Monday, April 22, 2013
Wednesday, March 27, 2013
Tuesday, February 26, 2013
Monday, February 25, 2013
Saturday, February 23, 2013
Saturday, February 2, 2013
Wednesday, January 16, 2013
Tuesday, December 18, 2012
Sunday, December 9, 2012
Saturday, December 1, 2012
Monday, November 26, 2012
Worcester's property valuation drops by $400M
By Nick Kotsopoulos TELEGRAM & GAZETTE STAFF
WORCESTER — The total assessed value of all taxable property in the city has lost most of its gains from the previous year, having dropped by nearly $400 million.
City Assessor William J. Ford said his office has determined total valuation for this fiscal year is $10.9 billion. That is based on the assessor's opinion of value for all individual taxable properties as of Jan. 1, 2012.
In comparison, the total valuation for the previous fiscal year was $11.3 billion.
With the drop in Worcester's total valuation, there is a corresponding increase to its combined single tax rate; it has gone up by $1.70, to $22.03, according to Mr. Ford.
Since 1984, the City Council has set separate tax rates for residential and commercial-industrial properties, using tax classification to shift more of the tax burden from residential to business property owners. The combined single rate is what the city's tax rate would be without classification.
The council is to hold its annual tax classification hearing on Dec. 4 and set the tax rates for this fiscal year.
Under tax classification, the City Council this year can set the residential tax rate as low as $17.72 per $1,000 in valuation; that would translate into a commercial-industrial tax rate of $33.05, according to Mr. Ford.
The tax rates for last fiscal year were $16.98 for residential and $29.07 for commercial-industrial properties.
It is the fourth time in the last five years that the city's total valuation has either dropped or held steady.
The only time it increased during that time was last fiscal year when a comprehensive revaluation of all taxable properties was undertaken.
That year, Worcester's total assessed valuation increased by roughly $420 million, but with this year's drop in property values the total valuation is now only about $22 million more than what it was two years ago.
The high water mark for the city's total valuation came in 2008, when it reached $12.7 billion; the city is now $1.8 billion below that figure.
Worcester's tax base is now made up of 48,518 pieces of taxable property, compared to 48,349 a year ago. It includes, in part: 24,931 single-family homes; 4,953 condominiums; 3,602 two-family; 4,884 three-family; 1,227apartment buildings (four units and more); 2,232 commercial and 593 industrial properties.
Residential property accounts for 72 percent of the tax base, while business properties make up the other 28 percent, according to the assessor.
WORCESTER — The total assessed value of all taxable property in the city has lost most of its gains from the previous year, having dropped by nearly $400 million.
City Assessor William J. Ford said his office has determined total valuation for this fiscal year is $10.9 billion. That is based on the assessor's opinion of value for all individual taxable properties as of Jan. 1, 2012.
In comparison, the total valuation for the previous fiscal year was $11.3 billion.
With the drop in Worcester's total valuation, there is a corresponding increase to its combined single tax rate; it has gone up by $1.70, to $22.03, according to Mr. Ford.
Since 1984, the City Council has set separate tax rates for residential and commercial-industrial properties, using tax classification to shift more of the tax burden from residential to business property owners. The combined single rate is what the city's tax rate would be without classification.
The council is to hold its annual tax classification hearing on Dec. 4 and set the tax rates for this fiscal year.
Under tax classification, the City Council this year can set the residential tax rate as low as $17.72 per $1,000 in valuation; that would translate into a commercial-industrial tax rate of $33.05, according to Mr. Ford.
The tax rates for last fiscal year were $16.98 for residential and $29.07 for commercial-industrial properties.
It is the fourth time in the last five years that the city's total valuation has either dropped or held steady.
The only time it increased during that time was last fiscal year when a comprehensive revaluation of all taxable properties was undertaken.
That year, Worcester's total assessed valuation increased by roughly $420 million, but with this year's drop in property values the total valuation is now only about $22 million more than what it was two years ago.
The high water mark for the city's total valuation came in 2008, when it reached $12.7 billion; the city is now $1.8 billion below that figure.
Worcester's tax base is now made up of 48,518 pieces of taxable property, compared to 48,349 a year ago. It includes, in part: 24,931 single-family homes; 4,953 condominiums; 3,602 two-family; 4,884 three-family; 1,227apartment buildings (four units and more); 2,232 commercial and 593 industrial properties.
Residential property accounts for 72 percent of the tax base, while business properties make up the other 28 percent, according to the assessor.
Thursday, November 15, 2012
Thursday, October 11, 2012
Worcester Mag - Boxed out
by Walter Bird Jr., Oct 10, 2012
Larry Worrick was one of more than 2,000 homeowners or businesses filing a tax abatement request this year. He took the step believing he had been overcharged on his property taxes, figuring he would either get approved or denied. What he didn’t count on was getting both.
Worrick says he was initially notified his abatement had been denied. He was later told it had been approved. In between being denied and approved, Worrick says he had to battle the assessor’s office to get to the bottom of the snafu. It wasn’t until last week, he says, that he was told a check for $601 would be in the mail. Assessor Bill Ford says the whole thing was an honest mistake—that the person who assessed Worrick’s property checked the wrong box on his form.
Mistake or no, Worrick is irate and says he believes there is “something rotten in the assessor’s office.” He believes, had he not checked for himself, he would not have learned he was owed money. He says he is just as upset at how he claims officials have treated him as he fought to determine why he was denied abatement in the first place.
“I’d like an investigation of the whole department,” says Worrick, who claims he sent letters to all city councilors and the city manager. “I think it’s corrupt.”
That, says Ford, is ridiculous.
“Where is the corruption? Mistakes can occur, but that’s not corruption,” says Ford.
