A recent appeal for an abatement that went before the South Berwick Board of Assessment Review is only the second application presented to the board since the town’s assessing agent took the post five years ago, and the only appeal granted by the review board.
The owner of 72 Vine St. this summer requested a $300,000 reduction of the $1.9 million valuation of his property.
The board agreed at a Sept. 8 meeting to grant a $203,000 reduction in assessed value, which would translate to a reduction of $2,541.56 in taxes, according to Assessing Agent Verna Sharpe.
KRT Appraisal, contracted by the Town to conduct the assessment, had assessed the property at $1.995 million in a 2025 townwide valuation.
The Board of Assessment Review is a quasi-judicial board that hears appeals when the South Berwick Board of Assessors or the assessing agent on behalf of the Board of Assessors denies a request for abatement that a property owner challenges.
Abatements recommended by Sharpe are approved or denied by the Town Council, which also serves as the Board of Assessors.
If the Town or the person filing disagrees with the review board’s decision, either party may request reconsideration within 10 days, according to Sharpe, and either party may appeal the review board’s decision to Superior Court within 30 days of the decision.
In his abatement application, homeowner Mark Zimmer argued the assessment did not “reflect the requirements of just value and uniformity across the tax roll.” He cited a 41.6% increase in his property’s assessed value, compared with an approximately 13%–15% median increase townwide.
Since the 2025 revaluation, 33 residents have requested abatements and 23 have been granted, according to Sharpe, and 24 administrative abatements have been processed to correct database errors.
Sharpe has asked the Board of Assessment Review, in a letter to its three members, to reconsider its decision regarding 72 Vine St., she told the Reporter in a Sept. 18 email.
Sharpe gave the board members a list of reasons for requesting the reconsideration, she said in the email. Among other things, she contended the board did not adequately consider the results of the full revaluation in April 2025, and the board showed “a lack of understanding of how assessments are derived” in connection with true market sales.
She also said that “little or no weight” was placed on the assessing agent’s analysis supporting the assessment and that both she and the board agreed the appraisal used by Zimmer “lacked merit and could not be relied upon for a credible opinion of market value,” thereby not satisfying his burden of proof.
According to the review board’s Rules of Procedure, Sharpe said, the opinion of a property owner is not enough to claim the assessment is too high and is insufficient grounds for an abatement. Also, the owner must submit “clear and convincing evidence” the property is overvalued by more than 10%.
As of Tuesday evening, no minutes had been posted for the Sept. 8 meeting of the Board of Assessment Review. Chair Paul Steinhauer did not respond to questions and several requests for comments.
