A number of large landowners in the Town of Bethlehem staged a protest last week to speak out against the recent townwide reassessments.
The protest was held Thursday, April 17, outside of Milestone Restaurant in Glenmont. The location and time was chosen to coincide with the Bethlehem Democratic Committee’s annual Jefferson-Jackson Day Fundraiser.
“We would like to send a message that the community at large benefits from all of the green space and viewshed that the Town Board constantly talks about, and the jump in assessments on open land is just so sudden and so unfair,” said resident Keith Wiggand, who was acting as spokesman for the group.
The Town Board opted to do a full reassessment last spring to ensure all property was assessed at full market value. The last reassessment was done in 2006, and although they are not required, the state recommends one is done every four years.
Preliminary assessments were sent out in March. A number of residents are now going through preliminary hearings with the firm that did the work, GAR Associates, to possibly get their assessments lowered before going to Grievance Day, which is scheduled for May 27.
Town Supervisor John Clarkson said the project wasn’t done to bring the town more revenue but to shift some of what residents are paying onto commercial property owners. He said the assessment will benefit the vast majority of homeowners, who should see their taxes stay the same or decrease.
Acting Town Assessor Laurie Lamberstan said she recently found out vacant land was not reassessed in 2006, which was not in compliance with state requirements.
Wiggand said the group of landowners decided to hold the protest because they did not feel their concerns were heard at the last Town Board meeting.
“Some parcels’ assessments are going up over 1,000 percent,” said Wiggand. “How are those people going to pay their taxes when the time comes?”
Some landowners said they were mad the town didn’t do more to reach out to them about the assessments before they were mailed out. Others were unhappy with the whole process.
Resident Glenn Lasher, who owns about 75 acres east of Route 9W, said his assessment increased by more than 200 percent.
“About 25 acres is steep slope, gullies, ravines and flood plains,” Lasher said. “GAR just took a flat map and decided everything was going to be taxed the same.”
Lasher said he wished a representative had walked his land before the preliminary assessment was mailed. GAR representatives said not every piece of property was walked because of time.
“You can’t just assess land looking at it from the road or a regular map. This company is supposed to be one that does assessments all the time for municipalities, and they didn’t have the wherewithal to get a topographical map or look at satellite images,” Lasher claimed. “I found it relatively easy to go to Cornell Cooperative Extension to their Soil and Water Conservation Office, and in 15 minutes, I walked out of there with the maps I needed.”
Lasher said he went through the preliminary hearing process with GAR Associates and is now waiting for the results.
Town officials are encouraging residents to go through the preliminary hearing and grievance process if they feel it is warranted.
“We certainly heard a lot of these same people’s comments at the Town Board meeting,” said Town Board member and Democratic Chairman Jeffrey Kuhn. “We tried to talk through the process, explain the process and listen to their concerns. We tried to address the problem and learn about what tools were at our disposal to help.”
Kuhn said he sympathizes with residents, but it was unfortunate they chose to protest the Democratic event because the assessments weren’t suppose to be a political issue. He did not feel the assessments had anything to do with the Democratic Party per se.
“A more appropriate forum to have these discussions is at the Town Board,” said Kuhn.
Wiggand said the landowner group wants the town to hold off on implementing the reassessment for one year. He said this could possibly give the town time to come up with a vacant land tax credit, similar to the one in Clifton Park.
A possible tax deduction for vacant land was recently suggested by the Open Space Technical Advisory Group, if private landowners were willing to conserve open space for a determined number of years and were not eligible for other deductions. At the time, some residents had expressed concerns that if deductions were granted or land trusts created, some would not be paying their fair share.
Both Kuhn and Clarkson said they would be willing to look into the tax credits, but a decision would need to be made by the Town Board.
“Right now, all of my land is up for sale,” said Wiggand. “It’s up for sale, and I plan to log every piece I can before it’s sold, which is a shame because it will be the community’s loss.”
Clarkson said most agricultural property used for farming will not be seeing any tax increase because of agricultural exemptions.
“Vacant land held for investment must be taxed at value in-use, and that is going to cause some increases, but right now we have no other alternative legally,” said Clarkson. “In virtually every case, that land is being assessed at a value far below what it would sell for on the open market. That’s because we don’t tax it like it will be subdivided, but tax it as what it is.”