Search

1, Amendment to Settlement Agreement. The parties hereby agree to amend the

Settlement Agreement to provide that the effective date thereof shall be July 1, 2020. All of the
other terms and conditions of the Settlement Agreement shall remain un-modified as previously

written.

GREG B. TURGISS

Dated

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE ADMINISTRATION

tol 25 | 2020 Apna, 1A. Bread
Dated® * Lindsey M. Stepp, Commissiona”

RECEIVED

JUN 24 2020

NH OE?) OF REVENUE ADMIN
MUMCIPA! & PRADERTY IV

This Agreement (“Agreement”) is made by and between Greg B. Turgiss, with an address
of ERAN (Asc) and the Commissioner of the
Department of Revenue Administration (“Me arment”), with her principal office at 109 Pleasant
Street, P.O, Box 457, Concord, NH 03302-0457,

WHEREAS: The Assessor is certified by the Department as a Property Assessor
Supervisor pursuant to RSA 21-J3:14-f: and

WHEREAS: Pursuant to RSA 21-J:i4-g, “The commissioner may decertify, suspend, or
take other disciplinary action against any person. for failure to comply with the rules of the
assessing standards board adopted pursuant to RSA 21-J:14-f, IT,” and

WHEREAS: The Assessing Standards Board (“ASB”) has defined assessor misconduct
to include the “Violation of any applicable NH property assessing statutes, Asb 300 or Rev 600;”

and

WHEREAS: The Assessor had a duty to perform his assessing work for the City of Nashua
in a way that was not a conflict of interest or did not create the appearance of a conflict of interest
but on or about October 8, 2018, he was derelict in that duty when he reviewed the previous
assessment work of his brother, another assessor for the City of Nashua; and

WHERRAS: on or about various dates during the month of April 2019, the Assessor was
derelict in his duty and violated ASB ethical standards by submitting false and misleading field
logs to his employer that conceuled the fact that instead of conducting the activities described on
them, he was napping or resting in his car; and

WHEREAS: The parties desire to avoid the delay and expense of further disciplinary
proccedings while imposing discipline in compliance with N.H. Admin. R., Asb 308.05 and 308.

09.

NOW, THEREFORE. in consideration of the foregoing recitals which are an integral part
hereof, and the promises and mutual covenants contained in this Agrecment, the receipt and
sufficiency of which arc hereby acknowledged the parties hereby agree as follows:

1. Settlement Agreement

A. The Assessor is demoted in his certification level to that of property assessor for a
period of one (1) year from the date hereof. At the end of the period, the Assessor
may have his certification status as property assessor supervisor restored by
requesting such in writing of the Director of the Municipal and Property Division,
certifying that he has complied with the terms hercof and establishing to the
Director's reasonable satisfaction his readiness to resume certification as property

assessor supervisor.

RECE VED
MAY 24 2020
VA UEP: OF REVERUE ADK

SMINITIDE! © NNOPEOTY NEF

B. Prior to seeking recertification as property assessor supervisor, the Assessor is
required to participate in the following continuing education classes and provide
the Director satisfactory evidence of successful completion of each course:

a. 15 Hour Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice.
b. NH State Statutes Part II.

c. New Hampshire Right to Know (subject to DRA prior approval}.
d. Ethics (subject to DRA prior approval).

C. Except as provided herein, this Agreement shall bar the commencement of further
disciplinary action by the Commissioner based upon the actions described above.
However, the Commissioncr may consider the above described actions as
evidence of a pattern of conduct in the event that the Assessor is subject to the
provisions of RSA 21-J:14-g in the future. In addition, the Director may audit the
work of the Assessor during the year of demotion to ensure compliance with this
Agreement.

2. Breach. The Assessor’s Breach of any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement,
shal] result in the imposition of the decertification provided above and shall entitle the Department
to commence disciplinary proceedings pursuant to RSA 21-J:14-g.

3. Waiver of Appeal. The Assessor agrees that this Agreement is not subject to
reconsideration or judicial review or appeal.

4. Mutual Releases.

A. The Commissioner, on behalf of herself and the State of New Hampshire, hereby
releases and discharges the Assessor, from all charges, complaints, liabilities.
obligations, penalties, promises, agreements, disputes, damages, actions, causes of
action, suits, rights, demands, costs, losses, debts, and expenses (including
attomeys’ fees and costs) and claims of any nature whatsoever that were or could
have been asserted pursuant to RSA 21-J:14-g.

B. Assessor, on behaif of himself and his successors and assigns, hereby rcleases and
discharges the Commissioner and the Department, the State of New Hampshire,
along with its employees and agents, from all charges, complaints, liabilities,
obligations, penalties, promises, agreements, disputes, damages, actions, causes of
action, suits, rights, demands, costs, losses, debts, and expenses (including
attorneys’ fees and costs) and claims of any nature whatsoever, that were or could
have been asserted in relation to this Agreement.

Bi Representations and Warranties. The Commissioner and Assessor hereby mutually

represent and warrant that the execution and delivery of this Agreement by each party has been
duly authorized and that this Agreement, when so executed and delivered, will constitute the
voluntary, informed und legally binding obligation of such party, enforceable against such party
in accordance with its terms.

6. Modification, Amendment and Termination. This Agreement may not be modified,
amended or terminated except with the express written consent of all partics.

7. Binding Effect. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of
the parties and their successors or assigns.

8, Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the complete understanding
between the Parties and supersedes any and all prior agrecments, promises, or inducements, no
matter what form, concerning its subject matter. No promises or agreements made subsequent to
the execution of this Agreement by the parties shall be binding unless reduced to writing and signed
by authorized representatives of all parties.

9. Goveming Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of New
Hampshire, regardless of the choicc of law rules of this State or any other State,

10. Execution in Counterparts. This Agreement may be exccuted in counterparts, each
of which shal] constitute one agreement, and such execution may be evidenced by signatures

delivered by facsimile or other electronic transmission.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement, effective as of the
date below.

GREG B. TURGISS

SS
v= :
=s ige Le Laz 2)
Dated ee ~
STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE ADMINISTRATION

s| 22] 2020 apg, St.
Dated Lindsey M. Stepp, Commissioner

State of New Hampshire
Department of Revenue Administration

109 Pleasant Street
77" * PO Box 487, Concord; NH 03302-0487
Telephone (603) 230-5000

Lindsey me Stepp wvew. revenue nh.goy MUNICIPAL AND PROPERTY
Commissioner DIVISION
forsee January 24, 2020 arias P Garry
Aselstant Commissioner Director
Samuel T, Greene
Personal & Confidential Asalstant Director
a
Re: of Misconduct Against DRA ified Assessing Personnel

Dear Mr. Duhamel

On February 19, 2019, we received a Charge of Misconduct Against DRA-Certified
Assessing Personnel ASB 307 (Form PA-71) against you. On August 19, 2019, we received
a second Form PA-71 against you. Since the time of receiving those charges we have
concluded a preliminary investigation of the allegations. We are now prepared to bring a
petition forward with the Department of Revenue Administration's Heating Officer to seek
the imposition of discipline by the Commissioner. Below is & summary of the charges of

misconduct which the Department is prepared to pursue.

Pursuant to RSA 21-J:14-f, you were certified by the Department as a Property
Assessor Supervisor on March 30, 2016, Pursuant to RSA 21-J:14-g, the Commissioner may
decertify, suspend or take other disciplinary action against you for failure to comply with the

ASB Rules.
Pursuant to Asb 301.36 “Misconduct” means:

(a) A dereliction of duty;

(6) A violation of appraisal practice ethical standards, such as,
but not limited to:

(1) New Hampshire assessing standards board (ASB);

(2) International Association of Assessing Officers
(IAAQ);

(3) New Hampshire Association of Assessing Officials
TDD Access: Relay NH 1-800-795-2004

individuas who need aiodilary aids for effective communication in programs and services of the
Department of Revenue Administration are invited to make their needs and preferences known to the Department.

