Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 23

Thread: Lancaster: ASSESSMENTS UBER ALLES, YA!

  1. #1
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,307

    Lancaster: ASSESSMENTS UBER ALLES, YA!

    The deadlines for federal and state income Tax filings have been extended:

    https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/tax-day-now-july-15-treasury-irs-extend-filing-deadline-and-federal-tax-payments-regardless-of-amount-owed

    The deadline for Driver License renewals have been extended:




    https://dmv.ny.gov/dmv/questions-and-answers


    The deadlines for assessment appeals have been extend in other communities...




    While other municipalities, including Cheektowaga and Grand Island, decided to postpone their reassessment projects because of social distancing guidelines that could affect residents' ability to challenge their property values, Lancaster did not.
    But, In contrast to those common sense accommodations, concerning the deadline for Lancaster residents to appeal their reassessments, from the administration whose Supervisor has said that that to him, going out to buy "a loaf of bread" was not essential, Lancaster property owners got this empathetic reply...

    “There really should be no complaining that people did not have an opportunity,” said Baker. “There was no contact. We have really bent over backwards to accommodate and understand.
    If Lancaster is fighting the ravages of a deadly virus, does it not seem reasonable that taxpayers may have been distracted with issues far more urgent than, what could perhaps be a flexible, reassessment appeal deadline?

    Or, is the urgency of this "Pause" being gratuitously applied to selective areas of personal and business life?

    These comments appear to suggest that Mr. Ruffino had his mind made up long ago...



    "In spite of those challenges, postponing the town's revaluation was never an option, said Lancaster Supervisor Ronald Ruffino..."


    ...and his position on the reassessment deadline appears to be, in my opinion, as harsh and inflexible as is the Ruffino position on "Pause" violators...

    image (14).jpg






    From The Buffalo News, April 29, 2020:



    In an abnormal year, Lancaster reassessment goes on as normal



    By Jane Kwiatkowski
    Published |Updated







    In 2017, Joseph Prybylski bought a 26,000-square-foot multi-use building on St. Joseph Street in Lancaster for $360,000. The property was recently valued by the town for $570,000. An adjoining parcel on Aurora Street was reassessed from $23,000 to $115,000. His residence on Madison Street was assessed at $155,000, up from $105,000.

    Prybylski, an electrician, would like to stand before town officials and explain why he believes those values are unfair. In a normal year, he would have done so already.

    But he can't. This is not a normal year.

    “It’s not fair for anyone who would not be able to physically stand before the board and explain their situation or compare and contrast like you should be able to," he said. “Doing it over the phone is so much different than being able to view who you’re speaking with and state your case. It’s just not the same.”

    Lancaster's townwide reassessment had been planned for years with notices for 19,200 properties mailed to residents and business owners in early March, just before Covid-19 began to make an impact on Western New York. While other municipalities, including Cheektowaga and Grand Island, decided to postpone their reassessment projects because of social distancing guidelines that could affect residents' ability to challenge their property values, Lancaster did not.


    “You cannot just hit a pause button and use the same numbers next year," said town Assessor Rebecca Baker. "They’re really not valid anymore."
    That is not a unanimous opinion in New York. Fifty municipalities throughout the state were continuing their assessments, including the Town of Newstead, said Baker. Twenty-nine postponed, including Cheektowaga, Grand Island and several municipalities in Genesee County.

    Municipalities periodically reassess all of their properties as a way to ensure that the property tax liability is spread evenly. Property tax bills to fund schools and municipalities are based on a parcel's value. The goal is to have every property assessed at 100% of its value.

    Without a reassessment, values can become skewed, with some property owners paying more than their fair share, and some less.
    Lancaster’s revaluation was its first in a decade.

    “The numbers themselves, there were very large increases,” Baker said. “Yes, maybe you were one of the unfortunate ones where the assessment has gone up drastically, but what that actually means is that for the last few years, you’ve been underpaying.”

    Reassessments typically lead to challenges from residents who believe the new value of their property is too high. Those challenges can include a face-to-face meeting with municipal officials.

