Laurie A. Ortolano Trust v. City of Nashua
Docket Nos.: 29472-18PT/29699-19PT
Page 10 of 18
In brief, the board finds Mr. Gardner’s use of the prior sale of the Property and the sale of
51 Berkeley Street to be questionable at best. Mr. Gardner would have arrived at much lower
market value conclusions had he not chosen to use those sales as comparables.
Mr. Gardner also testified he did not utilize the sale of 45 Berkeley Street that sold in
July, 2017 for $559,900. Ms. Ortolano testified this is the “sister” to her Property: i.e., designed
by the same architect and similar in age, size, quality, condition, location. Mr. Gardner testified
he did not use it because it was a “private sale” and therefore was “not arm’s-length.” Mr.
Gardner, however, is mistaken in his belief that private sales are always not arm’s length and
therefore their sale prices do not represent market value. So-called “private sales” are those that
are not listed on a multiple-listing service; non-arm’s length sales are those that are sold between
parties that have some sort of relationship and the resulting sale price does not represent market
value. The board finds the use of 45 Berkeley Street as a comparable is reasonable and, when
appropriate adjustments are made, generally supportive of the board’s market value findings.
The City placed some emphasis on the fact the Taxpayer did not appeal the assessments
on the Property for the years it owned the Property prior to tax years 2018 and 2019. The board
can place no weight on this fact because assessments are annual events and a taxpayer’s decision
not to challenge an assessment through the abatement and appeal process is not probative of the
proportionality of the assessment or a taxpayer’s agreement with it.
Finally, Ms. Ortolano testified at some length regarding her belief that the City’s
abatement process was flawed and that City employees were biased against her. The board finds
that although there is an ongoing, contentious relationship between the Taxpayer and the City
that is well-documented, both in the pleadings and the news media, the issues before the board
center on whether the Property was disproportionately assessed in 2018 and 2019 based simply
