|
Salisbury Drive, a street of 5 homes, located off Pleasant Street,
past Slaytonbush Lane. All five homes are in Neighborhood Code 4813, Utica Influenced. That neighborhood was
reassessed in 2003. Or at least 4 of the 5 homes were...one home was only trended. I have tried to figure out why. It is
the second largest home on the street and the newest on the street--built in 1980. Yet there is a difference of about $20,000 to $25,000 in assessed value
between this home and the others on that street probably because the home was never reassessed--only trended in 2004. The only
thing I can see different with the other houses on that street is that this particular home is a split level. The others are
ranch or raised ranch. Maybe split levels in Neighborhood Code 4813 (Utica Influenced) weren't selling in 2002/2003. Nope--I don't
think that's it. Several split levels in that neighborhood were reassessed
in 2003. However, several split
levels in Neighborhood Code 4813 were also not reassessed in 2003. I can't figure out why, but I am sure there is a reason
somewhere! Be sure to read my report on Neighborhood Code 4813.
How can a 2,700+ home
on Powell Avenue built in 1988 be a Neighborhood Code 4817 (Starter Home)?
Unless---yes, the tax map number.
Lindale Avenue (10 homes) and Weston Road (4 homes).
In 2001 and 2002, they were all Neighborhood Code 4811 (Rural). Then in 2003, they moved them all to
Neighborhood Code 4807, that was the year that Neighborhood 4807 was reassessed, however, none of these
homes were reassessed. In case you don't know where these roads are Weston Road is the road leading to
the Jr. High School and Lindale is the first left hand turn off of Weston Road. Of course, they all have
tax maps numbers similar to Sessions Road, a road that truly is rural--could that be why someone might
think they are rural, because I'm not seeing it. These streets sort of look like a part of a
subdivision to me.
So why did they move them? Because
a mistake was made in 2001 by placing them in Rural (4811) due to their tax map
number when they really were Older Subdivsion (4807)? Maybe, but then
their assessment wasn't increased like other assessments in Neighborhood 4807. Were they were already assessed at 100% of
market value? Well then, how come in 2004 (and still today), they all
have been moved back to Neighborhood Code 4811 (Rural) and they were all
reassessed in 2004, the year that Neighborhood Code 4811 was reassessed.
What's that all about? I don't understand how you can bounce back and
forth between Rural (4811) and Older Subdivision (4807)--are they rural or
an older subdivision? And if you think about it, as an Older
Subdivision (4807) they didn't increase in value in 2003, but in 2004 as
Rural (4811) they increased on average 12%. Of course, if they were
really Neighborhood Code 4807 (Older Subdivision) they might have been
reassessed in 2003 and then trended 5.5% in 2004 just like all the other
homes in that neighborhood. Maybe that would have brought their assessed
value closer to the last sale recorded on Lindale Avenue--$175,000 in 2004
for a home assessed for $136,100.
It's time to add another street - Narla Lane - all in Neigbhorhood Code 4813. Narla
Lane is in the Tilden Road/Beckwith Circle
area. There are 8 homes on Narla Lane built in the late 80s early 90s.
5 of the homes were reassessed in 2003 when Neighborhood Code 4813 was
reassessed and then trended in 2004. 1 of the homes appears to have only been
trended in 2004 and not reassessed in 2003---I have no idea why. 2 of the homes have never been reassessed
or trended. Of the two that have never been reassessed
or trended, 1 of them is unfinished and I believe in foreclosure so
that would account for no assessment increase for that one. The
assessment on the other one that has never
been reassessed or trended does not appear to be in line with the rest of
the assessments on Narla Lane. All the other homes are assessed close to or
over $300,000. The one that has never been reassessed or trended is currently assessed for $187,500.
According to the database it has 0 square feet, 0 bedrooms, 0 kitchens, etc. so it's kind of difficult to
tell whether the assessed value is correct. Actually, I mentioned this
particular home to the assessor and was told that the owner grieved his assessment
because of the slope of his yard. Funny, though one of the
fields in the assessment database details the parcels that were increased
and then grieved each year. There is nothing for this parcel--no record of the
assessment being increased or the owner
having grieved the assessment in either 2003 or 2004. Maybe someone
in the assessor's office just forgot to input the data--yes, that's probably it--the
paperwork is probably sitting in a corner of the assessor's office waiting
to be entered into the system. Although, there
does seem to be quite a discrepancy between the assessment on this house and all the others on Narla Lane.
But, I'm sure there is some reason I'm
just not seeing at this point.
I'm curious as to how some parcels seemed to escape the
annual reassessment and some escaped the trending as well. I thought
that trending applied to everyone--guess I was wrong. And if you really grouped "like" homes so that
you could use sales of "like" homes for reassessing, how come there is so much moving around
of homes from one Neighborhood to another? It just doesn't make sense.
And if you say that Neighborhood Code 4815 (High End Homes) can be in
any Neighborhood within the town, how come not every "High End" home is
in that neighborhood? How come Older Subdivision (4807) and Newer
Subdivision (4809) seem to overlap as far as year built and not all the
homes in the Pippinwood area are Neighborhood Code 4809 like the
definition says they are supposed to be? Just what
is an Older Subdivision vs. a New Subdivision? And just what is
Neighborhood Code 4813 (Utica Influence)? Is that a good thing or
a bad thing? Inquiring minds want to know!
Bottom line friends, every time a home sells
for a good deal more than it is assessed for we all pay. Equalization is determined by comparing
the total assessed value of our town to the value determined by the State using sales.
So there may be people getting a great deal on their assessment in New Hartford,
but you and I are footing the bill for each house that is "under-assessed".
Even if your home is assessed for about what you feel you would be able
to sell your house for, tax rates are determined by dividing the
budgeted amount (after subtracting all revenue) by the total assessed value.
Therefore, if others are not being assessed fairly, your tax rate is affected.
You will first notice the impact when you get
your school tax bill this year. Instead of a $30,000 Basic STAR exemption, this year it will be $29,100. At the last Board meeting, the assessor said he
hopes the equalization rate next year will be between 87-88%--so the Basic STAR exemption will be even less next year. Enhanced STAR likewise will be
less this year. Enhanced STAR was raised to $56,800 this year; however, New Hartford Enhanced STAR exemptions will be $55,100 because of
the drop in our equalization rate. Likewise, next year it will be even less. The equalization rate is figured on the difference between the
assessed value and the sales price. When you get the Homes Showcase in the Observer Dispatch have you ever
compared what the realtor says about a house in New Hartford versus what is in the assessment database?
Please take a moment to read the
questions outlined above and then visit our Online Assessment Program to check
the facts yourself. Also, be sure to visit the Neighborhood Codes page for more information
and descriptions of each neighborhood. Look around, not just at your street or your neighborhood --
Look at the town as a whole. For more information, please read the
sequel to our story--
Assessments: The Rest of the Story.
|