    But new social distancing guidelines during the pandemic make such meetings impossible.

    In spite of those challenges, postponing the town's revaluation was never an option, said Lancaster Supervisor Ronald Ruffino.

    "The project is for all practical purposes complete," he said. "The unfortunate thing is we haven’t done it in 10 years, so things are quite out of whack."

    Mark V. LaFratta’s two-family home on Miller Street in Depew went from an assessed value of $175,000 to $320,000. His estimated property taxes will jump more than $2,000, from $5,704 to $7,808. LaFratta, 41, is challenging his revaluation. He found information online and dropped his documents in the mail slot because Town Hall was closed.

    Baker noted that even the informal review process for preliminary assessment challenge is conducted by phone. She said that if residents were unable to submit their application for review, parks department employees were sent to pick them up. Informal review meetings, usually conducted with residents at Town Hall, were replaced by phone calls, Baker said.

    “There really should be no complaining that people did not have an opportunity,” said Baker. “There was no contact. We have really bent over backwards to accommodate and understand. I gave out my personal cell number to people who did not have computers, so they could text me photos. I think people had more opportunity – not the same opportunities – with Covid-19.”




    Last edited by mark blazejewski; April 29th, 2020 at 10:28 AM.
    LIDA Member Rinow to Member Ruda: You were a sitting Trustee on the Board. Did you help support Mr. Sweeney getting a seat on the CDC Board?"

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    4,643
    Mark, you’ve answered your own question about whether the rules are being selectively applied. We saw it in the contempt that Fredo Cuomo showed for the quarantine rules as he went out real estate shopping with a case of active Coronavirus. We’ve seen it in the actions of Cuomo’s daughters who have been seen out regularly without masks. Yesterday we saw it in the actions of Bolshevik Bill Wilhelm, er DiBlasio, who launched another Democratic Totalitarian screed against the Jews for attending a funeral of a beloved rabbi, an action his office had aporoved.

  3. #3
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,307
    Quote Originally Posted by grump View Post
    Mark, you’ve answered your own question about whether the rules are being selectively applied. We saw it in the contempt that Fredo Cuomo showed for the quarantine rules as he went out real estate shopping with a case of active Coronavirus. We’ve seen it in the actions of Cuomo’s daughters who have been seen out regularly without masks. Yesterday we saw it in the actions of Bolshevik Bill Wilhelm, er DiBlasio, who launched another Democratic Totalitarian screed against the Jews for attending a funeral of a beloved rabbi, an action his office had aporoved.
    Absolutely outrageous Grump. My posting from another site:

    Our Constitutional guarantee to practice our faith seems to be under challenge in New York, just my opinion.


    This intervention is particularly offensive; it smacks of repugnant echoes of long ago and far away Nazi Germany...

    https://www.mediaite.com/news/mayor-...-large-groups/
    LIDA Member Rinow to Member Ruda: You were a sitting Trustee on the Board. Did you help support Mr. Sweeney getting a seat on the CDC Board?"

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    8,922
    A different perspective

    Lancaster residents received their Assessment Notification letter the first week in March, weeks before the lockdown of Lancaster public buildings. I agree with Assessor Baker that ample opportunity was provided for residents to contact Baker for an informal discussion and to file a formal appeal.

    After several contacts with Baker, I and several other residents in my community filed formal RP-524 appeals to the Lancaster Assessment Board of Appeals.

    As Baker stated, “You cannot just hit a pause button and use the same numbers next year," said town Assessor Rebecca Baker. "They’re really not valid anymore." If this assessment becomes void, the Town eats the near $300,000 spent on the project.

    Like a great majority of taxpayers, I believe a timely re-assessment has value in leveling the playing field where every property owner is paying his or her fair share of the town taxes used to provide resident services.

    If the property owner believes his or her new assessment is too high, they have the right to appeal and provide information to validate their appeal claim. My appeal is not that my dwelling increased in value but that based on street sales, neighborhood sales and comparable sales in a hot home selling market, one size doesn’t fit all when the market was influenced by sellers updating units prior to sale. Screwed or not in the appeal outcome, I had an opportunity to appeal my assessment.

    Regarding Supervisor Ruffino being charged as “harsh and inflexible”, I disagree – as did 50 other municipalities who continued conducting their assessment projects. Ruffino supported Assessor Baker’s direction for like reasons. Residents pissed at newly elected Supervisor Ruffino will have an opportunity to remove him from office in four years.

    Ruffino has been promising to toe the line of taxes through job and department spending cuts. We shall see.

    Other

    What is amusing is when property owners complain to me that their new assessment does not reflect their property’s true value. When I then ask them if they were to put their property up for sale, what would they ask. Too often they reply with a value higher than their new assessment.

    I also learned that while appraisers are not allowed in one’s home or even backyard, beside market sale information they use Internet sales photos, permits, areal photography sites, etc. to assess properties. Good luck on your appeals!

  5. #5
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,307
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Chowaniec View Post
    Residents pissed at newly elected Supervisor Ruffino will have an opportunity to remove him from office in four years.
    Nah, I'm not pissed for personal reasons at the newly-elected Supervisor over the assessment issue; I made out well.

    I am however as equally concerned about pursing the reassessment process without consideration to the possible, if not inevitable, change in real estate values resultant from the Covid-19 calamity, as I am concerned about the others who may have been otherwise impacted by this crisis such as...

    In 2017, Joseph Prybylski bought a 26,000-square-foot multi-use building on St. Joseph Street in Lancaster for $360,000. The property was recently valued by the town for $570,000. An adjoining parcel on Aurora Street was reassessed from $23,000 to $115,000. His residence on Madison Street was assessed at $155,000, up from $105,000.

    Prybylski, an electrician, would like to stand before town officials and explain why he believes those values are unfair. In a normal year, he would have done so already.

    But he can't. This is not a normal year.

    “It’s not fair for anyone who would not be able to physically stand before the board and explain their situation or compare and contrast like you should be able to," he said. “Doing it over the phone is so much different than being able to view who you’re speaking with and state your case. It’s just not the same.”

    This crisis apparently is worthy of turning our lives, our privacy, and our freedoms "topsy-turvey."

    Our national economy has been trashed, school years destroyed, cancer surgeries are now considered optional; graduations, funerals and other milestone life events have been delayed; in-church worship has been suspended; and income tax collection deferred.

    Hell, you need to jump through hoops to get an eye test for driver license renewal, even though those deadlines too, have been delayed.

    Not that any of that matters, people can be "punished" if they do not tow-the-line on every aspect of the Lancaster "Pause," while the public is still perceptibly "in the dark" as to the statistics which would suggest the effectiveness of that "Pause."

    How about those people who were ill during the period before and extending through the reassessment appeal deadline?

    Was Lancaster exempt from the Covid-19 disease during that period?

    Perhaps if we had consistently accurate numbers, presented in a transparent, forthright, non-hand-wringing way, we would know for sure, eh?

    We need to agree to disagree on this one Mr. C.

    The appeal deadline for this reassessment does not, in my mind, rise to the level of importance of the items specified above, and I don't give a rat's ass about the "50 other municipalities who continued conducting their assessment projects," no more than you are favorably affected by the twenty-nine municipalities that chose to postpone their projects.

    Just my two cents.
    Last edited by mark blazejewski; April 29th, 2020 at 07:00 PM.
    LIDA Member Rinow to Member Ruda: You were a sitting Trustee on the Board. Did you help support Mr. Sweeney getting a seat on the CDC Board?"

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    8,922
    Yes Mark, we will have to agree to disagree on this subject. As someone whose tax increase is estimated at $300, I would like to wish away that happening. But it is what it is and regardless of outcome a re-assessment is a zero-sum game.

    Zero sum game - what one property owner doesn't pay will be picked up by someone else. So, if one property or one neighborhood is significantly underassessed, not only are they paying too little in taxes, but other property owners are subsidizing that taxpayer's or neighborhood's share of the bill.

    https://www.tax.ny.gov/research/prop...reassessqa.htm

    Your looking to government for understanding and fairness? Fairness here lies in the eyes of the property owners outcome. Living in a townhome community I could easily bitch about the unfairness of State Condominium Law 339-y. Where I and several other townhome HOA communities receive no 339-y tax break for providing services not provided by the town, those with Condo status are receiving assessment reductions up to 55% - reductions which lead to tax breaks that far exceed the Association costs of providing the services not provided by the town, and often tax reductions that cover their entire Association HOA fees, and more. It is what it is!

    The State Assembly Democrats promised in 2018 that if the Senate became Democratic controlled it would pass legislation passed in the Assembly that would allow municipalities to determine how Condominium Law 339-y would be administered. There is not one Assessor that I have spoken to that does not believe the Law should be changed. Well near 1-1/2 years later, nothing! Fairness? It is what it is!

    Your plea for information is something we do agree on. The general rule of thumb in an assessment project is that 1/3 of town property owners will receive a tax cut, 1/3 are held harmless and 1/3 will see a tax increase. I am hearing that division is not happening this year. Anyone whose property increased in value by 30% in 10 years can expect to see a tax increase.

    But we will never know the division ratio, will we. My assessment increased by $55,000 – 38%. We have 5 different sized units in our community. There are units increasing in assessment by $100,000 – based on one street sale.

    Appeal, appeal, appeal!

  7. #7
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,307
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Chowaniec View Post
    Fairness? It is what it is!
    Lee,

    During this time, people are worried about their children; lost their jobs; may themselves be ill; tending to elderly family members under unbelievable limitations; some have seen their savings destroyed; their civil liberties have been curtailed, and so on, and so forth.

    Under such circumstances, it does not surprise me that the reassessment deadline was not a priority concern of the Lancaster property owner.

    (As this is written, 3.84 million Americans lost their jobs in the last week.)

    With those circumstances present, I have a hard time being supportive of maintaining a deadline, subject to flexibility, which could have been extended.

    In fact, at the outset, long before the deadline expired, I suggested that the Supervisor, in light of NYS State of Emergency Declaration, seek guidance from the Governor, on the legality of such an extension, and on any possible state and federal financial mitigation that may be provided to the town for exercising such an extension...

    March 16:

    Quote Originally Posted by mark blazejewski View Post

    Also, given the Coronavirus crisis, has the Supervisor considered any type of TIME EXTENSIONS or other remediation for residents to engage appeals with regards to the new property tax REASSESSMENTS?
    https://www.speakupwny.com/forums/sh...Yet-quot/page3

    March 18:

    Quote Originally Posted by mark blazejewski View Post
    In light of New York State's designation of a State of Emergency, perhaps the Supervisor should consult the Executive Chamber in Albany for guidance in accordance with this?...

    https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation...8H9uJvLELErIec
    Quote Originally Posted by mark blazejewski View Post
    That assumes one can compile what one needs to compile, and that those officials who would engage the appeal are still functioning in their official capacities, and abbreviated operations of the office(s) are still existent at that point in time.

    Under these circumstances, I do not take anything otherwise foreseeable for granted.
    https://www.speakupwny.com/forums/sh...sessment/page4

    Apparently, the Supervisor, who demands obedience of his town's population to his "ORDERS", apparently never considered such an extension, nor seemingly, did he ever make such a query to the governor in consideration for the calamitous burdens that were placed up his constituents; you know, the people that elected him...

    "In spite of those challenges, postponing the town's revaluation was never an option, said Lancaster Supervisor Ronald Ruffino..."
    Ruffino is "for the people?"

    I guess political bosses are people too.

    Last edited by mark blazejewski; April 30th, 2020 at 09:38 AM.
    LIDA Member Rinow to Member Ruda: You were a sitting Trustee on the Board. Did you help support Mr. Sweeney getting a seat on the CDC Board?"

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    8,922
    Hey Mark:

    Your concern for residents facing increased taxes at a time of crisis is admirable. I will admit performing a reval during a ‘hot’ real estate market where prospective home buyers were outbidding each other was unfortunate. However, the re-assessment (reval) was commissioned by another town board three years ago when Lancaster’s equalization rate dropped below 90%, and where it is now at 77%. The last reval took place 10 years ago. For the first five years after the 2010 reval, Lancaster's equalization rate stayed at 100% - or near that rate.

    The time for entering an appeal was extended by one month. The Assessor and her staff have been more than accommodating in providing informal reviews with residents dissatisfied with their new assessments and their providing information to answer resident concerns / challenges.

    Unlike past revals, the 1/3 split is not at play this year. Only a few property owners will see their assessments remain the same. An estimated 51% will see an assessment increase, 49% a decrease.

    Those property owners believing their increased assessments are out of line have an opportunity to file a formal appeal. The petitioner better have provided more information on the appeal document than, “I don’t believe I can get the amount you have stated on my assessment letter – or I am already paying too much in taxes and can’t afford to pay more.”

    Do you, or anyone have apathy for the property owners whose assessments were lowered because they were over-assessed and paying more than their fair share.

    There are 19,200 parcels in Lancaster. It is my understanding that of the 9,792 parcels realizing an assessment increase, an estimated 900 formal appeals have been filed with the Lancaster Assessment Board of Appeals at this time. That is 9.2% of the number of assessment increases, 0.097% of the total parvels.

    Town property valuation should increase substantially. The tax rate should decrease. What the town receives in revenues and in turn spends in the 2021 budget will impact the tax levy and tax rate. Don’t shoot the messenger (Assessor).

    As someone who is projected to see a $280 tax increase, I would love to see this go away. It did not! I had several informal discussions with the Assessor and her staff to plead my case and was ultimately told to file an appeal based on my information. My appeal was filed well before the March 31 deadline; a deadline that was extended.

    What disturbs me is that there are residents not having computers and unable to access the town website to get OARS information regarding street sales, neighborhood sales, comparable home sales, etc. With the closing of town offices and the Library because of Covid-19 and residents sheltered in, hopefully someone is looking after these people.

  9. #9
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,307
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Chowaniec View Post

    What disturbs me is that there are residents not having computers and unable to access the town website to get OARS information regarding street sales, neighborhood sales, comparable home sales, etc. With the closing of town offices and the Library because of Covid-19 and residents sheltered in, hopefully someone is looking after these people.
    Lee, that was a major component to my concerns which I did not express; my bad.

    With that said, what I am trying to simply convey is this horrible situation is complicating the lives of those who legitimately may have been impacted by dire circumstances resultant from the virus, through absolutely no fault of their own.

    There will always be present those that will deliberately exploit a situation to compensate for their own failures and deficiencies, I get that.

    But for those not so driven; for those who may have been severely victimized by the pandemic; for those who inadvertently failed, for whatever understandable reason, to receive and comprehend what may have been a rather inconspicuous message, I am simply suggesting that Supervisor Ruffino, who previously sought to lead this town on a public proclamation of qualifications and experience, apply the same empathetic understanding to those from whom he sought the same with these words on March 16:

    "It hurts a lot to be going through this."


    Comment: We are all "going through this" Mr. Supervisor.

    That he was...
    "under a lot of pressure."


    Comment: We are all under "a lot of pressure" Mr. Supervisor.


    "I'm new to this."


    Comment: How many people are familiar with reassessments, Mr. Supervisor? They most probably are new to the reassessment process, eh?

    Lee, without intending to be argumentative, let me just summarize with one anecdote:

    When I was a rookie teacher, my mentor faculty member gave me a very simple, but profound, bit of advise which, in a paraphrase said "Mark, you can make a great deal of progress with a student and the parents if you leave them with the knowledge and feeling that they have been treated fairly."

    In that connection, I wonder if this messaging could have been improved upon...

    "In spite of those challenges, postponing the town's revaluation was never an option, said Lancaster Supervisor Ronald Ruffino..."


    “There really should be no complaining that people did not have an opportunity,” said Baker. “There was no contact. We have really bent over backwards to accommodate and understand."


    As always, thank you for your truly insightful thoughts and civil exchange Lee.
    Last edited by mark blazejewski; April 30th, 2020 at 03:37 PM.
    LIDA Member Rinow to Member Ruda: You were a sitting Trustee on the Board. Did you help support Mr. Sweeney getting a seat on the CDC Board?"

  10. #10
    Member gorja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lancaster, NY
    Posts
    13,150
    I was just reading on the town assessor's site that the residents who would like an appointment for a Board of Assessment review have until 8pm, May 26th to submit their RP-524 form.

    SO there is still time for those residents who procrastinated earlier on.


    If you are interested in scheduling an appointment with the Board of Assessment Review, we ask that you complete the RP-524 (which is available under the forms tab on this page) and submit it as soon as you can, but no later than 8 pm on May 26, 2020. This can be done by mailing it to the address below, dropping it in our drop box by the Clark St. entrance, faxing it to 716-681-7054, or emailing it to assessor@lancasterny.gov. Be sure to indicate if you want an appointment at the top of the form or if you are just mailing it in for review.

    Once our office receives your application, and you have noted that you request an appointment, we will contact you (be sure to include your phone number) to schedule an appointment. The hearings will begin on May 26, 2020 from 10 am to 8 pm and will continue until all requests have been heard.

    This year's Board of Assessment Review hearings present some challenges in order to meet all New York State laws. At this time, we do NOT believe these hearings will be in person, but a phone-in method instead. As a result, the Town of Lancaster must wait until May 15th to see what the Governor's Executive Order will state.

    Instructions on how to proceed, including the phone number to call if needed, will be placed on our website as soon as we know what we can and cannot do. Please be sure to check our website often to make sure you do NOT miss any important information.

    Mail Applications to:

    Town of Lancaster

    Board of Assessment Review

    21 Central Avenue

    Lancaster, NY 14086

    Georgia L Schlager

  11. #11
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,307
    This is very perplexing:


    Below, you will note two identical homes, in very close proximity to each other, on the very same street.

    In connection with the reassessment appeals process, purportedly, the exact same identical assessment standard was applied to each property by the very same Tax Assessor's office.



    Given the Assessor's "Statement"...



    ...specifically those comments concerning paying "their fair share," are these comments and questions appearing in the quoted "Letter To The Editor" below, and highlighted in red, not worthy of transparent response and truthful answer?

    Lancaster assessments are dysfunctional
    May 13, 2020


    We received our 2020 home assessment for $330,000. We filed a review along with approximately 20 pages of information and comparisons, including an appraisal from the bank from April of 2018. We received our denial letter today. I helped many Lancaster residents complete their reviews of their obscene assessments. Our neighbor’s home has the same style, age and square footage. They had their assessment lowered to $295,000, using the exact same method comparable to the one we used for our assessment review. This whole process has been an abuse of government, especially with the COVID-19 crisis, which will send home prices tumbling.

    Is Supervisor Ronald Ruffino’s home assessment fair and honest? Does he have a finished basement? Fireplace? Did he acquire the proper permits to finish the basement? His home is assessed at $265,000. Is that really comparable to other homes in Lancaster of the same size and age? Is his estate-like backyard included in the assessment?

    He stated in the paper that people need to pay their fair share. Hypocrites! I have the FOIL of his property permits, and they include a pool and two sheds. No finished basement.


    Gregory Sojka
    Spruceland Terrace
    Lancaster

    Reference: https://www.lancasterbee.com/article...dysfunctional/
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by mark blazejewski; May 14th, 2020 at 04:22 PM.
    LIDA Member Rinow to Member Ruda: You were a sitting Trustee on the Board. Did you help support Mr. Sweeney getting a seat on the CDC Board?"

  12. #12
    Member gorja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lancaster, NY
    Posts
    13,150
    I wonder if the denial Mr Sojka received was from an informal review or the Board of Assessment review
    I, received a denial letter for my informal assessment review but didn't bother with the board assessment review
    which residents have until May 26 @8pm to submit their RP-524 form.

    So there is still time

    Georgia L Schlager

  13. #13
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,307
    Don't know Gorja, but in my mind, the questions that Mr. Sojka asked remain worthy of transparent comment and truthful answer.
    LIDA Member Rinow to Member Ruda: You were a sitting Trustee on the Board. Did you help support Mr. Sweeney getting a seat on the CDC Board?"

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    8,922
    Quote Originally Posted by gorja View Post
    I wonder if the denial Mr Sojka received was from an informal review or the Board of Assessment review
    I, received a denial letter for my informal assessment review but didn't bother with the board assessment review
    which residents have until May 26 @8pm to submit their RP-524 form.

    So there is still time
    Spot on!

    Eight (that I know of) unit owners in my townhome Association filed both informal and RP-524 assessment appeals. Six of the eight received letters declaring they received assessment reductions based on information provided in the informal review process.

    Of the two denied, one unit owner is filing another RP-524 to the Assessment Board of Appeals for a personal hearing. One of the unit owners that received an assessment reduction is filing a RP-524 requesting a larger deduction than what was awarded.

    I will also mention that I mentored six of the unit owners with like sized units. Two of the unit owners received larger deductions than I did.

    We also did not use comparisons based on other townhome, patio home and condominium Associations receiving Condominium Law-339y assessment reductions – assessment reductions our Association doesn’t get despite our Association being founded in 1990. Our data was based on street sales, neighborhood sales, like condition units, etc. – market value based.

  15. #15
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,307
    This is not written with an arrogant representation of a full understanding of all of the technical components to the reassessment formula or the perceived virtues of the appeals process.

    Rather, it is submitted in the tradition and spirit of " Speak Truth to Power," in order to bring to light what I believe to be some troubling fundamentals of the entire process.

    First, without specific reference to Lancaster, I am troubled by any government's imposition upon the citizen, the product of its own finding, particularly when that product was perhaps resultant from what some believe to have been a closed, flawed process, and a formula potentially subject to personal whim.

    As I understood that process, the only remedial recourse available to the citizen was a swift, time-limited engagement of an appeal which placed solely upon the subject, the burdensome responsibility of disproving the government's findings. Such a mechanism is suggestive of the tyrannical template applied by the IRS, wherein that agency essentially engages taxpayers with the intimidating words "We say you owe us money; you prove you don't."

    Both the reassessment/appeals mechanism(s) and the IRS template, in my mind, although not entirely analogous, stand in contradiction to the basic American standard for due process, which places upon the accuser, the onus of proving its case.

    Second, I do believe that everyone should pay their fair share, and in that connection, the Supervisor, I believe, needs to answer the questions contained within the "Letter To The Editor" illustrated on post #11:

    Is Supervisor Ronald Ruffino’s home assessment fair and honest?

    Does he have a finished basement? Fireplace?

    Did he acquire the proper permits to finish the basement?

    His home is assessed at $265,000. Is that really comparable to other homes in Lancaster of the same size and age?

    Is his estate-like backyard included in the assessment?
    I vividly recall, and it was not that long ago, when another Supervisor did not dodge probing query, but transparently engaged questions on television, in order to explain its reasoning in confronting taxation issues.

    Should not the current Supervisor be held to the same standard, or has the current Supervisor's campaign pledge of "transparency" been revised to compliment Napoleon's admonishment in Animal Farm, "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others?"
    Last edited by mark blazejewski; May 15th, 2020 at 09:26 AM.
    LIDA Member Rinow to Member Ruda: You were a sitting Trustee on the Board. Did you help support Mr. Sweeney getting a seat on the CDC Board?"

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Uber uber alles
    By grump in forum Speakup Here
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: August 13th, 2017, 08:21 PM
  2. Should Lancaster Residents be Looking at their Assessments?
    By Wag in forum Village of Lancaster and Town of Lancaster Politics
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: October 16th, 2008, 03:23 PM
  3. Lancaster 100% Proprerty Tax Assessments
    By jennifer7 in forum Morning Breakfast - Breaking News
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: March 8th, 2005, 10:04 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •