Property owners along the Haigis Parkway who recently found out their property would be assessed at a higher value told town councilors last week they didn’t believe the new values were fair.

The town recently adjusted assessed values along the Parkway to settle a legal dispute with property owners who have felt the original assessments were unfair. As a result of the adjustment, assessments decreased for some property owners and increased for others.

Peter Plumb, a lawyer representing the Moore family, which owns three lots along the Parkway, and resident Erik Peterson both told the Town Council at Wednesday’s public hearing that they do not find the newest assessments fair.

A scheduled vote to further move the new assessment values towards adoption was placed on hold until the next council meeting on Aug. 16 at 7:30 p.m. This decision was made before the public hearing began.

In order to settle the suit between the town and two landowners, Three Diamond Realty and Davric Maine Corporation, the new assessments need to be accepted by the Town Council.

The reassessment of all property along the Haigis Parkway was prompted by that lawsuit. Though the town originally claimed the assessments were fair, it recently admitted making mistakes. As a result, both Three Diamonds and Davric’s assessments were lowered.

The mistakes were centered around utility improvements the town extended to the Parkway in hopes of spurring large development. According to Town Manager Ron Owens, the town did not consider that $1 million of the additional sewer actually serves areas outside of the parkway. As a result, all property owners were asked to pay 40 percent of the $10 million in improvements as opposed to half.

He also said engineers did not properly take into account the more valuable frontage land in certain lots.

While most of the 24 Parkway lots will have lower assessments, there are at least three property owners that are unhappy with the new assessments.

At the council’s first review of the new assessments earlier this month, Ellen Fontaine, manager of 262 Payne Road LLC, said she could not accept an assessment increase from $59,000 to $113,000. She added that because she had already made payments to the town based on her original assessment it should not have been changed so dramatically.

Richard Moore, R.C. Moore Inc. and Moore Brothers Realty own three lots on Ginn Road for a combined new assessment of about $247,000. Their original assessment before the litigation began was $112,000 for all three lots.

According to Plumb, the first time they heard of a possible assessment change came in a June 27 letter that notified them of the higher number.

“We want the council to understand how upset we are about how this was handled,” said Plumb. “My purpose here tonight is to flag any problems for you,” he added. “I would hope that this doesn’t lead to more litigation down the road.”

Plumb said that because the Moores agreed to their original contract with the town last October they have been “making good faith payments.”

He also said they understand that the town is entitled to settle the lawsuit but it is unfair for that outcome to adversely affect other landowners who were not involved.

He asked that the town reveal their new assessment formula, telling the council that he believed that not all landowners were assessed in the same way.

“The calculations clearly have a long way to go before they are fair,” he said.

Owens said the formula should be a part of the ordinance and that it will be added as soon as possible. After the meeting, Owens said the town is working with the Moores to either defer or extend payments in an effort to help them with the larger assessment, and he does not believe any new litigation will occur.

Peterson, a homeowner on the Payne Road with a total of 2.3 acres and a $24,000 assessment, agreed with Plumb that the newest round of assessments is unfair.

“For a young man trying to live in the town he grew up in, paying $24,000 for a project that someday will benefit projects like Cabela’s doesn’t make sense,” said Peterson.

He added that since he has no intentions of developing or selling his land he finds it unnecessary to help pay for the utility improvements designed to help large development along the Parkway.

Councilors Jeffrey Messer and Carol Rancourt questioned why Peterson was not considered under exemption applied to home owners on the Parkway.

“I have some serious questions about the whole process,” said Rancourt. “I’d hoped we’d do this with out so much controversy and that we would better consider private residences.”

According to Owens, the exemption created for home owners was intended for people with assessments in the “hundreds of thousands,” he said after the meeting. This exemption allowed two landowners to designate a portion of their property as a residence, unlike the rest of the land on the Parkway, which is now zoned for commercial use. The exemption was created in order to ensure that they would not lose their homes if they were unable to make the payments.

The town gave residents like Peterson a different kind of tax break. The town assessed his land solely based on the acreage without taking into account the valuable frontage they owned.

Plan adopted

In other news, the Council also adopted the new Comprehensive Plan that will guide further development in Scarborough.

Every 10 years towns are required by state law to update their plans. The last time Scarborough did so was in 1994, making this update 12 years later.

The plan includes guidelines for “walkable neighborhoods” throughout the town, how Oak Hill and Dunstan Corner should grow, how to increase affordable housing and many other suggestions town officials can refer to when planning any new developments.