Can Connecticut municipalities use independent contractors as their property assessors, or does the law require assessors to be municipal employees?

Plain-English summary

OPM Secretary Jeff Beckham asked AG William Tong a practical question with real budget implications for small towns: when § 12-55 says a "certified assessor" must sign and publish a municipality's grand list each year, does the assessor have to be a town employee, or can the town hire an independent contractor? Beckham forwarded a letter from the Connecticut Association of Assessing Officers (CAAO) arguing for the employment-only reading.

Tong concluded the statute does not require employment. Section 12-55 says assessors must be certified under § 12-40a, must take and publish the grand list, must take an oath, and must do their job under the rules of Chapter 203. None of that mandates an employer-employee relationship. The CAAO had pointed to the phrase "the assessors or board of assessors shall publish the grand list for their respective towns" as suggesting a possessory relationship. Tong rejected that reading, walking through dictionary usage and the canon that ordinary language gets ordinary meaning under § 1-1(a). Employers do not "possess" workers; the word "their" describes an agency relationship that contractors fit just as comfortably as employees.

On enforcement, Tong sketched four overlapping channels. Taxpayers can appeal assessments under §§ 12-111(a) and 12-117a. Municipalities can use contract law to hold an assessor to the statutory quality and methodological standards. The OPM Secretary can call a delinquent assessor to account and seek mandamus to force compliance under § 12-4. And, the most significant tool, the Secretary can rescind certification "for sufficient cause" under § 12-40a(b), which functionally bars the assessor from practicing in the state.

The opinion also rebuts the CAAO's "political intervention" concern: a contractor is no more or less susceptible to political pressure than an employee, and municipalities can put ethics and conflicts clauses in contracts the same way they can in employment agreements.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2022. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Why do small towns care whether assessors must be employees?
A: Because hiring a full-time municipal employee is expensive. Many small towns share assessors or contract with a firm. If § 12-55 required direct employment, those arrangements would be unlawful and would force small towns to either hire alone, share an employee through interlocal agreements, or merge their assessor functions, all of which carry administrative costs.

Q: What does an assessor actually have to do?
A: Revalue all property every five years (§ 12-62), revalue when there's total demolition or new construction (§§ 12-64a, 12-53a), conduct a field review (§ 12-62(b)(2)), measure or verify the exterior dimensions of every taxable building every ten years and "enter and examine the interior" to verify characteristics, sign and publish the grand list by January 31 (§ 12-55(a)), file the abstract with OPM by May 1 (§ 12-120), and take the oath required by § 1-25.

Q: Can a contractor really sign the oath?
A: Yes. The oath in § 1-25 is sworn personally by the individual who prepared the list, attesting that the lists are "made up and perfected according to law." The legal status of the signer's relationship with the town does not change whether the oath is valid.

Q: What is the "ABC test" the AG mentioned?
A: The three-part test in Conn. Gen. Stat. § 31-222 that Connecticut uses to determine whether a worker is an employee for unemployment-compensation purposes specifically. Whether someone is an employee for unemployment, tax, or other purposes is a separate analysis from whether the assessor statute itself requires employment, and the AG used the test only to make the broader point that classification is fact-dependent.

Q: What can OPM do if an assessor doesn't follow the rules?
A: Three things, in escalating order. (1) Under § 12-4, OPM can call the assessor to account in writing for any administrative-duty failure. (2) If the failure is not remedied, OPM can sue for relief in the nature of mandamus, with costs against the assessor. (3) Under § 12-40a(b), OPM can rescind the certification "for sufficient cause," which removes the assessor from practice statewide.

Q: What can a taxpayer do if they think their assessment is wrong?
A: Appeal to the local board of assessment appeals (§ 12-111(a)), then to Superior Court (§ 12-117a), or sue under § 12-119 if the alleged overvaluation violates the statutory scheme. If the court reduces the assessment, the town must reimburse the taxpayer for any overpayment, with interest and costs.

