Cicero’s property assessments

re: Cicero’s property assessments

Dave — Tue, 20 May 2008 02:37:43 GMT

I want the assessor removed from her job immediately before she can unfairly harrass more innocent tax payers. I hate to hear our officials blame each other. It shows unprofessionalism on the part of them both. (The assessor and the supervisor.) I don't believe it's common practice to reassess homes only on one side of the streets for miles. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. The supervisors excuse is lame to say the least. I think he should go too. I feel like I'm no longer in America here in Cicero. I bought my home one year ago. The new assessed value of my home went up 150%!!!! Imagine if you had to pay $900.00 more a month to live in your home after 1 year!!!! AND they STILL are saying the taxes are going up in the new role. I'm disabled and I just wanted a nice place to spend the rest of my life. Now I feel like my future here is NOT going to be. They gotta go and we need new SMARTER people to fill their shoes here in Cicero government. They both are new to this and in my opinion have failed the taxpayers of this town and should resign immediately.

re: Cicero’s property assessments

james taylor — Tue, 20 May 2008 04:25:10 GMT

i think The assessor and the supervisor should be fired ,they have no consideration for people on a fixed income.don't we have enough people sticking it to us!

re: Cicero’s property assessments

Chris Andrus — Tue, 20 May 2008 07:19:49 GMT

The assessor is just doing their job - the REAL problem is that we should NOT be funding government based on a "percieved" property value. This is exactley the sort of thing that appears to have put you, Mr. Cummings into "conspiracy" mode, pits neighbor versus neighbor, etc.. all for what ? Everyone you ask for an opinion of a home's value will probably tell you a different value. Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder - one man's castle is another's shack. A family of 5 living in a $25k home and a family of 5 living in a $250k home drive on the same roads, use the same schools, have the same basic government needs, why should the tax burden be different? A family / couple / single person living in the same home in the country for 50 years and may now be on a fixed income - is it their fault that urban sprawl pushes the suburbs out to them? Why should they be forced out of their home because we have a tax system that draws its basis from "perceived" property value?The problem was created by our great-great grandparents when they agreed to this ridiculous tax system. Fund the government through a flat tax or consumption-based tax like sales taxes, and let people's home values be what they are - an investment and something to be proud of.

re: Cicero’s property assessments

Michael Boyle — Tue, 20 May 2008 11:16:25 GMT

Dan:

How come it is Ok for the Supervisor Chet Dudzinski and Town Councilman Vern Conway to vote last Friday. If you go to www.ongov.net and link to the office or real property services, both of their properties had double digit assessment increases this year. Should they not have abtained from their votes as their actions reversed their own assessments and allowed them to benefit financially. This seems like a really big conflict of interest.

Dudzinski's assessment for 2007 was $4,775 and for 2008 it would have been $7,093. Conway's was $31,575 for 2007 and $42,630 for 2008. I guess most residents wish they could vote to lower their own assessment but this seems to be for only the elite or elected officials.

re: Cicero’s property assessments

Tom — Tue, 20 May 2008 12:44:57 GMT

I'll bet this town board first approved this increase, before they became spineless and looked to become saviors, leaving this assessor hanging out to dry. People are very misinformed on this reassessment issue.

re: Cicero’s property assessments

facefurny — Tue, 20 May 2008 13:57:06 GMT

Chris, you are partially correct. The assessor's job is to insure that each property is correctly assessed at its fair market value, and to insure that properties within a taxing jurisdiction are uniformly assessed. This means that when a reassessment is performed it should be district/town/village-wide, not just in one area. From the reporting, it appears that this was not the case in Cicero. The proper way to do this was to survey all properties, determine fair market values, and then, and only then, submit a new assessment roll. This could take two years to complete, especially with only one assessor, which, by the way, is a thankless job. The State also provides periodic reviews of assessed values and assigns an equalization ratio, basically the percentage of full value that the town uses. This number has a bigger influence on your taxes tha nyour assessment, because its based on a sampling of properties, and if the random selection uses grossly undervalued parcels the ratio becomes unfairly low.

The proper way to correct unfair assessments is not to "chat" with the assessor, but to file a grievance with the Board of Assessment Review. That formalizes the process and makes a public record of the review process. It allows everyone to present evidence in their favor and have it considered by an impartial board whose job is to do just that. The assessor is always biased in favor of their own work, regardless of any claims to the contrary - it's human nature.

Chris is also correct that the property tax system is grotesquely unfair in today's society. Back in colonial days when landowners were the only ones with significant resources, that might have worked, but court decisions in recent times have indicated a dissatisfaction with real estate taxes for funding schools. We expect people to pay for services provided by government, but then turn around and charge those with highly valued real estate, on the grounds that they recieve more benefits. I'm finding it increasingly hard to see the difference in value received for law enforcement response to a $50,000 home or a $1,000,000 estate or for roads used by the entire public, or libraries used by all.

re: Cicero’s property assessments

Bob Camp — Tue, 20 May 2008 15:17:33 GMT

Taking a peek at the current values for these homes, and having seen them, the town has them severely underpriced. I live in Cicero five miles from the lake. Some of these waterfront houses have a market value of less than half of my house even though they are almost the same size! These waterfront homeowners are postponing the inevitable, even if the price increase is spread out over a few years. The good news is that when they sell their house, they will get a huge amount of money. Their investment will have tripled (or more) in value -- why aren't they happy?

I'm not sure why the waterfront properties in Cicero haven't been reassessed until recently. Some of us in Cicero (who have been reassessed recently) think they have been getting a free ride.

Incidentally, I think paying for town services through property taxes is fair. I think someone living in a $50,000 house should pay less taxes than someone living in a $500,000 home. And remember that people over 65 get a much larger STAR exemption than others. Besides, it's either property taxes, a new town income tax, or a new town sales tax. Pick your poison.

re: Cicero’s property assessments

Notahappy Camp-er — Tue, 20 May 2008 15:43:36 GMT

Mr. Camp that isn't true for all. My mother lives in one of those lake front homes. It is a remodeled camp from the 60's that has a crumbling foundation and completely outdated living space. It's assessment went from $98,000 to $282,000. She lives on one social security check a month and just wants to stay rightfully in her own home. 2 larger houses in the same area that have been completely gutted and remodeled only sold for $160 & $170,000. If anyone wants to give her $300,000 I'm sure she'ld be glad to sell. New York is being taxed to death...We pay some of the highest taxes in the country already. Enough is enough.

re: Cicero’s property assessments

kcoyne — Tue, 20 May 2008 17:24:59 GMT

Yes, Mr. Camp, let's take a look at the current values. As was told on the news last week, I just bought my home on Chittenango Creek last October for $226,000. Now, suddenly, it's worth $393,000 (according to the assessor). That seems almost fair, doesn't it? As far as being re-assessed, everyones assessment goes up some every year. This whole"the waterfront hasn't been looked at in years" thing is a joke. My house was built in 1969, yet the assessed value when I bought it was $203,000. Seems to me that the assessment has been pretty close to the fair market value. I even told the assessor that raising my assessment to the $229,000 original asking price for the house would be fine with me. I was still turned down. I don't know of many people who would ask to have their assessment raised by ~12%. I'm sure you would though, right?

re: Cicero’s property assessments

Bob Camp — Tue, 20 May 2008 17:41:52 GMT

The $98,000 house above may not be worth $282,000, but it could be worth at least $140,000 believe it or not. That would be a 40% increase in property taxes, still a significant increase.

Taxes are high here. That is why many people are leaving. But this issue is about fairness. Many of those waterfront homes are listed way below market value, the people living in them are not "little old ladies", and those people are not paying their fair share of local taxes.

