ST. GERMAIN — A packed house filled a town hall meeting room in St. Germain last week during its annual board of review as a group of citizens objected to what they perceived as sometimes unfair, and inconsistent property valuations by the town assessor.

Board of review meetings are often low-key events as they are designed to allow individual property owners the ability to appeal the valuation of their land parcels. This meeting was different because prior to the board of supervisors hearing specific cases, the floor was open to public comment which was at times lively, and filled the entire first hour of the meeting.

In fact, the entire assessment process has been different because 2026 is a reassessment year for the town, similar to what several other towns in the area, and the City of Eagle River, went through in recent years.

According to assessor Ryan Kernosky, this was the first formal reassessment for St. Germain in 18 years. He explained that a lot has changed in the real estate marketplace, but that higher assessed values do not automatically mean a matching change in property tax.

“The overall increase in 2026 assessment value was approximately 70% compared to last year,” Kernosky said. “If your assessed value was at this level or less, you will not likely have a tax increase based on the assessment.”

He also explained that some properties will experience a higher tax, but formal tax levels will not be available until the end of the year.

“An assessment is a redistribution of the tax burden,” he added, “and is supposed to be reflective of what is currently occurring in the market as of January 2026.”

Public challenge

Doug and Deborah Schults led the group of property owners challenging some of the methods used in the latest assessments. Through their own research, social media communications, and door-to-door canvassing, the couple said that they have been trying to help their neighbors understand the assessment process. The Schultses advised them to reach out directly to the assessor in the future, and prior to the board of review, to negotiate a more accurate value if they see an element in the assessment that they do not agree with. They said this approach has already made a significant impact in their neighborhood.

They both stated the importance of an assessment being fair and consistent. Deborah Schultz shared an exhibit with several examples of widely differing values of similar building types. She suggested that future assessments have more comparable values, and that written notices to property owners contain more detail instead of simply listing a land and building value.

Doug Schultz later added his concerns about some of his elderly neighbors struggling with understanding the assessment process, and of high property tax in general.

“We don’t want to see people taxed out of their homes,” he said.

After the first hour of public comment, the board of supervisors took a short recess and then reconvened the meeting to hear formal appeals in a more traditional near-empty room. The board sustained the two cases heard, and then dismissed another based on late submission of paperwork without cause. Three hours later, the room was now empty outside of the assessor and supervisors as the 2026 board of review meeting was officially closed.