2005 Complaint on Tentative Special Francise
""
\L,
,;oJ
"-
, (y
~I'.,:,?
II ii'. ....
If' '"
V' \.k'l
Before the \ \.
NEW YORK STATE BOARD OF REAL PROPERTY SERVICES
COMPLAINT ON TENTATIVE SPECIAL FRANCHISE
ASSESSMENTS FOR THE YEAR 2005
.~ RP-7142 (12/01)
All relevant parts of the complaintform must be completed. Submit any additional documentation which youfeel
supports your complaint. Serve an original and one copy of this complaint on the Assistant to the State Board and one
copy on each adverse party. Service may be made in person or by mail.
PARTONE: GENERALINFORMATION
(General information and instructions for completing this form are contained in form RP-7142-Ins.)
\~~:~,<,.\
1.
Special Franchise Owners: Complete This Section
k.5
C~\'.j~.;~.;J
~ IY\ ...." "
C~ \ \ 1..~~~
C\...'f;~
~O\f'.lN
a. Complainant Information
Frontier Comm. Sylvan Lake, a/k/a Citizens Communications
Company Name
3 High Ridge Park, Stamford, CT 06905
Street Address, City, State, Zip
(203 ) 614-4663
Fax Number
(203 ) 614-5172
Telephone Number
b. List of Assessing Units and Company's Estimates of Assessment (Attach additional sheets, if needed)
County Name(s)
Assessing Unites)
SEE ATTACHED
ORPS Tentative
Assessment
Company's Estimate
of Assessment
2. Assessin2 Units: Complete this section
a. Complainant Information
SEE ATTACHED
Assessing Unit Name
( )
Telephone Number
Street Address, City, State, Zip
( )
Fax Number
b. List of Companies and Assessing Unit's Estimates of Assessment (Attach additional sheets, if needed)
County Name(s)
ORPS Tentative Assessment
SEE ATTACHED
Assessing Unite s)
Estimate of Assessment
· i RP-7142 (4/01)
Page 2
PART ONE: GENERAL INFORMATION (CONT.)
3. Designation of Representative (Optional)
I, , on behalf of complainant, hereby designate
to act as my representative in any and all proceedings
before the State Board of Real Property Services for purposes of reviewing the tentative special franchise
assessment(s) for the year
Date
Signaturerritle
Name, address and telephone number of representative:
Mark D. Lansing
Contact Person and Title
50 Beaver Street, Albany, New York 12207
Street Address, City, State, Zip
(518 )434-2163
Telephone Number
(518) 434-2621
Fax Number
4. Service on Adve~e Party
A copy of the complaint form and any supporting documentation must be served on the adverse party at the same time
of filing with the State Board (at least ten days before the hearing date).
Have you attached the affidavit of service?
Yes
x
No
If no, the affidavit of service must be filed with the Assistant to the State Board at least five (5) days prior to the
hearing date.
PART TWO: GROUNDS FOR COMPLAINT
(Check one or more)
,\( A. Unequal Assessment
The tentative assessment did not reflect the proper equalization rate or uniform percentage of full value for the
assessment roll in question.
nc B. Improper Full Value
Full value of property is erroneous
\,A c. Unlawful Assessment
1. Tangible property included in value is not special franchise property.
2. Tangible property is owned by a municipal corporation.
3. Value includes property that is exempt.
.;; RP-7142 (4/01)
Page 3
PART THREE: INFORMATION NECESSARY TO DETERMINE
SPECIAL FRANCmSE ASSESSMENT OF PROPERTY
(Check and complete one or more)
You must provide infonnation to support the value of property claimed in Part One, section l.b. for special franchise
owners, or, section 2.b. for assessing units. You must supply facts, figures, calculations and underlying assumptions
that support your position.
