Two Rockport homeowners filed a complaint Aug. 6 in Knox County Superior Court appealing a July 7 decision by the Rockport Board of Assessment Review (BAR) to uphold denial of their property tax abatement request.

On Aug. 17, Attorney David Silk, of the firm Curtis Thaxter LLC in Portland, wrote to the court on behalf of the Town of Rockport, requesting the July 7 decision by the BAR be affirmed.

G. Scott Gazelle and Judith Bonzi, who own a home and land on Amsbury Hill above Rockport Harbor, dispute the town's 2025 property tax assessment of $3.971,400, which had increased from the 2023 valuation of $3,512,800, according to the complaint.

After their abatement request of $1,321,400 was denied by the Assessor's Office, Gazelle and Bonzi made appealed to the BAR, and met with its members July 7.

In a follow-up letter outlining their decisions the BAR members wrote: "After considering the documentation and testimony of the Taxpayers and the Assessor, the Board finds that the Taxpayers' evidence and testimony challenging the total current assessment of the Property was not persuasive and that the assessed value of the Property is consistent with the Property's market value, such that the Property is not shown to be overvalued."

The Rockport Board of Assessment consists of Rockport resident volunteers Thomas Laurent, William Freeman and Robert Hall.

Gazelle and Bonzi are arguing now before Knox County Superior Court, which is the standard process of citizens seeking relief after the municipal course of action is exhausted. They maintain that the BAR decision should be reversed because it is unsupported by substantial evidence, reflecting, "an abuse of discretion, and does not contain an adequate reasoned explanation for the denial," the complaint said.

The Amsbury Hill taxpayers are asking the court to remand the matter to the BAR, "with instructions to apply the correct legal standards, independently evaluate just value, and enter adequate findings and reasons based on full market value."

Or, they ask that the court instruct the BAR to grant the requested $1,321,400 abatement and have their property's assessment be set at $2,650,000.

The complaint objected to the assessor's office use of a "cost-derived methodology" for calculating the $3.97 million assessment, with a conclusion, "lacking adequate evidentiary and analytical foundation."

In the complaint, Gazelle and Bonzi further allege that the BAR's, "stated inability to assign an 'accurate valuation' did not relieve it of its statutory obligation to independently evaluate whether Plaintiffs were over-assessed and, if so, grant a reasonable abatement. The Board instead treated uncertainty as requiring deference to the Assessor's figure, even though the Assessor's own evidence did not establish that the resulting assessment equaled fair market value."

In their July letter to Gazelle and Bonzi, BAR members said that the primary concern of the homeowners, "regarding the assessment appears to be that the assessment of the property is manifestly wrong because it is inconsistent with both recent market sales and the assessed values of comparable properties in Rockport, particularly nonwaterfront homes."

The July BAR letter outlined Rockport Assessor Kerry Leichtman's process and procedures, noting that Leichtman, "characterized the Taxpayers' presented material as primarily an impeachment of his assessing methodology, which, in itself, is insufficient to prove that an assessment was manifestly wrong."

In the letter, the BAR noted that assessing personnel had been told not to enter the property.

The letter also said that Gazelle was within his rights to refuse an in-person property inspection by the assessor's office.

Reach Lynda Clancy at lyndaclancy@penbaypilot.com; 207-706-6657