Q: Could a municipality just write the statutory standards into the contract?
A: Yes, and the AG suggested it. The opinion cited the OPM "Procurement Standards for Personal Service Agreements and Purchase of Service Contracts" and noted that incorporating Chapter 203 requirements, ethics clauses, and quality measures into the contract is a clean way for towns to manage compliance without hiring directly.

Background and statutory framework

Chapter 203 of the Connecticut General Statutes is the primary framework for municipal property taxation. Section 12-62 sets the five-year revaluation cycle and the field-review and interior-inspection requirements. Section 12-55 governs the annual grand-list signing and oath. Section 12-40a establishes the certification system and gives OPM the power to grant and rescind certifications. Section 12-4 gives OPM mandamus authority over delinquent assessors. Section 12-119 gives taxpayers a direct cause of action against improper assessments.

The AG's analysis used three statutory-construction tools. First, plain-text interpretation under § 1-2z: nothing in § 12-55 says the word "employee," so the statute has no employment requirement on its face. Second, ordinary-meaning canon under § 1-1(a) and Connecticut Energy Marketers Ass'n v. DOE, 324 Conn. 362 (2016): "their" means the assessors of a town in an agency-relationship sense, not in a possessory employment sense. Third, the structure of Chapter 203: every requirement in the chapter (training, certification, oath, methodological standards, deadlines) is about what the assessor does, not how the assessor is employed.

The opinion is also a useful demonstration of how Connecticut treats different employment-classification tests as context-specific. The "ABC test" decides employment status for unemployment compensation; the IRS 20-factor test decides for federal tax withholding; Southwest Appraisal Group, LLC v. Administrator, Unemployment Comp. Act, 324 Conn. 822 (2017), confirms that classification turns on the test applied and the facts of the case. Reading any one classification test back into Chapter 203 would be importing law from a different statute.

Citations and references

Property tax statutes:
- Conn. Gen. Stat. § 12-4 (OPM enforcement)
- Conn. Gen. Stat. § 12-40a (assessor certification)
- Conn. Gen. Stat. § 12-55 (grand list signing)
- Conn. Gen. Stat. § 12-62 (revaluation cycle)
- Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 12-111(a), 12-117a, 12-119 (taxpayer appeals)
- Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 12-120, 12-120c (OPM filings)

General statutory-construction provisions:
- Conn. Gen. Stat. § 1-1(a) (ordinary meaning)
- Conn. Gen. Stat. § 1-2z (plain meaning rule)
- Conn. Gen. Stat. § 1-25 (oaths)

Employee-classification authorities:
- Conn. Gen. Stat. § 31-222 (unemployment ABC test)
- IRS Form SS-8 (federal 20-factor test)
- Southwest Appraisal Group, LLC v. Administrator, UCA, 324 Conn. 822 (2017)

Statutory-construction cases:
- Conn. Energy Marketers Ass'n v. DOE, 324 Conn. 362 (2016)
- State v. Menditto, 315 Conn. 861 (2015)

OPM guidance:
- Benjamin Barnes, Office of Policy and Management, Procurement Standards for Personal Service Agreements and Purchase of Service Contracts (Dec. 5, 2014)

Source

• Landing page: https://portal.ct.gov/AG/Opinions
• Original PDF: https://portal.ct.gov/-/media/ag/opinions/2022/2022_1_assessor_opinion.pdf?rev=67a8b6081f69495393888fa7628ffd6e