1. Inventory
SEE ATTACHED
(If additional explanation or documentation is necessary, please attach - # of attached pages ~
2. Valuation
SEE ATTACHED
(If additional explanation or documentation is necessary, please attach - # of attached pages ---.J
3. Other
SEE ATTACHED
(If additional explanation or documentation is necessary, please attach - # of attached pages ---.J
RP-7142 (4/01)
Page 4
PART FOUR: CERTIFICATION
I certify that I have read the foregoing complaint and know the contents thereof, that the facts stated therein are true
and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, and I understand that the making of any willful
false statement of material fact herein will subject me to the provisions of the Penal Law relevant to the making and
A::~~ O:.fw::o,:rement" I~ . /
Date
This complaint form and supporting documentation must be mailed or served upon the State Board at least ten days
before the hearing date to:
Darlene A. Maloney
Assistant to the State Board
New York State Board of Real Property Services
16 Sheridan Avenue
Albany, NY 12210-2714
A late complaint form and documentation will not be accepted. Please refer to the "Notice of Tentative Special
Franchise Full Values" which specifies the complaint submission deadline. Specific supporting documentation must be
provided in accordance with 9610 of the Real Property Tax Law. If supporting documentation is not filed, the tentative
special franchise full value(s) will be made final without change. A copy of the complaint form and documentation
must be served on the adverse party at the same time of filing with the State Board (ten days before the hearing date).
An affidavit of this service must be filed with the State Board no later than five days before the hearing date.
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
Complaint Number
Hearing Date
Staff Review Completed
Date Complaint Delivered to State Board
State Board vote on complaint:
Approved staff recommendation
_ Did not approve staff recommendation
STATE OF NEW YORK
STATE BOARD OF REAL PROPERTY SERVICES
In the Matter of the Complaint Under
S 610 of the Real Property Tax Law
COMPLAINT
of
2005-2006 Special '._
Franchise Assessme \.~
FRONTIER COMM. SYL VAN LAKE,
(alk/a Citizens Communications Co.)
(Towns)
Hearing Date:
April 21, 2005
TO: THE STATE BOARD OF REAL PROPERTY SERVICES
Frontier Comm. Sylvan Lake, (alk/a Citizens Communications Co.,) (hereinafter
"Complainant"), a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware,
having its principal office at 3 High Ridge Park, Stamford, CT 06905 and engaged in the provision
of telecommunication services to consumers in the County of Dutchess, and other counties of the
State of New York, has received written notices, dated March 18, 2005, that, for the fiscal year
2005-2006, the tentative assessments of its special franchise property in the assessing units listed in
paragraph 4 (Column "Assessing Unit") of this Complaint have been determined by the State Board
of Real Property Services (hereinafter "State Board") to be the amounts listed in paragraph 4
(Column "Tentative Assessment"). Said notices are attached hereto as Exhibit A.
The notices of tentative assessments received from Respondent did not contain any
indication of the full value of Complainant's special franchise property located in the said assessing
units.
Complainant complains of and objects to the determinations made by the State Board, and
in support of this complaint alleges upon information and belief that said determinations are
excessive, unequal and unlawful as further set forth below:
1. The real property in question is special franchise property as defined by RPTL S
102(17) and located in the assessing units set forth in paragraph 4.
2. The State Board values special franchise property by the cost approach of
reproduction cost new less depreciation, as set forth in the Rules of the State Board of Real Property
Services, 9 NYCRR S 197, et seq.
AS AND FOR A FIRST GROUND OF COMPLAINT
3. The State Board failed to adjust the service lives, net salvage factors and residual
values currently employed in assessing Complainant's property. The State Board further failed to
recognize all forms of physical, functional and economic obsolescence (except for a 11 % functional
obsolescence deduction from the copper wire account which said allowance is not challenged
herein).
