1. There was a home on the parcel in years 2001 and 2002 and 2003.  If the parcel was a vacant lot in either year, it was not included so as not to skew the report.

2. The home was in Neighborhood Code 4809 in 2006 yet was built prior to the reassessment of Neighborhood Code 4809 in 2002 and should have been included in the reassessment; however, it was in the wrong neighborhood so it was included.  The column is highlighted in blue for the year 2002, the year of the reassessment in Neighborhood Code 4809.  The report is currently sorted by the address of the parcels.

For this neighborhood code, I have created two reports--Report 1 for the parcels that were actually in Neighborhood Code 4809 in 2002 and were part of the reassessment. Report 2 is for the parcels that were subsequently moved into Neighborhood Code 4809 in 2003; these parcels were not included in the 2002 reassessment of Neighborhood 4809 are in red on the spreadsheet. Most of the parcels moved into Neighborhood 4809 in 2003 were then reassessed in 2003. That would explain why people in Neighborhood Code 4809 kept saying that their neighborhood was hit twice. Some were reassessed in 2002 and some were reassessed in 2003 (and some were never reassessed at all--Oops!).

If you would like to view an Adobe pdf copy of my spreadsheet, please click here for report 1 and click here for Report 2.

If you have a copy of Excel and would like the actual spreadsheets so you can sort the information yourself, please click here for Report 1 and click here for Report 2.

Both versions are currently sorted by street.

Here are some facts about Neighborhood Code 4809 and the 2002 reassessment:

• 170 homes were in Neighborhood Code 4809 in  2002 - of those homes, 6 were in Neighborhood 4809 in 2002 only because they were moved from Neighborhood Code 4801 (Village of New Hartford) where they were originally placed because of their tax map number.  The homes that were actually moved into the "neighborhood" for the 2002 Reassessment equate to 3.5% of the home in Neighborhood Code 4809 in 2002 and all the homes moved were on Eagle Ridge.  

 

• Of the 6 homes moved into 4809 from Neighborhood 4801, only 2 assessments were actually increased.  3 of the assessments were not changed and  was lowered, I would assume as of result of Grievance.  So why move them into the neighborhood? 

 

• Of the 170 homes total homes in Neighborhood Code 4809, 26 homes had no increase in their assessment and 11 were newly built so 2002 was the first year they were fully assessed (these are the parcels highlighted in gray on the spreadsheet).  Take away the 11 newly built and you have 159 homes where the assessment could have been raised.  Therefore, the 26 homes not raised represents 17% of the homes in 4809 that saw no increased assessment in 2002, the year that neighborhood 4809 was supposedly reassessed.  By the way, this percentage does not reflect the 8 homes where the assessment was actually decreased in 2002 or the 11 newly built homes.  (I assumed that was either by a stipulation of Board of Assessment Review decision.  The same applies to any decrease in 2004.)

 

• 86 homes that were not considered Neighborhood Code 4809 in 2002 were moved to Neighborhood 4809 in 2003.  These homes were in other neighborhoods in 2002--including 4807 (Older Subdivisions), 4815 (High End Homes), 4811 (Rural) and 4806 (Townhouse), but should have been included in 4809 and possibly reassessed in 2002.  In 2004, 1 more home was moved from Neighborhood Code 4811 (Rural) to Neighborhood Code 4809. 

 

• 69 of the 87 parcels that were not in Neighborhood Code 4809 in 2002 were moved in 4809 in 2003 and reassessed even though Neighborhood Code 4809 was supposedly not reassessed in 2003. The other 18 were moved into Neighborhood Code 4809 in 2003, but they did not get raised.

In looking over the homes that were moved into 4809 in 2003 (After the neighborhood had already been reassessed), they all seem to be following the same "modus operandi"' that is, they all were moved because of their tax map number.  Also several homes that should be included in Neighborhood Code 4809 are still in other neighborhoods today.  For example, only 2 o of the 8 homes on Butternut Road (behind the Chestnut Hills) were moved into Neighborhood 4809 in 2003.  That is because they both had tax map numbers starting with 339.012.  The other 6 homes have tax map numbers starting with 339.008 and were therefore placed in Neighborhood Code 4807 (Older Subdivisions) in 2001 where they remain today.  Neighborhood Code 4807 was only trended 5.5% in 2004 whereas Neighborhood Code 4809 was trended 10%.  Also, a different set of sales would have been used to reassess in 2003 than was used in 2002.  So actually more than 87 homes could have been included in the 20002 reassessment of Neighborhood Code 4809, but weren't simply because they were placed in other neighborhoods in 20001 by using their tax map number to determine their "neighborhood".  The neighborhood codes they were placed in included Neighborhood Code 4807 (Older Subdivision), Neighborhood Code 4811 (Rural0 and Neighborhood Code 4815 (High End Homes).  Although some of the homes were moved to Neighborhood Code 4809 in 2003 it was a little too late, don't you think?  Could assessment in Neighborhood Code 4809 been raised less if all the homes that qualified for that Neighborhood were indeed included in the calculations in the 202 reassessment?  Is it fair to exclude certain homes out of a neighborhood reassessment only because their tax map number is different than their neighbors?  Is this your idea of fair and equitable assessing?

Look at the report for any homes in your area or homes that you are familiar with before you decide what these reports are showing. We certainly are not able to physically look at all the properties that weren't increased.  These reports are provided for your information only.  Sales for each property are now included in the Assessment Program and would be helpful in determining if a property has increased in value.

If you think that because you are not in Neighborhood Code 4801, 4807, 4809 or 4813 this doesn't affect you, think again.  It impacts everyone!  Stay tuned for our review of other neighborhoods!

If these reports bother you, we urge you to call your councilman.  Unless we let them know how we feel, they will continue to deny there is a problem.  They seem to be good at doing just that!

The International Association of Assessing Officers (IAAO) defines a neighborhood as "(1) The environment of a subject property that has a direct and immediate effect on value.  (2)  A geographic area of properties sharing important location characteristics defined for purposes of market analysis or modeling (typically with fewer than several thousand properties)."  Notice both of these definitions revolve around the notion of effect of location on value.

In simpler terms, a "neighborhood" consists of properties that are comparable in terms of the probability of a buyer being equally as interested in buying House A as they would be in buying House B.  In other words, if I was a buyer, I would not be interested in looking at a house in a neighborhood code made up with homes that are 1,000 sq. ft. when I intend to buy a 5,000 sq. ft. home. Therefore, the 1,000 sq. ft. home should not be in the same neighborhood code as the 5,000 sq. ft. home.