Original opinion text

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
CONNECTICUT

william tong
attorney general

October 5, 2022
Jeffrey R. Beckham
Secretary
Office of Policy and Management
450 Capitol Avenue
Hartford, Connecticut 06106
Dear Secretary Beckham:
By letter dated March 1, 2022, you have requested a formal opinion regarding § 12-55 of the
Connecticut General Statutes. Specifically, you have asked the following questions:
 Does an assessor need to be employed by the town for which he/she is signing a
Grand List to satisfy the requirements of C.G.S. § 12-55 or is it sufficient that a
certified assessor who is a non-town employee familiarize themselves with the
municipality’s administration of the Grand List, review all property in question, and
using their own independent judgment, confirm it was a fair administration of the
local property tax to satisfy the dictates of C.G.S. § 12-55?
 What agency(s) or person(s) has enforcement authority over C.G.S. § 12-55?
As you know, the primary role of Connecticut’s assessors is to value property and assemble each
municipality’s grand list, which serves as the basis for the municipality’s property taxes. The General
Assembly has articulated a statutory system to ensure that municipalities assess property values
carefully and fairly. As part of that system, assessors must be properly trained, certified, and sworn;
must meet a legislatively-defined timeline; and are subject to decertification by the Secretary of
Connecticut’s Office of Policy and Management (OPM) if they fail to fulfill their responsibilities.
However, as explained below, Conn. Gen. Stat. § 12-55 does not require that assessors be employees
– as opposed to contractors – of the municipalities they serve. As for enforcement authority, it appears
that there are a number of possible enforcement mechanisms, including OPM’s authority to enforce
delinquent assessors’ obligations and, with sufficient cause, to rescind or decline to renew their
certifications.
Legal Background: The Roles, Responsibilities, and Qualifications of Municipal Assessors
Chapter 203 of Connecticut’s General Statutes governs the valuation, imposition, and collection of
municipal property taxes. In Connecticut, property taxes are based on valuations determined by

165 Capitol Avenue
Hartford, Connecticut 06106
An Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer

Jeffrey R. Beckham, Secretary
October 5, 2022
Page | 2
certified assessors. The legislature has imposed standards to promote assessors’ accuracy, integrity,
and expertise.
The statutory scheme charges assessors with revaluing property every five years. Conn. Gen. Stat. §
12-62. They must revalue whenever property damage requires total demolition or reconstruction,
Conn. Gen. Stat. § 12-64a, or when new construction is completed. Conn. Gen. Stat. § 12-53a. Before
finishing each revaluation, assessors must conduct a field review. Conn. Gen. Stat. § 12-62(b)(2). Every
ten years, for each taxable structure in the jurisdiction, assessors must “measure or verify the exterior
dimensions of [the] building or structure” and must also “enter and examine the interior of such
building or structure in order to observe and record or verify the characteristics and conditions
thereof.” Conn. Gen. Stat. § 12-62. Assessors revaluing property must use generally accepted mass
appraisal methods, “which may include, but need not be limited to, the market sales comparison
approach to value, the cost approach to value and the income approach to value.” Conn. Gen. Stat. §
12-62(b)(2).
By January 31 of each year, the assessor working for each municipality must sign and publish the
municipality’s grand list – a record of all the municipality’s taxable and tax-exempt property. Conn.
Gen. Stat. § 12-55(a). An abstract of the list is then filed with OPM on or before May 1. Conn. Gen.
Stat. § 12-120. 1 Before publishing the list, an assessor must “take and subscribe to the oath, pursuant
to section 1-25, which shall be certified by the officer administering the same and endorsed upon or
attached to such grand list.” Conn. Gen. Stat. § 12-55(a). In taking the oath, the assessor attests or
affirms “that all the lists, and the abstract of said town… are made up and perfected according to law;
so help me God or upon penalty of perjury.” Conn. Gen. Stat. § 1-25.
Assessors who sign each municipality’s grand list must “be certified in accordance with the provisions
of section 12-40a.” Conn. Gen. Stat. § 12-55(a). A committee under OPM’s auspices is charged with
developing policies for training, testing, certifying, and recertifying assessors. The certification process
is intended to ensure that assessors have relevant substantive and methodological knowledge, and
appreciate the ethical standards of their profession. See Conn. Gen. Stat. § 12-40a. OPM’s Secretary is
empowered to grant certification – or to rescind it “for sufficient cause as said secretary may
determine.” Id.
Assessors Must Adhere to the Statutory Scheme – But Need Not Be Municipal Employees

On the same date, the assessor must also certify to the Secretary of the Office of Policy and Management “the amount
of exemptions approved under the provisions of subdivisions (60), (70), (72) and (76) of section 12-81 for the most
recently completed assessment year, together with such supporting information as the secretary may require.” Conn.
Gen. Stat. § 12-120c.

