Loading...
Aimco Chelsea Ridge, LLC S~REME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF DUTCHESS -------------------------------------------------X In the Matter of OC# 0006-0018 PETITION e:< () df- ..>7' d J i ~ C nC r--I ::;of"T'ln ("1'l::::O::C ("'):;:lI::f"T1 ~ ~ ,,)~ -~on )> 8~o _c n'2: C:;i f"T'l..... -< AIMCO CHELSEA RIDGE. LLC Index No. -against- Pet it i oner. Respondents. : -------------------------------------------------X RECEIVED JUl 2 2 2008 TOWN CLERK o THE BOARD OF ASSESSORS AND/OR THE ASSESSOR OF THE Town of WAPPINGER AND THE BOARD OF ASSESSMENT REVIEW, The petitioner above-named by his attorney, Herman, Katz Cangemi & Clyne. LLP respectfully alleges as follows: 1. At all times herein mentioned, petitioner was and still is an aggrieved party with respect to the assessment or assessments described below within the meaning of Section 706. Real Property Tax Law, State of New York. and the Board of Assessors and/or Assessor is the respondent herein (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessing jurisdiction'). 2. The respondents have heretofore prepared, completed and perfected, purportedly according to law, an assessment roll for the assessing jurisdiction, for the tax year 2009 (2008/09), which assessment roll included an assessment for petitioner's real property, described in Column I and assessed as set forth in Column II of the following schedule: COLUMN I Town WAPPINGER Vi 11 age S.D. Dist. Sec. Blk. Lot COLUMN II COLUMN III COLUMN IV COLUMN V Original Valuation Claimed Confirmed Valuation Valuation Extent Unequal and/or Excessive 6056 01 373534 Land $ 1,900,000 Total $ 24,000,000 $ 190.000 * $ 2.400. 000 * $ 1.710,000 $ 21. 600.000 Dist. Sec. 6056 Bl k. 01 Lot 468615 Land $ 2,000,000 Total $ 28.000,000 $ 200,000 * $ 2,800,000 * $ 1. 800, 000 $ 25,200,000 Dist. Sec. 6056 Bl k. 02 Lot 506726 Land $ Total $ 150.500 150,500 $ $ 15,050 * 15.050 * $ $ 135.450 135.450 Dist. Sec. 6056 B 1 k . 02 Lot 540718 Land $ Total $ 63,800 63.800 $ $ 6,380 * 6,380 * $ $ 57.420 57.420 *Same as Column II except as otherwise indicated. Tax Year 2008/09 0006-0018 Petitioner: AIMCO CHELSEA RIDGE. LLC COLUMN I COLUMN II COLUMN I II COLUMN IV COLUMN V Town WAPPINGER Village WAPPINGER Original Claimed Confirmed Extent Unequal S.D. Valuation Valuation Valuation and/or Excessive Dist. Sec. 6056 Land $ 81.000 $ 8,100 * $ 72,900 Blk. 02 Total $ 335,800 $ 33,580 * $ 302,220 Lot 558539 Dist. Sec. 6056 Land $ 350,000 $ 35,000 * $ 315.000 Blk. 02 Total $ 14,000,000 $ 1. 400 , 000 * $ 12.600.000 Lot 590514 Dist. Sec. 6056 Land $ 475.400 $ 47,540 * $ 427.860 Blk. 02 Total $ 475.400 $ 47,540 * $ 427,860 Lot 590610 Dist. Sec. 6056 Land $ 101. 000 $ 10.100 * $ 90,900 Blk. 02 Total $ 101. 000 $ 10,100 * $ 90,900 Lot 621570 *Same as Column II except as otherwise indicated. Tax Year 2008/09 0006-0018 Petitioner: AIMCO CHELSEA RIDGE. LLC COLUMN I COLUMN II COLUMN III COLUMN IV COLUMN V Town WAPPINGER Village WAPPINGER Original Claimed Confirmed Extent Unequal S.D. Valuation Valuation Valuation and/or Excessive Dist. Sec. 6056 Land $ 120.000 $ 12.000 * $ 108.000 Blk. 02 Total $ 3.000.000 $ 300.000 * $ 2.700.000 Lot 635539 Dist. Sec. Land $ $ * $ Blk. Total $ $ * $ Lot Dist. Sec. Land $ $ * $ Blk. Total $ $ * $ Lot Dist. Sec. Land $ $ * $ Blk. Total $ $ * $ Lot *Same as Column II except as otherwise indicated . 3. Petitioner duly made and filed with respondents a written application and statement under oath, to have said assessed valuation, transition assessment and exemption, if applicable, of said real property corrected and revised, specifying therein the respect in which the assessment complained of was incorrect, and which application and statement sought to reduce the assessment complained of as set forth in Column III Paragraph 2 above. The application and statement are hereby referred to and made part hereof as though fully set forth herein. 4. Upon information and belief, a final decision and determination on the application and statement were duly rendered by respondents who failed to reduce the assessment as requested and confirmed or set the assessed valuation of petitioner's property as set forth in Column N Paragraph 2 above. 5. Thirty days have not elapsed since the filing of the certified copy of the completed and verified assessment roll with notice thereof, or law day, whichever is later, as permitted by RP.T.L. Sec. 702. 6. The assessment of petitioner's property is erroneous upon the following grounds: (a) Excessive, as fully defined in RP.T.L. Sec. 522, (to the extent set forth in Column V Paragraph 2 above); (b) Misclassification, the class designation is incorrect, as fully defined in RP.T.L. Sec. 522; (c) Unequal, as fully defined in RP.T.L. Sec.522, (to the extent set forth in Column V Paragraph 2 above). The assessed value is at a higher percentage of value than the assessed value of other real property in the same class on the assessment roll and/or the assessed value has been made at a higher proportionate value than the assessments of all other real property on the assessment roll. The specified instances of such unequal assessment is the assessments of all the real property (or where applicable, in the same class on the same roll) in the assessing jurisdiction and each and every parcel thereof; and (d) Unlawful, in that this property and all real property in the assessing unit is not assessed at a uniform percentage of value and that it is based upon an assessment practice of selective or spot reassessment that has been declared illegal and unconstitutional by the Courts of the State of New York, as defined in R.P.T.L., and is unlawful as more fully defined in its entirety in R.P.T.L. Sec. 522. 6a. Each claim as set forth in Paragraph 6 above is defined in R.P.T.L. Sec 522 and is incorporated herein as if fully set forth. 7. In the event that the assessment at issue is or should be subject to a transition assessment and/or exempt or partially exempt and has been incorrectly calculated, or not set forth at all on the taxable assessment roll, the assessment should be reduced as it exceeds the statutory formula and/or is unlawful, unequal and excessive. 8. Petitioner is aggrieved and injured by said unequal, excessive, illegal, unlawful and/or misclassified assessment (as defined in R.P.T.L. Sec 522), and will be required to pay a greater amount and proportion oftaxes than petitioner would be required to pay if the assessment had been equal and not excessive, illegal, unlawful, misclassified and erroneous. 9. No provision is made by law for an appeal or other relief from the final determination of the respondents except by a review by petition to the Supreme Court. No previous application for the relief herein asked has been made to any court or judge. 10. Ifthere is more than one petitioner herein, the word "petitioner" shall mean "petitioners" or "each of the petitioners" as the context requires. As used herein the singular shall include the plural and the plural shall include the singular as the context requires. II. Petitioner protests payment of said taxes based upon the within claims and upon the grounds that the tax rates are calculated incorrectly. 12. Petitioners are persons asserting grounds for review which present common questions oflaw or fact within the meaning ofR.P.T.L. See 706(2). 13. Respondents assessments were promulgated contrary to the rules and regulations of Respondents, and are therefore void, illegal and unconstitutional. 14. The assessment is illegal in that it fails to comply with the requirements of RP.T.L. Sec. 305(2). 15. The assessment is illegal in that it is not predicated upon market value of the subject property as of the appropriate taxable status and valuation dates. 