Skip universal navigation

New York State Universal header

Skip to main content

RPTAC Equalization Project Team

MINUTES
January 14, 2009
10:00am to 2:30pm
ORPS Newburgh Office

Attending:

Assessors:  Colleen Adamec, Curt Schoeberl, Denise Trudell and Todd Wiley

County Directors:  Lynda Levine and Mike Sabansky

ORPS:  Patricia Holland, HK Lo, Tim Maher and Tom Pinto 

Guests: Jim Dunne, George Herren, Paul Burckard and Dave Williams 

Publication of Assessment Equity Statistics by ORPS

For the past few years ORPS has published a residential COD and an overall (municipal-wide) COD for municipalities that have not conducted a recent reassessment.  The agency does not publish CODs for municipalities that have conducted recent reassessments.  It was discussed that years ago when ORPS conducted appraisals for every municipality the agency published CODs for every municipality. 

 

We discussed that for municipalities that have done a recent reassessment we can compute CODs for the residential class of property based on our sales ratio studies or CAMA studies.  In some cases the COD for a municipality that has conducted a recent reassessment may be misleading because the assessed values were determined after the properties sold.  We decided that the next time ORPS publishes CODs we will publish CODs for residential properties for every municipality. The CODs for the recent reassessment municipalities will have a footnote that explains how they were calculated and why they might be misleading in certain situations. We don't have COD information for the non-residential classes of properties in municipalities that have completed recent reassessments and therefore we will only publish overall (municipal-wide) CODs for the municipalities that have not conducted a recent reassessments.

 

We also discussed the study on COD standards that Bob Gloudemans is conducting for ORPS. Bob's report should be final within the next two months and we will discuss at our next team meeting.

 

 

Tolerances for Confirming LOAs

We discussed the appropriate tolerance to use for confirming the local level of assessment identified on the tentative assessment roll.  The team believes that it is important that the LOAs on the assessment rolls are reasonable, rational and understandable to the taxpayer.  The team also believes that it is important and useful that tolerances continue to be used in the determination of equalization rates. The team discussed the following eight alternatives for confirming the LOA:

 

1)  Use a 5 percent tolerance for all municipalities.

 

2)  Use a 5 percent tolerance for municipalities that have conducted a recent reassessment and a 3 percent tolerance for municipalities that have not conducted a recent reassessment.

 

3)  Use a 3 percent tolerance for municipalities that have conducted a recent reassessment and a 5 percent tolerance for municipalities that have not conducted a recent reassessment.

 

4)  Use a 5 percent tolerance for municipalities that have conducted a current year reassessment and a 3 percent tolerance for municipalities that have not conducted a current year reassessment.

 

5)   Use a 5 percent tolerance for municipalities that actively participate in the PDC process by supplying data to ORPS and a 3 percent tolerance for all other municipalities.

 

6)  Use different tolerances based on the volatility of the market place.

 

7)  The assessor would declare an initial LOA in November and ORPS would confirm or deny the initial LOA based on a 5 percent tolerance.  If ORPS did not confirm the initial LOA then there would be a lower tolerance for confirmation of the LOA on the tentative assessment roll.

 

8)  Only allow the assessor to claim certain specific LOAs (ex. 100, 95, 90 …).  The numeric differences between the acceptable LOAs would get smaller as the LOA decreased.

 

The team reached a general consensus that option 8 might be the best solution.  At our next meeting we will discuss option 8 more thoroughly.  For our next meeting ORPS will provide data on what the 2008 equalization rates would have been if option 8 was in place for the 2008 equalization rates. 

 

The team agreed that we should keep the 5 percent tolerance in place for 2009 equalization rates.  Any change to the acceptable tolerance will be implemented with the 2010 rate process.

 

Rules and Legislation

HK reported that the State Board has started the process to repeal sections 191-3.1(d) and 191-3.2 of the State Board's rules.  These provisions deal with revised residential assessment ratios and were made obsolete because of the new RAR law (section 738 of the RPTL) that was enacted on May 21, 2008.  HK anticipates that the State Board will repeal these sections at their meeting on March 26, 2009.

 

2009 PDC Status

Tom distributed a status report that showed that we are generally on schedule with the 2009 PDC process.  We should have final PDC ratios for the residential class for all municipalities by the deadline for establish RARs (March 1).

 

Next meeting:

Wednesday, April 1, 2009 at the ORPS Albany office.. 

 

Topics for next meeting:

-          Continue discussions on the pros and cons of the eight options for confirming the LOA and try to reach a consensus for future equalization rate procedures.  Review information on option 8 (only allow assessors to claim certain specific LOAs).

-          Status of 2009 PDC and equalization rates

-          Status of 2009 RARs – any issues or concerns?  Do we need to make any changes for 2010?

-          Review the study on COD standards

 

Updated: