Clark, Matt

From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Clark
Thursday, January 22, 2015 4:22 PM
Steven Rubenstein
RE: Pilot Program

S
ThankyouIagreethatassessmentchangesbasedoncharacteristics/amenitieserrorsshouldsurviveor,more
importantly,allfuturevaluationmustconsidertheactualdetailsthatshouldbepermanentlyreflectedonthePRC.
Theappealenvironmentistoprovidemeaningfulinformationforfuturevaluation

Iwilldistributeanemailconveyingthesame.

From: Steven Rubenstein [mailto:steven.rbnstn@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2015 3:34 PM
To: Clark, Matt
Subject: Pilot Program

Hi Matt,
Hope things are going well with you. I've been working on 2015 county tax board appeals for a week or two
now and have a few observations.
First, the basic idea that every year brings a fresh new look at assessments is a good one . I like the fact that just
because a tax board commissioner grants an assessment reduction one year doesn't mean that that reduction runs
for years and years until the next revaluation. The new system certainly reduces the incentive to file an appeal,
which is good, I think.
However, as you know, there is more than one kind of tax appeal. One type is based on fluctuations in the real
estate market and uses comparable sales to support a reduction in assessment. This is the type of appeal
reduction that should be "overrided" each year, as new sales occur.
A second type of appeal, in my opinion, is based on a physical, economic or functional issue with the subject
property: a dwelling's poor condition, over or under-size nature, bad layout, lack of functional utility; or the
land's poor topography, shape, proximity to undesirable things, etc.
These physical, functional and economic issues should be incorporated into the assessment for the following
year. The property record card should be revised to reflect the proper amount of depreciation, land and/or
building.
Neglecting to do so dooms the property owner to present a case every year, which is burdensome and unfair.
I just started noticing this when working on a town that we revalued in 2013 for the 2014 tax year. I don't want
to name the town.
I have a feeling that property owners might be talking about this when the appeals start up soon. I've been
reading comments like this on the petitions.
1

Steve

NOTICE OF CONFIDENTIALITY
This message, including any prior messages and attachments, may contain advisory, consultative and/or deliberative material, confidential information or
privileged communications of the County of Monmouth. Access to this message by anyone other than the sender and the intended recipient(s) is unauthorized. If
you are not the intended recipient of this message, any disclosure, copying, distribution or action taken or not taken in reliance on it, without the expressed written
consent of the County, is prohibited. If you have received this message in error, you should not save, scan, transmit, print, use or disseminate this message or any
information contained in this message in any way and you should promptly delete or destroy this message and all copies of it. Please notify the sender by return email if you have received this message in error.

Clark, Matt
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:

Steven Rubenstein <steven.rbnstn@gmail.com>

Thursday, January 22, 2015 3:34 PM
Clark, Matt
Pilot Program

Hi Matt,
Hope things are going well with you. I've been working on 2015 county tax board appeals for a week or two
now and have a few observations.
First, the basic idea that every year brings a fresh new look at assessments is a good one . I like the fact that just
because a tax board commissioner grants an assessment reduction one year doesn't mean that that reduction runs
for years and years until the next revaluation. The new system certainly reduces the incentive to file an appeal,
which is good, I think.
However, as you know, there is more than one kind of tax appeal. One type is based on fluctuations in the real
estate market and uses comparable sales to support a reduction in assessment. This is the type of appeal
reduction that should be "overrided" each year, as new sales occur.
A second type of appeal, in my opinion, is based on a physical, economic or functional issue with the subject
property: a dwelling's poor condition, over or under-size nature, bad layout, lack of functional utility; or the
land's poor topography, shape, proximity to undesirable things, etc.
These physical, functional and economic issues should be incorporated into the assessment for the following
year. The property record card should be revised to reflect the proper amount of depreciation, land and/or
building.
Neglecting to do so dooms the property owner to present a case every year, which is burdensome and unfair.
I just started noticing this when working on a town that we revalued in 2013 for the 2014 tax year. I don't want
to name the town.
I have a feeling that property owners might be talking about this when the appeals start up soon. I've been
reading comments like this on the petitions.
Steve