4. A schedule of the assessmg units, the tentative special franchise assessments,
Complainant's claimed value for each special franchise assessment, and the claimed overassessment
for each is as follows:
CLAIMED
TENTATIVE CLAIMED OVER-
ASSESSING UNIT ASSESSMENT VALUE! ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT
COUNTY OF
DUTCHESS
Town of Beekman 805.119 201 280 603,839
Town of East Fishkill 845,674 211,419 634,256
Town of La Grange 958,281 239,570 718,711
Town of Union Vale 68,532
Town of Wappinger 24,061 6,015 18,046
TOTALS 2,701,667 658.284 1,974,851
ALLIBOI \114066\1
2
5. The methodology utilized in computing physical depreciation for the claimed
value/assessment is straight-line depreciation to a residual value of 5%. Additional amounts are
deducted for functional and economic obsolescence. In addition, other appropriate valuation
methodologies have been employed.
6. As a result, Complainant's special franchise property is overassessed and said
assessments should be reduced to reflect the claimed values set forth in the preceding paragraph.
7. Complainant is aggrieved, is and will be injured by said determinations of the State
Board in fIxing such tentative assessments. Complainant will be required to pay a far greater
amount in taxes in fIscal year 2005-2006 than it would be compelled to pay had such determinations
been made justly and properly. As a result, Complainant will pay far more than its just proportion
of the aggregate taxes to be levied upon its real property, including special franchise property,
situated in the above assessing units for fIscal year 2005-2006.
8. The tentative assessment valuations referred to herein are erroneous by reason of
overvaluation, and are illegal and void in that the tentative valuations for the above assessing units
are in excess of the valuations of each of the special franchises.
AS AND FOR A SECOND GROUND OF COMPLAINT
9. Complainant repeats, reiterates and realleges each and every allegation of those
paragraphs of the complaint hereinabove designated I through 8 inclusive with the same force and
effect as if set forth herein at length.
A.
10. In fIxing the tentative assessments of Complainant's special franchise property,
including the intangible element of each of said special franchise properties, the State Board
ALLIBOlI114066\1 3
erroneously, improperly and illegally deducted from its estimate of valuation an arbitrary,
inadequate and insufficient sum for depreciation, including physical, economic and functional
depreciation. As a result, it adopted for each special franchise property a valuation in excess of and
more than the valuation produced by a correct and proper application of the accepted rules of
valuation, and in excess of and more than the maximum value of said tangible property, and in
excess of and more than the fair market or full valuation of each of Complainant's special
franchises.
11. Respondent failed' and/or refused to take into account the effect of present market
conditions and regulatory constraints on the value of Complainant's property, or to make
adjustments attributable to such economic obsolescence. As a result, Respondent erroneously,
improperly and illegally deducted arbitrary, inadequate and insufficient amounts for economic
obsolescence in calculating the appropriate depreciation amount to be deducted in determining the
value of Complainant's special franchise property.
12. Respondents' long standing method for evaluating economIC obsolescence is
arbitrary and capricious; without support in appraisal theory; irrational and without support in the
market; ignores common sense and cannot withstand serious scrutiny.
13. Respondent also failed and/or refused to make sufficient adjustments attributable to
the functional obsolescence present in the subject property. Respondent erroneously, improperly
and illegally deducted arbitrary, inadequate and insufficient amounts for functional obsolescence in
calculating the appropriate depreciation amount to be deducted in determining the value of
Complainant's special franchise property.
ALLffiOl\114066\1
4
B.
14. The State Board, in its determination of the tentative assessments, separated each of the
special franchises into two parts, or elements, namely, the tangible and the intangible, and, after
evaluating the tangible part of the property, which already reflected any intangible value, then added
an intangible element arbitrarily, fictitiously, and without reasonable basis, and thereby, fixed
incorrect and excessive assessments.
15. The State Board annually arbitrarily fixes and determines the value of the "intangible"
part of each of said special francmses at an excessive and confiscatory amount, more specifically, at
a sum representative of 5% of the State Board's estimate of the value of the tangible part of each of
the special franchises as operative and usable utility property. The annual pro forma application of
a 5% intangible value without a review and analysis of the Complainant's operations, or
Complainant's property, specifically, is inappropriate, capricious and arbitrary, and results In
individual and total assessments in excess of the value of the special franchises.
C.
16. Complainant is subject to the provisions of the Public Service Law of the State of New
York and to the jurisdiction of the Public Service Commission in the method of the determination
and regulation of rates which Complainant may charge for the services rendered in the above
mentioned assessing units. Complainant is also subject to the jurisdiction and rules of the Federal
Communication Commission (FCC). Complainant's property consists of its real property, plant and
equipment, special franchise, and other miscellaneous property located within the above assessing
units and such property has no greater value for tax purposes than that which the Public Service
ALLIBOI\114066\1 5
Commission and the FCC accept as the value of Complainant's property in the fixation and
prescription of the maximum rates which may be charged by Complainant for services furnished in
the above mentioned assessing units.
17. The State Board, in determining the value of the special franchise property referred to
herein, failed to correctly apply any approved or appropriate method or rule of valuation, failed to
equalize the valuation properly and also failed to give due and proper consideration to all elements
of value, including, among others, the economic and regulatory constraints imposed by the Public
Service Commission and the FCC on the operation of the property, and thereby, failed to reduce
said special franchise property for the resultant economic obsolescence.
D.
18. The data used by the State Board, the indices employed to trend that data and the failure
to include proper adjustments for required construction, duplication and relocation, results in gross
overvaluation of the reproduction cost new used by the State Board.
E.
19. Complainant further claims that the aforesaid determinations fixing the tentative
valuations are illegal and void in that they do and will result in confiscation of Complainant's
property, do and will result in denying to Complainant the equal protection of the laws, do and will
deprive Complainant of its property without due process oflaw, and do and will result in the taking
of Complainant's property for public use without rendering just compensation therefor in violation
of the laws of the State of New York, and of Sections 6 and 11 of Article I of the Constitution of the
State of New York, and of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United
States.
ALLIBOl\114066\1 6
F.
20. The actions of Respondent in determining the 2005 tentative assessments on
Complainant's special franchise property are invalid in that they failed to consider all elements of
value on a uniform basis in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
to the Constitution of the United States, of Section 11 of Article I of the Constitution of the State of
New York, and ofRPTL S 305.
21. Complainant is aggrieved, is and will be injured by said determinations of the State
Board in fixing such tentative valuations, as Complainant will be required to pay a far greater
amount in taxes in fiscal year 2005-2006 than it would be compelled to pay had such determinations
been made justly and properly. As a result, Complainant will pay far more than its just proportion
of the aggregate taxes to be levied upon real property, including special franchise property, situated
in the above assessing units for fiscal year 2005-2006.
22. The tentative assessments referred to herein are erroneous by reason of overvaluation
and are illegal and void in that the tentative assessments for the above mentioned assessing units are
in excess of the valuations of each of the special franchises.
23. No previous application for this relief has been requested for said special franchise
property for the 2005 fmal assessment rolls.
WHEREFORE, Complainant respectfully demands that:
The determinations of tentative valuations of Complainant's special franchise property in the
ALLIBOI\114066\1
7
foregoing assessing units be annulled, canceled, and withdrawn by the State Board and that said
assessments be established as set forth in the claimed values in paragraph 4.
Dated: April 4, 2005
FRONTIER COMM. SYL VAN LAKE,
(aJk/a Citizens Communications Co.)
ALLIBO]\] ]4066\]
8
. .
STATEOFNEWYORK )
) ss.:
COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER )
Ed Kippennan, being duly sworn, deposes and says that:
1. I am the Vice President of Frontier Comm. Sylvan Lake, a/k/a Citizens
Communications, Inc., the Complainant herein.
2. I read the foregoing complaint and know the contents thereof, that the facts stated
therein are true to the best afmy knowledge, infonnation and belief, and
3. I understand that the making of any willful false statement of material fact herein
will subject me to the provisions of the penal law relevant to the making and filing
of false statements.
Sworn to before me this
31M dayofN.AeU( ,2005.
n-t' AD
Notary Public
~~
NOR ENE HARTOG
NOTARY PUBLIC
COMMISSION EXPIRES MAR. 31, 2006
f {f - () j-
,
STATE OF NEW YORK
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT
STATE BOARD OF REAL PROPERTY SERVICES
16 Sheridan Avenue
Albany, New York 12210-2714
(518)474-1071
RP27
Dated
March 18, 2005
NOTICE OF TENTATIVE SPECIAL FRANCHISE ASSESSMENT
For city and town assessment roll to be filed in 2005
Frontier Comm: Sylvan Lake
C/O Mr. Steve Peleschuk
3 High Ridge Park
Stamford, cr 06905
644200
Hearing: Date and Location:
April 21, 2005 at 10:00am
Board Room - 5th Floor
16 Sheridan Avenue
Albany, New York
The State Board of Real Property Services has determined the tentative special franchise assessments
for the following assessing unit(s) at the amounts shown below. The assessments were determined in
accordance with Article 6 of the Real Property Tax Law and Part 197 of Title 9 of the Official
Compilation of Codes, Rules and Regulations of the State of New York. The assessments include both the
value .of the tangible property situated in, upon, under or above public streets, highways, waters and
other public places and the value of the franchise, right, authority or permission to occupy such
public streets, highways, waters and other public places.
The State Board or its duly authorized representative will conduct a hearing in its office in the City
of Albany on the day indicated above as the "Hearing Date" to hear any complaints concerning such
assessments. Complaints must be filed in accordance with the procedure provided in Section 610 of the
Real Property Tax Law. In order for a complaint to be considered by the State Board, a complainant
must:
(1) Specify its objections to the tentative special franchise assessments on Form RP-7142 available
from the Office of Real Property Services.
(2) Serve its complaint to the State Board at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing date. Service
maybe made in person or by mail.
(3) Serve a copy of the complaint upon the appropriate assessing unit(s) .
(4) File with the State Board, at least five (5) days prior to the hearing date, an affidavit stating
in substance that the copy required in step 3 above has been served.
Tentative Pct Change
FrOllll
Assessment Prior Roll
5805,119 -16.1
-8.2
5845,674 -6.6
-4.2
5958,281 -6.4
-8.8
568,532 -17.5
-5.4
Assessment
Number
Town of Beekman, Dutchess County
Equalization Rate: 61.50
Town of East Fishki1l, Dutchess County
644200-1322
644200-1328
Equalization Rate:
12.30
Town of La Grange, Dutchess County
644200-1334
Equalization Rate:
67.50
Town of Union Vale, Dutchess County
644200-1354
Equalization Rate:
44.00
Town of Wappinger, Dutchess County
Equalization Rate: 44.34
Town Outside Villages
Total Town:
644200-1356
24,061
$24,061
$2,701,667
-7.6
22.8
22.8
Grand Total
'-9.7
T-05-0330
Page 1
e.
- - .'-,.
J ~ . .
STATE OF NEW YORK
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT
STATE BOARD OF REAL PROPERTY SERVICES
16 Sheridan Avenue-
Albany, New York 12210-2714
(518) 474-1071
RP27
Dated
March 18, 2005
NOTICE OF TENTATIVE SPECIAL FRANCHISE ASSESSMENT
For city and town assessment roll to be filed in 2005
-f;I/j~41Keil
Program Manager
State Valuation Services
Note: The amounts of the special franchise assessments set forth in this notice are "tentative" and
must not be entered on the assessment roll. The final assessments for entry on the assessment roll
will be transmitted at a later date.
T-05-0330
Page 2
STATE OF NEW YORK
STATE BOARD OF REAL PROPERTY SERVICES
IN THE MATTER OF THE COMPLAINT UNDER
~ 610 OF THE REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW
OF
FRONTIER COMM. SYLVAN LAKE,
(a/k/a Citizens Communications Co.)
(Towns)
COMPLAINT
Hiscock & Barclay, LLP
Attorneys for Frontier Comm. Sylvan Lake
50 Beaver Street
Albany, New York 12207
(518) 434-2163
ALLIB01lJ5430\1