It all started, according to Worrick, when his property taxes increased by $601. He says he requested an assessment of his house, which was done near the end of June. He filed an abatement request on the basis of that assessment, believing his house had been overvalued. On Aug. 10, Worrick says, he was notified his request had been denied. At that point, he asked for a copy of the assessor’s report and was given what is called a field card. The card listed the current value of the house as $139,800—a decrease from the 2011 assessed value of $149,400. Worrick says he could not understand why the property value would go down, but he would be denied abatement.
“I spoke to Mr. Ford,” says Worrick, explaining that he was helped during the process by real estate agent Joan Crowell. She has sent out emails under the heading “AWARE,” or Accurate Worcester Assessments on Real Estate, detailing Worrick’s situation, but never naming him. Crowell says she helped other applicants file abatement requests.
“He was just sugar-coating everything,” Worrick says of Ford. “I pulled out the field report. He got extremely upset.”
A short while later, on Thursday, Aug. 23, Worrick says he went to see Ford at his office. The assessor was on the phone for over an hour and Worrick eventually left. He says he sent a letter to Chief Financial Officer Tom Zidelis and City Manager Mike O’Brien. Zidelis called him on Aug. 30 right before the Labor Day weekend, Worrick says, telling him he would call again the following Tuesday.
“He didn’t call,” Worrick says. “I called his office several times, and he never called back. Mr. O’Brien didn’t even have the decency to reply.”
In the meantime, Worrick says he mailed a letter on Oct. 1 to all city councilors. He says Councilor Rick Rushton called him and said he would speak with Zidelis. On Wednesday, Oct. 3, according to Worrick, Zidelis called him and said the city owed him an apology and that his abatement had been approved.
“Of 11 members of the council, [Rushton] is the only one who came through,” Worrick says.
Ford acknowledges a denial notice was sent to Worrick. That form informed Worrick his request had been denied by a vote of assessors. Ford says there was no vote because there is no three-person board—most large cities, he says, do not have them. The denial notice is a standard state form, Ford says, and was only sent because of an error made on the original application for abatement. At the bottom of the application, under the section for assessor’s use only, there are three boxes: Granted, Denied and Deemed Denied. A checkmark was inadvertently placed in the Denied box, Ford says, adding Worrick’s is the only case where that happened this year.
“It was a mistake,” he says, noting there are nearly 48,000 properties in the city.
“When you’re dealing with properties at the numbers we were doing, mistakes happen. We have a staff of nine people. Understand that accidents will happen.”
Ford’s office received 2,395 qualified abatement applications this year. Of them 1,112 were approved. When a denial is made, a crosscheck is performed to ensure it was accurate, he says. Ford disputes Worrick’s contention that no one would have noticed the error, saying: “We would have found it when we did the cross-check. We did the first two batches of denials before we did a cross-check, so he was sent a denial notice.”
Ford says Worrick should get his abatement check within four to six weeks. The checks are sent out of the treasurer’s office.
Larry Worrick was one of more than 2,000 homeowners or businesses filing a tax abatement request this year. He took the step believing he had been overcharged on his property taxes, figuring he would either get approved or denied. What he didn’t count on was getting both.
Worrick says he was initially notified his abatement had been denied. He was later told it had been approved. In between being denied and approved, Worrick says he had to battle the assessor’s office to get to the bottom of the snafu. It wasn’t until last week, he says, that he was told a check for $601 would be in the mail. Assessor Bill Ford says the whole thing was an honest mistake—that the person who assessed Worrick’s property checked the wrong box on his form.
Mistake or no, Worrick is irate and says he believes there is “something rotten in the assessor’s office.” He believes, had he not checked for himself, he would not have learned he was owed money. He says he is just as upset at how he claims officials have treated him as he fought to determine why he was denied abatement in the first place.
“I’d like an investigation of the whole department,” says Worrick, who claims he sent letters to all city councilors and the city manager. “I think it’s corrupt.”
That, says Ford, is ridiculous.
“Where is the corruption? Mistakes can occur, but that’s not corruption,” says Ford.
It all started, according to Worrick, when his property taxes increased by $601. He says he requested an assessment of his house, which was done near the end of June. He filed an abatement request on the basis of that assessment, believing his house had been overvalued. On Aug. 10, Worrick says, he was notified his request had been denied. At that point, he asked for a copy of the assessor’s report and was given what is called a field card. The card listed the current value of the house as $139,800—a decrease from the 2011 assessed value of $149,400. Worrick says he could not understand why the property value would go down, but he would be denied abatement.
“I spoke to Mr. Ford,” says Worrick, explaining that he was helped during the process by real estate agent Joan Crowell. She has sent out emails under the heading “AWARE,” or Accurate Worcester Assessments on Real Estate, detailing Worrick’s situation, but never naming him. Crowell says she helped other applicants file abatement requests.
“He was just sugar-coating everything,” Worrick says of Ford. “I pulled out the field report. He got extremely upset.”
A short while later, on Thursday, Aug. 23, Worrick says he went to see Ford at his office. The assessor was on the phone for over an hour and Worrick eventually left. He says he sent a letter to Chief Financial Officer Tom Zidelis and City Manager Mike O’Brien. Zidelis called him on Aug. 30 right before the Labor Day weekend, Worrick says, telling him he would call again the following Tuesday.
“He didn’t call,” Worrick says. “I called his office several times, and he never called back. Mr. O’Brien didn’t even have the decency to reply.”
In the meantime, Worrick says he mailed a letter on Oct. 1 to all city councilors. He says Councilor Rick Rushton called him and said he would speak with Zidelis. On Wednesday, Oct. 3, according to Worrick, Zidelis called him and said the city owed him an apology and that his abatement had been approved.
“Of 11 members of the council, [Rushton] is the only one who came through,” Worrick says.
Ford acknowledges a denial notice was sent to Worrick. That form informed Worrick his request had been denied by a vote of assessors. Ford says there was no vote because there is no three-person board—most large cities, he says, do not have them. The denial notice is a standard state form, Ford says, and was only sent because of an error made on the original application for abatement. At the bottom of the application, under the section for assessor’s use only, there are three boxes: Granted, Denied and Deemed Denied. A checkmark was inadvertently placed in the Denied box, Ford says, adding Worrick’s is the only case where that happened this year.
“It was a mistake,” he says, noting there are nearly 48,000 properties in the city.
“When you’re dealing with properties at the numbers we were doing, mistakes happen. We have a staff of nine people. Understand that accidents will happen.”
Ford’s office received 2,395 qualified abatement applications this year. Of them 1,112 were approved. When a denial is made, a crosscheck is performed to ensure it was accurate, he says. Ford disputes Worrick’s contention that no one would have noticed the error, saying: “We would have found it when we did the cross-check. We did the first two batches of denials before we did a cross-check, so he was sent a denial notice.”
Ford says Worrick should get his abatement check within four to six weeks. The checks are sent out of the treasurer’s office.
Wednesday, October 10, 2012
GoLocalWorcester.com - City Bracing For Flood Of Tax Appeals
Adam Joseph Drici, GoLocalWorcester Contributor
The City Council approved the addition of a part-time Assistant City Solicitor last week to deal exclusively with the increased number of Appellate Tax Board cases expected after Worcester's real estate revaluation this year.
Nearly 2,400 tax abatements were filed this year, almost half of which were approved by City Assessor William Ford and his staff.
Ford said that his office did receive additional abatement applications, but they were all late filings received after the late June deadline. The City had 90 days, plus an additional 10 days under state law, to review and decide on the applications.
Filing With The Appellate Tax Board
Now that the City has worked through all the abatement filings and issued its approvals or denials, said Ford, property owners have 90 days to file with the state's Appellate Tax Board (ATB) if they still have issues with their final assessments.
The ATB is authorized by the Commonwealth to hold hearings and issue decisions on appeals for all state and local taxes, from property and real estate taxes to the sales taxes.
Filing with the board carries a fee that ranges from $10.00 for all property assessed at $20,000 or less to $100.00 for property with an assessed value between $100,000 and $1,000,00. Properties with assessed valuations in excess of $1,000,000 face a filing fee of $0.10 per $1,000 of assessed value with a minimum fee of $65.00 but not to exceed $5,000.
"I hate to see those people move forward with what they got assessed at," said Bill Breault, who sits on the Board of Directors at the Main South Community Development Corporation.
"I believe a lot of the businesses lawyered up, and they'll go to the state appellate board with theirs."
Some Worcester property owners have already begun the process.
George Valeri owns a commercial building at 26 Cambridge Street, which is home to a window company, an automotive repair company and a towing company. Valeri said the property's assessed value increased from $423,000 to $756,000 this year. An abatement later reduced the valuation by $30,000, but that was still too high for the property owner.
"It wasn't what I was looking for," said Valeri, the secretary of the Worcester Property Owners Association.
"If you do an income and expense analysis, it shows a value of about $300,000, and that's done by a third-party."
Valeri, who said he would be happy if his property was just returned to its old valuation, will not be hiring a lawyer and will instead represent himself for the ATB proceedings.
"This is nothing personal," he said. "It's survival."
Small Businesses Hit Hardest
Bill Vernon, the state director in Massachusetts for the National Federation of Independent Business, said the Commonwealth's dual tax rates for commercial and residential properties, first instituted through a ballot measure in the 1970s, already place an added burden on commercial property owners.
"When the valuation is off, that exacerbates the problem."
Worcester's fiscal year 2012 residential tax rate is $16.98 per $1,000 of assessed value. The city's commercial tax rate is $29.07 per $1,000 assessed valuation.
"Compared to some of their counterparts, it is lower," said Vernon.
In cities such as Lawrence and Holyoke, the commercial property tax rate is more than double the rate for residential properties.
Even though Worcester's commercial tax rate is on the low end of the spectrum, it still can take a toll on small businesses, especially if they see their property's valuation nearly double.
"What they're trying to do, frankly, is turn the property tax into an income tax," Vernon said.
But that plan can end up backfiring when the income generated by the commercial property cannot keep pace with its rising tax bill.
"What you get is less commercial property and less jobs and less economic activity."
The City Council approved the addition of a part-time Assistant City Solicitor last week to deal exclusively with the increased number of Appellate Tax Board cases expected after Worcester's real estate revaluation this year.
Nearly 2,400 tax abatements were filed this year, almost half of which were approved by City Assessor William Ford and his staff.
Ford said that his office did receive additional abatement applications, but they were all late filings received after the late June deadline. The City had 90 days, plus an additional 10 days under state law, to review and decide on the applications.
Filing With The Appellate Tax Board
Now that the City has worked through all the abatement filings and issued its approvals or denials, said Ford, property owners have 90 days to file with the state's Appellate Tax Board (ATB) if they still have issues with their final assessments.
The ATB is authorized by the Commonwealth to hold hearings and issue decisions on appeals for all state and local taxes, from property and real estate taxes to the sales taxes.
Filing with the board carries a fee that ranges from $10.00 for all property assessed at $20,000 or less to $100.00 for property with an assessed value between $100,000 and $1,000,00. Properties with assessed valuations in excess of $1,000,000 face a filing fee of $0.10 per $1,000 of assessed value with a minimum fee of $65.00 but not to exceed $5,000.
"I hate to see those people move forward with what they got assessed at," said Bill Breault, who sits on the Board of Directors at the Main South Community Development Corporation.
"I believe a lot of the businesses lawyered up, and they'll go to the state appellate board with theirs."
Some Worcester property owners have already begun the process.
George Valeri owns a commercial building at 26 Cambridge Street, which is home to a window company, an automotive repair company and a towing company. Valeri said the property's assessed value increased from $423,000 to $756,000 this year. An abatement later reduced the valuation by $30,000, but that was still too high for the property owner.
"It wasn't what I was looking for," said Valeri, the secretary of the Worcester Property Owners Association.
"If you do an income and expense analysis, it shows a value of about $300,000, and that's done by a third-party."
Valeri, who said he would be happy if his property was just returned to its old valuation, will not be hiring a lawyer and will instead represent himself for the ATB proceedings.
"This is nothing personal," he said. "It's survival."
Small Businesses Hit Hardest
Bill Vernon, the state director in Massachusetts for the National Federation of Independent Business, said the Commonwealth's dual tax rates for commercial and residential properties, first instituted through a ballot measure in the 1970s, already place an added burden on commercial property owners.
"When the valuation is off, that exacerbates the problem."
Worcester's fiscal year 2012 residential tax rate is $16.98 per $1,000 of assessed value. The city's commercial tax rate is $29.07 per $1,000 assessed valuation.
"Compared to some of their counterparts, it is lower," said Vernon.
In cities such as Lawrence and Holyoke, the commercial property tax rate is more than double the rate for residential properties.
Even though Worcester's commercial tax rate is on the low end of the spectrum, it still can take a toll on small businesses, especially if they see their property's valuation nearly double.
"What they're trying to do, frankly, is turn the property tax into an income tax," Vernon said.
But that plan can end up backfiring when the income generated by the commercial property cannot keep pace with its rising tax bill.
"What you get is less commercial property and less jobs and less economic activity."
Monday, October 8, 2012
T&G - Half of tax-cut requests granted
By Nick Kotsopoulos TELEGRAM & GAZETTE STAFF
WORCESTER — Roughly 46 percent of the real estate abatement applications filed for last fiscal year ended up being approved by city assessors.
According to City Assessor William J. Ford, 1,112 of the 2,395 abatement applications were granted and processed. That is the most since 2009, when 844 abatement requests, or roughly 47 percent of the applications filed, were approved.
He said the abatements totaled a little more than $3 million, which is about what the city had set aside to fund abatements and exemptions.
In comparison, 1,283 abatement applications were denied, he said.
Mr. Ford said city assessors were able to review within the three-month deadline set by state law all the abatement applications it received. In addition, the majorities of those properties were inspected, unless the homeowners refused the inspection or did not respond to the request.
He said his office had received additional abatement applications after the filing deadline in June, but state law prohibits review of those properties.
But the completion of the city’s review process does not mean the end of the appeal process.
Mr. Ford said property owners who are dissatisfied with the valuation determinations of the city’s Assessing Division have 90 days to file with the state Appellate Tax Board.
He said those commercial property owners who did not respond to the Section 38D Income and Expense requests as part of their abatement application with the city are not entitled to receive a review by the Appellate Tax Board.
The Massachusetts Appellate Tax Board is a quasi-judicial state agency designed to conduct hearings and render decisions on appeals of all types of state and local taxes, including property tax (both real estate and personal property), corporate excise, individual income tax, sale and use tax, and automobile and other excise taxes.
The most frequent type of appeal filed with the Appellate Tax Board is real estate tax appeals.
The filing fee to have a case heard by the Appellate Tax Board is based on the assessed valuation of the property.
If the assessed value is $20,000 or less, the filing fee is $10. If the assessed value is more than $20,000 and not in excess of $100,000, the filing fee is $50.
If the assessed value is more than $100,000 and not in excess of $999,999, the filing fee is $100.
Meanwhile, if the assessed valuation is $1 million or more, the filing fee is 10 cents per $1,000 of the assessed value, with a maximum filing fee of $5,000.
According to the Appellate Tax Board, taxpayers who claim their assessed property valuation is too high should be prepared to show that the fair market value of their property for last fiscal year is lower than the assessed value.
Because the assessed value of properties assigned by assessors is presumed by law to be valid, taxpayers bear the burden of proving that their property is overvalued.
In anticipation of increases in Appellate Tax Board cases, the City Council recently authorized the city manager to bolster the staffing in the city’s Law Department by adding a part-time assistant city solicitor position.
City Solicitor David M. Moore said the new position will be restricted to Appellate Tax Board cases.
He said given the expected volume of those cases, covering both commercial and residential property valuations, he felt it was best to obtain in-house expertise to reduce the potential expense of outside counsel.
WORCESTER — Roughly 46 percent of the real estate abatement applications filed for last fiscal year ended up being approved by city assessors.
According to City Assessor William J. Ford, 1,112 of the 2,395 abatement applications were granted and processed. That is the most since 2009, when 844 abatement requests, or roughly 47 percent of the applications filed, were approved.
He said the abatements totaled a little more than $3 million, which is about what the city had set aside to fund abatements and exemptions.
In comparison, 1,283 abatement applications were denied, he said.
Mr. Ford said city assessors were able to review within the three-month deadline set by state law all the abatement applications it received. In addition, the majorities of those properties were inspected, unless the homeowners refused the inspection or did not respond to the request.
He said his office had received additional abatement applications after the filing deadline in June, but state law prohibits review of those properties.
But the completion of the city’s review process does not mean the end of the appeal process.
Mr. Ford said property owners who are dissatisfied with the valuation determinations of the city’s Assessing Division have 90 days to file with the state Appellate Tax Board.
He said those commercial property owners who did not respond to the Section 38D Income and Expense requests as part of their abatement application with the city are not entitled to receive a review by the Appellate Tax Board.
The Massachusetts Appellate Tax Board is a quasi-judicial state agency designed to conduct hearings and render decisions on appeals of all types of state and local taxes, including property tax (both real estate and personal property), corporate excise, individual income tax, sale and use tax, and automobile and other excise taxes.
The most frequent type of appeal filed with the Appellate Tax Board is real estate tax appeals.
The filing fee to have a case heard by the Appellate Tax Board is based on the assessed valuation of the property.
If the assessed value is $20,000 or less, the filing fee is $10. If the assessed value is more than $20,000 and not in excess of $100,000, the filing fee is $50.
If the assessed value is more than $100,000 and not in excess of $999,999, the filing fee is $100.
Meanwhile, if the assessed valuation is $1 million or more, the filing fee is 10 cents per $1,000 of the assessed value, with a maximum filing fee of $5,000.
According to the Appellate Tax Board, taxpayers who claim their assessed property valuation is too high should be prepared to show that the fair market value of their property for last fiscal year is lower than the assessed value.
Because the assessed value of properties assigned by assessors is presumed by law to be valid, taxpayers bear the burden of proving that their property is overvalued.
In anticipation of increases in Appellate Tax Board cases, the City Council recently authorized the city manager to bolster the staffing in the city’s Law Department by adding a part-time assistant city solicitor position.
City Solicitor David M. Moore said the new position will be restricted to Appellate Tax Board cases.
He said given the expected volume of those cases, covering both commercial and residential property valuations, he felt it was best to obtain in-house expertise to reduce the potential expense of outside counsel.
Saturday, October 6, 2012
Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Monday, October 1, 2012
Wednesday, September 19, 2012
Monday, September 3, 2012
T&G - Assessors confident of closing requests
By Nick Kotsopoulos TELEGRAM & GAZETTE STAFF
WORCESTER — City assessors have acted on more than half of the 2,395 real estate abatement applications that were filed for last fiscal year, and have already inspected the properties of roughly 86 percent of the total applications.
They remain confident they will be able to complete their inspections and reviews of each property in the time required by law.
City Assessor William J. Ford said assessors had inspected 2,065 properties through Wednesday, and another 100 inspections have been scheduled.
Of the inspected properties, 1,334 have been reviewed. About half of those abatement applications have been approved, and the assessments for those properties were lowered.
Mr. Ford said 654 abatements were granted and processed, totaling about $1.4 million, while 670 requests have been denied. He said the remaining 10 are still being reviewed by staff for final determination.
The percentage of abatement applications that have been approved compared to those that have been denied has been pretty consistent since assessors began reviewing the abatement applications in June.
Historically, abatement approval rates don’t often run more than 50 percent.
State law requires the assessor to act on abatement applications within 90 days — the filing deadline was June 25 — and then notify each property owner of the determination within 10 days.
Mr. Ford said 190 commercial properties and 140 residential properties have yet to be inspected. He said those properties will be inspected and reviewed with current in-house staff in the time required by law.
The city has set aside $3 million to fund abatements and exemptions and has gone through slightly less than half of that amount.
There was a spike in abatement applications last fiscal year, because many business properties were hit with major increases in their assessments, which, in turn, caused their tax bills to skyrocket.
In comparison, residential property assessments dropped 3.8 percent, on average, compared with the previous year.
The assessed valuations for many of Worcester’s 2,278 commercial parcels went up by as much as 40 percent to 100 percent, while assessments for 174 commercial properties increased by more than 100 percent.
Meanwhile, of the 598 industrial properties in the city, 101 properties shot up 40 percent to 100 percent, while valuations of 60 more than doubled.
While assessors have until Sept. 25 to act on all abatement applications, the process will not end then. Those taxpayers whose abatement requests were denied by the assessor will then have until Dec. 25 to file an appeal with the state Appellate Tax Board.
As a result, the number of those appeals may not be known until early January, and then the process before the Appellate Tax Board could be a long, drawn-out one.
WORCESTER — City assessors have acted on more than half of the 2,395 real estate abatement applications that were filed for last fiscal year, and have already inspected the properties of roughly 86 percent of the total applications.
They remain confident they will be able to complete their inspections and reviews of each property in the time required by law.
City Assessor William J. Ford said assessors had inspected 2,065 properties through Wednesday, and another 100 inspections have been scheduled.
Of the inspected properties, 1,334 have been reviewed. About half of those abatement applications have been approved, and the assessments for those properties were lowered.
Mr. Ford said 654 abatements were granted and processed, totaling about $1.4 million, while 670 requests have been denied. He said the remaining 10 are still being reviewed by staff for final determination.
The percentage of abatement applications that have been approved compared to those that have been denied has been pretty consistent since assessors began reviewing the abatement applications in June.
Historically, abatement approval rates don’t often run more than 50 percent.
State law requires the assessor to act on abatement applications within 90 days — the filing deadline was June 25 — and then notify each property owner of the determination within 10 days.
Mr. Ford said 190 commercial properties and 140 residential properties have yet to be inspected. He said those properties will be inspected and reviewed with current in-house staff in the time required by law.
The city has set aside $3 million to fund abatements and exemptions and has gone through slightly less than half of that amount.
There was a spike in abatement applications last fiscal year, because many business properties were hit with major increases in their assessments, which, in turn, caused their tax bills to skyrocket.
In comparison, residential property assessments dropped 3.8 percent, on average, compared with the previous year.
The assessed valuations for many of Worcester’s 2,278 commercial parcels went up by as much as 40 percent to 100 percent, while assessments for 174 commercial properties increased by more than 100 percent.
Meanwhile, of the 598 industrial properties in the city, 101 properties shot up 40 percent to 100 percent, while valuations of 60 more than doubled.
While assessors have until Sept. 25 to act on all abatement applications, the process will not end then. Those taxpayers whose abatement requests were denied by the assessor will then have until Dec. 25 to file an appeal with the state Appellate Tax Board.
As a result, the number of those appeals may not be known until early January, and then the process before the Appellate Tax Board could be a long, drawn-out one.
Wednesday, August 29, 2012
Thursday, August 23, 2012
Thursday, August 2, 2012
Womag - City Assessor: Palladium owners should know its value
The way Worcester assessor Bill Ford sees it, if you own property, you should know what it is worth. He believes that philosophy should apply to the owners of the beleaguered Palladium – home to a thriving heavy metal music scene, but in danger of being silenced permanently.
The city this year valued the property at 255-261 Main St. – which in addition to the Palladium includes office and retail space – at $2.3 million. That was slightly more than triple its assessed value of $688,700 in 2011. The tax bill more than doubled, from $23,863.46 in fiscal 2011 to $65,887.16 in fiscal 2012. Local attorneys John Fischer and John Sousa bought the building in 1990 for $1.3 million. Three years later, it was assessed at just $391,600. Until this year, it had been assessed two straight years at $688,700.
“In my opinion, they should know the value of their property,” Ford says. “If you bought something for $1.3 million, and it is assessed at $600,000, wouldn’t you think that was strange?”
Fischer doesn’t think so. He and Sousa have appealed their assessment, filing for an abatement of $494,904. No decision has been made yet on that request. At the same time, Fischer has made it clear he thinks the price tag is too steep. He and Sousa have openly questioned the future of the Palladium, going so far as to threaten demolition. Just last week, Fischer brought forward a request for a waiver from the city’s demolition delay ordinance. That measure requires a 12-month wait before historical property can be razed. The Historical Commission unanimously denied the waiver, ensuring the building will remain in place – for now.
As for why he never took issue with earlier, much lower assessments of his property, Fischer says, “It’s not uncommon for properties to be valued less than what they were purchased for.” Some have questioned how much the owners did to increase the value of the building, which Fischer admits is in need of “repairs and upgrades.” Ford raised that issue directly, saying, “The fact is the property owners did not properly maintain that building. (They) allowed the building to deteriorate, but now they say, ‘Wait. I have to tear the building down because you’re taxing me.’”
Worcester officials have made no secret of their opposition to any attempt to destroy the building and the Palladium. The Historical Commission’s vote provided added emphasis and followed a strong recommendation from Joel Fontane, director of the city’s Planning and Regulatory Services Division. He advised members to deny the waiver, saying, “Demolition of this historically significant structure would be detrimental to the architectural and historical resources of the city … and because the applicant has not demonstrated undue economic hardship.”
Mayor Joseph Petty has also taken a stance on the issue, telling Worcester Mag in a statement: “The Palladium is a unique destination and cultural venue in our city and it is our desire that this structure not be demolished.” He declined further comment “until the city assessor makes his final decision” on the abatement request.
The abatement, according to Chris Besaw, is “the key.” Besaw is general manager for Mass Concerts, which has booked shows at the Palladium since 1990. John Peters owns Mass Concerts, a major promoter of shows in arenas throughout New England. How big? In November 2000, under Peters’ guidance, Mass Concerts booked Prince at the Palladium, when the pop icon was performing mostly in theaters and small arenas. Fischer admits the Palladium would be a barren place without the promoter.
“Mass Concerts has been there for 12 years,” says Fischer. “He’s the person who has been keeping the place alive all that time.”
The next big show scheduled at the Palladium is Summer Slaughter Tour North America 2012 on Aug. 10. It will no doubt be music to the ears of heavy metal fans and supporters who do not want to see the building torn down. Among them is Jonathan Noble, a Worcesterite known for his participation in the grassroots movement, Occupy Worcester.
“We don’t have the most vibrant reputation outside Worcester,” Noble says. “What we are known for is pretty much being a nexus of the heavy metal scene.”
Noble and others can take some comfort in knowing the Palladium won’t be going anywhere in the immediate future. Fischer himself isn’t quite ready to write the building’s epitaph. “There’s more than a 50-50 chance it will be there next year at this time,” he says. “We’re going to keep it alive for the next year. Hopefully, word will get out and someone will see there’s a hell of an opportunity there.”
The city this year valued the property at 255-261 Main St. – which in addition to the Palladium includes office and retail space – at $2.3 million. That was slightly more than triple its assessed value of $688,700 in 2011. The tax bill more than doubled, from $23,863.46 in fiscal 2011 to $65,887.16 in fiscal 2012. Local attorneys John Fischer and John Sousa bought the building in 1990 for $1.3 million. Three years later, it was assessed at just $391,600. Until this year, it had been assessed two straight years at $688,700.
“In my opinion, they should know the value of their property,” Ford says. “If you bought something for $1.3 million, and it is assessed at $600,000, wouldn’t you think that was strange?”
Fischer doesn’t think so. He and Sousa have appealed their assessment, filing for an abatement of $494,904. No decision has been made yet on that request. At the same time, Fischer has made it clear he thinks the price tag is too steep. He and Sousa have openly questioned the future of the Palladium, going so far as to threaten demolition. Just last week, Fischer brought forward a request for a waiver from the city’s demolition delay ordinance. That measure requires a 12-month wait before historical property can be razed. The Historical Commission unanimously denied the waiver, ensuring the building will remain in place – for now.
As for why he never took issue with earlier, much lower assessments of his property, Fischer says, “It’s not uncommon for properties to be valued less than what they were purchased for.” Some have questioned how much the owners did to increase the value of the building, which Fischer admits is in need of “repairs and upgrades.” Ford raised that issue directly, saying, “The fact is the property owners did not properly maintain that building. (They) allowed the building to deteriorate, but now they say, ‘Wait. I have to tear the building down because you’re taxing me.’”
Worcester officials have made no secret of their opposition to any attempt to destroy the building and the Palladium. The Historical Commission’s vote provided added emphasis and followed a strong recommendation from Joel Fontane, director of the city’s Planning and Regulatory Services Division. He advised members to deny the waiver, saying, “Demolition of this historically significant structure would be detrimental to the architectural and historical resources of the city … and because the applicant has not demonstrated undue economic hardship.”
Mayor Joseph Petty has also taken a stance on the issue, telling Worcester Mag in a statement: “The Palladium is a unique destination and cultural venue in our city and it is our desire that this structure not be demolished.” He declined further comment “until the city assessor makes his final decision” on the abatement request.
The abatement, according to Chris Besaw, is “the key.” Besaw is general manager for Mass Concerts, which has booked shows at the Palladium since 1990. John Peters owns Mass Concerts, a major promoter of shows in arenas throughout New England. How big? In November 2000, under Peters’ guidance, Mass Concerts booked Prince at the Palladium, when the pop icon was performing mostly in theaters and small arenas. Fischer admits the Palladium would be a barren place without the promoter.
“Mass Concerts has been there for 12 years,” says Fischer. “He’s the person who has been keeping the place alive all that time.”
The next big show scheduled at the Palladium is Summer Slaughter Tour North America 2012 on Aug. 10. It will no doubt be music to the ears of heavy metal fans and supporters who do not want to see the building torn down. Among them is Jonathan Noble, a Worcesterite known for his participation in the grassroots movement, Occupy Worcester.
“We don’t have the most vibrant reputation outside Worcester,” Noble says. “What we are known for is pretty much being a nexus of the heavy metal scene.”
Noble and others can take some comfort in knowing the Palladium won’t be going anywhere in the immediate future. Fischer himself isn’t quite ready to write the building’s epitaph. “There’s more than a 50-50 chance it will be there next year at this time,” he says. “We’re going to keep it alive for the next year. Hopefully, word will get out and someone will see there’s a hell of an opportunity there.”
Monday, July 30, 2012
Telegram: Dust yet to settle on abatements
By Nick Kotsopoulos Politics and the City
The way things are trending, those Worcester property owners waiting to hear from city assessors about their real estate abatement applications may have more than a puncher’s chance of getting their property assessment knocked down a bit.
That’s because 55 percent of the abatement applications reviewed and acted on by city assessors through last Monday have been approved.
According to City Assessor William J. Ford, 383 abatements have been granted and processed, returning $483,927 to taxpayers. Another 14 abatement applications have been approved and are being processed, he said.
In comparison, 323 abatement applications have been denied.
Mind you, 2,395 property owners have challenged their fiscal 2012 assessments by filing for abatements and city assessors have only acted on roughly 30 percent of those applications. But the fact that 55 percent have been approved so far has to provide some hope to those still waiting to hear back on their challenge.
That’s not to say that the odds are in their favor but, hey, while a puncher’s chance may not be much, it is certainly better than no chance at all, as has been the case in other years.
Historically, abatement approval rates don’t often run more than 50 percent.
In 2010, for instance, only 34 percent (483) of the 1,432 abatement applications filed were approved, while in 2009 roughly 47 percent (844) of the 1,784 applications were granted, and in 2008 nearly 43 percent (406) of the 952 applications were approved, according to the assessor’s office.
Perhaps a better apples-to-apples comparison would be other triennial revaluation years such as this — those years when the city conducts full field reviews in updating the valuations of all properties.
In 2007, the city’s last triennial revaluation, 58 percent (342) of the 587 abatement applications were approved. In other triennial revaluation years, the approval rate was close to 50 percent; in 2004, 47 percent (196) of the 414 applications were approved, while in 2001, 49 percent (330) of the 679 applications were granted.
Of the 720 abatement applications that have been reviewed and acted on, a majority of them have dealt with residential properties (559), while far fewer commercial, industrial or apartment properties (148) and mixed-use properties (13) have been taken up
Wait until assessors act on the bulk of the 780 abatement applications that were filed for the latter two classes of properties; that is when things should really get interesting.
Why?
Because many of those properties were hit with major increases in their assessments, which, in turn, have caused their tax bills to skyrocket. In comparison, residential property assessments dropped 3.8 percent, on average, compared with the previous year.
Of Worcester’s 2,278 commercial parcels, the assessed valuations of 540 of them went up by 40 percent to 100 percent, while the assessment for 174 commercial properties increased by more than 100 percent.
Meanwhile, of the 598 industrial properties in the city, 101 properties shot up 40 percent to 100 percent, while 60 had their valuations more than doubled.
Just along the business corridor on the Southwest Cutoff, no fewer than 28 business property owners have filed for abatements, and in many instances their property assessments nearly doubled or more.
A business property at 37-69 Southwest Cutoff, for instance, saw its assessment jacked up from $2.1 million to $4 million, for an increase of 92 percent.
Another property at 126 Southwest Cutoff saw its assessed valuation skyrocket from $196,200 to $1 million, for a whopping 433 percent increase, while another business at 182 Southwest Cutoff saw its assessed valuation jump 106 percent, from $347,600 to $717,500.
The Southwest Cutoff isn’t the only major commercial corridor in which a number of business owners have filed abatement applications. The same is true along Main Street, Park Avenue, Shrewsbury Street, Southbridge Street, Grafton Street and Chandler Street.
In the downtown, many owners of office buildings have also filed for abatements, as have eight of the 11 major property owners on Front Street.
Many of the abatement applications for those properties have yet to be taken up by the assessors because they were submitted just before the June 25 filing deadline. It will be interesting, though, to see the outcome of all those abatement applications, because some pretty significant bucks will be at stake
The fact that the city has set aside $3 million to fund abatements and exemptions is an indication that city officials are well aware of what is involved. That is underscored by the fact that in the past 11 years the most the city ever paid out on abatements and exemptions was $917,004 in fiscal 2007, followed by $708,649 in fiscal 2009 and $702,389 in fiscal 2011.
Most other years, the city spent less than $500,000 on abatements and exemptions.
City assessors have until Sept. 25 to act on all abatement applications, but that doesn’t mean the process will end then.
Those taxpayers whose abatement requests were denied by the assessor will then have until Dec. 25 to file an appeal with the state Appellate Tax Board.
As a result, the city won’t really know the full impact of those appeals until sometime in January, and then the process before the Appellate Tax Board could be a long, drawn-out one.
In other words, it could be months, even years, before the dust settles on all the challenges to last fiscal year’s new property assessments.
The way things are trending, those Worcester property owners waiting to hear from city assessors about their real estate abatement applications may have more than a puncher’s chance of getting their property assessment knocked down a bit.
That’s because 55 percent of the abatement applications reviewed and acted on by city assessors through last Monday have been approved.
According to City Assessor William J. Ford, 383 abatements have been granted and processed, returning $483,927 to taxpayers. Another 14 abatement applications have been approved and are being processed, he said.
In comparison, 323 abatement applications have been denied.
Mind you, 2,395 property owners have challenged their fiscal 2012 assessments by filing for abatements and city assessors have only acted on roughly 30 percent of those applications. But the fact that 55 percent have been approved so far has to provide some hope to those still waiting to hear back on their challenge.
That’s not to say that the odds are in their favor but, hey, while a puncher’s chance may not be much, it is certainly better than no chance at all, as has been the case in other years.
Historically, abatement approval rates don’t often run more than 50 percent.
In 2010, for instance, only 34 percent (483) of the 1,432 abatement applications filed were approved, while in 2009 roughly 47 percent (844) of the 1,784 applications were granted, and in 2008 nearly 43 percent (406) of the 952 applications were approved, according to the assessor’s office.
Perhaps a better apples-to-apples comparison would be other triennial revaluation years such as this — those years when the city conducts full field reviews in updating the valuations of all properties.
In 2007, the city’s last triennial revaluation, 58 percent (342) of the 587 abatement applications were approved. In other triennial revaluation years, the approval rate was close to 50 percent; in 2004, 47 percent (196) of the 414 applications were approved, while in 2001, 49 percent (330) of the 679 applications were granted.
Of the 720 abatement applications that have been reviewed and acted on, a majority of them have dealt with residential properties (559), while far fewer commercial, industrial or apartment properties (148) and mixed-use properties (13) have been taken up
Wait until assessors act on the bulk of the 780 abatement applications that were filed for the latter two classes of properties; that is when things should really get interesting.
Why?
Because many of those properties were hit with major increases in their assessments, which, in turn, have caused their tax bills to skyrocket. In comparison, residential property assessments dropped 3.8 percent, on average, compared with the previous year.
Of Worcester’s 2,278 commercial parcels, the assessed valuations of 540 of them went up by 40 percent to 100 percent, while the assessment for 174 commercial properties increased by more than 100 percent.
Meanwhile, of the 598 industrial properties in the city, 101 properties shot up 40 percent to 100 percent, while 60 had their valuations more than doubled.
Just along the business corridor on the Southwest Cutoff, no fewer than 28 business property owners have filed for abatements, and in many instances their property assessments nearly doubled or more.
A business property at 37-69 Southwest Cutoff, for instance, saw its assessment jacked up from $2.1 million to $4 million, for an increase of 92 percent.
Another property at 126 Southwest Cutoff saw its assessed valuation skyrocket from $196,200 to $1 million, for a whopping 433 percent increase, while another business at 182 Southwest Cutoff saw its assessed valuation jump 106 percent, from $347,600 to $717,500.
The Southwest Cutoff isn’t the only major commercial corridor in which a number of business owners have filed abatement applications. The same is true along Main Street, Park Avenue, Shrewsbury Street, Southbridge Street, Grafton Street and Chandler Street.
In the downtown, many owners of office buildings have also filed for abatements, as have eight of the 11 major property owners on Front Street.
Many of the abatement applications for those properties have yet to be taken up by the assessors because they were submitted just before the June 25 filing deadline. It will be interesting, though, to see the outcome of all those abatement applications, because some pretty significant bucks will be at stake
The fact that the city has set aside $3 million to fund abatements and exemptions is an indication that city officials are well aware of what is involved. That is underscored by the fact that in the past 11 years the most the city ever paid out on abatements and exemptions was $917,004 in fiscal 2007, followed by $708,649 in fiscal 2009 and $702,389 in fiscal 2011.
Most other years, the city spent less than $500,000 on abatements and exemptions.
City assessors have until Sept. 25 to act on all abatement applications, but that doesn’t mean the process will end then.
Those taxpayers whose abatement requests were denied by the assessor will then have until Dec. 25 to file an appeal with the state Appellate Tax Board.
As a result, the city won’t really know the full impact of those appeals until sometime in January, and then the process before the Appellate Tax Board could be a long, drawn-out one.
In other words, it could be months, even years, before the dust settles on all the challenges to last fiscal year’s new property assessments.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)