Draft ~ Subject to Change

Board of Assessment Appeals Minutes

Town of Enfield

DATE:  March 9, 2010

Board of Assessment Appeals special meeting was held in the Thompsonville Room, Town Hall.

The special meeting commenced at 4:00 p.m. with Rudolph Kuraska, chairman, present; Charles Woods, member, present; Thomas Tyler, member, present.

Appeal for Healthrax, Helen Gaynier, Agent, Business Personal Property, Appeals 83, 84, 85, and 86

Appealing the audit for business personal property done last fall.  In looking at the audit report 4562 depreciation schedule lists all assets.  Does not reflect disposals.  No longer has assets that auditor picked up.  There does not appear there was any question raised.  Ms. Gaynier feels there is a missing link.  There are some findings they are in agreement with.  Supplies and they do lease some equipment.  Presented declaration to Board with disposals.  The auditor did not receive complete list of disposals.  227,000 disposed of since 1986.  Mr. Tyler asked if she recalculated what they think they have.  Mr. Tyler requested to supply to the board her recalculations and fax documentation.

Appeal for Business Personal Property, William Drexler, agent, Appeal #81

Susan Daley, General Manager, also present.

Read letter to board and provided board with copy.  Would like business personal property to go back to the 2008 figures.  They have no new assets as of 10/1/09.  Mr. Drexler acknowledges they did not respond to declaration.  Did not provide any information to the assessor.  The property was purchased on 9/4/09.  Closing papers have value of assets and can supply it, will fax documentation to board.

Not appealing #82

Appeal for 935 Enfield St., Ghanshyam Shah, Appeal #77

Mr. Shah went into town hall and was explained increase was for 10% penalty.  He has always filed on time since 2000, does not feel it is his fault.  He has now marked on his calendar that if he doesn’t receive the form, he  will come in and get it.  Supplied previous years, 2005, 2006 and 2007 to board.  He received a letter from the Town Manager and filled out right away.

Appeal for Brian Lawton, Appeal #32, No show

Appeal for Iwona Rutkowski, Appeal #87, No show

Appeal for business personal property, Marcia Wyman, Agent, Appeal #93

Father forgot to file for farm exemption.  Her father is ninety years old. 

Mr. Tyler asked if her father suffers from dementia.  Ms. Wyman stated, no, just low energy.  He did not file with intent to defraud.  He has always filed.  Mr. Tyler requested copy of declaration.  Ms. Wyman to drop it off.  The farm is due 10/31 for farm exemption.

Appeal for business personal property, John Whitely, Appeal #94

Mr. Whitely is appealing the penalty for filing late.  Mr. Woods explained the penalty is not a dollar amount.  Mr. Whitely didn't realize it was not a dollar amount.  He never received the forms.  He's not blaming anyone.  His two sons now run the business.  Mr. Tyler asked if mailing address still the same and Mr. Whitely responded it is.

Appeal for Polean Ware, Appeal #78 and 79, No show

Appeal for 88 Till St., Graham James, Appeal #3

Mr. James purchased the property at the end of May last year.  Brought some comparables for the board.  Comparables of 74 Till St. 75 Till St. 93 Till St. and 90 Till St. There had been nothing done for twenty years plus.  He is the second owner of the house.   It needs a lot of work.  Couldn't even see from the road because of the overgrown shrubs when he purchased it.  Excessive termite damage.  Paid 116,000 and appraised for 140,000.  Presented pictures to the board.

Appeal for 24 Dannunzio Ave., Donna Perry, Appeal #35

Ms. Perry is appealing for flood damage.  The damage was 150,000 at the time of the flood.  The town was doing road work so the contractor had to wait.  Documents presented to board.  Ms. Perry stated she came in for previous appeal but was denied.  In the spring she hopes to get it finished.  Foundation was fixed but not totally.  Holes left around foundation. The foundation was finished July 2009.  The porch had fallen off.  Mr. Kuraska asked what percentage is complete.  She stated it’s 60% complete from when the flood happened.  There is an outbuilding on the property.  Costs to fix have risen with inflation.  Cost went up from 96,000 to 142,000.  All work completed on prior permits but not to Ms. Perry's satisfaction.  Mr. Kuraska asked if 60% of 142,000 was complete.  She said yes.  No landscaping has been done yet.  Hopes to start up again in the spring.

