Days
Hours
Primary Election • May 19, 2026
Days
Hours
Fair, accurate, assessments should be non-political. It’s basically data collection, math and statistical analysis. The Assessor’s work depends on three interdependent pillars: People, Systems, Data. In 2020, each of these were unstable. The instability was inherited from the prior administration affecting all three pillars. Reforms were needed to stabilize all three. The controversy and disruption were a response, in part, to the reforms.
Controversy erupted in the fall of 2021 (before the 2022 election cycle) when the Chief Deputy (only 5 months into her job) rallied with a core group of appraisers (former colleagues) and formed a plan to unseat me. In April of 2022, the Chief Deputy and the group initiated an executive session with the Commissioners to unseat me and they published their anecdotal complaints in the press threatening they’d quit, which could jeopardize operations. Four years later most still work in the Assessor’s Office; a few have retired.
Change is difficult, especially when people have invested years holding an unstable system together. But the changes were necessary. Reforms meant changes to the core group of employees. It was a culture shock resulting in fear, apprehension, misunderstanding, polarization and resistance through an internal campaign against me.
My inquiries and my proposed reforms, as an outsider, threatened the staff’s “norm.” The tragic passing away of the previous Assessor was a huge loss that shook their world. As an outsider, I was seen as one more change amid many others including rapid growth, public COVID shutdowns, political and national riots and unrest and much uncertainty.
The reforms also meant making processes and methodology changes to enhance uniformity. Over the years, residential property owners have shouldered a greater share in paying property taxes primarily due to legislative changes – but processes and methodology have an impact, too. Housing is no longer affordable. By redressing inequities through process changes and easing the residential tax burden, the reforms were a threat to the interests of some local community leaders who wanted to preserve the status quo.
Things got political. Opposition followed a pattern of attack and discredit taking the hard line against me.
The 2022 internal campaign against me caused tremendous internal disruption in the operations.
Allegations against me were, and are, false. The Commissioners had no evidence whatsoever to support their allegations against me.
As a result, the District Court and Supreme Court found in my favor and reversed the actions of the Commissioners.
First, things have settled down.
The Assessor’s Office is a great place to work, and we have an amazing team.
We have a lot of dedicated, long-term employees (≥ 6+ years) who have the proper skills and competence, and most importantly, their hearts are in the right place. Their experience is valuable in getting the work done and we needed their help to transfer their knowledge on to the newer personnel. Most of these long-term employees are also Baby Boomers with an eye on their deserved retirement in the not-too-distant future.
Next, we have a good mix of newer employees (< 6 years). What these employees bring their willingness to learn from the more experienced while also bringing their technological savvy and offering a willingness to innovate and automate and a fresh look from new perspective and new insights.
We need both the experience and the new perspectives.
From the start, my approach and my intent have been to show respect for the past and especially the dedication of long-term staff, and to balance that with a realism for the present to face the hard issues, while also promoting a vision with optimism and hope for the future. My belief is that this is what will unite us – dedication to our core mission and a vision on how to accomplish that mission.
Looking back, I recognize that my direct approach was not seen by some (especially the long-term employees) in the way that I intended.
In the span of 2.5 short years (i.e., from June 2020 through 2022 – which felt very long), the department has gone through a very difficult and turbulent time of instability. In the heat of that battle, I was direct in my questioning. I asked staff: “What works?” “What doesn’t work?” “What are your needs?” “How can I help?” and the big one, “Why do we do it that way?” In hindsight, I see that these questions can be perceived as threatening.
In the campaign year of 2022, I was open and transparent about operational issues and needed fixes, which was necessary to gain community and Commissioner support to make the needed changes, which required resources and funding. Some employees likely saw such openness and transparency as a betrayal. That was not my intention.
In 2022, after I won the November general election, I apologized to those who were offended, and I maintain that apology even now and without reservation – because I sincerely recognize that change is difficult. But the fact is we were in a difficult situation in 2020-2022, and we needed to act by facing the realities of the current situation.
Project Sympatico is well underway, it will be a huge benefit to the Assessor, to the Treasurer and to the County. It will stabilize all three pillars of the Assessor’s Office -Systems, People and Data. It is Phase 1, of a multi-phased effort.
I am running for re-election to finish the work of stabilizing all three pillars of the Assessor’s Office. I respectfully ask for your vote on May 19, 2026.
Like many organizations that record calls “for quality and protection purposes,” I made audio recordings for accuracy and documentation — never with malicious intent and never to harm anyone. The recordings were simply a reliable form of note-taking and were never used to gain advantage or attack any person. Nothing negative resulted from them.
When I became Assessor in 2020, the office faced serious instability — missing files, no written procedures, inconsistent information, and a tense working environment. After my written notes disappeared and I was warned that false allegations might be made against me, I began recording meetings as a matter of necessity and self-defense so that the truth would be preserved.
Idaho law allows one-party consent recordings, and in public buildings where there is no reasonable expectation of privacy. My actions were lawful and defensive. The District Court and Idaho Supreme Couty ultimately confirmed that my position was justified. There was never any misuse of the recordings.
These recordings protected accuracy and accountability in a toxic and hostile environment where the Commissioners abused their discretion. The recordings harmed no one, produced no adverse actions, and were released only in limited redacted form in response to public record requests.
I regret any concerns or loss of trust that the recordings caused, but the recordings were made in good faith to protect the truth and ensure fairness. Today, we continue moving forward and rebuilding trust. Three employees who resigned have asked to come back and are now again working on our team.
You are now caught up on this FAQ topic.
You don’t need to read any further, unless you want to. If so, take a deeper dive by clicking the next plus sign (+) below to expand the topic to read further and then click the links provided below.
Organizations use recordings for quality and protection purposes, a use that has become common practice. Those are the same reasons that I made audio recordings, and they have never been used against anyone, or for any other reason, other than as my notes. They’ve not been released except for redacted copies released to a handful of employees who made public record requests.
I am sincerely sorry for any loss of trust caused by the recordings. It was never my intention to erode trust among the many good-willed employees who work hard every day. Only those who’ve experienced similar challenges can understand why I took the steps I did.
When I became Assessor in the turbulence of 2020, the office environment felt closed off and resistant to change. All three pillars (People, Systems and Data) that make up the operations of the Assessor’s Office were unstable.
From day one, the transition was not smooth. The Assessor’s files had been removed from the office; all file drawers were empty. There were no written operating procedures to guide me through the complex operations. Staff told me that the Assessor’s files were in storage; when I asked to see them, I was then told they were missing. The files have never been recovered.
I met, one-on-one, with the employees and other county personnel to learn the operations (none were recorded). Some were hesitant to speak; some said they would disavow some of what they had revealed to me if anyone ever asked them about it. Most complained about the computer system. The staff seemed to exhibit a stance duty combined with a self-defensive posture that seemed fearful of repercussion if they opened up and spoke honestly. More than a few mentioned scrupulous concerns about any possible exposure to ethical violation through no fault of their own because they had been doing the best that they could with the limited resources that they had. The discussions yielded inconsistent information. Some said that no documentation existed. Others acknowledged that some documentation did exist, but it had not been updated in years, because laws can change year-to-year and the workload did not allow for updated documentation. I believed that to be true. I took copious notes, but inconsistencies in processes and terminology did not match-up with state law and the software maker’s documentation, making it difficult to reconcile.
When my notes vanished from my office, I began locking my office door. I started making recordings for my notes and quality purposes, not suspecting they’d be deemed a public record. Later, I was tipped off before the two executive sessions, so, I recorded each as a matter of necessity in self-defense because I was denied legal counsel and the tip-off revealed that I would face false allegations it would be illegally demanded that I resign and end my campaign. Commissioners, as a governing body, are prohibited from disclosing; executive session information; I’m not a commissioner and the prohibition applies only to commissioners. Furthermore, an executive session cannot be used to conceal illegal or illicit activity. Finally, I was in a position adverse to the Commissioners and I have the right to a reasonable defense, especially against false allegations.
