To the Editor:

I spent some time watching the Aug. 23 hearing on the equalization rate determination for the town of Guilderland. In fact, I viewed it twice. I also had email conversation with Michael Coles who represented the town of Scribo at that hearing.

I then did some research obtaining the commercial sales from the town of Guilderland online as well as obtaining a year’s worth of commercial sales from the assessor in the town of Colonie. I also had an email conversation with G. Stephen Beals Jr. of the State Board of Real Property Tax Services.

There were 23 commercial sales in the town of Guilderland from July 1, 2013 to June 30, 2016, according to the assessor’s website. There were 50 commercial sales in the town of Colonie from July 1, 2015 to June 30, 2016, according to the list provided to me by Colonie’s assessor, Ron Monfils.

The town of Guilderland’s residential assessment ratio for the year 2017 is 84.26. The town of Guilderland equalization rate is 75.58. The town of Colonie’s residential assessment ratio is 57.38. The town of Colonie’s equalization rate is 66.50.

Why the difference between one neighboring town and another? The difference is in the level of commercial assessments.

The 23 commercial sales in the town of Guilderland range from .2003  (commercial assessment ratio) to 1.95. The total assessed values for these 23 sales is $12,971,700. The total sales prices for these 23 sales is $25,560,000. Dividing the assessed value into the sales price yields a percentage of .5075.

There is a major outlier in this set, which is the Sept. 27, 2013 sale at 3 Mercycare for $9,110,000 while being assessed for $2,678,000. Setting this sale aside, you have an assessed value-to-sales price ratio for the remaining 22 sales of .62576.

If you take a mean assessed value to sales price ratio of the 22 remaining sales, you have a ratio of .6579, which is similar to the .62576 mentioned above. Truly 23 (or 22) is not a high number but, with only 415 commercial parcels in the town, it represents 5.5 percent of the 415.

The question remains as to how much of a drag downward does this commercial assessment ratio affect our equalization rate when our 10,787 residential parcels exist with a residential assessment ratio of 84.26.

I am also submitting information that I have researched regarding recent residential sales in the town from July 1, 2017 to Dec. 1, 2017 based on published sales as well as assessor records. The residential assessment ratio for these 48 residential sales has dropped to .808.

In addition, there is evidence of inequity since for some reason townhouses or condominiums in the town are assessed at just under 43 percent of fair-market value as determined by sales. There are 152 of these properties in town.

Elsewhere, there has been a recent sale of $5,000,000 for the combined parcels at 1881 and 1883 Western Ave. These two properties combined were assessed at a total of $2,611,000 or a commercial assessment ratio of .5220. This further compounds the lower commercial property assessments in the town of Guilderland.

So we have under-assessed commercial properties as well as under-assessed townhouse properties. What else is under-assessed?

The situation in the town of Colonie is reversed. Colonie’s 50 sales in the above-mentioned time period of July 1, 2015 to June 30, 2016 had a combined assessed value of $43,316,400. The total sales prices were $60,508,500 or an assessment-to-sales ratio of .71587. The mean ratio of the 50 sales was .77.

The town of Colonie residential assessment ratio is 57.38. Its equalization rate is 66.50. It is clear that the higher level of assessment in Colonie for commercial properties goes a long way toward boosting its equalization rate.

I then investigated Crossgates Mall’s assessments. There are six major parcels (52.01-1-4.1, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 4.7) In 2017, The total assessed value for these parcels is $251,784,800. The total fair-market value per the tax rolls is $296,171,824. This produces a ratio of 85.01, which is very similar to the residential assessment ratio for the town of Guilderland of 84.26.

In 2016 for Crossgates (same parcels as mentioned), the assessed value was the same at $251,784,800. The fair-market value was $286,050,909 or a ratio of .88. The residential assessment ratio for the town of Guilderland 2016 was 88.00.

My questions are:

— If we are going to do a revaluation with the intent of going to full-market value (as we should) should we not inform the commercial property owners and certain residential owners that they will be facing major hikes in their assessments to get to 100 percent? It appears that the commercial ratio has a major effect on the equalization rate as demonstrated by either the town of Guilderland (negatively) or the town of Colonie (positively)

— How do we explain to Crossgates that its assessment ratios (assessed value-to-full market value — av to fmv) far exceed the typical commercial ratios of assessment-to-fair market value verified by sales in the town of Guilderland (.8501 to  .6257)?  Are we not inviting major litigation on this? (We may already be doing so.)

— Who is going to do the appraisal of Crossgates to establish fair-market value and at what cost?

— I see that the proposed resolution to hire a firm was presented on Tuesday, Dec. 5, and passed. This resolution authorizes up to $250,000 for the firm involved to provide professional services. What are these professional services and what will be the finished product? How much will the firm guide the assessor who will ultimately set the values for the 13,000 parcels?

As it exists right now, the lower levels of commercial assessments in the town of Guilderland are hurting our equalization rates. This is pretty much what the state said but in a roundabout way.

In Albany County, all the townships have an identical state equalization rate with the level of assessment with the exception of Guilderland. I am not sure how we got here but the prior facts as well as the ratios bear this out.

Again, we have close to 13,000 parcels. Even if a professional mass-appraisal firm or whomever does the revaluation correctly, there is going to be some blow-back from the public. The town needs a comprehensive plan to pull this off with a minimum of grief and a maximum of understanding from the public. In short, in addition to a revaluation plan, you need a public-relations plan as well.

John B. Haluska

Guilderland

Editor’s note: John B. Haluska is a retired New York State general real estate appraiser.