Monday, Dec 23rd

Residents Press Trustees to Void Revaluation

nelsoroadA boisterous group of residents continued to press Scarsdale Village Trustees to rescind the 2016 revaluation at a protracted meeting of the Board of Trustees on Tuesday night July 12th. Though the critics' assertions were similar to previous meetings, their tone was decidedly angrier. They attacked the Mayor, the Board of Trustees, the Village Assessor, the Village Attorney, John F. Ryan and village managers both professionally and personally.

They questioned the validity of the model and the assumptions behind it, asked who supervised Ryan and argued that he had not met the terms of his agreement. Some pointed to individual trustees and asserted that their taxes had not gone up, while the residents in the audience suffered unfair increases.

The trustees listened respectfully and allowed many to speak far longer than their allotted time. However, they said there was little they could at this point except to let the grievance process take it's course, permitting those who believed their assessments were too high to have their cases considered by the Board of Assessment Review.

In his opening remarks, Mayor Jon Mark referenced a letter from Brice Kirkendall-Rodriguez that was published in the Scarsdale Inquirer and on Scarsdale10583. Mark said, "Characterizations are the opinion of its author." He said, "Detailed criticisms were made to the 2014 reval as well and are made nationwide. The comments received do not change where we are. 2016 is done."

To those who raised concerns about the Village's financial health he said, "Assertions that bond issues will receive less support is a matter of speculation. Moody's reiterated its AAA credit rating and indications are that there is strong demand for the $6.6 million debt refinancing which will be made on Thursday."

Addressing those who questioned the need for this second revaluation, Mark said, "The 2016 reval was initiated in good faith to address perceived inequities in the 2014 reval... Hindsight is 20-20 and here we are." He reiterated his belief in the strength of the non-partisan system and urged those in the audience to participate more regularly.

Robert Berg, who serves on the Board of Assessment Review, (BAR) speaking on his own behalf said, "We are reviewing 1,056 grievances. Calling the burden "overwhelming and unfair," he told trustees that BAR member Dorothy Finger had recused herself from the proceedings but failed to resign, leaving the remaining four members of the BAR with even more work. He said, "Given the crazy workload, we need a replacement as soon as possible." He urged the board to recruit another member and said, "You just keep your head in the sand and hope this will go away."

He also reported that the BAR had thus far granted reductions to 61% of the cases they heard, calling the number of reductions, "unprecedented." He said, "We have already reduced valuations by millions. My guess is that the tax rate will go up significantly. We cannot increase those that are undervalued. This is a terrible state of affairs."

Mayra Kirkendall-Rodriguez spared no one in her remarks. She said, "We are 42 days into this disasterous revaluation. You failed to bring Ryan here. The assessor is not here even though she is supposed to be here. There is no transparency."

She raised concerns about Ryan's firm, his credentials and oversight of the model and the process. She told the Board, "We'll be here every week because we don't trust any of you. Many forgot the trust in trustees. Maybe we should just call you "ees" from now on." She mentioned a possible lawsuit saying, "On the basis of this, as well as the statistical analysis quite a number of quantitative Scarsdalians have presented to you, we believe that courts likely would find that we have met the very minimal burden of proof that is required for an unequal assessment challenge."

Turning to Trustee Carl Finger, she said, "Two weeks ago, you said you were sorry that we are upset. The more you kept talking, I was convinced that you were going to break out a bottle of bourbon and a banjo and sit on a three legged couch to sing a country song about how you feel our pain. Mr. Finger, I am from Texas. I did not like country music then, and I am not about to start liking it now. You do not feel our pain."

Others joined the chorus. Woody Kraut, a former president of the Edgewood Association said, "2014 seemed to be a very professional job while 2016 looked like a superficial job. I think this is a flawed process – I think you should rescind it. You'll be seeing me a lot more."

Jane Curley of Hamilton Road said, "I don't have a sexy job. I look at models all day and see if I can find flaws. I write my own code and see if I can validate models." Holding up a graph she said, "There is a problem at the bottom and the top of this model. ....Not everyone understands this stuff ...It's infuriating that you're saying this is a matter of option."

She then showed another chart and said, "After the Tyler revaluation, all the .012 acre lots on Hamilton and Nelson Roads were valued at $467,000. The 2016 revaluation valued these same lots at $675,000 on Hamilton Road and $575,000 on Nelson Road. This is a sloppy, indefensible job. What will it take before you acknowledge the model is flawed?"

Jordan Copeland added, "The community needs to be heard. It doesn't look like it was fair. My property went up 50% in two years. Something has to be done. I have to pay half the amount to the grievance company. It could be $5,000 to $10,000 out of my pocket. .... You should be able to go to the state and throw this out!"

Kai-Hong Tang of 22 Ridgecrest East said, "You accused us of not participating, but when Bob and others participate it falls on deaf ears ..... You have a problem! Many have pleaded and begged, but why should we participate if you're not listening."

Farley Baker told trustees that he has lived here since 1992 and had a 41% increase in the assessment on his 1,100 square foot home. He said, "There is a lot of anger here. Now I am just disappointed in you guys and in the system I participate in....
Take some responsibility here and find out what happened. I respect all of you. I love this place."

Bob Harrison said, "I have been outspoken. The Village still owes Ryan $40,000 and wants some answers from him."

Trustee Stern replied, "We all have a lot of angst about this. We prepared questions for Ryan and gave them to him. We feel your pain. We are all stakeholders and taxpayers and we are all very upset about what happened. We are handcuffed by the laws of NYS. We are all extraordinarily upset with this situation. If we can find a way to correct it, we will."

Harrison then lost control and started screaming at the Trustees, saying, "Did your assessment go up? You don't have pain. We're talking about pocketbooks and people who want to age in place. I move to void the 2016 revaluation."

Carl Finger attempted to interject to answer Harrison's call to void the reval and said, "If we take an illegal action and the other 4,000 people file a lawsuit against the village it will cost thousands to lose and we will be right back to where we started before."