I think many of the people who are complaining are indeed over 65, retired, and could not afford the new taxes. Perhaps in addition to the STAR exemption, another local exemption could be put in place for them. But they would still end up paying more in taxes. If enough is enough, then sell the house and move like everyone else.

re: Cicero’s property assessments

jim — Tue, 20 May 2008 18:02:10 GMT

why has no one mentioned the fact that many of the properties at issue haven't been assessed in nearly a decade?

doesn't that one fact alone pretty much completely nullify the opposition's arguments?

and what about the assessor's track record for accuracy as measured by how close they come or are to what the property actually sells for (when it sells)?

to just complain because the number went up is meaningless.

re: Cicero’s property assessments

tom f — Tue, 20 May 2008 21:57:00 GMT

facefurney, brilliant as always; how does corruption , kickbacks, and forcing people to foreclose ; working deals with the banks or lien holders. this, at the mercy of financial giants greedy, waitng to RAPE the homeowners,; hey dont we vote these vultures in office, maybe ,we should pay attention closer to people we put in office in our town elections; also we cant stop the greed, but we can useour voice and our pen to confront our oppressors; better than loving our terrorists leaders[our close freinds] will stop what theyve been doing for 2500 years. does OBAMA have a BLUE TURBIN.

re: Cicero’s property assessments

tom f — Tue, 20 May 2008 21:57:01 GMT

re: Cicero’s property assessments

needachange — Tue, 20 May 2008 23:06:05 GMT

Facefunny, I think your response to Chris' email was right on the money! The only thing I disagree with is going to the Board of Review! I tried this and the board did come down on my assessment but it was still higher then everyone else's on my street. I have given up hope on all our greedy government entities! We need a change! The government needs to find a new way to get money. So much has changed since the colonial days when the property tax laws were written.
There appears to be no rhyme or reason to the way an assessor assesses property. I can't figure out what criteria is being used to calculate property tax. Is it land? Is it the house? Is it who we know? This is not just a problem in cicero, but everywhere. I live in a 2300 square foot colonial with 2.50 acres and I fought to get my assessment from 247,000 down to 225,000. There is quite a number of similar colonials on my street that start around 180,000 up to my assessed value. My neighbor's house down the street has a 2300 square foot house with 21 acres of land and there assessment is 155,000. I am not 65 years old and I am mad as a hornet because why should I pay more in property taxes than my neighbor when I DO NOT receive any more or less services than anyone else! I am tired of being ripped off! Mr. Camp I would love to hear your perspective on why you think property taxes are fair!

I agree with Chris that property taxes need to be abolished! I think we should have a tax based on consumption or sales tax! This would be fair to everyone! No tax on essentials like groceries and clothing and raise taxes on material things. If you can't afford it .....don't buy it.

re: Cicero’s property assessments

jim rebbeor — Tue, 20 May 2008 23:36:53 GMT

If you think the taxes are high in Clay and Town of Oswego you should live in the Town of new Haven. They went to full assessment value and my assessment went from $58,000.00 t0 $168,900.00. my taxes went from $2500.00 to over $7000.00. Again it was out of state buyers coming in and paying over priced money for camps on the lake. Seniors on a fixed income will be forced to sell their property. Come on up and see what high taxes are really like.

re: Cicero’s property assessments

jim — Wed, 21 May 2008 02:31:49 GMT

"out of state buyers coming in"?

how does that jive with all those news stories about people leaving the area?

if population, locally, is falling, as we're told, wouldn't that cause home values to likewise decline?

re: Cicero’s property assessments

erand — Wed, 21 May 2008 07:03:30 GMT

I have lived in the town of Cicero fo rmany years. The town government needs to be locked at. It is almost like a monopoly with everyone riding along on the supervisors strings. Be careful that he is not given too much control. And the assessor was appointed by the supervisor, what are her qualifications. And to make people return something within less than a week? C'mon, it is your error, just fix it, don't make people go thru hoops.

re: Cicero’s property assessments

Notahappy Camper — Wed, 21 May 2008 11:23:09 GMT

Mr. Camp, that is discrimination against the elderly that have paid their fair share in taxes for years. You think all the elderly and low income people should be made to move. They have just as much of a right to stay in their homes as anyone else. So your answer is to uproot your families and move just because of taxes. BULL . And for her house being a value of $140,000. thats bull too! I wouldn't pay more than $ 100,000 myself ( But, her house is her castle and she paid for it no matter what the value)and I don't think you would either.

