Homeowner challenges Fairfield reassessment, says house condition not reflected in $1.38M value

The Board of Assessment Appeals heard homeowner Megan McKini on March 21 contesting a $1,376,691 town assessment for 272 Quincy Street and asking the board to reduce it to $1,100,000.

McKini told the board she believes much of the town’s valuation reflects land value in a beach-adjacent neighborhood, while her house—built in 1983 and largely original inside—has not been updated. "The kitchen, the bathrooms, no central air," she said, arguing those shortcomings reduce what the home would fetch on the open market. Board member Neil Frink answered that the board determines value based on what the property would have sold for on the revaluation date and that both lot and dwelling are included in that market value standard.

Frink described how comparable sales and assessor field cards are used to set values and noted the assessor itemized the property as roughly $1.1 million in land and $283,000 in improvements. He told McKini the board looks for recent sales and condition adjustments; he also explained Connecticut’s assessment mechanics, including that taxable amount is typically a percentage of appraised value (participants discussed a 70% assessment factor) and that the town will lower the mill rate to offset a large overall increase in assessments.

McKini walked the board through properties she had pulled as comparables on Roland Road and Colonial Drive, and Frink pointed out cases where builders bought lots and rebuilt homes—after which those properties’ sale prices reflected new construction rather than the pre-rehab structure. Frink advised McKini that he would present her documentation and his notes to a majority of the nine-member board, which will deliberate and vote; a decision will be mailed within seven days after that vote. If the board grants any reduction, the homeowner cannot re-appeal until the next revaluation period; if denied, the homeowner may appeal to the courts per the decision letter’s instructions.

The board did not announce any immediate reduction; Frink said the panel can recommend an amount between the homeowner’s request and the assessor’s figure and that McKini’s packet would be considered alongside the assessor’s field cards.

The board’s next step is internal deliberation and a mail notification of the decision.