N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. Tit. 20 §§ 8186-15.2

Current through Register Vol. 46, No. 51, December 18, 2024

Section 8186-15.2 - Complaints; complaint form; supporting documentation

(a) A complainant may obtain administrative review of its tentative State equalization rate, tentative class ratios or tentative class equalization rates as determined, pursuant to sections 1204 and 1206 of the Real Property Tax Law and Subpart 8186-2 of this Part, by serving a complaint and supporting documentation on the commissioner at least five days prior to the date specified for the hearing on such rate or ratios. A complaint concerning data used for purposes of a tentative State equalization rate, class ratios, class equalization rates or special equalization ratios is considered applicable with respect to such data for all purposes. Complaints and supporting documentation may be served personally at the Albany office of the commissioner or by mail. If a complaint is not accompanied by supporting documentation, ORPTS will recommend to the State Board that the tentative State equalization rate, tentative class equalization rates or tentative class ratios be established as the final State equalization rate, final class equalization rates or final class ratios.

(b) The complaint shall be in writing on a form prescribed by ORPTS and signed by the chief executive officer or legal representative of the complainant.

(c)

(1) An objection to the tentative equalization rate, class equalization rate or class ratios, other than sample parcel objections, shall be made in writing. The basis for the objection may be:

(i) incorrect assessor's report data which was filed pursuant to Part 8193 of this Title;

(ii) violation of a law or a commissioner's rule;

(iii) any objection relative to taxable State land property;

(iv) any objection to the assessing unit's aggregate full value or the aggregate major type full value estimates established pursuant to section 8186- 1.15, 8186-1.16, 8186-2.15, 8186-2.16 or 8186-2.17 of this Part;

(v) the information or methodology used to develop a major type full value estimate by means of Computer Assisted Mass Appraisal (CAMA) techniques is incorrect;

(vi) the information or methodology used to develop a major type full value estimate by a means other than CAMA techniques is incorrect, or that an alternative full value estimate can be developed by the same technique used to calculate the tentative rate or a different technique; and

(vii) the complainant asserts that the uniform percentage entered on the tentative assessment roll for which the equalization rate is to be established is the level of assessment of all property on that assessment roll or of a particular major type of property on that roll.

(2) Specific documentation must be supplied to support the objection as follows:

(i) If the objection alleges invalid or incorrect assessor's report data for any earlier year or the year for which the equalization rate is being determined, the assessor must identify the assessor's report year where the invalid or incorrect data was originally reported, and the specific parcel or parcels in question. A revised assessor' s report as defined in Part 8193 of this Title or information as required by section 8193-4.4(c) and (e) of this Title must be provided.

(ii) If the objection alleges a violation of law or the commissioner's rules, the appropriate law or rules must be cited and a detailed explanation provided.

(iii) If the objection concerns taxable State land, documentation to support the objection must be included.

(iv) If the objection alleges an incorrect aggregate full value or aggregate major type full value estimate, the complainant must provide its estimation of the assessing unit' s aggregate full value or aggregate major type value, on a form prescribed by ORPTS, and provide sufficient documentation to support such aggregate value. If supporting documentation is based on 25 sales or more, such information must be submitted in a computer readable format previously agreed to by ORPTS.

(v) If the complainant alleges that a major type full value estimate developed by using a CAMA technique is incorrect, it may provide alternative CAMA data or modeling to support a claimed alternative full value estimate or it may provide an alternative major type full value estimate as provided in subparagraph (iv) of this paragraph.

(vi) If the complainant alleges that a major type full value estimate developed by using some technique other than CAMA or sample parcels is incorrect, it may provide alternative data using the same technique to support an alternative full value estimate or it may provide an alternative major type full value estimate as provided in subparagraph (iv) of this paragraph.

(vii) If the complainant alleges that the uniform percentage entered on the tentative assessment roll is the level of assessment of all property on the assessment roll or of a particular major type of property on that roll it must submit credible information to support that allegation and an explanation of how that information supports that allegation.

(d) Objections to sample parcels that are appraisal observations included in the market value survey or surveys upon which the tentative rate or ratio is based shall be made on a form prescribed by ORPTS, which shall include, at a minimum, the following information with regard to each sample parcel:

(1) Name and SWIS code of the assessing unit in which the sample parcel is located.

(2) Identifying information including the ORPTS control number, the name of the owner of the parcel, and the tax map number as it appeared on the measured roll.

(3) The year of the market value survey at issue.

(4) Where the complainant disagrees with the appraised value of the sample parcel, the complainant's opinion of the appraised value of the sample parcel as of the survey valuation date and documentation that supports that opinion and an explanation of why that opinion of value should replace the ORPTS appraised value. In no event will more than the first five submitted comparable sales be considered. Each sale of an improved property other than a subject sale or sale of another appraised sample parcel must be accompanied by a complete inventory and a clear photograph identified by the liber and page number of the sale.

(5) The basis for the objection to the sample parcel, which may include:

(i) incorrect assessed value for the appraisal or sale sample parcel on the measured roll;

(ii) incorrect assignment to major type of taxable real property according to the procedures for the appropriate market value survey;

(iii) incorrect valuation as of the survey valuation date;

(iv) appraisal sample parcel is subject to a court-ordered determination;

(v) an objection to a sale used as an observation in a major type; and

(vi) violation of a law or a commissioner's rule.

