package to create his assessments.
However, he says he believes MPAC takes the square footage of the building and of the lot and then attributes two numbers to these calculations.
This is the number, he says, that the city will use to base Nixon’s 2006 property taxes.
Carl Isenburg, president and chief administrative officer of MPAC in a letter to Centretown News, reiterates Contant’s statement that the assessments MPAC produces are based on the selling prices of similar properties in the area.
However, Nixon rejects MPAC’s bureaucratic response.
“Everybody on the street has different houses, so how does one know what the prices are?”she says, adding, “their arrival at these decisions is undemocratic.”
Contant says Nixon should file a request for reconsideration of her property with MPAC and someone from the MPAC office would be in touch with her to verify details of her property.
“I find it just the most awful thing being unsettled and to be made to feel unwelcome in my own home,” says Nixon.
“When they get their act together and make it public, everyone will be a lot happier.”