Mr. R. Jonathan Duhamel

January 24, 2020
Page | 2
(NHAAO); or bon baie
(4) Uniform standards of professional appraisal practice
(USPAP);

(c) An affirmative act of misrepresentation or concealment of a
material fact;

(d) Violation of assigned duties by malfeasance, misfeasance or
nonfeasance; or

(e) An act or failure to act when there is a duty to do so in
reckless disregard of another’s rights, committed voluntarily and
intentionally,

Asb 307.02, provides in pertinent part,

Charges of misconduct shall include:

(e) Misconduct as defined in Asb 301.36 or violation of any
applicable NH property assessing statutes, Asb 300 or Rev 600;

4) Non-compliance with an individual's right to know pursuant
to RSA 91-A.

ASB Code of Ethics and Standards of Professional Conduct (March 9, 2018)

provides,

As a matter of fundamental principle, DRA Certified Personnel
should adhere to the highest ethical standards. Public trust in our
performance is the foundation of our credibility.

DRA Certified Personnel shall conduct themselves in a
professional manner that reflects favorably upon themselves, the
assessing profession, and the property tax system, and avoid any
action that could discredit themselves or these entities.

Canon 1: (Professional Duties Ethicat Rule)

ER 1-1 It is unethical for DRA Certified Personne! to conduct
their professional duties in a manner that could reasonably be

expected to create the appearance of impropriety.

Canon 3: (Conflict of Interest Ethical Rule)

Mr. R. Jonathan Duhamel

January 24, 2020

res | 3
DRA Certified Personnel shall not engage in any activities ir in
which they have, or may reasonably be considered by the public
as having, a conflict of interest.

i tt ee re on le eee

ER 3-1 it is unethical for DRA Certified Personnel to accept an
appraisal or assessment related assignment that can reasonably
be construed as being in conflict with their responsibility to their
jurisdiction, employer, or client, or in which they have an
unrevealed personal interest or bias. ER 3-2 It is unethical to
accept an assignment or responsibility in which there is a
personal interest without full disclosure of that interest and
showing mitigation of the conflict,

ER 3-3 It is unethical to accept an assignment or participate in
an activity where a conflict of interest exists and could be |

perceived as a bias, or impair objectivity.

1. Dereliction of Duty. During the fall of 2018 you served asthe chief assessor
for the City of Nashua. In that capacity you supervised the City assessing staff, including
DRA certified propesty assessor supervisor Greg Turgiss and his brother, DRA certified
property assessor Gary Turgiss. At the time, the City was working through a full statistical
revaluation of the property in Nashua under a contract with KRT. As past-of that revaluation
process, the City undertook an active role in performing the informal reviews of the
valuations of individual properties. In January 2014, Gary Turgiss assessed 41 Berkeley
Street. During the 2018 revaluation informal review process, the owner of that property, Ms.
Laurie Ortolano asked that the property be reviewed by KRT. Instead, you assigned Greg
Turgiss to review the assessment originally done by his brother Gary. Under Asb 304.04(f)
one of your duties was to “supervise informal reviews of property assessments with the
property owner.” In performing that duty, you assigned Greg Turgiss to review the work of
his brother Gary, and Greg visited the property on October 8, 2018. You were derelict in
your duty when you did that because your assignment created a conflict of interest or the
appearance of a conflict of interest. Your responsibility was to make work assignments in
conformity with standards of conduct and law applicable to the circumstances and the
persons involved. Assigning Greg Turgiss to review the work of Gary Turgiss resulted in a
situation where a taxpayer reasonably questioned and doubted the objectivity and fairness of
the City’s assessing process and the assessment of their property. You did not perform your
duty in accordance with Asb 304.04 and Rev 603.05, when you made a work assignment that
required Greg Turgiss to violate the Asb Code of Ethics. The sanction for these violations
under Asb 308.05 is decertification for up to 5 years.