In Idaho, there’s no reasonable expectation of privacy for actions or events that occur in public view. Idaho is a “one-party consent” state and that means a conversation in a public building can be recorded as long as one person involved in the conversation agrees to it.
The recordings were never used to leverage advantage over any person. At worst, the recordings served as a counterbalance of defensive necessity against Commissioner abuses (as confirmed by one District Court judge and three Idaho Supreme Court judges).
The Commissioners held a December 28, 2023, public meeting seemingly to cast suspicion and discredit me by suggesting the recordings created liability. My County attorney said he would be present in the meeting to answer my legal questions that were still pending. Because my County attorney was not present, I asked if I had representation. Stanley Mortensen said I should ask my legal questions publicly (generally not done publicly due to attorney-client privilege). I chose not to ask my question publicly; however, later after the Supreme Court decision, I did ask my questions in April of 2025. Mortensen refused to answer.
If there was any County liability, then it was dramatically expanded by holding a public meeting, instead of a separate executive session, for the Treasurer and Commissioners to make inquiry. No action occurred as a result of the audio recordings.
On a positive note, three employees who previously resigned have had the confidence to return and are back working. The actual record shows no misuse of the audio recordings. I will continue working to restore and rebuild any lost trust.
The 2000 AGJD report to the Idaho State Tax Commission describes statewide assessor system challenges since the 1990s. Kootenai did not join the 1996 statewide procurement. The computer system implemented by the Idaho State Tax Commission (ISTC) in 1996 along with 42 other counties is what I refer to as the “Idaho Standard”. See pgs. 18-21 and 32-40 of the 2000 AGJD Report. Since 2000, the Technical Services Bureau (TSB) Division of ISTC has created and a system of +400 checklists, audits, reports that they call the TSB Dashboard.
In 2004 Kootenai County partnered with Canyon and Payette counties for a three-county bid, and then each county contracted on their own to buy their new computer systems. Canyon and Payette counties stayed with the “Idaho Standard”, but Kootenai heavily customized the software.
That computer system is still used now, but due to the customizations in Kootenai, it does not conform to the “Idaho Standard” so Kootenai cannot reliably use the checklists, audits, reports and resources of the TSB Dashboard. However, after we implement Sympatico, we will be able to use the TSB Dashboard resources.
This Table shows the different computer systems used throughout the different counties in the State of Idaho since 1996. Sixteen counties use the same system as Kootenai County; but Kootenai is the only county that customized it losing vendor support. By 2020 Kootenai had was 24 versions behind on software updates, patches, fixes.
Customizations caused ongoing trouble: a system crash in 2005 losing all data and requiring manual rebuilding; a failure in 2007, resulting a class-action lawsuit in 2007, another failure in a failure in 2008 causing the county to short taxing districts in 2008; the acceptance of a partially non-functional system in 2010. Issues continued in 2014 with the rolls certified over a month late in mid-September. In January of 2015, Assessor Mike McDowell’s brother, Auditor, Dave McDowell, abruptly resigned amid controversy, likely related to that delay. Thus, the statement made by former Clerk, Jim Brannon on August 9, 2022, statement appears to be false. One fact is clear; the customization created a faulty computer system.
In 2023, before the Sympatico project, we contracted with XTR Consulting to fix the end-of-the-year property rolls – the most problematic issue generating ±40,000 lines of data each year to painstakingly and blindly search for errors. The IT Director confirmed that the fix was implemented with great success for the 2024 roll. My next project would be Sympatico.
