Grievance Day: How it Went in Scarsdale

June 17th was Grievance Day in Scarsdale .... a day for those who wanted to appeal their tax assessment to go before the Board of Assessment Review to state their case. Given the revaluation, and discontent by some with their new valuations, we wondered how it went at Village Hall. Village Assessor Nanette Albanese promised to send some statistics on the day and will do so. In the interim, we received the following comment from Robert Berg, a member of the Board of Assessment Review along with Tom Giordano, Paul Sved, Gary Ellis and Ken Sklar.

Here is what Bob said followed by observations with a resident who was less than thrilled with his session:

From BAR Member Robert Berg:

Yesterday (6/17) was property tax Grievance Day in Scarsdale. That means it was the last time for property owners to file any challenges to their tentative property assessments resulting from the first town-wide property tax revaluation since 1969. Grievance Day also provided property owners with the opportunity to present evidence at a live hearing to the Scarsdale Town Board of Assessment of Review to support their challenges. The Board of Assessment Review is an independent town board comprised of five residents of the Village of Scarsdale who are familiar with local real estate property values. The Board members are all community volunteers who have been appointed by the Village Board of Trustees. The primary responsibility of the Board of Assessment Review is to determine whether the assessment of each complainant is illegal or erroneous by reason of inequality or overvaluation, without regard to the methods employed by the assessor in making her own determinations. Thus, the Board of Assessment Review provides an important, independent "check and balance" on the accuracy of the assessment roll as we decide the grievances based on the evidence presented by the property owners.

We hear, in person, all grievances by property owners who have requested an in-person hearing on Grievance Day. Most grievances, however, are submitted by the property owners "on the papers" without a live hearing. The Board meets frequently over the summer to deliberate, and the decisions we reach are mailed to property owners on September 15, 2014, the date the assessment roll becomes final. If a property owner of a qualifying property disagrees with our determination, he/she may file a simple Small Claims Assessment Review petition with the Supreme Court, and owners of all types of property may bring an Article 78 action in the Supreme Court.

Because of the revaluation, the number of grievances filed, unsurprisingly, is very high. The Assessor's Office has been hard at work processing these filings, and the actual number will not be known until the end of the week. However, the number of property owners who scheduled a live hearing before the Board and appeared yesterday was much higher than usual. Given the revaluation, and certain property owners' unhappiness with the tentative property assessments determined by Tyler Technologies, this was expected. Last year, I recall about 2 or 3 owners appearing for a live hearing. Yesterday, we had close to ninety (90)! Given this large number, we tried to limit each hearing to five minutes, but we really wanted to give each owner the opportunity to speak his/her peace and present whatever evidence he/she wants us to consider. As a result, we fell behind schedule, and some property owners had to wait for an hour or two past their scheduled hearing time. For that, we apologize, but no property owner was shortchanged. Every one who wanted a live hearing received one. We thank the taxpayers for their patience and understanding. We actually heard cases for about 11 hours, including a short dinner break. We thank the Village Assessor and her staff, the Village Attorney, and the court reporter for sticking with us, hour after hour, so that all property owners could be accommodated.

We did not make any determinations yesterday. Instead, as we told grievants, we are in an information-gathering mode with respect to their complaints. One thing property owners need to understand is that, by law, the tentative property assessments they have received are presumptively correct. In order to prevail in their grievance, the taxpayer must produce evidence to rebut this presumption. The type of evidence necessary to rebut this presumption will vary. But as we told taxpayers yesterday, the Board finds that the submission of an independent appraisal from a licensed professional real estate appraiser is oftentimes very helpful evidence to support a taxpayer's claim for an assessment reduction.

Nonetheless, we took pains to tell taxpayers that we do not require them to submit such a professional appraisal and that we will consider any and all evidence that they submit. By way of example, other very helpful evidence includes:

-An executed contract for the purchase of a property in an arm's-length transaction between unrelated parties for a property that was offered on MLS,
-Other evidence of the purchase price on a recently closed transaction,
-An active MLS listing of a property being offered for sale.

Many grievants or their representatives have submitted, or have stated that they will submit, independent appraisals to support their claims. We invited grievants, if they have not done so, to submit an independent appraisal in the next two to three weeks, again reminding them that they are not required to do so in order to have their assessment reduced. We have the authority to reduce an assessment, under the law, whenever we determine, in our judgment, that the proof submitted by the complainant is sufficient to overcome the presumption that the tentative assessment is correct. The Board takes its responsibility very seriously, and the members of the Board will be spending many hours meeting and deliberating this summer as we carefully evaluate the merits of each grievance.

From a Resident:

I was warned in advance by the Assessor's office not to be late for my 7 pm scheduled hearing, so I arrived on time and was told the hearings were an hour behind schedule. Since the evening hearings were 2 hours behind schedule, I was called before the board at just after 9 pm.

Although the board took a recess, when the hearings resumed a pizza delivery was made and several members ate pizza while listening to citizen's grievances.

Board members were not provided with nameplates for their seating as is typical of Village meetings.

Nanette Albanese, the Village assessor who sat with the board, was aggressive; she countered every argument she heard. She was especially aggressive towards attorneys speaking on behalf of property owners.

Bob Berg seemed to chair the board. He was patient and sympathetic and he let everyone have their say, hence the delays.

Most owners were prepared with statements, but focused on trivial issues, e.g., small differences in property square footage, quality conditions of homes and rooms. Most owners were not prepared with relevant material to support their arguments, e.g., recent third-party appraisals.

In all cases I heard that evening, Bob Berg suggested to all that lacked a third-party appraisal to get one and deliver it to the Assessor's office within 2 weeks so it could be considered when a final review of grievances would be conducted. For those who did already have appraisals available to deliver, Bob Berg and Nanette Albanese said emailed PDFs would be accepted.

Most property owners seemed ill-equipped to present an argument that would result in any substantial changes to their assessments, focussing on personal opinions and affections towards their property. Some brought to light that their property's location was in a unique setting, such as elevated land or flood zones.

I had submitted 3 appraisals from 3 consecutive years within the last 5 years, personally delivering a stack of 100 pages to the assessor's office when filing my grievance, and received a receipt for the delivery. All of my paperwork was lost by the Assessor's office. After the meeting I emailed the Assessor's office copies of my appraisals as PDFs and requested another confirmation of receipt -- which I have yet to receive.

I reminded the board that they were in violation of a lawsuit settlement that had offered me and agreed to 2 years prior.

Nanette Albanese argued against me that the lawsuit settlement (which she personally initiated and signed into contract) was not substantial to this year's grievance. Other board members were quick to interrupt her and requested I resubmit all of my appraisals, assuring me that the lawsuit and multiple appraisals would strongly be considered.

I explained to the board that Tyler Corps first assessment of my property was 50% above the agreed lawsuit settlement, and that Tyler's revised assessment was sent out late, missing its end-of-May deadline, which made it difficult for property owners to be prepared with the most up-to-date assessments available. In my case, the correction I received was substantial, adjusting the majority of the excessively high first valuation — I told them that was a good start.

Did you go before the BAR on Tuesday? What was your experience? Email scarsdalecomments@gmail.com or comment in the area below to share your thoughts with other readers.