2001-04-17
6~'
(}iLJ-
THOMAS G. GRIFFEN
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
STATE OF NEW YORK
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT
OFFICE OF REAL PROPERTY SERVICES
263 Route 17K, Suite 2001
NEWBURGH, NEW YORK 12550-8310
Tel.( 845) 567.2648
CHARLES A VIZA
Regional Manager
JOHN WOlHAM
Regional Manager
April 17, 2001
Constance O. Smith, Supervisor
Town of Wappinger
Supervisor's Office
20 Middlebush Road
Wappingers Falls, NY 12590
Re: 2000 Maintenance Aid Denial
for the Town of Wappinger
SWIS: 135600
Dear Ms. Smith:
We have completed a review of the 2000 Maintenance Aid Application that was submitted on behalf of the
Town of Wappinger. Your municipality has failed to meet one or more of the critical standards that govern the
program and, therefore, is not eligible for state assistance on the 2000 assessment roll.
The enclosed "2000 Maintenance Aid Review for Compliance with Critical Standards" Report provides a summary of
your municipality's compliance or noncompliance with each standard. If your municipality failed to meet the
Coefficient of Dispersion (COD) standard, a copy of the COD calculation has been provided to your assessor.
If you wish to appeal this decision, you must submit your appeal in writing, within 30 days from the date of the mailing
of this letter. The appeal, including any supporting documentation, should be sent to:
Sally Cooney, Office of State Aid
NYS Office of Real Property Services
16 Sheridan Avenue
Albany, NY 12210-2714
If you have any questions concerning this denial, please contact your regional State Aid representative.
Sincerely,
9L)~
John Wolham
cc: Linda A Tasadfoy, Assessor
Stephen D. Curran, County Director, Real Property Tax Services
April 16, 2001
2000 Maintenance Aid Review
for Compliance with Critical Standards
135600 Dutchess: Wappinger
Standards
1*. Based on population density, the current Coefficient of Dispersion (COD) standard for
Maintenance Aid purposes is 15% or less.The COD that was calculated for the municipality was
16%.
2*. Did the municipality submit quarterly automated sales corrections in RPS format or an alternative
format approved by ORPS?
3*. Was Sales Reporting at 90% or greater?
4. Did the municipality submit Article 15-C assessment roll, inventory, sales files and the
corresponding libraries in an ORPS approved computerized format?
5. Is the municipality free of an adjudicatory proceeding commenced by the State Board relative to
the assessment roll for which state aid is sought?
6. Does the Municipality have parcel inventories for at least 95% of its parcel records?
7. Did the assessor submit a notarized affidavit verifying that the uniform percentage appeared on
the tentative assessment roll and the appropriate notices to taxpayers had been sent?
8. Did the municipality meet current uniform assessment criteria for the receipt of maintenance aid?
9. Was documentation submitted to show that informal review hearings were held?
10. Has the assessor provided evidence of a system to identify and maintain physical and quantity
changes?
11. Was there evidence of an integrated file system where at least 99% of all records in the
assessment roll, inventory and sales files matched?
12. Is the assessor or members of the Board of Assessors in compliance with the training certification
requirements as of tentative roll date?
13. Were 95% or more of the exemption codes entered on the assessment roll valid and in the
correct roll sections?
14. Was the assessor's report filed within 30 days of final roll date and reconciled?
Note:
* 1, 2 & 3 are based on sales occurring during the 12 month period prior to the roll for which aid is to be paid.
Compliance
No
Yes
Yes
99.00%
Yes
Yes
Yes
100.00%
Yes
Yes
N/A
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
100.00%
No
,: ~
Memorandum
F.xEtm1I'1I1E IIIIIIllII\WJIlIIENT
O~'FlCE OF R~:AL PROJ'ERTY SERVIC~:S
April 17, 2001
FROM:
Linda Tasadfoy, Town of Wappinger Assessor
~kAJ
Charles A \#iiI, Regional Manager
TO:
SUBJECT:
2000 Maintenance Aid - Failing COD (Coefficient of Dispersion)
The enclosed letter, which denies your municipality Maintenance Aid on the 2000
assessment roll, indicates that you may appeal this decision, if you wish.
If your municipality has been denied aid because ofa failing COD, I would like to remind
you of a memo which I sent to you dated December 8, 2000. This memo provided you with an
opportunity to review the sales, which would be used in the calculation of the COD for 2000
Maintenance Aid, PRIOR to the actual calculation. Sales corrections were to be submitted to ORPS
Sales Unit by no later than January 15, 2001. All sales corrections, which were received, were
processed before the COD was determined.
The memo also advised you of the following:
"Once the COD is calculated for purposes of Maintenance Aid review,
no additional corrections will be considered. If you are denied aid because of failure
to meet the COD standard you will not be allowed to submit
sales corrections as part of your appeal."
Therefore, if you choose to file an appeal to the denial of2000 Maintenance Aid, please DO NOT
submit sales corrections. They will not be considered.
If you have any questions, please contact Barbara O'Connell, your regional State Aid
representative.
cc: Supervisor
County RPTS Director