January 2024, I launched Project Sympatico with Board approval and the Treasurer’s knowledge, to “reset” the Assessor’s processes to the Idaho Standard, restoring compatibility and access so we can use the TSB Dashboard. With programming complete, testing in late 2024 balanced property rolls within pennies on the first try (the difference was due to rounding). The Treasurer’s noticed and decided that they wanted their own version of Sympatico which has delayed our rollout by over one year. Testing of both Sympatico projects is now underway again with promising results, and we hope to implement it soon.
The next project is to remain with the Idaho Standard as the ISTC and other counties move to replace the aged computer system. I am running for re-election to continue these projects and move forward with advanced tools such as multiple regression analysis, automated valuation models, AI, and full system replacement aligned with statewide upgrades.
This is an impartial list, and I will provide more examples in other FAQ responses.
* The text in blue font are hyperlinks to open and review supporting documents or meetings that support these statements.
In 2022, I campaigned on the promise of ensuring accurate, fair, assessments.
Accurate and fair assessments depend on People, Systems and Data – these are the three “pillars” of the Assessor’s Office.
Each of these pillars is interdependent on one another.
A change in one affects the other two. All effect accuracy and fairness.
“Systems” are work processes, business processes, appraisal methodology and, of course, computer systems.
The computer system has the biggest impact on all pillars. It has been a problem from the beginning. It is aged. It crashes. It has inefficient, manual, labor intensive processes and it is incompatible with the rest of the state. All because Kootenai County customized it without the software maker’s approval. Since 2004, one computer process alone (the year-end property rolls) causes errors to be buried in +40,000 lines of data each year. The +40,000 lines of data had to be painstakingly reviewed by human eyes with repeated, blind, trial and error attempts to correct the errors within a short span of 1-2 weeks.
So, it was, and is, important to fix the computer system and standardize work processes. In 2023-2024, we did fixed the big error. It paid off. With great success* we fixed the problem causing the +40,000 lines of errors and we streamlined year-end property rolls.*
In 2024, I created project Sympatico to align Kootenai County with the “Idaho Standard” – the way that the State Tax Commission the other counties do things. This will prepare Kootenai County to migrate to a new generation computer system* along with the rest of the State. It will also allow Kootenai to use nearly 400+ Idaho state checklists, audits, reports. That will allow for routine and on-going quality checks, data cleaning – a program for increasing accuracy. The Treasurer noticed and wanted to join in on Sympatico*, too, so that his processes can also benefit from Sympatico.
We’ve also had a lot of success in standardizing, automating and streamlining other work processes. These successes will eliminate manual processes, reduce worker fatigue and lead to better worker retention, while also reducing errors and increasing accuracy.
This effort has been challenging because it changes work processes.
Generally, workers, like most people, don’t like change – it is a culture change (a culture “shock”).
But it is bearing good fruit, and it will save on tax dollars and increase fairness and uniformity.
I am asking for your support and recommendation for the May 19, 2026, Primary so that I can continue this work to benefit you and our community.
The answer is that the Commissioners are responsible and to blame for the late property rolls in 2022. It is the combined fault of Leslie Duncan, Chris Fillios and Bill Brooks. However, they blamed me as their scapegoat – as proof see the two signed letters by Chris Fillios, on July 12th and a second time on July 26th.
The process for completing the property rolls and transferring responsibility to the Commissioners as the Board of Equalization (“BoE”) begins when the Assessor mails the assessment notices on, or before, the first Monday of June [I.C. § 63-308(2)] and when the assessor must complete the assessment rolls on or before the fourth Monday of June [I.C. § 63-301(1)]. In 2022, I did everything on time, in fact, I did it early in mid-May by certifying the property rolls while I sat beside my dying mother who passed away from cancer on May 16, 2022. Therefore, on the fourth Monday of June (i.e., June 27, 2022) all ownership and responsibility for the property rolls transitioned to the Commissioners. From that point forward, it is the statutory duty and responsibility of the Commissioners to timely deliver the property rolls to the County Auditor. See I.C. § 63-509.