Appeal for 138 South Rd., Ira Nagel, Appeal #88

Appealing the 10% penalty on his real estate.  He doesn't think he ever got the form.  He closed on 9/15/08 and thinks it went to the wrong address.  Did not know cut off was 10/1.  All his mail now goes to p o box in Enfield.  When he purchases a building, he goes down to the town hall and changes all his addresses.  Mr. Tyler requested a copy of the deed to see what return address it had from Mr. Nagel.

Appeal for Paul Organek, Appeal #73, no show

Appeal for Business Personal Property, Paul Oliver, Appeal Nos. 39, 40, 41, and 42

Stephen Leibowitz, CPA, also present

Mr. Oliver is appealing audit for business personal property.  Two copies presented to Board.  Mr. Oliver previously had prepared declarations.  CPA Karen Marakel handed over the depreciation schedule to auditor, however, there were over 20 years of disposals not taken off the schedule.  Stephen Leibowitz a CPA for other Taylor Rentals is submitting three amended returns for 2006, 2007 and 2008 and work papers used to prepare.  He is appealing the m&e.  Mr. Oliver listed all assets located at store and put on spreadsheet.  The assets go back to 1997 of what’s on location.  Summations of m&e, rental report and revenue,  two leases and mv tax summary and three depreciations schedules.  Feels amended return is true and accurate. New assessments 2008 – 135,710; 2007 – 139,790; and 2006 - 108,990.  2009 is comparable to 2008.  Hasn't put any new equipment in.  Mr. Tyler questioning 2009 assessment.  He is to fax information.  Mr. Kuraska feels auditor may have received bad information.  He is also to fax comparison between auditor and their findings.  Mr. Oliver also asking for waiver of penalty for 2006, 2007 and 2008.  

Appeal for 7 Riverview St., Helena Hepp, Appeal #96

Ms. Hepp stated this is her third year appealing.  Feels her assessment is too high.  There was an appraisal done back in 2006 and was appraised at 50,000 less back in 2006 and was appraised by a certified appraiser.  Ms. Hepp requested names and titles of Board for her attorney.  Mr. Tyler introduced himself.  Mr. Tyler stated he knows her as they are neighbors.  Mr. Kuraska stated he is a corporate tax attorney retired and Mr. Woods is a retired Air Force major.  Ms. Hepp questioned if he had any previous experience in real estate.  Mr. Woods stated his family was in the building business throughout the state of Connecticut.

House was appraised at $575,000.  The Board was given copies of  the appraisal in prior years.  Presenting different articles regarding value of house.  Twenty feet from her bedroom is a paved street.  Originally when she purchased the house she was told they couldn’t build in back.  Now there are thirty homes to be built.  Three approved lots are in her backyard.  Dr. Pappas is at the end of the street.  He is semi-retired now.  There are 8 cars on the street dealing with his business and a driveway full.  Her street is a dead-end street with no exit.  The gate is opened for students from Enfield High.  There are 5 – 8 cars parked across the street from her house of students that don’t park in the parking lot of the school.  Kids speed down the street and she has notified the police.  They use her driveway as a turnaround.  She has a circular driveway.  She feels her house is worth less. 

While on the market people from New York wanted to know why the taxes are so high.  Purchased for $525,000.  Has been on the market with no offers in three years.  She purchased this home because she needed that type of home at the time.  Had been on the market for two years prior to when she purchased it.  Land is very wet.  Not allowed to build in back via deed. 

The new school building that was built drains into her yard.  She was told by her neighbor that the Town piped it down there and the excess flows into the pond.  She has not brought this to the Town’s attention.  Soil so wet in back industrial lawn mower sinks.

Mr. Kuraska stated the town will have a reval next year.  She reiterated no work had been done.  She stated someone from the town came and did a physical inspection and saw all was the original work.  She commented one of the Board members last year stated should not be rewarded by not doing upkeep. 

Ms. Hepp requested appraisal be resubmitted to be attached to this year’s appeal. 

Ms. Hepp also stated the Board should be incorporated with people who deal with real estate/appraisal.

Board members informed her minutes are available online.

Packet left with board.

Meeting adjourned 8:50 p.m.