2. Derelicti y — Violation of RSA 91-A. In’‘September and October
2018 you received a series of emailed requests for government records from a taxpayer. Jt
was your responsibility as the recipient of these requests to ensure that they were responded

Mr. R. Jonathan Duhamel
January 24, 2020
Page | 4

to in a complete and timely fashion pursuant to RSA 91-A:4. The table below describes four
different émailed requests for government records to which you did not respond in a timely
fashion as required by RSA 91-A::4.

| Date Subject Docs requested
1 | 9/27/18 “Process and | The taxpayer requested “comparable old homes that you
BFB” have adjusted to 1990 or above for EYB. Data produced
by the City and not KRT...” You did not respond.
2 | 10/42018 | “KRT The taxpayer requested “a list of properties that were

Appraisal” | changed and what their new values are” (from the KRT
North End review). You did not respond.

3 | 10/31/2018 | “Assessing | The taxpayer requested “copies of the 25 letters that you
Office” requested from the assessing office sent to residents for
assessment changes.” And also asked if there were
policies concerning the internal workings of the assessing
department. You did not respond.

4 | 11/16/2018 | “39 Stark The taxpayer requested a policy whereby a resident doing
Street —a a renovation on a home would know of a “discount”
good when the owner did not occupy the property.

training and | You responded the same day saying you would get back
policy case” | to her on Monday (which would have been 11/19). On -
11/26 you responded again and said that there were “no
documents”,

Under Asb 301.36 misconduct includes dereliction of duty, in addition to
nonfeasance, misfeasance and malfeasance, as well as failures to act when there is a duty to
act in reckless disregard of another’s rights committed voluntarily and intentionally. Under
Asb 307.02 misconduct includes non-compliance with RSA 91-A. When you did not respond
to the taxpayer's requests for government records you violated RSA 91-A which constitutes
sanctionable misconduct. The sanction for non-compliance with RSA 91-A under Asb

308.09 is up to 6-months suspension.

3. While we do not intend to bring a charge due to the limitations imposed by
Asb 307.01, we must address your role in attending to the proper execution of the 2018
revaluation by KRT. You held the position of chief assessor for the City and yet had
apparently no meaningful role in carrying out or overseeing the work. As an assessor
supervisor, however, you had a duty to ensure that the KRT contract was performed
according to its terms. Asb 304.04(c)(2). From the outset, it became clear that KRT was not
performing the measure and list of the sales properties as the contract unmistakably required.
This may in fact have been because of a misrepresentation made by you or a

Mr. R. Jonathan Duhamel
January 24, 2020
Page| 5

ee ee

misunderstanding perpetuated by you and never corrected. At a minimum, we have seen no
evidence in the ensuing months until your departure in March 2019 that you took any steps to
remedy the situation, As a result, the City and its taxpayers paid for a service that was not
performed and the resulting revaluation was not conducted according to the contract.

Recommended charges

As a result of your misconduct as summarized above, we are prepared to bring a
petition against you seeking to discipline you before a DRA hearing officer with the

following charges:

1. Asb 301.36, Asb 307.02, Asb 304.04(b)(7) for dereliction of duty by assigning one
brother to review the work of another relating to the informal review of a taxpayer’s

property.
2. Asb 301.36, Asb 307.02, Asb 308.09 for dereliction of duty by failing to respond to a

taxpayer’s right to know requests ## 1,2,3 & 4.

Before we initiate such a petition we would like to provide you an opportunity to
meet with us to discuss a resolution of the charges which will include some form of
discipline. Please let me know by January 31, 2019, if you would like to discuss this

possibility.
Sincerely,

reg

Aames P. Gerry — cy
Director

cr ore oe es ee Ot ee ete a tr

mrt ee ete oe