The County Commissioners sit as the Board of Equalization (“BoE”).
Starting on the fourth Monday of June, all ownership and responsibility over the property rolls transfers to the County Commissioners – see I.C. § 63-501(1).
See slide #9, on the State Tax Commission’s BoE training, which says this: “After the property roll has been submitted to the Board of Equalization, the assessor cannot make a change without an order from the Board.”
According to Idaho State Law in I.C. § 63-509, after the fourth Monday in June, it is the duty and responsibility of the County Commissioners as the Board of Equalization (BoE) to deliver the property rolls, on time, to the County Auditor (County Clerk).
Chris Fillios delayed the delivery of the property rolls two times (first on July 12th and a second time on July 26th) causing the property rolls to be late. Duncan, Fillios and Brooks did that in 2022, because thought they could not finish hearing all 791 appeals by the second Monday of July deadline [see I.C. § 63-501(b)].
By Comparison, Ada County, had roughly 1,700 appeals in 2022 and they also have only three county commissioners – and yet Ada County finished hearing all 1,700 appeals on time and without being late or any fanfare.
The Commissioners were late, but they blamed me as the new Assessor.
RESPONSE: The 2022 Letter of No Confidence signed by 34 individuals. Here’s the Breakdown.
Incidentally, of the 32 total employees, nine (28%) individuals were new employees that had been employed a mere matter of months, to less than one year, when Allyson Knapp and their new boss asked them to sign the letter of No Confidence.
Of the 32 total employees in 2022, seven (21.8%) of the 32 employes were long-term employees who subsequently retired within the four years following the May 2022 primary. Of the overall 34 total individuals, a total of six (17%) are retired Baby Boomers; roughly 20 (58.8%) of them, are Babby Boomers.
Baby Boomers are demographically considered to be one of the largest generational waves ever retire earning the moniker of the “silver tsunami” in the July 2020 issue of Fair+Equitable Assessor’s magazine. and severely affecting the field of Assessment.
This has made an impact on all organizations in the country, and the field of Assessment felt considerable impact sparking much discussion by International Association of Assessing Officers (IAAO) – Succession Planning Toolkit.
See also this 2022 IAAO Conference PowerPoint – Finding New Blood.
This FAQ addresses each one of the seven “fake news” articles and local news posts listed as public record media coverage by Allyson Knapp on the “Comparison” page of her website.
First, I agree that a campaign should be clean and respectful – we owe that to The People we serve. Our society needs to have a lasting return to civility. At the same time, we all know that fake news is used to sway public opinion. Detraction, slander, derision and defamation is as old as the Devil.
As St. Augustine once said: “Truth is like a lion; you don’t have to defend it. Let it loose; it will defend itself”
In New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964), the U.S. Supreme Court established that the First Amendment protects free speech, confirming that truth is an absolute defense against defamation, particularly for public officials.
Click the plus signs (+) below to expand each topic and review the response to each article.
There was only one lawsuit, and the Commissioners lost the lawsuit on all counts. The courts accepted all arguments made by Kovacs in defense of the lawsuit. The Commissioners defended it frivolously.
This is not a complete list of all of the disruptive issues that were encountered but gives an idea of how problematic it can be if an internal campaign is allowed. ICRMP’s Candidacy for Public Office policy was designed and intended to avoid just the type of disruption and drama that would likely erupt when a subordinate employee initiates a political campaign against the elected official for whom they serve. The vast majority of the counties in Idaho that I checked with have adopted ICRMP’s Candidacy for Public Office policy for these reasons.
Significance of March 30, 2022 – It appears to be more than an interesting “coincidence” that this date of Knapp’s HOEX application coincides with the timing of her coup attempt by employee letters of no confidence and rallying subordinate employee, Robert Scott to initiate an internal campaign to run for Assessor. Motive is a valid consideration in any investigation.
