Ossining, Pelham, and Rye Town have changed their valuation date to July 1 of the year preceding the assessment roll. The change is effective as of the 2007 roll, such that properties on that roll will be valued as of July 1, 2006. This is particularly important if you are preparing trial appraisals that, of course, must value the property as of the correct date.
Interestingly, because the change occurs only as of 2007, if you have appeals pending that span 2006 and 2007, the property for those two years will be valued only a month apart: the 2006 AV will be valued on the old system, as of June 1, 2006, and the 2007 AV will be valued on the new system, one month later, as of July 1, 2006.
In one of my cases, the property spans Ossining and another town, and the other town is still using the valuation date of June 1 of the AV year, so our appraisal must conclude two values for the same assessment year. As most of you know, the change is similar to the valuation date change that was made in most other jurisdictions of New York State. If anyone hears of other Westchester munis that follow suit or has more information or experiences concerning this, please post!
Interestingly, because the change occurs only as of 2007, if you have appeals pending that span 2006 and 2007, the property for those two years will be valued only a month apart: the 2006 AV will be valued on the old system, as of June 1, 2006, and the 2007 AV will be valued on the new system, one month later, as of July 1, 2006.
In one of my cases, the property spans Ossining and another town, and the other town is still using the valuation date of June 1 of the AV year, so our appraisal must conclude two values for the same assessment year. As most of you know, the change is similar to the valuation date change that was made in most other jurisdictions of New York State. If anyone hears of other Westchester munis that follow suit or has more information or experiences concerning this, please post!
1 comment:
David:
Congratulations on setting up this web site. It's very helpful.
I suggest the following for discussion at the upcoming CLE program:
--the inequity resulting from a JHO having the authority to refuse to hear a selective reassessment case and require that it be re-commenced as an Article 7 case in order for a single family homeowner to obtain relief.
--the fact that an assessor has the ability to prevent a single family homeowner from obtaining relief in a SCAR proceeding by intentionally engaging in selective reassessment.
I suggest that the upcoming CLE program be longer than just a few hours. The last time there was an all day tax cert CLE program was ten years ago sponsored by the NYSBA.
Joel Lieberman
Post a Comment