re: Cicero’s property assessments

facefurny — Wed, 21 May 2008 20:54:17 GMT

I should clarify that your tax bill is related t oyour assessment, but there are a large number of other factors.
1. If the assessor is doing the job correctly, and maintaining the assessments properly across the entire town, taxes may or may not change on each property. The job of the assessor is to correctly place a fair market value on each parcel, not the maximum possible value, not the minimum. Using comparable sales is avalid way to do that, because it is a clear indication of the market. Some of the other methods, such as replacement cost estimates, may not reflect the market, especially now that housing is in a slump.
2. Let's assume a good assessment roll. Now, the state evaluates those assessments against its own meothd of valuation - again not always a valid one. The numbers returned, the Equalization Ratio which represents the fraction of fair market value vs. the assessed values, and the Residential Assessment Ratio which represents the same but only for residences are used to determine the true total assessed values.
3. The taxes levied by the town itself are divided by the assessed value, and that determines the town tax rate, usually in dollars per thousand of assessed value. Multiply your assessment by the tax rate and there is your TOWN tax bill.
4. For the county and school districts, however, the tax rate is determined the same way, but now, the rate is divided by the equalization rate, which is almost always less than 1. That makes the school and county tax rates higher. In theory, this method insures that people with the same assessments pay the same taxes. In practice, it never works.
If this math is too much for you, don't feel bad - few people ever really understand it - it took me three years to nail down the formulas.

What ruins the fairness is having some properties assessed at higher percentages of full value than others, which makes those poor souls pay more than their fair share of the tax bill. What's worse, most of what property taxes cover has little relationship to protecting your homes value - at least I fail to see how Medicaid and other social programs make my house any more valuable. I would suspect just the opposite.

Assessment Review Boards are not infallible, but if you formally grieve and present solid evidence, they usually do the right thing. Remember that it falls on the person grieving to prove their case, not on the assessor. The ARB is not there to adjust your taxes, just your assessment. Moaning about high taxes might get you sympathy, but not much else. If you are not satisfied, you can go to court. It's not free, but it's really an independent process and is very fair - again, you need to be prepared to prove your case.

re: Cicero’s property assessments

ChrisAndrus — Thu, 22 May 2008 13:57:24 GMT

facefurny, excellent lesson in the confusion of our current tax system - now, let's fix it by abolishing it and starting over with something that is FAIR to everyone and leavs people's home values alone - a sales tax only.

re: Cicero’s property assessments

Ldsucese — Thu, 22 May 2008 18:05:25 GMT

Tax,Tax Tax and More Tax, Governments at any level, any officials or reps. you need to look into your own pockets. We People of this country and this state are
feed up with higher taxes, our government is slowly distroying this country and
this state along with all citizens faith in our government. We have a president
that has a poor record of business practices. Why did he ever get a second term
because the other candidates were worst than him. We have all these politicians
living very well on the tax payers money always wanting more. are their positions
worth what there getting. The other problems we have are some of the new laws passed into act during the past 20-25 years for the most part have taken away
some of our rights for freedom and it only is going to get worst. Our government
needs big change some of those so called political positions could be eliminated
to save tax payers money. or government Positions should be volentary like they were during the 1700's,

re: Cicero’s property assessments

dtaylor4 — Fri, 23 May 2008 11:59:15 GMT

What we really need is to get rid of is the town government. How many different towns are there in Onondaga County? How many duplicate positions are our tax dollars paying for? How much duplicate office space and highway equipment is being maintained? How many little police forces are there out there?
Get rid of government at the town level and let the county run the county. As taxpayers, do we want to keep people employed in duplicate government jobs or get our services provided at the least possible cost?
Consolidate all the town governments and services into one county government and we will all reduce our taxes.

re: Cicero’s property assessments

ChrisAndrus — Fri, 23 May 2008 13:52:34 GMT

dtaylor4 - You're right on the money! Great post!!

