Loading...
Loewen Development of Wappingers Falls, LP SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF DUTCHESS ______________________________________________1 In the Matter of the Application of I 1 1 I I I 1 I I I 1 1 I 1 I For a Review under Article 7 of the RPTL. I ----------------------------------------------1 LOEWEN DEVELOPMENT OF WAPPINGERS FALLS, LP Petitioner(s) -against- THE TOWN OF WAPPINGER, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, ITS ASSESSOR AND BOARD OF ASSESSMENT REVIEW, Respondents, t(Q)~1f INDEX NO. 01/4.23'6' ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007 NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF TAX ASSESSMENTS ~ S t;::::; P ~\ f~'..~' ~. ",'-\ '.- '.' ~'-': - ( r; 'r~~U);,-f" er./ ,,:::. (-) r=;\ -'n_ S Ci;::::; .-.... -~ .... -' f'1i ...( - -l P-ll -~ ..;- - - .. ;:- -l PLEASE TAKE NOTICE, that upon the annexed Petition, duly-verified July 13, 2007, an application will be made by the attorney set forth below at a Special Term of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, on September 14, 2007, at 9: 30 0' clock in the forenoon thereof or as soon as counsel can be heard, for a review under Article 7 of the Real Property Tax Law of the State of New York of the tax assessment (s) of certain real property(s) of the Petitioners situated in the above captioned Municipal Corporation located in the County of Dutchess, State of New York, appearing upon its assessment rolls, and being the real property more particularly described in the annexed Petition, to the end that all proceedings, decisions and actions in the matter of the said assessment(s) and assessment rolls of said property(s) may be reviewed, reduced, corrected, modified, vacated, be adjudged illegal, null and void on the merits by such Court as alleged in the said Petition and for such further and other relief as will be applied for and as may be just and proper in the premises. Dated: Bronxville, New York July 13, 2007 REC'EIVr-1 J JUL 1 7 2007 TOWN CLERK Griffin, Coogan & Veneruso, P.C. Attorneys for Petitioner(s) 51 Pondfield Road Bronxville, New York 10708 (914) 961-1300 TO: RESPONDENTS SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF DUTCHESS ______________________________________________1 In the Matter of the Application of I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I 1 I For a Review under Article 7 of the RPTL. I ----------------------------------------------1 LOEWEN DEVELOPMENT OF WAPPINGERS FALLS, LP Petitioner(s) -against- THE TOWN OF WAPPINGER, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, ITS ASSESSOR AND BOARD OF ASSESSMENT REVIEW, Respondents, TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK: The petitioner above-named respectfully shows: PETITION FOR REVIEW OF TAX ASSESSMENTS ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007 FIRST: That at all times hereinafter mentioned Petitioner was and is the individual or domestic corporate owner or lessee obligated to pay taxes on certain property located within the tax district of the Respondent Municipal Corporation set out, described and designated herein on Schedule A. SECOND: That the Assessor or Board of Assessors of the Respondent Municipal Corporation, ascertained all the real property located therein and the names of the owners thereof; and on or before the time prescribed by law assessed all real property situated therein not exempt by law from taxation; and made, prepared and completed the tentative 2007 assessment rolls of said Municipal Corporation and deposited them in his/her or their office for examination. That the actual assessment and/or transition assessment is excessive because of a failure to comply with the provisions of Real Property Tax Law ("RPTLU), section 1904. If the assessing jurisdiction is a special assessing unit as defined by the RPTL, the actual assessment and/or transition assessment is excessive because of failure to comply with the methods of computation and limitations on increases in assessed value set forth in RPTL section 1805. THIRD: That the assessment and descriptions on said assessment rolls for each Petitioner's real property as the same appeared thereon were as listed herein on Schedule A. FOURTH: That each Petitioner or its authorized agents or attorneys examined said assessments and descriptions and within the time allowed therefor, said Petitioner (s), their authorized agents or attorneys having knowledge of the facts, protested and complained of said assessments and made application to have them corrected and reduced to their correct assessed values upon the grounds that they were unequal, excessive and unlawful and Petitioner(s), their authorized agents or attorneys, filed with the Board of Assessors or Assessor, of the Respondent Municipal Corporation a complaint or statement under oath, specifying the respects in which the assessments complained of were incorrect and objecting and protesting against the same and requesting that said assessments be reduced to the correct val ua tions listed on Schedule A. That the said complaint or statement under oath was made and filed in compliance with the Real Property Tax Law of the State of New York and with such provisions of Charter, Local Law and Ordinances of the Respondent Municipal Corporation as may apply and as may be valid. FIFTH: That the said Board of Review and Assessor or Board of Assessors denied each of Peti tioner' s applications to reduce the assessed values of its property to said requested correct assessed values. That the Assessor and Board of Assessors and/or Board of Assessment Review, on or before the time prescribed by law, made and completed the final assessment rolls of its taxing unit. That the Board of Assessors or Assessor verified said rolls and duly made and subscribed his or their oaths thereto pursuant to Section 514 or 1406 of the Real Property Tax Law of the State of New York substantially as follows: I (We), the undersigned, do (severally) depose and swear that, to the best of my (our) knowledge and belief, I (we) have set forth in the foregoing assessment rolls all the real property situated in the assessing unit in which I am (we are) assessor(s), and with the exception of changes made by a board of review ar:d. special franchises assessed by the state board, I (we) have estimated the value of such real property at the sums which I (we) have determined to be in accordance with section three hundred five of the real property tax law, That the Assessor or the Board of Assessors thereafter filed said assessment rolls or certified copies thereof and delivered same to their Clerk. That the assessments and descriptions on the final assessment rolls of each Petitioner's real property is listed herein on Schedule A. SIXTH: That the final assessments of Petitioner's real property are erroneous by reason of unequal assessment, excessive assessment and unlawful assessment, That the said real property is actually of an assessable value not exceeding those values listed as Requested Correct Valuation(s) on Schedule A; and that the extent of such over-assessments are listed herein on Schedule A. SEVENTH: That the assessments of Petitioner's real property are unequal in that they have been made at a higher proportionate value than the assessments of other real property on the same rolls by the same offices, That while the real property of each of the Petitioners is assessed at more than its full value, other properties situated in this taxing unit and assessed upon its assessment rolls are assessed at a much lower percentage of their full value, That such inequality exists not only in specific instances but generally throughout Respondent Municipal Corporation. That the assessments have been made at a higher proportionate valuation than the assessed valuation of other real property in the same class on the same roll by the same officers, specifying as the instances of such unequal assessment all the real property in said class on the tax rolls in the assessing jurisdiction. That Petitioners specify as instances in which inequality exists, other real properties situated within said assessing unit and assessed upon its assessment rolls, and that your Petitioners are and will be injured thereby. 2 That if the assessing jurisdiction is an approved assessing unit as defined by the RPTL, Article 19 of the RPTL and the applicable local laws adopting the provisions of Article 19 violate the equal protection clauses of the federal and state constitutions because they permit similarly situated properties in different geographic areas wi thin the municipality where the assessing jurisdiction is located to be taxed unequally and, therefore, they are unconstitutional. That the assessing jurisdiction's deliberate policy of reassessing only those properties that have been recently transferred results in a denial of Petitioner's right to equal protection under the United States and New York State Constitutions. That the assessing jurisdiction's method of selective reassessment and its failure to reassess all real property on its assessment rolls is illegal and unconstitutional and results in Petitioner bearing a disproportionate tax burden. EIGHTH: That Petitioner's property is unlawfully assessed In that: (a) Petitioner's property and all real property in the assessing jurisdiction are not assessed at a uniform percentage of value as required by RPTL Section 305 (2); (b) in the event the assessed value has been increased over the final assessed valuation for the previous tax year, respondenots have failed to comr1y with the provisions of the RPTL; (c) petitione:t;' s property is not properly classified in that there are no valid and reCl.60nable differences between it and other property placed in other classes; (d) the assessment on Petitioner's property has been made by a person or body without the authority to make such assessment; (e) respondents have unlawfully employed a defective valuation statute; and (f) the property is wholly exempt from taxation and has been incorrectly set forth on the taxable assessment roll. NINTH: That the general ratio of the assessed values to the full values of real property situated in the Respondent Municipal Corporation is such, that in order to be equal and proportionate with the assessments of other real property, the assessments of Petitioner's real property should be reduced as aforesaid. TENTH: That the assessing jurisdiction exceeded the limitations established by the Constitution of the State of New York, Article 8, Section 10, for the amount of revenues that could be raised through real estate taxes. In addition, by discriminating between types of properties, respondents have reduced the value of "taxableu real estate so that the tax rate exceeds the constitutional limitations by reason of their having effectively granted exemptions from taxation to certain premises; Petitioner has, therefore, been compelled to pay more than the constitutionally permissible tax rate. ELEVENTH: That RPTL Section 720(3) in that it improperly limits the scope Petitioner. is unlawful and unconstitutional of evidence to be adduced by TWELFTH: That the assessments were fixed in contravention of RPTL Section 581 and, therefore, are unlawful, unequal and excessive. THIRTEENTH: That if the assessment of the property herein was 3 increased, it determination thereof for a discriminatory was without adequate cause after a final order, administrative or stipulation between parties determining the assessment previous year. That the amount of the assessment is grossly and that your Petitioners are and will be injured thereby. FOURTEENTH: That thirty days have not elapsed since the filing of the certified copy of the completed and verified assessment roll as required by law. WHEREFORE, your Petitioner (s) pray (s) that the Court review all and singular, the proceedings, decisions and actions of the Assessor or Board of Assessors, as the case may be, the Board of Assessment Review and Respondent Municipal Corporation in the matter of the tax assessments and assessed valuations of the real property of the Peti tioner and that the said tax assessments and assessed valuations be modified, corrected, vacated or reduced, and be made equal to assessed valuations by class or generally on the same rolls, as the case may require, that said assessments be adjudged unlawful, null and void and that the Respondents refund to Peti tioner all unlawfully assessed taxes paid, and that the Petitioner have such other and further relief including additional allowances pursuant to Section 722 of the Real Property Tax Law of the State of New York as may be just and proper in the premises and that the Petitioner be awarded costs and disbursements of this proceeding, together with reasonable expenses, including fees of experts and attorneys. Dated: Bronxville4 New York July 13, 2007--; LOEWEN DEVELOPMENT OF WAPPINGERS FALLS, LP Petitioner(s), By: (,) /\ f} ~."" . ~ ~,-" ( ~ WILLIAM . SULZER, ESQ. STATE OF NEW YORK ) ) } 55. : COUNTY OF DUTCHESS WILLIAM E. SULZER, ESQ., being duly sworn, deposes and says that he is the duly authori zed representative and attorney for the Petitioner above named, that he has read the foregoing petition, knows the contents thereof, that the same is true to his own knowledge, except as to those matters therein stated to be alleged upon information and belief and as to those matters he believes the same to be true. aJ,~, WILLIAM E. SULZER, ESQ. me on 4620 Notary Public MOriEA POTANOVIC NOTARY PUBLIC, STATE OF NEW YORK NO.O"IPO(i121071 QUALIFIED Ih1 WESTCHESTER COUtllB' COlvlivHSSION EXfJlRES 1/03/20 eLl 4 SCHEDULE "A" LOEWEN DEVELOPMENT OF WAPPINGERS FALLS, LP THE TOWN OF WAPPINGER Property Description 19/6158/0/646130/00 62-72 IMPERIAL BLVD. WAPPINGERS CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT Tentative Assessed V aluation( s) ($) 11,000,000 5 Requested Correct Va1uation(s) ($) 1,100,000 Final Assessed V aluation(s) ($) Extent of Over-Assessment ($) 11,000,000 9,900,000 ------- ------. ..-... ...,..J A,.'-' '-'I ,-,_-J...J .I. ~ - J'..J AumOlUZA'110N I, the under.;igned, being an aggrieved person within the IJle'lIIing of the Real Property Tax Law, or an officec or partner of such aggrieved ~ as comphu~ hereby de.~lv~ and authorize of the law :fum of GriIIia, c_~ a v~ P.c., 51 Pondfield Road, BronxviIlc, NY ) 0708 or any other member or employee of said firm, to (1) act as my representative with respect to any and all negotiations with the Assessor and/or Counsel in regard to the tcnbltive or final assessment; (2) act as my rcpresent1Ltive in any and aU proceedings before the Board of Assessment Review of the municipality mentioned below for purposes of reviewing the assessment of following real }1l~ty as it appears OD the a8se&m1ent roll of such mmricipality; (3) act as my agent to verify, serve and file a petition for review of said real pI()perly assessment, pursuant to Section 706 and Section 730 of the Real Property Tax LaW; and (4) act as my agent to claim and receive any and all property tax refimd resulting :from said firm's represeotation in any assessment reduction proceedings: ASSI'..SSMENT YI':AR.: 2007 COUNTY: DUTCHESS M.UNlt;Jrj..I ATV: vn..LAGE: TAX MAP LD.: TOWN OF WAPPINGER W APPINGERS FALLS Grid 19/6158/0/646130/00 TAXYEAR: 2008 TAX YEAR: 2008 TAX YEAR: 2007/08 ADDRESS OF PREMISIS: 62-72 IMPERIAL BLVD. Petitioner: Loewea DenIopIBeIIt ofW~ J.t3Ik, U By: r;~ Title: ~/I!jJ 7 Date: