You Decide
If this story does not cause
you to question the integrity of the Board of Supervisors and real estate tax
assessments in Gloucester
  County , Virginia 
On October 4, 2016  the Gloucester County Board of Supervisors (BOS)
approved a land swap deal between Gloucester Gloucester 
The story as I know it
started to form while I was serving on the Gloucester Public Utilities Advisory
Committee (PUAC). During a Committee meeting in late 2015, the Director of
Utilities spoke briefly about a possible land swap deal between Utilities and
Mr. Kerns. During the same meeting the Director also spoke about failing septic
systems in the Terrapin Cove Sewer Extension project (Project) area. (This
Project was frozen by the BOS in 2014 due to a lack of funding and the
unwillingness of property owners to commit to connecting to the system.) During
that PUAC meeting the Director also spoke about Utilities’ efforts in
attempting to obtain grant funding to finance the extension of public sewer
down just one street in the Project area. That street was Laurel Drive Laurel Drive 
The land swap proposal next
came to my attention in late July 2016 when it appeared on the County’s website
as an agenda item for the August 2, 2016  BOS meeting. Utilities was requesting the BOS to
approve advertising a Public Hearing on the land swap deal. I found this
troubling because the PUAC had not been provided with any information
pertaining to the deal and had not been given the opportunity to vet it before
the Director presented it to the BOS. Upon researching the locations, values
and such pertaining to the properties contained in the deal; I found some
highly questionable anomalies in the County’s real estate tax assessment
values. The following information obtained from Gloucester  County 
Assessment Comparison
*14627          Belroi
  Rd 
*/Red = Kerns property
Black = Utilities property
As you see; the County
assessed values of the two Utilities properties decreased dramatically during
the 2015 assessment cycle. It is also clearly evident the County’s assessed
value of Mr. Kerns’ property dramatically increased during the same assessment
cycle. For some strange reason, all of the dramatic shifts in property values
substantially benefited Mr. Kerns. 
Another anomaly I discovered
was the difference in assessment values between the Terrapin Cove property and
a cleared vacant property on Laurel Drive Gloucester 
Terrapin Cove and Laurel Drive 
16706        Terrapin
Cove                .32           $45,000          $24,290         $43,720
As you can see; the
assessment values were consistent in 2010, but in 2015 the larger Terrapin Cove
property mysteriously lost value long enough for Utilities and Mr. Kerns to
make the land swap deal. And look at that; after the land swap deal was
completed, the Terrapin Cove property increased in value during the 2017
assessment cycle, but more on that later because those values were an unknown
at the time.
When I discovered the
questionable changes in the 2015 assessment values I shared them with York
District Supervisor Phillip Bazzani. He in turn created a PowerPoint
presentation representing my concerns that he shared with me and said he shared
with the rest of the BOS and members of County staff. The PowerPoint
presentation was never shown to the public. Utilities presented the land swap
deal to the BOS on August 2, 2016  and the BOS sent it back to the PUAC for vetting. The
BOS also instructed the County  Administrator 
During that same BOS meeting
the County Administrator publicly said, the County Assessor said, that among
other complex things (that he did not elaborate on), assessing the value of
non-taxable property was not on the list of priorities to be accomplished
during the 2015 assessment cycle; therefore little time was spent insuring the
accuracy of those values because they are nontaxable properties. My question
is; why did the values of only those two Utilities owned properties
dramatically decrease when the values of the other two buildable Utilities’
properties contained in the deal experienced unusual increases in value? More
about the third, unbuildable property later. Also; what caused Mr. Kerns property
to increase in value so much?
The following information
obtained from Gloucester 
Assessment Comparison of
Utilities’ Properties Contained in the Land Swap Proposal
RPC                
2010 Asses       2015 Assess       2017 Assess
28607                
$50,000              $59,970             $47,660
12656                
$35,000              $46,940             $36,100
19691                
$4,700                $4,060               $1,800
Bunting's Appraisal Service, which has a
lengthy history of providing real estate services to Gloucester 
RPC         
Street           2010 Assess    2015 Assess      Ind 
16706    Terrapin
Cv.      $45,000             $24,290             $30,000             $43, 720
*14627   Belroi Rd 
*/Red = Kerns property
Black= Utilities property
As you can see; the 2016
independent appraisal values also strongly favored Mr. Kerns in comparison to
the 2010 assessments and the 2017 assessments that were released only a few
days after the deal was completed. 
The PUAC met on two occasions
to discuss the land swap deal. (Keep in mind we did not know the 2017 values)
The independent appraisals had not been received by the first time we met so
the discussion was tabled until they were available for review. During the
brief second PUAC discussion, a vote was taken by the committee members and
resulted in a split decision to recommend the BOS approve the deal. The vote
was 4 to approve, 2 to disapprove and 1 member abstained from voting. I voted
against the land swap deal for multiple reasons like; there was no data
supported business case presented to justify acquiring the property, but the
most profound reason I voted the way I did was because I clearly saw the whole
deal as being government corruption. In fact, during the last PUAC discussion,
one of my fellow committee members said I was just upset about the assessments
and can’t let it go. He was right and I say he is part of the corruption for
letting it go. Meeting Minutes from the Land swap deal Public Hearing reflect
Utilities’ director insinuating I voted the way I did because I felt the
Utilities property values were to low. Funny how there was no mention of me
disagreeing with giving away highly marketable real estate based on his
unsupported speculations.  
The BOS unanimously approved
the land swap deal after a Public Hearing; during which the County  Administrator Terrapin
  Cove Road 
After finding out Mr. Kerns’
property had been sold; I checked the 2017 County assessment that was released
to the public only a few weeks after the BOS approved the land swap deal. I
could not believe my eyes. The following demonstrates the County’s assessment
values of the swapped properties from 2010 thru 2017 and the 2016 independent
appraisal values:
2010 thru 2017 Assessments
and 2016 Independent Appraisal
RPC          Street           2010 Assess      2015
Assess    Ind 
16706    Terrapin
Cv.      $45,000             $24,290             $30,000             $43, 720
*14627   Belroi Rd 
*/Red = Kerns property
Black= Utilities property
When the BOS approved the
land swap deal, their decision was based on the 2016 independent appraisal
values. The combined value of Utilities two properties at that time was $35,000
and Mr. Kerns’ property was valued at $45,000. The combined assessment values of
Utilities former properties is now $70,180 and the value of Mr. Kerns former
property is now valued at $41,780. At the time the deal was approved, Mr.
Kerns’ property was determined to be worth $10,000 more than the property he
received from Utilities. Within days of the deal being made, the property Mr.
Kerns received from Utilities became worth $28,400 more than the property he
unloaded on Utilities.
So why did Mr. Kerns decide
to sell or trade his property instead of building rental units on it? I guess
it could have been for any number of reasons, but I have a theory that is
probably not to far off target. Like I said earlier; the entrance to Supervisor
Meyer’s personal estate shares a property line with the piece of land Mr. Kerns
unloaded on Utilities. I believe having renters living at the entrance to his
home did not sit well with Supervisor Meyer, but he opted not to pay $50,000
for the property. From there the land swap plan was hatched. I believe
somewhere along the way someone with full access to the County’s real estate
tax assessment database manipulated the property values of the three properties
exchanged in the deal.
The land swap deal is just
another example of the corruption that takes place within Gloucester  County Gloucester  County 
Kenny Hogge, Sr.
Gloucester Point
Retired United States 
Helping to Drain the Swamp
 
 
 