Look at the pain this all causes - all over the state. Why do we continue to even have a property tax? Let's push for something that is fair to everyone - sales tax only.
- Having a property tax does not encourage you to improve your home.
- Having a property tax forces people on fixed incomes out of their homes.
- Having a property tax makes it harder for lower income people to even buy a home.
- Having a property tax is pitting us against one another over what everyone's perception of home value is.
- Having a property tax makes people who live in a house with a "perceived" value of $250k pay twice the taxes of people who live in a house with a "perceived" value of $125k - for what ???? You get no better services, and may even earn the same amount per year or less - it's just a perception issue.

ABOLISH THE PROPERTY TAX!! It's driving us all crazy and our younger and smarter people away.

re: Cicero’s property assessments

al — Fri, 23 May 2008 16:38:35 GMT

two things:

first, good luck getting the abolition of property tax past the teachers' union. have you taken a careful look at their complete benefits package? any clue where all that money comes from? pick a school district, any school district. your jaw will drop.

second, property tax actually makes property affordable. here's how: if no tax were paid on property, people would horde it, and never sell it, or at least sell it a whole lot less. why get rid of something that costs you nothing to keep? what little did turn over, would be priced through the roof.

also, what does "perceived value" mean? isn't it fairly easy to check the accuracy of assessments by what a property actually sells for? if an assessor has a history of being way off the mark, you get a new assessor. but, from what I understand, assessments generally prove to be pretty much right on the money . . .

re: Cicero’s property assessments

needachange — Sat, 24 May 2008 00:35:06 GMT

I'm sure it will take nothing short of a lynch mob to get our voices heard and changes made. Which is why as citizens we feel so powerless to stop the insanity of all the greed and the overkill of governments - big and small! We need to ban together and get people to write letters to our senators!

I disagree that property tax makes property affordable! I have had four neighbors move in the past two years because they couldn't afford the property taxes and chose not to. These were good people who work in our community and teach at our schools.....and they were forced out of there homes by taxes! It will get to the point that people won't be able to spend any extra money on keeping there property looking nice because we are paying way to much a month in PROPERTY TAX! At this point I feel like getting a few old school buses, used tires, ripping off some shingles from the roof, and letting my grass grow til the cows come! Maybe my property won't be so appealing anymore! As well as making the neighbors cringe!

Oh and I can assure you that I have checked many assessments and there were plenty of errors and assessments that made no sense! There are MANY that are NOT right on the money!

I would love to get a new assessor.....as soon as I figure out how to do that! What I really want to do is not have an assessor at all. I believe they are not voted in by citizens they are appointed by local officials ...guess that would fall under the category of who you know....

re: Cicero’s property assessments

ChrisAndrus — Sat, 24 May 2008 01:59:42 GMT

al,

Thanks for your interest - when I say "Perceived" property value, I mean that one person's castle is another's shack. On this post-thread alone, there are many taxpayers who have stated that they recently purchased their home and have been assesed much higher. Last year, my new neighbor bought their 2-story, 3 bedroom house built in 2001 and are now assessed at $30,000 LESS THAN the sale value! How is that FAIR? Why would New Yorkers want to have to prove, year after year, that our home values are what WE think they are, versus what the appointed government official says they're worth? It is such a magnanimous waste of time and resources! I'd so much rather put the money into the teacher's union than into paying an assessor to do anything! Let them become the real estate professionals they think that they are!

Take the dollar value of all the schools, counties, cities, villages, towns and the state budgets together, compare it with the lottery and existing sales tax revenue, then alter the sales tax to make up the rest. Those that consume more taxable items will pay more - those that don't will not. Your home will be your home, and you'll pay a sales tax when you buy it -that's it.

