Pro-Active Transparency and Trust in Local Government

The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ASPA as an organization.

By Michael R. Ford
August 5, 2024

I was recently appointed to serve on the City of Oshkosh’s Board of Review. In Wisconsin, the Board of Review is “a quasi-judicial body responsible for correcting errors on the assessment roll and administering property tax assessment appeals.” In other words, we are where property owners go to appeal property tax assessments they deem unfair. The body itself is very formal, following rules and processes that are dictated by state statute. The annual board of review meeting (or meetings when necessary) is usually pretty busy, but that was especially the case this year as Oshkosh underwent a complete revaluation of all our properties.

Under state statute, a city-wide revaluation is triggered when assessed values of properties within the city limits are less than 90 percent of the actual market value. On average, Oshkosh’s assessed values were less than 70 percent of actual market values, hence the need for a revaluation. The market values of properties can change for any number of reasons, (location, changing consumer preferences, inflation, improvements, etc.), and the revaluation process aims to ensure the tax burden is shared equitably across properties and property types.

For this budgeting professor the process, and the logic behind it, seem obvious enough. However, I quickly learned the logic is not so clear to, nor accepted by, everyone. The result of the revaluation was every single property owner getting a letter explaining that the assessed value of their property went up. The immediate reaction, made very clear on social media, was concern that taxes were going up as part of a government money grab. And I get why people had that reaction. When Individual properties do an improvement or are sold, they get reassessed and often do see a property tax increase.

But that is not the case when all properties are reassessed. The assessed values of residential properties in Oshkosh increased, on aggregate, about 50 percent. So those receiving assessment increases below 50 percent will actually enjoy a property tax cut. The entire city will see its tax rate decrease because reassessing properties does not empower the city to collect more property tax. In other words, the pie is the same size, but where it comes from is changing.

Explaining all of this is not easy, especially when people are having an emotional reaction to a perceived large tax increase. It made for quite a surreal experience on the Board of Review. Some property owners were coming up to appeal a reassessment that will decrease their property taxes out of fear their taxes would go up. Others testified to all the reasons their property was sub-par to try to get their assessment lowered. Others who had refused, sometimes quite rudely, to allow the assessor’s office into their home on prior occasions begged for the assessor’s office to come take a look. Others spoke broadly about how awful the city was for what they perceived as a money grab.

The assessor’s office was very professional, and for the most part, people were calmer once the facts were explained. But I cannot help but think about how much time, energy and emotion was wasted due to the challenge of communicating complex government information to a broad audience. To be fair, the city tried. Flyers explained how the revaluation worked, how people can appeal their new assessments, and why a changed assessment does not automatically mean higher taxes. But it was not enough. I honestly do not think any amount of communication would have been enough.

I see the whole experience as evidence of the consequences of declining trust in government institutions. No amount of communication, or presentation of facts, could counteract some people’s belief that their government was out to get them. Any attempt to respond was viewed as a lie because that response was coming from a government that cannot be trusted. It does not help that the revaluation process is complex, written in the language of government and not intuitive to those outside of government. It feeds the assumption that government is talking down to those it serves, or using jargon to distract citizens from what is going on.

There is no easy fix for declining trust in local government. But, I do think those of us working in and around local government can take steps to translate the language of government into the language of citizens. We can prioritize the simple communication of complex information, seek to distribute the same information in different ways and recruit and use trusted messengers to present facts to different audiences. These steps all fall under the concept of proactive transparency, which can, in my opinion, rebuild trust in our governing institutions.

---

Author: Michael R. Ford is an associate professor of public administration at the University of Wisconsin  Oshkosh, where he teaches graduate courses in budgeting and research methods. He frequently publishes on the topics of public and nonprofit board governance, accountability and school choice. He served two terms as an elected member of the Oshkosh, WI Common Council. 

(4 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading...