Will Cheektowaga go to 100% assessments?

[gorja]

From the Lancaster Bee-

What’s the worth of your house? ¦ Assessing homes at 100 percent market value could clear up residents’ confusion


by MATT KRUEGER Cheektowaga Editor



New York State encourages it. Amherst recommends it. Cheektowaga wants it.

So why doesn’t the Town of Cheektowaga assess its properties at 100 percent market value?

The short answer, it seems, is money.

The up-front costs for reassessing every parcel in the town, which would be required by law, and the inevitable challenges and lawsuits over reassessments would be too great, according to town officials. But maintaining a 100 percent assessment rate is the preferred method in the state and is considered to be easier and less confusing to taxpayers.

“We’ve talked about going to 100 percent a number of times,” said Cheektowaga Supervisor Mary Holtz, adding that she would be in favor of doing it. “One of the concerns is taxing units. When Amherst went to 100 percent, it was a nightmare.”

The Town of Amherst recently reverted to assessing at 100 percent after a few years of doing it at a lower percentage.

The town contracted the work. But that was just the beginning of the cost.

“We had an enormous amount of challenges to the assessments,” Deputy Supervisor Guy Marlette said. “It took about two years to get through the process. It should not have gone to $1 million, but there were a lot of challenges and lawsuits.”
Cheektowaga would have to follow the same process. And since the town doesn’t have the number of employees in the Assessor’s Office that would be needed to reassess all 35,000 parcels, it would need to contract the work to an outside company.

“We don’t have the manpower to do it ourselves,” said Town Assessor Jeneen McSkimming, who splits her time between Cheektowaga and the Town of Boston in a shared capacity. “We only have two in our office. We would have to see if it is cost-effective.”

According to McSkimming, Cheektowaga does assessments each year, but only in certain neighborhoods.

“We superficially look at every neighborhood but don’t do every house every year,” she said.

Some neighborhoods haven’t been reassessed in several years, so changes are very likely on those homes when they are reassessed.

McSkimming said she would like to see Cheektowaga switch to assessing at 100 percent, as Boston does, because it would make things easier. However, she said doing so would be a “public relations nightmare,” and that residents would roar about the changes in assessed value.

According to the New York State Office of Real Property Tax Services, the benefits for maintaining a 100 percent assessment are: equity for taxpayers, improved bond ratings, fewer court challenges to assessments, increased state land assessments and transparency in government.

Prior to 2012, New York State offered reimbursement to towns that maintained a 100 percent assessment rate on a cyclical basis. The state would pay up to $5 per parcel in the first and last years of the reappraisal plan and up to $2 per parcel in non-reappraisal years. Amherst received $5 per parcel in previous years, which worked out to about $225,000.

This year, aid was slashed to just $750,000 statewide, and it’s a first-come, first-serve basis.

“We did receive a reimbursement, but I don’t anticipate getting it anymore,” said Ann Terranova, Amherst’s town assessor. “We didn’t get anything this past year. Now with the new value, we don’t qualify. A representative from the state told us nothing is guaranteed anymore.”

Terranova said that assessing at 100 percent is a benefit and that it allows residents to understand their tax bills more easily. She recommended it for other towns.

Marlette agreed, also recommending it for other towns.

“It gives residents a better idea of the worth of the neighborhood,” he said. “And the town can make budget decisions accordingly.”
According to information from the Erie County Office of Real Property Tax Services, residents in Cheektowaga pay the second-highest property tax rate in the county. The 2012 tax rate is $15.55 per $1,000 of assessed value for town residents outside the villages of Depew, Sloan and Williamsville. That’s only lower than West Seneca (16.94).

By comparison, Cheektowaga’s neighbors Amherst (4.22) and Lancaster (3.99) maintain lower tax rates. But those numbers are misleading, since both Amherst and Lancaster assess their properties at 100 percent market value. West Seneca uses a 45 percent assessment rate.

If Cheektowaga were to assess its properties at 100 percent, the tax rate would drop and give a clearer comparison to those towns.

The real comparison on taxes must be calculated by using the equalization rates for each municipality, including school and county taxes. For instance, if you compared two houses each with a $150,000 market value on Huxley Drive, the one in Amherst would include a tax bill of $3,863.75 per year, while the one in Cheektowaga would be $5,514.63.

Holtz pointed out that while changing to a 100 percent assessment rate would lower the tax rate, the tax levy — the amount of money raised by taxes — would remain the same.

“If we do it, we have to do it right,” she said. “Taxes wouldn’t change. It would just be a little less complicated. The residents would understand their tax bills better. We keep revisiting it. It’s something that’s always on the back burner.”

[WNYresident]

The real comparison on taxes must be calculated by using the equalization rates for each municipality, including school and county taxes. For instance, if you compared two houses each with a $150,000 market value on Huxley Drive, the one in Amherst would include a tax bill of $3,863.75 per year, while the one in Cheektowaga would be $5,514.63.

So why do we pay so much more in cheektowaga to live in our homes?

[gorja]

So why do we pay so much more in cheektowaga to live in our homes?

Ask Nogods, he/she'll say his/hers taxes on his Cheektowaga home are better than the taxes on his Amherst home

[mikenold]

I applaud Mary Holtz for doing the right thing here. Mary is going to bring Cheektowaga in to the 100% assessment club. This is a bold and courageous move. She is stepping up where others have shied away. I, for one, am very pleased by this news.

[Riven37]

Something is starting to smell rotten in cheektowaga

[WNYresident]

Why is it so hard to change the billing multiplier against the value of your home for services rendered?

It's math.

They still teach basic math don't they?

[mikenold]

Why is it so hard to change the billing multiplier against the value of your home for services rendered?

It's math.

They still teach basic math don't they?

You are correct here. It is a simple mathematical equation to bring the assessments up to 100%. This will not change the amount of tax one pays but will simply bring the rate down to compensate for the value increase.

[WNYresident]

You are correct here. It is a simple mathematical equation to bring the assessments up to 100%. This will not change the amount of tax one pays but will simply bring the rate down to compensate for the value increase.

So why would the people who run our town make it sound like it's a big deal costing money to do so?

“We had an enormous amount of challenges to the assessments,” Deputy Supervisor Guy Marlette said. “It took about two years to get through the process. It should not have gone to $1 million, but there were a lot of challenges and lawsuits.”
Cheektowaga would have to follow the same process. And since the town doesn’t have the number of employees in the Assessor’s Office that would be needed to reassess all 35,000 parcels, it would need to contract the work to an outside company.

Why would every parcel need to be revalued? They already carry a value that is recorded they are taxed against.

[gorja]

So why would the people who run our town make it sound like it's a big deal costing money to do so?



Why would every parcel need to be revalued? They already carry a value that is recorded they are taxed against.

When they change to 100%, they do revalue every parcel. That's what they did in Lancaster. Some parcel market values went down but I think most market values went up when they did the reval.

[therising]

I applaud Mary Holtz for doing the right thing here. Mary is going to bring Cheektowaga in to the 100% assessment club. This is a bold and courageous move. She is stepping up where others have shied away. I, for one, am very pleased by this news.

Considering the following, don't you agree that it's kind of idiotic to consider it now - as opposed to last year (or the year before that, or the year before that, or the year before that.....)?

Prior to 2012, New York State offered reimbursement to towns that maintained a 100 percent assessment rate on a cyclical basis. The state would pay up to $5 per parcel in the first and last years of the reappraisal plan and up to $2 per parcel in non-reappraisal years. Amherst received $5 per parcel in previous years, which worked out to about $225,000.

[WNYresident]

When they change to 100%, they do revalue every parcel. That's what they did in Lancaster. Some parcel market values went down but I think most market values went up when they did the reval.

Is it law that each property has to be revalued or is it just what "they" did in the past?

[WNYresident]

Considering the following, don't you agree that it's kind of idiotic to consider it now - as opposed to last year (or the year before that, or the year before that, or the year before that.....)?

Well last year they had elections. They were more concerned with fund raisers and keeping their positions. I don't know what the excuses were years past.

[gorja]

Originally posted by therising:
Considering the following, don't you agree that it's kind of idiotic to consider it now - as opposed to last year (or the year before that, or the year before that, or the year before that.....)?

Prior to 2012, New York State offered reimbursement to towns that maintained a 100 percent assessment rate on a cyclical basis. The state would pay up to $5 per parcel in the first and last years of the reappraisal plan and up to $2 per parcel in non-reappraisal years. Amherst received $5 per parcel in previous years, which worked out to about $225,000.

Damn, good point. Why do Holtz and company put programs on the backburner that could save taxpayers' money?

Originally posted by WNYresident:
Is it law that each property has to be revalued or is it just what "they" did in the past?

I think that is why they call it a reappraisal plan

[WNYresident]

I'm just wondering if they use it as an excuse to make themselves up some work to do. If it's basically just a multiplier against the value of the home do the math and be done with it.

I'm looking at it in a simple way...

Home valued at $100,000 and figure at 50% of the value $50,000 and you pay $5000 a year in taxes means you were paying 10% X $50,000 = $5000 a year...

Home valued at $100,000 and figure at 100% of the value $100,000 and you pay $5000 a year in taxes means you would pay 5% X $100,000 = $5000 a year.

So why is it difficult to just adjust the multiplier against the value of assessment?

[reformthi$]

according to dave marrano, the previous assessor in lancaster, he quotes
"when we do assessment equity, it has nothing to do with increasing tax dollars. the point is to make sure the tax dollars are being distributed equitably."
www.speakupwny.com/article_3870.shtml

lancaster sure misses dave marrano