East Hampton's Revaluation, As It Lands

The town next door is living Colchester's 2026 revaluation one year early — measured from the state's new grand list data

The revaluation has landed; the final FY 2027 rate has not been posted. East Hampton’s new assessments took effect October 1, 2025 and reached the July 2026 tax bills at an interim rate of 27.79 mills. The FY 2027 budget went to referendum on June 2, July 14 and August 5. The town-government budget was approved on August 5; the Board of Education budget went to a fourth referendum on August 26, 2026. This page uses 27.82 mills, the rate printed on the town’s August 26 referendum budget, which is the same rate as the August 5 budget. One thing to know about that figure: as of September 24, 2026 the town had not posted the August 26 result. Its Collector of Revenue page listed the 27.79 interim rate, saying the permanent rate would be set by the Board of Finance once the budget was approved, and CT OPM’s mill-rate dataset (emyx-j53e) listed 27.79 for FY 2027. If the permanent rate differs from 27.82, each estimated FY 2027 bill on this page moves by about 3.6% per mill, and the share of homes paying more shifts with it; the calculator below takes any rate.

Why this page matters for Colchester

East Hampton — one town over — last revalued in 2020, right at the start of the housing run-up, so its October 1, 2025 revaluation swallowed the entire boom in one bite: home assessments rose about 51% town-wide. Colchester faces the same reset on October 1, 2026. East Hampton is the closest measured preview of how that lands on a town whose tax base — like Colchester’s — is mostly homes.

The short version: the same arithmetic that raised nearly every Norwich bill 27% produces something far milder here, because East Hampton has little commercial base to shift taxes away from — homes already carry 77% of the list. For how that mechanism works lever by lever, see How a Revaluation Moves Your Bill, or compare Norwich’s measured outcome and the Colchester 2026 what-if.

Home assessments (measured)

+51.1%

residential grand list $968M → $1,464M at the Oct 1, 2025 revaluation; whole taxable base +40.2%.

Mill rate

39.71 → 27.82

the rate on the August 26 referendum budget (−30%); collections move +0.1% at that rate, so it is close to levy-neutral. Break-even: +42.7%.

Median home’s bill (measured)

+6.4%

the median home’s assessment changed +51.9% across 4,998 homes matched parcel by parcel, so at 27.82 its real-estate bill changes +6.4%. Estimated: 82% of homes pay more, 18% pay less.

Car taxes

−14%

rate effect: cars were pinned at the 32.46 cap under the old 39.71 rate; at 27.82 they ride the lower rate.

What happened, in plain English

1. Assessments were frozen at 2020 values for five years. Between revaluations, Connecticut assessments don’t move with the market. East Hampton’s were set in October 2020 — before most of the boom — while sale prices kept climbing until homes were selling for more than double their assessed values (the 2023–24 median sales ratio was 0.44 against a legal target of 0.70).

2. The 2025 revaluation reset everything to market at once. Home assessments rose ~51% town-wide. That does not raise the town’s total tax collections — the mill rate falls in step. At 27.82 (down from 39.71), the town collects +0.1% — close to the same dollars.

3. What changes is each property’s share. A home’s bill rises only if its assessment rose more than the break-even (+42.7%). Because homes as a class rose ~51% while the small commercial base rose ~21% and cars and equipment barely moved, homes’ slice of the pie grew from 77.4% to 83.5% — so the typical home pays somewhat more, homes that rose the most (mostly lower-priced homes and condos) pay noticeably more, and homes that rose least (mostly the most expensive fifth) land near flat or lower.

The tax base, before and after — measured

Share of East Hampton’s net taxable grand list by class, GL Oct 1, 2024 vs. GL Oct 1, 2025 (CT OPM). Class shares use gross class values over the net grand list and are approximate.

What it shows: the same class shift as Norwich — homes up, everything else down as a share — but from a much higher starting point: homes went from 77.4% to 83.5% of the base (+6.1 points), versus Norwich’s 51.1% to 61.5% (+10.3). With only ~6% of the base in commercial and industrial property, there was never much tax to shift from — which is why the typical bill change here is a fraction of Norwich’s.

Grand list class	GL Oct 1, 2024	GL Oct 1, 2025	Change
Residential (homes)	$968,376,149	$1,463,539,920	+51.1%
Apartments (5+ units)	$7,632,640	$16,859,400	+120.9%
Commercial	$27,974,479	$72,980,430	+160.9%
Industrial	$46,369,915	$17,097,910	−63.1%
Vacant land	$26,616,490	$6,099,680	−77.1%
Motor vehicles (net)	$126,546,950	$132,938,060	+5.1%
Personal property (net)	$52,738,790	$50,602,310	−4.1%
Net taxable grand list	$1,250,395,106	$1,753,259,070	+40.2%

Gross assessed values by class except where marked net. Commercial and industrial moved between those two lines in the town’s records (2020 and 2025 reclassifications) — combined they rose +21.2%. The vacant-land drop largely reflects reclassification at the revaluation, not value loss. Source: CT OPM, Net Grand List by Town (webp-fgt3), 2025 rows.