1

Jeffrey R. Beckham, Secretary
October 5, 2022
Page | 3
You asked for a formal opinion about the employment status and job responsibilities of Connecticut’s
municipal assessors:
Does an assessor need to be employed by the town for which he/she is signing a
Grand List to satisfy the requirements of C.G.S. § 12-55 or is it sufficient that a
certified assessor who is a non-town employee familiarize themselves with the
municipality’s administration of the Grand List, review all property in question, and
using their own independent judgment, confirm it was a fair administration of the local
property tax to satisfy the dictates of C.G.S. § 12-55?
Assessors must comply with the requirements of every relevant statute and regulation – including the
ones you list, which may not be exhaustive. But an assessor need not be a municipal employee.
In interpreting statutes, we start with the text itself. See Conn. Gen. Stat. § 1-2z. Here, the text is clear.
There is no language in § 12-55, or anywhere else in the General Statutes, requiring that assessors be
“employed” by the municipalities for which they work. 2 So any argument that the legislative scheme
requires assessors to be “employed” must fall back on implication from statutory purpose and context.
And here, too, I find no evidence that the legislature meant to mandate an employer-employee
relationship between municipalities and assessors.
There is no single test for whether a worker is an employee or a contractor in all instances. For
instance: Connecticut uses the three-part “ABC test” to determine whether a worker is classified as
an employee for purposes of unemployment compensation. Conn. Gen. Stat. § 31-222. The federal
government uses a different 20-factor test to determine whether a worker is an employee for purposes
You forwarded a letter from a professional affinity organization, the Connecticut Association of Assessing Officers,
Inc. (“CAAO”), suggesting that § 12-55(a)’s requirement that “the assessors or board of assessors shall publish the
grand list for their respective towns” implies a possessory relationship that can be satisfied only by employment. I do
not agree.
2

Words and phrases in a statute are “construed according to the commonly approved usage of the language.” Conn.
Gen. Stat. § 1-1(a). “In interpreting the language of a statute, the words must be given their plain and ordinary meaning
and their natural and usual sense unless the context indicates that a different meaning was intended.” Conn. Energy
Marketers Ass’n v. DOE, 324 Conn. 362, 393-394 (2016); see State v. Menditto, 315 Conn. 861, 866 (2015)
(“Accordingly, General Statutes § 1-1 (a) directs that we construe the term according to its commonly approved usage,
mindful of any peculiar or technical meaning it may have assumed in the law. We may find evidence of such usage,
and technical meaning, in dictionary definitions, as well as by reading the statutory language within the context of the
broader legislative scheme.”).
“Their” means “of or relating to them or themselves especially as possessors, agents, or objects of an action.” Their,
Merriam-Webster Dictionary, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/their (last visited Sep. 27, 2022).
Employers do not, under any circumstances, “possess[]” workers. Given the most logical ordinary meaning, then, the
statutory “their” denotes an agency relationship that is entirely consistent with independent contracting.

Jeffrey R. Beckham, Secretary
October 5, 2022
Page | 4
of federal income-tax withholding. See IRS Form SS-8. A worker’s classification depends on the test
applied – and on the particular facts of their case, since all applicable inquiries are fact-intensive. See,
e.g., Southwest Appraisal Group, LLC v. Administrator, Unemployment Comp. Act, 324 Conn. 822, 839 (2017).
There are hypotheticals in which a statutory scheme might be interpreted to imply the need for an
employer-employee relationship. Imagine, for instance, a legislative command that assessors be subject
to granular control by their municipalities; that they work out of municipal office space; and that they
do no independent assessing work. In that hypothetical, it might be fair to infer that the legislature
intended assessors to be employees for unemployment compensation, since it mandated work
requirements suggesting an employee classification under the applicable legal test. 3
But nothing in the statutory scheme actually enacted by the legislature supports an inference of an
employment mandate for assessors. Chapter 203 is unconcerned with classifying the employment
relationship. Instead, it demands compliance with rules aimed at ensuring fair and accurate valuations
– rules that, depending on the facts of each working relationship, are not necessarily incompatible
with independent contracting.
Municipalities are motivated to ensure that assessors working for them are scrupulously fair, thorough,
ethical, and compliant with all relevant laws and rules. After all, aggrieved property owners can sue
municipalities for wrongful or excessive assessments. 4 But getting assessments right does not depend
on the nature of the employment relationship. Independent contractors, too, can be held to standards
of professionalism and ethics. 5 See, e.g., Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 1-86e, 1-101nn (providing ethical rules for
state contractors). Contractors can also be held by contract to statutory quality and methodological
standards, like the ones imposed on assessors by Connecticut’s statutory scheme. See generally Benjamin
3

See Conn. Gen. Stat. § 31-222 (articulating the ABC test for unemployment compensation).