- Having a property tax does not encourage you to improve your home.
- Having a property tax forces people on fixed incomes out of their homes.
- Having a property tax makes it harder for lower income people to even buy a home.
- Having a property tax is pitting us against one another over what everyone's perception of home value is.
- Having a property tax makes people who live in a house with a "perceived" value of $250k pay twice the taxes of people who live in a house with a "perceived" value of $125k - for what ???? You get no better services, and may even earn the same amount per year or less - it's just a perception issue.

ABOLISH THE PROPERTY TAX!! It's driving us all crazy and our younger and smarter people away.

re: Cicero’s property assessments

joe — Sun, 25 May 2008 16:03:26 GMT

If real property taxes in Cicero are so intollerable, and are "driving younger and smarter people away", how do you explain the last TWO DECADES of explosive new home construction and ownership in Cicero? Who is buying and living in all those new homes? Homes that generally START at a quarter million dollars, I might add.

And where are all the abandoned and vacant homes from people who can't afford to live there any more?

All state taxes and fees, not just real property taxes, are a disincentive to doing something, and almost all are unduly burdensome on the poor (or fixed income types).

For example, having a thruway toll does not encourage you to take that road (ask the Skaneateles truckers). Plus, rich and poor pay the exact same fee.

How about the filing fees for a court case? Does not encourage anyone to seek legal redress. Hits the poor just as hard as the rich (ie. harder).

The list is endless . . .

re: Cicero’s property assessments

ChrisAndrus — Mon, 26 May 2008 01:59:17 GMT

joe,

You're right - there has been a large amount of construction on areas that are booming - but now that those people are being assessed more closely to their actual home prices, you're seeing the effects of a regressive tax system like the property tax. When the Cicero residents got a break on their assessments for a decade, then get hit with market value assessments, or ridiculously high assessments, they start to change their mind about whether or not to keep their investments in the community here. That hurts everyone.

You raise great points about thruway tolls and court fees - if I were king for a day they'd be gone, too - but this forum is about tax assessments, and my point is simply that we don't need a property tax anymore. It's too easy for the assessor to incorrectly assess your property, whether too high or too low (like for their friends or other cronies in positions of perceived power) because "value" is a subjective thing.

Also, just because someone lives in a nice home, that someone thinks (or even that the "market" shows) is worth a lot of money, that does not mean that they have more money than anyone else, and more importantly, why should home value equate to paying more taxes?

If the goal of taxing the "rich" people that live in big expensive houses is to minimize the tax on the "poor", but assessed value is not a concrete science that will be FAIR, let's abolish it and devise a system like the FairTax (www.fairtax.org). If the "rich" have more disposable income and choose to spend their money on taxable items, they'll pay more taxes. If the "poor" have less money, they'll buy less taxable items and pay less tax. You'll be able to improve your home without fear of the assessor, or such concern for your neighbor's home improvements, either. We could all vote on the state tax rate, and the state taxes collected could pay for everything.

I think we're a smarter state and nation now and can do much, much better than property tax, because:
- Having a property tax does not encourage you to improve your home.
- Having a property tax forces people on fixed incomes out of their homes.
- Having a property tax makes it harder for lower income people to even buy a home.
- Having a property tax is pitting us against one another over what everyone's perception of home value is.
- Having a property tax makes people who live in a house with a "perceived" value of $250k pay twice the taxes of people who live in a house with a "perceived" value of $125k - for what ???? You get no better services, and may even earn the same amount per year or less - it's just a perception issue.

PLEASE ABOLISH THE PROPERTY TAX!!

re: Cicero’s property assessments

Joseph Pacini — Fri, 30 May 2008 18:07:43 GMT

Tax Assessment Issues

This is a NY State wide problem that has manifested throughout all counties. It has been created by selective assessing and eroneously assessing properties over the years. Individual tax assessors and appraisal services cannot justify his/her assessments. Property owners need to fight back or be forced from their homes because of the tax bills. There is help. Property owners should check out the following website:

http://www.townofnewhartford.com/FIGHTINGBACK/joeindex.htm

— Joseph Pacini, 210 Comenale Crescent, NY Mills, NY