Two different break-evens on this page. The section below is the site’s shared parcel measurement, the same one on every measured town’s Tax Outlook page. Its break-even (+49.1%) is how much homes rose as a class, which is where a home’s bill would be unchanged at a flat levy if every kind of property had risen as homes did. The break-even elsewhere on this page (+42.7%) uses the rate actually on the August 26 budget, 27.82 mills. It is lower because cars, business equipment and commercial property rose less than homes, so the rate fell by less than homes rose. A home whose assessment rose by an amount between the two pays more dollars than in FY 2026, while its share of what homes pay goes down.

When the last revaluation came, which homes went up most?

What the last revaluation did, home by home

Loading…

Source: CT OPM parcel and CAMA data — i7xw-titi, pqrn-qghw, rny9-6ak2 and ibe8-9i3q — reduced to revaluation_detail.json by Data/fetch_ct_cama.py. Each property is matched to itself across the revaluation using the identifier named below, and the figure is the change in its assessment. Homes are sorted by what they were assessed at before the reset and cut into ten equal groups; each bar is the median change within its group. A property counts only where it is a home in both files, and new construction is excluded by year built, because a house that did not exist before did not have its assessment reset. Which towns can be measured this way is decided by Data/check_cama_coverage.py and recorded in Data/cama_coverage.json.

Notes

Shared chartThe same measurement, on the same statewide parcel files, published for every Connecticut town whose records support it. See the chart catalog.

This is a record, not a projection. The other revaluation charts on this site carry drift forward on a stated assumption. This one does not assume anything: both numbers behind every bar are assessments the town actually filed, before and after. It measures assessments and not bills. A bill also needs the mill rate, which a budget sets, and no budget is in this file. The break-even is the bridge between the two: a home that rose by more than the break-even pays a larger share afterwards, one that rose by less pays a smaller share, and that holds before any budget change is added on top.

Every bar is a median within its group. Half the homes in a group moved more than its bar and half moved less, and a property that moved differently from its group moved differently from this chart. The spread inside each group is real and is not drawn here.

Why a revaluation moves some bills and not others

A revaluation does not decide how much a town collects; the budget does. It decides how the total is divided. When every assessment is reset at once, a home whose value ran ahead of the town’s average takes a larger share of the same total, and a home that lagged takes a smaller one. That is why a falling mill rate is not a tax cut and a rising assessment is not automatically a larger bill.

Did the reset land differently on different kinds of home?

The same revaluation, by kind of home

Loading…

Source: the same CT OPM parcel and CAMA files and the same matched properties as the chart above, grouped by the property type the town’s own assessor recorded rather than by any category imposed here. Type labels vary between towns and are normalized by Data/cama_use.py. A type is shown only where at least 20 matched homes carry it, so a handful of properties never becomes a published median. Towns that file every dwelling without a type do not carry this chart at all.

Estimated distribution of bill changes — who pays more, who pays less

Estimated change in the annual bill across 5,156 East Hampton homes at 27.82 mills, in 2.5-point bins. Red: bill rises; blue: falls. Estimate: the town-wide +51.1% and the FY 2026 rate of 39.71 are measured; 27.82 is the rate printed on the August 26, 2026 referendum budget, not a posted permanent rate; each home’s individual move is estimated by carrying the home-to-home spread measured in Norwich, matched by value rank. This estimate was made before the state published its GL 2025 parcel file. That file is now out and the measured change for each home is in the section above; at 27.82 the measured median bill change is +6.4%, against +6.7% estimated here. The share of homes paying more is not in the published measurement, so it is still estimated.

What it shows: unlike Norwich — where the cushion between the median rise (+61%) and the break-even (+27%) was so wide that 98.9% of homes paid more — East Hampton’s cushion is thin: median rise ~+51% against a +42.7% break-even. The estimated result is roughly 82% of homes paying more and 18% paying less — a revaluation with genuine winners and losers.

Who pays more — the tilt toward less expensive homes, two ways

Estimated median bill change by value fifth (GL 2024 assessed value), at 27.82 mills. Two independent estimates: East Hampton’s own measured tilt (from 592 arm’s-length sales, 2021–24 — how far each segment’s prices ran ahead of its frozen assessments) and the Norwich parcel tilt carried over by value rank.

Both estimates agree on the shape: increases concentrate at the entry level — condos (sales imply ~+53% assessment rises), mobile homes, and lower-priced houses — while the most valuable fifth lands near flat at a levy-neutral rate. East Hampton’s own sales tilt is gentler than Norwich’s, which compresses the spread; the median home is ≈ +6–7% either way. Measured parcel by parcel, it is +6.4%.

Check an East Hampton home

Old and new assessments are on your revaluation notice or the town’s property record cards (Assessment History on the field card); the town also runs its own FY 2027 estimator. Real-estate levy only, before exemptions.

Assessment before (GL 2024)

Assessment after (GL 2025)

FY 2027 mill rate

27.82 = the rate on the August 26 referendum budget; no permanent rate had been posted. Edit it to test another.

Defaults: the median home at the town-wide +51.1% change. FY 2026 bill uses 39.71 mills.

Three towns, one mechanism

Norwich is measured; East Hampton is measured at the class level and home by home, with the share of homes paying more still estimated; Colchester 2026 is a scenario.

	Norwich (GL 2023, measured)	East Hampton (GL 2025)	Colchester (GL 2026, scenario)
Homes’ share of base, before	51.1%	77.4%	70.9%
Home assessments at the reval	+62.0%	+51.1%	+45% / +62% scenarios
Homes’ share after	61.5% (+10.3)	83.5% (+6.1)	~77–79% (+6 to +8)
Mill rate	42.22 → 33.25 (levy +6.1%)	39.71 → 27.82 (levy +0.1%)	29.92 → ~20.7–24.3
Median home bill	+27.1% (+$1,064)	+6.4% (measured)	+8% to +19% by scenario
Homes paying more	98.9%	≈ 82% est.	86–98% by scenario
Car taxes	unchanged (at cap both years)	rate −14%	−24% to −36% scenarios

The pattern: the size of a town’s homeowner shift tracks its tax-base structure, not the size of its housing boom. Norwich’s half-commercial base turned a +62% housing move into a +27% median bill increase; East Hampton’s 77%-residential base turned +51% into single digits. Colchester sits between the two. Try the levers yourself on How a Revaluation Moves Your Bill.

How this was measured, and what is estimated

Measured: class values and shares from CT OPM, Net Grand List by Town, 2011–2025 (webp-fgt3), GL 2024 and GL 2025 East Hampton rows; rates from the Town’s Annual Budget 2026-2027 page (FY 2026: 39.71; FY 2027: 27.82, the rate printed on the town’s FY 2027 Budget – August 26 2026 Referendum document, which shows the town-government budget approved August 5 and the Board of Education budget on the ballot. The July 14 ballot had carried 28.22 and the July interim billing rate was 27.79. As of September 24, 2026 the town had not posted the August 26 result or a permanent FY 2027 rate, the Collector of Revenue page still listed 27.79, and the Town Council’s August 11, 2026 minutes set the fourth referendum on the education budget alone; confirm against the town’s posted result or the Board of Finance’s rate-setting vote) and Assessor page (“Last Revaluation: 2020”; the 2025 revaluation applies to the July 2026 and January 2027 installments); CT OPM emyx-j53e (FY 2026 rate, MV cap; FY 2027 interim 27.79) and Revaluation Years by Town (2025/2030/2035 cycle). At 27.82 the town collects +0.1% vs. FY 2026, computed from the two grand lists.
Measured home by home: CT OPM parcel and CAMA data, Connecticut CAMA Data 2022 (i7xw-titi) before the reset and 2026 Connecticut Parcel and CAMA Data (ibe8-9i3q) after it, 4,998 homes matched to themselves, reduced by Data/fetch_ct_cama.py into revaluation_detail.json. The measured median bill change applies the two mill rates to the median assessment change; real estate only, before exemptions.
Estimated (labeled): the bill distribution and the share of homes paying more, made before the parcel file was published. The home roll is the state’s GL 2024 extract (rny9-6ak2; 5,156 homes, median assessed $170,375). The distribution carries the Norwich parcel-measured spread by value rank, rescaled to the measured +51.1%; the alternative tilt is measured from East Hampton’s own 2021–24 arm’s-length sales (5mzw-sjtu, segmented by assessed value — the overall sales-implied move, +49.9%, independently matches the +51.1% grand-list result). Validation of the town-wide arithmetic: the town’s own FY 2027 estimator example reproduces to within 0.01 points.
Archived: raw extracts, the model, and notes in EastHamptonReval/ and RevalSegmentAnalysis/ in the project repository.