Loading...
The Stop & Shop Companies, Inc/ Bj's Wholesale Club, Inc (2) -- ,. i SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF DUTCHESS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --X In the Matter of the Application of: THE STOP & SHOP COMPANIES, INC. BJ's WHOLSALE CLUB, INC. NOTICE OF PETITION AND PETITION -against- Petitioner, Index # 0 6 - 3 i> / > THE ASSESSOR, THE BOARD OF ASSESSORS AND THE BOARD OF ASSESSMENT REVIEW OF THE TOWN OF WAPPINGER AND THE TOWN OF WAPPINGER Tax Year 2006/07 Respondents. For Review of a Tax Assessment Under Article 7 of the Real Property Tax Law. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --x SIR S PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that upon the annexed Petition, application will be made at Special Term of the Supreme Court of the State of New York to be held at the Courthouse located in the State of New York, County of DUTCHESS, 10 MARKET STREET, POUGHKEEPSIE on the 30 day of August 2006 100- 476 at the opening of Court on that day or as soon thereafter as counsel can be heard, for review under Article 7 of the Real Property Tax Law of the assessment upon Petitioner's real property described in the Petition, and for such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. DATED: 7/10/06 Yours, etc. CRONIN, CRONIN, & HARRIS, P.C. Attorneys for Petitioner 200 Old Country Road Mineola, New York 11501 ***DUPLICATE*** RECEIVED JUl 1 8 2006 TOWN CLERK 4. . P. c., respectfully alleges as follows: . The afor....ntion.d Petitioner, by its attorn.y, CRONIN, CRONIN & RAR1US, 1. The afor...entioned Petitioner, whose post office address is c/o CRO"IN, CRON"IN ~ HARRIS, P.C., 200 Old Country Road, Mineo1a, ".w York 11501, at all time, herein mentioned, was and still is an aggrieved party under section 704 and 705 oj the RPTL with respect to the assessment roll set forth in the schedule in thi, petition. 2. The Respondents prepared and completed, according to law, a tentativE assessment roll for the assessing juriSdiction for the year set forth on the Covel page of this petition and notice of petition, which assessment roll included aI assessment for Petitioner's real property, described in the following schedule. 3. If there be more than one Petitioner herein, the word "Pe~itiQner" shal: mean "Petitioners" or "each of the Petitioners", whenever the sense and contexl so requires. 4. If there be more than one assessment herein, the word "assessment" shal] mean "assessments" or "each of the assessments", whenever the sense and context so requires. 5. If there be more than one property herein, the word "property" shall mean "properties" or "each of the properties", whenever the .sense and context Be requires. 6. Respondents are authorized to assess real property in said jurisdiction. 7. Respondents are authorized to hear and determine complaints in relatioI: to assessment and has all of the powers and duties imposed by the Real Property T~ Law. B. The Respondents prepared and completed a tentative assessment roll of all real property in said juriSdiction for the tax year as set forth on the attachec schedule. { , 9. On or before Grievance Day, Petitioner protested said assessment b, filing with Respondents a written application for correction of the assessel valuation(s), in which application was included a statement, under oath, specifyin, the respects in which. said assessment was incorrect and a request that sail assessment be corrected and reduced as set forth in the aforementioned schedule Said application and statements are hereby referred to and made a part of thi, Petition as if fully set forth herein. 10. The said application and statements were received by Respondents, wi thou' objection, within the time fixed by law for the making and hearing of complaints il respect to assessments. 11. A final decision and determination of the assessments of said rea: prop~rties we~~ duly rendered by Respondents, who failed to correct and reduce sail assessment as requested and finally completed and filed the assessment roll a: required by law to the amount set forth in the aforamentioned schedule. 12. Thirty (30) days has not elapsed since the latter of the final completiol and filing of the assessment roll and the giving of notice thereof as required b: law, or, the final day set by law for the filing of the assessment roll. 13. The Petitioner herein alleges that a common question of law or fac' exists pursuant to RPTL Section 706(2). 14. The said assessment of your Petitioner's property on the assessment rol: as finally completed is incorrect and erroneous upon the following grounds: (a) Excessive to the extent set forth in the aforementioned scheduled. (b) Unequal to the extent set forth in the aforementioned scheduled in that therE is an inequality of assessments, the Petitioner'S assessment having been made at c higher proportionate valuation than the assessments of other real property on thE same roll and/or other real property in the same class on the same roll by the samE officers and Respondents; the specified instances of said inequality are thE "'"""..""...........=.........'" U.L. a.....L U.I.. LLle rea.L property and/or other real property in the same class other than the property of Pet:itioner in the assessing jurisdiction and in each and every parcel thereof. In order that the assessment of Petitioner's real property he made proportionate to assessments of all of the real property throughout the assessing jurisdiotion and/or other real property in the S~e class throughout the assessing jurisdiction, it is necessary that it be reduced to the ~ount set forth in the aforementioned schedule. (c) Illegality to the extent set forth in the aforementioned schedule in that subject property is being assessed in an erroneous, arbitrary, and capricious manner. (d) Unconstitutional to the extent the ~ethodology used by the Respondents is in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the New York state Constitution and the United States Constitution. (e) Illegal and unconstitutional to the extent that the Petitioner's property has been reevaluated by the Respondents, and on information and belief, no improvements had been made by Petitioner and no construction of any structure had occurred which could justify the increase in assessment. 15. While confirming the increased assessment placed upon Petitioner's real property, on information and belief, the Respondent AsSeSBor(s) did not engage in any market reevaluation as to lots that are similar to those owned by the Petitioner. 16. If the assessment at issue is a transitional assessment, such assessment is excessive, erroneous and illegal in that it eXceeds the permissible transitional increase as set forth in the Real Property Tax Law. 17. Your Petitioner is aggrieved and injured by said unjust, unequal, excessive, illegal, incorrect and erroneous assessment in that, by reason thereof, Petitioner 'will be Compelled to pay a greater amount and proportion of taxes based ---- ----- ~~ ~ ='-.... '-....UU~.l.: wou..tCJ. .oe requi.red to pay if sai assessment had bean ju.st, fair, equal and correct. lB. No provision is made by law for an appeal or other relief from the fina determination of Respondents, ~cept by a review by petition to the Supreme Court and no previous application for the relief herein asked has been made to any cour or JUdge. 19. The assessment is excessive and illegal in that Petitioner is denied th benefit of a R.l?TL S485-b New Construction Exemption even though the Petitione complied with all the requirements set forth therein and that the construction i completed in accordance with RPTL S485-b. 20. The. Petitioner's real property has been misclassified. The clas designation of Petitioner's real property results in an incorrect allocation of th real property's assessed valuation between two or more classes. The criteria Use by the Respondents for the determination by t~ class is arbitrary, capricious an unlawful. 21. The Agricultural Exemption is improperly implemented in that it omitte acreage as not qualified for the exemption even though this acreage is used soleI for agricultural use. WHEREFORE, your Petitioner prays that the Supreme Court review and correct 0 the merits the aforementioned final determination of the Respondents on the ground set forth in this Petition, and that the said Court take evidence to enable you Petitioner to show the unjust, unequal, excessive, illegal, misclassified an erroneous assessment of the said real property to the end that the assessment ma be reduced to the full, true and market value thereof for land and improvements an to a valuation proportionate to the assessments of other real property, and/or al other property in the same class, assessed on the same rolls for the same year, s that equality of assessments will result, and may be properly classified, and fo ----- -- --- and di8Durs~ents of this proceeding. ~~~~ =~x U~em propar, together with the CDS CRONIN, CRON~ ~ HARRIS, P.C. Attorneys for Petitioner 200 Old Country Road, Suite 570 Mineo I a, New York (515) 747-7800 STATE OF NEW YORK ) ss. : COUNTY OF NASSAU ) ERIN STANTON, being duly sworn, deposes and says: That deponent is the agent for the Petitioners herein, that deponent has read the foregoing Notice of Petition and Petition and knows the contents thereof; that the same is true to deponent's own knowledge, except as to matters therein stated to be alleged upon information and belief, and that as to those matters, deponent believes it to be true; and that the reason this verification is made by deponent and not by the Petitioners is that all the material allegations (except those as to matters of public record) of said Petition are within the personal knowledge of deponent. Sworn to before me this lQ-f" day Of'"5L>J) 2006 3~~ ANGELA R. FORGIONE Notary Public, State of New York No. 01F06063490 Qualified in Nassau County Commission Expires Aug. 27, 2009 100- 476 ~g , 1 1 ***DUPLlCATE*** Des 6157-02-707773- #2 MV #3 Tentative AV Claimed AV $9,200,000 $920,000 Final AV $9,200,000 11111' 11111 1111111111111111111111111111 Ineq/OvVal $8,280,000 CRONIN. CRONIN & HARRIS. P.C. IS HEREBY AUTHORIZED to file and verify as agent complaints and petitions for the reduction of real estate taxes for the following property and to represent the petitioner in all appeals therefrom. CLIENT ID#: 598 PROPERTY LOCATION: 1357 ROUTE 9 COUNTY: DUTCHESS TOWNMLLAGE WAPPINGER (SWIS) 135600 S.D. Desc#1 #2 135601 6157-02-707773- 00001fV #3 1 DATED: 1/02/06 PETITIONER: THE STOP & SHOP COMPANIES. INC. TOTAL PARCELS 1 BY~M C~ TITLE: goP- ~ ~ OurFile# 100- 476 640 ( 55 ) //111/1/11111111111111111' "'I "'" , II' , ., CRONIN, CRONIN & HARRIS, P.C. IS HEREBY AUTHORIZED to file and verify as agent complaints and petitions for the reduction of real estate taxes for the following property and to represent the petitioner in all appeals therefrom. CLIENT ID#: 0053 PROPERTY LOCATION: 1357 ROUTE 9 COUNTY: DUTCHESS TOWNNILLAGE WAPPINGER (SWIS) 135600 S.D. Desc#1 #2 135601 6157-02-707773- OOOO~ #3 1 DA TED: 1/02/06 PETITIONER: BJ's WHOLSALE CLUB, INC. TOTAL PARCELS 1 BY:C1!.AO ~. vi TITLE: 'le.::rO>C Our File# 100- 476 1111111111 I 111111111 11111 I /11111111 1111 6250 ( 7)