To the editor: 

BRAVO Barrington, your town council just passed a resolution whose origin was unknown, without consensus as to what it actually said, that seeks a solution for a problem that does not exist and has zero chance of going anywhere. This, after one councilperson declared "the faster we get it to (the legislature), the better" followed by exultant bravos by another. 

It presumably asks the RI legislature to look at property assessment metrics, with an eye towards permission to revalue property assessments every year. This follows the unconscionable actions of a rogue tax assessor who ostensibly decided on his own to start contemporaneous revaluations based on the actual sale price of a property. That ugly chapter in Barrington's seemingly never-ending money grab is now in abeyance after an aptly named patriot, one Mr. Payne (different spelling) decided to take the town to task. While feigning lack of knowledge on critical concerns and outright hiding material facts, the council has been righteously embarrassed into reversing that egregious policy.

(Not-so-old-timers such as myself may recall the shenanigans of the same bad actors embroiled in a controversy  in 2009 in which Mr. Minardi, assessor, and Mr. Ursillo, solicitor, went one step too far in toying with a very angry and capable Barrington couple, a Mr. and Mrs. Black. accountant and lawyer alike, who were abused and stonewalled and the town ended up being fined with the maximum amount the RI Attorney General could impose.

Indeed, there was genuine inequality when recent buyers of property were taxed at the sale price, and the rest were taxed at a previous statistical assessment, as was the case in the methodology conjured up by the scoundrels, both known and unknown, in the lead-up to the present debacle. But because, under intense scrutiny, the town reverted to the original method, no such inequality exists. Fully ignoring the old adage "if it ain't broke don't fix it," the council, in stunning unanimity, can't seem to fathom that the previous, now restored method of every three year statistical adjustments is equitable and fair.

Currently, all property assessments start and end on the same cycle, thus all properties are treated the same regardless of who the current owner is or when they acquired the property. A new owner will simply be at the beginning, middle or end of that cycle and while a longer term owner will be at the beginning, middle and end. Since councilmen Boyajian and Brier are fond of numbers, let's present some. 

Consider the following scenario: 123 Main Street has just been statistically valued at $500,000. The owner pays taxes for the next three years on that $500,000 assessment.124 Main Street, is identical in characteristics and thus has an equal assessment. But it sells for $550,000 one year after the assessment. 124 Main street is now paying taxes on a $550,000 house but at the value of $500,000. But so is 123 Main Street! The same goes for both properties in years 2 and 3 regardless of who owns them or what their value is.

Muddled thinking is no excuse for dispatching to the State of Rhode Island wound-licking, red herring gobbledygook hastily considered resolutions. The General Assembly will recognize this for what it is and wisely dispense with it forthwith. The beleaguered people of Barrington should similarly dispense with this cast of characters and end this travesty of governance.

Robert Pease

Escazu, Costa Rica