The battle over Richmondville’s assessments continues to rage, the sparks coming this time from a property owner who blames the Board of Assessment Review for much of the trouble.
The attack several weeks ago by John Primeau was only the latest in the long-running controversy since Richmondville re-evaluated properties two years ago.
Although stung by Mr. Primeau’s charges, BAR members––who can lower property assessments when owners grieve––believe they’re doing good work in Richmondville.
Both Mr. Primeau and the BAR have support from others familiar, and in some cases, involved in the controversy.
Mr. Primeau made his charges at the August 14 town board meeting. Besides claiming that Richmondville’s BAR is “acting on a misguided and improper agenda, he blasted the BAR on three points:
That on grievance day in late May, the BAR lowered assessments of grieving property owners by $4.5 million, including $440,000 on five high-end properties.
Reducing those assessments, Mr. Primeau contended, shifts the tax burden to the other 1,400 properties in Richmondville.
“That’s nearly $200,000 in actual tax burden being picked up by the remaining town members,” Mr. Primeau said.
Also, Mr. Primeau said, the BAR developed a formula for making reductions. The formula pushes a grieving property owner’s assessment back to its 2007 level, then adds two percent.
“This is ludicrous,” Mr. Primeau said, arguing that the BAR is to look at each property individually and not use an across-the-board formula.
“They’re saying all properties are in the same boat,” he added. “They’re not.”
“The BAR’s worst offense,” Mr. Primeau wrote, is lowering the assessment of Richmondville Power and Light, the local power company. The BAR rolled back Power and Light’s assessment from $981,736 to $550,389, a reduction of almost 44 percent.
“You cannot reduce Power and Light’s assessment and pass it on to taxpayers and expect people to swallow it,” Mr. Primeau said.
Interviewed last week, BAR members Marge Sperbeck, Vern Hall, Joan Sondergaard and Horst Fierek countered that “everything we did, we did by the book,” according to Ms. Sperbeck, who chairs the BAR.
They argued that much of what they acted on was to correct the work of Assessor Matt Richardson, under fire himself from property owners in town.
“We have Richmondville at heart,” Ms. Sondergaard said. “We can’t not speak out when we see something wrong. Our charge is not to cover up.”
As for Mr. Primeau’s charges:
BAR members agreed that they reduced many properties, but they did so after only seeing and hearing proof––including comparable properties and sales––from property owners.
“They have to come with material proof, and they did,” Ms. Sperbeck said. “We were within our rights.”
Comparable properties in Richmondville didn’t exist for the high-end homes, she added, so the BAR had to act as best it could.
The shifting tax burden happens often, BAR members said. Ms. Sondergaard said that for years, her property’s high assessments helped compensate for those too low in the town.
“The shifting tax burden happens every time somebody grieves,” Mr. Hall said.
Developing a formula, BAR members said, is an acceptable practice. And it’s especially acceptable, they argued, when Mr. Richardson didn’t share his insights on his assessment decisions.
“As taxpayers and BAR members, we have a right to know,” Ms. Sperbeck said. “But he [Mr. Richardson] was a no-show.”
BAR members added that the formula was helpful in dealing with the huge number of grieved properties––more than 120 over two days––when there was little other guidance.
Also, they didn’t use the formula on all properties, they said.
Richmondville Power and Light’s reduction was fair, supported by an income statement brought by utility representatives.
“A property is worth what income it generates,” Mr. Fierek said.
“According to what was brought to us, we agreed with the income statement.”
BAR members stressed that in all their actions, they strove for fairness and equity.
“In our interpretation, we did what’s right,” Ms. Sperbeck said. “Whatever we did, we stand by it.”

* * *
Although Mr. Primeau and BAR members are at odds, they agree on one thing:
The town board should act on the assessment problem.
Before the 2008 assessments were finalized, Ms. Sperbeck said, town officials could have stopped the process “as Rotterdam and Decatur did.”
It’s too late for that now, but Mr. Fierek observed that board members “should get involved. . .inform themselves.”
Mr. Primeau argued that the town board should have contested the Richmondville property values set by the state Office of Real Property Services.
Such action, Mr. Primeau said, would have lessened the assessment impact.
“It’s too late this year, but at least the town can make that effort,” he said.
“If we contest as a town, we can prove ORPS’ numbers are wrong.”