(6) Specific documentation must be supplied to support each objection as follows:

(i) If the objection alleges an incorrect assessed value on the measured roll, a copy of the page from the measured roll must be submitted which shows the appraisal or sale sample parcel, the assessed value, and the year the assessment roll was filed.

(ii) If the objection alleges an incorrect assignment to major type of taxable real property, a copy of the page from the measured roll must be submitted which shows the appraisal or sale sample parcel, the property classification code, and the year the assessment roll was filed. For special assessing units, the real property class code must also be supplied. For homestead assessing units, the homestead/nonhomestead designation must also be supplied.

(iii)

(a) If the objection alleges that ORPTS appraised the wrong parcel (i.e., not the same parcel that was assessed on the measured roll), the inventory of the correct sample parcel and an opinion of the appraised value of the correct sample parcel as of the survey valuation date and documentation that supports that opinion must be provided. In no event will more than the first five submitted comparable sales be considered. Each sale of an improved property other than a subject sale or sale of another appraised sample parcel must be accompanied by a complete inventory and clear photograph identified by the liber and page number of the sale.

(b) If the objection alleges that the quantity of property appraised for a utility parcel or economic unit does not correspond to the quantity of property assessed on the measured roll, an explanation of the discrepancy must be provided along with the list of parcels appearing on the measured roll which corresponds to the appraisal.

(iv) If the objection alleges an incorrect appraised value for the sample parcel or that the ORPTS method of valuation is inappropriate, documentation for at least one of the three approaches to value (market, cost or income) must be provided and a statement as to why that approach is appropriate. The requirements for documentation are as follows:

(a) market approach:

(1) an inventory of the subject parcel, if different from the ORPTS inventory, and an inventory for any comparable sales, if different from the ORPTS inventory. In no event will more than the first five submitted comparable sales be considered. Each sale must be an arm's length transfer and identified by SWIS code, and liber and page number. Each sale of an improved property other than a subject sale or sale of another appraised sample parcel must be accompanied by a clear photograph identified by the liber and page number of the sale.

(2) an explanation of how the complainant's comparable sales support the complainant's opinion of value of the sample parcel;

(b) cost approach:

(1) an inventory of the subject parcel, if different from the ORPTS inventory;

(2) the reproduction cost or replacement cost as of the survey valuation date;

(3) the source of the cost data;

(4) the amount of depreciation and an explanation;

(5) the land value with explanation and support of the land value;

(c) income approach:

(1) an inventory of the subject property, if different from the ORPTS inventory;

(2) income and expense data including source of the data and whether it is actual or economic;

(3) the income capitalization method used, the supporting data and the reason;

(4) the capitalization rate, its breakdown and its source.

(v) If the objection alleges that the appraisal of public utility sample parcel components (land, outside plant, depreciation or structures) and/or subcomponents (original cost units, indices, service lives, depreciation curves, etc.) is incorrect, the component inventory part allegedly in error or the valuation error must be identified and an appraisal of the sample parcel or component part at the survey valuation date must be supplied.

(vi) If an objection alleges an incorrect valuation or inventory for a sample parcel appraised using the forestry methodology, the following items must be supplied depending upon the error alleged:

(a) Valuation schedule or inventory error. A statement as to which inventory component is allegedly in error and sufficient sales and documentation, including liber and page numbers, to support revised value schedules indicating land value/acre, waterfront value/unit, improvement value/square foot, or timber value, and an explanation of why the value schedules used by ORPTS are inappropriate or inaccurate.

(b) Subject sale. If the objection alleges an incorrect valuation based on a sale of the subject parcel, the liber and page number.

(vii) If the objection alleges that the sample parcel is subject to a court- ordered determination, a copy of the court order and any other findings of the court must be supplied.

(viii) If the objection alleges that there is a violation of a law or the commissioner's rules in the selection or appraisal of the sample parcel the appropriate law or rules must be cited and a detailed explanation provided.

(ix)

(a) If the objection alleges that a sale, used as an observation in a major type or in a sales ratio study, should not be included in the calculation to determine the aggregate municipal full value, the complainant must submit a statement as to why the sale is not an appropriate sale as defined by section 8191-4.1 of this Title and documentation to support the statement. Such sale must be identified by SWIS code and liber and page number.

(b) If the objection alleges that a sale should be used as an observation in a major type in which sales have been included in the calculation to determine the aggregate municipal full value or in a sales ratio study, a statement as to why the sale is an appropriate sale as defined by section 8191-4.1 of this Title and documentation to support the statement. Such sale must be identified by SWIS code and liber and page number.

(c) If the objection alleges that a sale sample parcel contains incorrect data affecting its indicated sale price, date of sale or conditions making such sale an appropriate sale as defined by section 8191-4.1 of this Title, signed documentation by a party to the transfer must be submitted. Documentation must provide the specific data item(s) in error and the correct data with explanation. Such sale must be identified by SWIS code and liber and page number.

N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. Tit. 20 §§ 8186-15.2