A property owner can appeal an assessment to the board of assessment appeals. Conn. Gen. Stat. § 12-111(a). If the
board chooses not to conduct a hearing, the owner can seek relief from the Superior Court. Id. The owner can appeal
an adverse board decision to the Superior Court. Conn. Gen. Stat. § 12-117a(a)(1). If the owner is successful and “the
assessment made by the board of tax review or board of assessment appeals, as the case may be, is reduced by said
court, the applicant shall be reimbursed by the town or city for any overpayment of taxes, together with interest and
any costs awarded by the court, or, at the applicant’s option, shall be granted a tax credit for such overpayment, interest
and any costs awarded by the court.” Conn. Gen. Stat. § 12-117a(b).

4

The CAAO letter you forwarded asserts that anything other than an employer-employee relationship “allows… for
political intervention which is exactly what C.G.S. 12-55 was intended to avoid.” Inappropriate political intervention
in property valuation can be both unethical and illegal, but there is no reason to believe that a municipal employee
who depends on political actors for their entire livelihood is less susceptible to political interference than an
independent contractor. Municipalities are no strangers to ethics and conflicts clauses in contracts and may wish to
craft agreements with assessors – whether employees or contractors – that explicitly require compliance with all
relevant ethical and legal requirements.
5

Jeffrey R. Beckham, Secretary
October 5, 2022
Page | 5
Barnes, Office of Policy and Management, Procurement Standards for Personal Service Agreements and
Purchase of Service Contracts (Dec. 5, 2014) (providing standards for Connecticut state government
contracts, including guidance on writing quality measures). The statutory assessment scheme requires
adherence to Chapter 203 and all other applicable law, and municipalities can consider writing
contracts that incorporate all relevant statutory mandates. An employer-employee relationship is not
among those mandates.
OPM’s Secretary Is Empowered to Enforce Assessors’ Obligations and Rescind their
Certifications
Your second question was: “What agency(s) or person(s) has enforcement authority over C.G.S. § 1255?” Aspects of that statute – and of the entire property tax system – are enforced by different actors
in different ways. Among them: Taxpayers may be able to appeal and sue over improper or inaccurate
assessments. Municipalities may have contract remedies against assessors who violate statutory
requirements. OPM’s Secretary can sue to enforce delinquent assessors’ obligations. And, with
sufficient cause, the Secretary can rescind or decline to renew their certifications.
Taxpayers can sue if they believe that an assessor overvalued their property in derogation of the
statutory scheme. Conn. Gen. Stat. § 12-119. So municipalities have an incentive to hold assessors to
high standards. Assessors, in turn, are motivated to measure up. They can be held accountable,
including where applicable through suit on breach of contract, if they fail to live up to the expectations
of the municipalities for whom they work.
Assessors can also be compelled to follow the statutory scheme. Section 12-4 of the General Statutes
authorizes the OPM Secretary to call to account, in writing, any “assessor[]” who “fails to discharge
his or its administrative duty according to law.” If the assessor does not remedy the failure, the
Secretary may sue for relief seeking “an order in the nature of a mandamus requiring compliance with
the provisions of the statute particularly mentioned in such application, and shall render judgment
against any official, board or person who has so failed, with costs.” Id. Finally, the Secretary has the
power to rescind an assessor’s certification “for sufficient cause as said secretary may determine.”
Conn. Gen. Stat. § 12-40a(b). Assessors cannot practice in Connecticut without this certification.
I trust this opinion is responsive to your request.
Very truly yours,

WILLIAM TONG