Skip universal navigation
Skip to main content

Department of Taxation and Finance

RPTAC Equalization Project Team

October, 25, 2006
10:00 a.m. – 3:00 p.m.;
Syracuse and Newburgh Offices


Assessors:  Tom Frey, Edye McCarthy, Curt Schoeberl, Todd Wiley, Walter Smead, Denise Trudell

County:  John Noto, Paul Burckard, Robert Diener, Paul Warneck

ORPS:  Pat Holland, Tim Maher, Jim O'Keeffe, Tom Pinto, Dave Ange

From the RPTAC Valuation Team:

Assessors:  Edye McCarthy

County:  George Michaud

ORPS:  Robert Aiken, Tara Hoffman, Sheryl Klewicki, Matt Riordan 

Meeting with the RPTAC Valuation Team: 

The RPTAC Equalization team met with the RPTAC Valuation team to identify issues that impact equalization. 

 Agricultural valuation was discussed.  Cornell University has proposed a two part study regarding agricultural valuation.  Part 1 of the study targets where there is significant agricultural use, but a limited number of sales.  Part 2 of the study takes sales, other data, land leases and puts together a valuation system where there are no farmer to farmer sales.  The County Directors have not reached a consensus on supporting the study.  The County Directors plan to discuss this issue at the NYSAC conference in January. 

 The Equalization team asked the Valuation team to explore the possibility of posting capitalization rates on the ORPS web page.  We also discussed the possibility of the valuation team looking into the validity of using commercial sales for valuation and trending.  Some areas of the State are getting assistance in using income based commercial valuation and trending.  Also discussed was the applicability of using old lease information in the trend methodology.  The policy on using old lease information needs to be defined / investigated.  The Valuation Team will hold a meeting prior to the next RPTAC meeting to discuss these issues and then bring their findings to the next RPTAC meeting. 

Rules and Legislation Update:       

Items at the November 14th State Board meeting:  NYC Assessor Training – no substantial changes; increase in the RPS user fee; 2 other sets of rules involve changes to the valuation date for Special Franchise and Ceiling Railroad properties to match up with the local property valuation date – no comments received so far. Also, Assessor administrative training rules are at GOER 

Case Study – Jefferson County 

ORPS handed out a report of 2006 equalization rates and changes in full value for municipalities in Jefferson County.  The report showed the towns of Orleans, Alexandria and Clayton are all in the same market, but Orleans did a 2006 reassessment and had the largest market trend and tax shift.  Some of the local officials in Jefferson County believe that the equalization rates for the non-reassessment towns are too high.  Since Orleans is a waterfront town, should there be a class for waterfront properties?  ORPS will put together some Jefferson County data including median residential sales price and RAR from 2001 to 2006.  Also need to check the spread between the Major Type A CAMA and sales ratios.  ORPS will assemble this data  

PDC Process

Tom Pinto handed out screen shots of web pages that deal with the PDC process from the ORPS website.  A PDC guidebook will not be handed out this year.  It was discussed that the skill sets and skill levels of the CRMs vary.  Some CRMs are comfortable explaining the PDC reports and analysis while others simply share the final ratio with the assessors.  It was agreed that more information sharing is needed before the tentative rates are established.  The assessors would like to complete the PDC process by the end of December.  More CRM to assessor contact is needed – a couple of times a year.  Perhaps a “kick-off” meeting between regional CRMs and assessors would be useful.  Need to see how well the Statewide Real Property Tax Equity Information Gathering sessions are attended.  

Use of Sales in equalization process

            ORPS handed out a report of total number of sales and total number of sales removed for significant change for each municipality (did not include municipal name).  ORPS also handed out a report analyzing the sales included and excluded for RAR purposes.  This report compared the original 5217 data set to the edited sales data set.  There was discussion that many municipalities are not identifying any sales with significant change.  There was also some discussion on sales of homes where no building permits were issued.  

Use of condominiums in Market Value Survey           

ORPS handed out a list of all the municipalities which contained condominiums and cooperatives and the percentage of assessed value that the condominium and cooperative parcels comprise in each of these municipalities.  There are many more condos being built and the issue is becoming bigger.  It was decided that starting with 2007 equalization rates, all residential condominiums and cooperatives will be assigned to the commercial class (major type B).  In previous market value surveys the assignment to major type for these types of properties was dependent on the property class codes assigned by the assessor for these parcels.  Therefore, in previous market value surveys some of these properties were assigned to major type A and some were assigned to major type B

Procedures for 2007 Equalization rates 

We briefly reviewed the draft procedures for 2007 equalization rates.  The procedures are similar to the 2006 equalization rate procedures.  The changes from the 2006 procedures include the following:

1)  The 2007 rate products for cities and towns will be based on a valuation date of July 1, 2006.  The 2007 State equalization rate will represent the ratio of assessed value on the 2007 assessment roll to the July 1, 2006 full value of these municipalities.

2)  The measured roll for a reassessment municipality will be the 2004, 2005, 2006 or 2007 reassessment; whichever is the most recent reassessment.

3)  The measured roll for new appraisals will be the 2005 assessment roll.

4)  For measured rolls that are earlier than 2007, the aggregate full value for each major type will be adjusted to a July 1, 2006 aggregate full value.

5)  A residential full value will continue to be developed with a sales ratio study where there is a sufficient number of sales and with a computer assisted mass appraisal (CAMA) ratio study where there is sufficient inventory data.

6)  Where a sales ratio study or a CAMA ratio study is used for the residential class, the full value will be as of July 1, 2006 and the measured roll will be the 2006 assessment roll.   

7)  All residential condominiums and cooperatives will be assigned to major type B.  In previous market value surveys the assignment to major type for these types of properties was dependent on the property class codes assigned by the assessor for these parcels.  Therefore, in previous market value surveys some of these properties were assigned to major type A and some were assigned to major type B.  

Gloudemans Report

            The report examining trends in full market value municipalities is not ready, but will be shared with the team when it is available.

Next meeting – Wednesday, January 10, 2007 in the ORPS Syracuse office from 10-3.  We will video-conference to the ORPS Newburgh office. Proposed agenda topics include:

-          Status of PDC for 2007 assessment rolls and eq rates

-          Review of full value changes in Jefferson County