16. The provisions ofR.P.T.L. Sec. 727(1), (2), (4) as applied to the assessments under challenge herein, are illegal and unconstitutional, as violative of the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Federal and New York State Constitutions, and conflict with the standard of assessing under R.P.T.L. 302, 305 and Chapter VI of the Nassau County Administrative Code, if applicable. 17. The provisions ofRP.T.L. Sec. 739(1), (2), (3) as applied to the assessments under challenge herein, are illegal and unconstitutional, as violative of the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Federal and New York State Constitutions, and conflict with the standard of assessing under RP.T.L. 302, 305 and Chapter VI of the Nassau County Administrative Code, if applicable. 18. The provisions referenced in paragraphs 16 and 17 above, are violative of Article 16, Sections I and 2 of the New York State Constitutions. 19. The assessment is unlawful and/or illegal as the Assessor and/or the Board of Assessors has included within the assessment non-assessable and/or non real property items, thereby violating R.P.T.L. Section 300, and the New York State Constitution. WHEREFORE, petitioner prays that the Supreme Court review and correct on the merits the final determination of respondents on the grounds set forth in this petition, and that the Court take evidence to enable petitioner to show the unequal, excessive, unlawful, illegal, misclassified and erroneous assessment of the real property to the end that the assessment may be reduced to the value thereof for land and improvements, and to a valuation proportionate to the assessments of other real property, and/or other property in the same class, assessed on the same rolls for the same year, so that equality of assessments will result, and may be properly classified, and for such other and further relief as the Court may deem proper, together with the costs of disbursements of this proceeding. . SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF DUTCHESS -------------------------------------------------X In the Matter of OC# 0006-0018 AIMCO CHELSEA RIDGE. LLC NOTICE AND PETITION Index NO.~~p;r--~~~ Petitioner. -against- o a ("')5 ,. ~("') <.- ::o-;o~ ~ ~~<.f) ....., f1i c.() tfl - .-:; 0 ("') ;n-no ""'" ..........,'c y \...J _ -;::. ~ ~'1 THE BOARD OF ASSESSORS AND/OR THE ASSESSOR OF THE Town of WAPPINGER AND THE BOARD OF ASSESSMENT REVIEW. Respondents. : -------------------------------------------------x Herman. Katz Cangemi & Clyne. LLP 400 Garden City Plaza. Suite 206 Garden City. NY 11530 516 741-1130 - " VERIFICATION STATE OF NEW YORK. COUNTY OF NASSAU) ss.: The undersigned being duly sworn. deposes and says: I am the agent for the petitioner herein. I have read the foregoing petition and know the contents thereof; the same is true to my own knowledge. except as to matters therein stated to be alleged upon information and belief and. that as to those matters. I believe it to be true. The reason this verification is made by me and not by petitioner is that all the material allega . ns (except those as to matters of public record) of said petition are within my perso knowledge. Sworn to before me this day: JU1~ l.W (/~ DEB~TIRLOTTE Notary Public State of New York No. 01VE6065331 Qualified in Suffolk County Commission Expires: October 15. 2009 NOTICE OF PETITION TO THE RESPONDENTS NAMED WITHIN: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT. upon the annexed verified petition. an application will be made. pursuant to the provisions of the Real Property Tax Law at a Special Term for Tax Certiorari of this Court. to be held at the courthouse thereof. on September 29. 2008 at 9:30 a.m.. or as soon thereafter as counsel can be heard. for the relief prayed for in said petition. upon the grounds set forth therein. and for such other and further relief as may be just and proper in the premises. Dated: July 1. 2008 Herman. Katz Cangemi & Clyne. LLP 400 Garden City Plaza. Suite 206 Garden City. NY 11530 516 741-1130 AUT H 0 R I Z A T ION I, the undersigned, being an aggrieved person within the meaning of the Real Property Tax Law, or an officer or partner of such aggrieved person, as complainant, hereby designate and authorize the below named law firm or any other attorney designated by said firm, to act as my representative in any and all proceedings before the Board of Assessment Review or the municipalities mentioned below for purposes of reviewing the assessment of my real property as it appears on the assessment roll of such municipalities for the proceedings applicable to the date set forth below and to act as agent to verify, serve and file a petition for review of said real property assessment pursuant to Section 706 or 730 of the Real Property Tax Law and this applies to property described below as follows: LAW FIRM: HERMAN, KATZ & CANGEMI, LLP COUNTY: DUTCHESS TOWN: WAPPINGER CITY: (if applicable) VILLAGE: (if applicable) DESCRIPTION: S.D. Section: 6056 Block: 01 Lot: 373534 ROUTE 9D S.D. Section: 6056 Block: 01 Lot: 468615 ROUTE 9D S.D. Section: 6056 Block: 02 Lot: 506726 ROUTE 9D AIMCO CHELSEA RIDGE, LLC (Name7t:i{~ ' Bv: !Ie ,,-""- /)';).}Dfl'ID'T (Signature) (Date) ~~ ~ ChrJC (Please Print Signature Above) ~~. V'/~ k~,O-o.jr- Title (i.e., Owner, Partner or Officer) January 2, 2008 Our File No. 0006-0018 05T BIGG PAT AUTHORI ZATI ON I, the undersigned, being an aggrieved person within the meaning of the Real Propertv Tax Law, or an officer or partner of such aggrieved person, as complainant, hereby designate and authorize the below named law firm or any other attorney designated by said firm, to act as my representative in any and all proceedings before the Board of Assessment Review or the municipalities mentioned below for purposes of reviewing the assessment of my real property as it appears on the assessment roll of such municipalities for the proceedings applicable to the date set forth below and to act as agent to verify, serve and file a petition for review of said real property assessment pursuant to Section 706 or 730 of the Real Property Tax Law and this applies to property described below as follows: LAW FIRM: HERMAN, KATZ & CANGEMI, LLP COUNTY: DUTCHESS TOWN: WAPPINGER CITY: (if applicable) VILLAGE: (if applicable) DESCRIPTION: S.D. Section: 6056 Block: 02 Lot: 540718 ROUTE 90 S.D. Section: 6056 Block: 02 Lot: 558539 ROUTE 90 S.D. Section: 6056 Block: 02 Lot: 590514 ROUTE 90 AIMCO CHELSEA RIDGE, LLC (Name of petitioner) By: ~G-~ D2(l2i10t (Signature) (bate) 6(J::f~ ~. /AtJtJC (Please Print Signature Above) S~. V;~ ?~U)DJr- Title (i.e., Owner, Partner or Officer) January 2, 2008 Our File No. 0006-0018 05T 8100 PAT . AUT H 0 R I Z A T ION I, the undersigned, being an aggrieved person within the meaning of the Real Property Tax Law, or an officer or partner of such aggrieved person, as complainant, hereby designate and authorize the below named law firm or any other attorney designated by said firm, to act as my representative in any and all proceedings before the Board of Assessment Review or the municipalities mentioned below for purposes of reviewing the assessment of my real property as it appears on the assessment rol1 of such municipalities for the proceedings applicable to the date set forth below and to act as agent to verify, serve and file a petition for review of said real property assessment pursuant to Section 706 or 730 of the Real Property Tax Law and this applies to property described below as follows: LAW FIRM: HERMAN, KATZ & CANGEMI, LLP COUNTY: DUTCHESS TOWN: WAPPINGER CITY: (if applicable) VILLAGE: (if applicable) DESCRIPTION: S.D. Section: 6056 Block: 02 Lot: 590610 ROUTE 9D S.D. Section: 6056 Block: 02 Lot: 621570 ROUTE 9D S.D. Section: 6056 Block: 02 Lot: 635539 ROUTE 9D AIMCO CHELSEA RIDGE, LLC (Name of Petitioner) By, ~!)C~ IPZI'iXl~ (Signature) (Date) ~~ [). ~N~ (Please Print Signature Above) b~- ~U; r:r/l.GSIO~ Title (i.e., Owner, Partner or Officer) January 2, 2008 Our File No. 0006-0018 05T SIGG PAT