Bus Co. Appeals Denied

Read the license plate number… Move to reject appeal… Second… All in favor?… It’s unanimous… The appeal is denied.

Repeat 200 times.

That was the drill on Tuesday night, as a relentlessly methodical Board of Assessment Appeals demonstrated that the value of a vehicle, in the eyes of the city, is determined only by its book value, not by its purchase price.

The board rejected appeals on 136 school buses and 69 trucks belonging to two companies. It granted the appeals of 20 other taxpayers.

Tuesday’s meeting was the first voting session of the recently revamped appeals board. The board is charged with helping taxpayers who feel the city has over-valued their taxable property. On Tuesday, the board’s three freshly appointed board members considered appeals on city car taxes.

Among the appeals on the table: 136 complaints from First Student, the school bus company that says the city over-valued almost half its fleet. The board rejected all 136 appeals, citing the NADA book value of the vehicles, which was more than the bus company’s purchase price. The bus company, a major city contractor, had been looking to recoup a quarter million dollars in taxes.

The appeals board also rejected 69 appeals from a trucking company. The appeals period for those taxes had expired, board members said.

Tuesday’s was the third meeting for the all-new board. Members of the previous board resigned amid a storm of controversy prompted by complaints of incompetence and unfair treatment by taxpayers. Aldermen investigating the board raised allegations of nepotism and possible no-show work.

In September, the mayor appointed Chris Mordecai, Jeffrey Granoff, and Kenneth Janke (pictured above at left, center, and right) to the board. Granoff, a former appeals board member, promised a professional, ethical, and service-oriented board.

At the new board’s first meeting, on Sept. 30, Granoff was elected chair and worked to deliver on his promise, earning high marks from applicants looking for tax revisions. The board heard from 21 people, some of whom had multiple appeals.

At that meeting and at Tuesday’s meeting, the new board set a new standard. Where the last board was painted as capricious and inscrutable, Granoff’s board is tirelessly methodical and process-oriented. At the two meetings, each step of procedure was carefully explained, to either a roomful of appellants — on Sept. 30 — or to a lone reporter and the board’s digital audio recorder — on Oct. 19.

In between those two meetings, the board met in the tax assessor’s office on Tuesday Oct. 12 to validate the information provided by applicants on Sept. 30. On Tuesday, the board voted with little or no discussion on the appeals of 21 applicants, plus one last-minute entry.

Little discussion is necessary, Granoff said after the meeting. The process is straightforward: determine the qualities of the applicant’s car — mileage, condition, special features — and look the car up in the NADA book. If the value listed matches the city’s valuation, an appeal is rejected. If it’s lower, the appeal is granted, Granoff said. Those comparisons were made at the Oct. 12 meeting.

At the Sept. 30 meeting, Britt Liotta, a representative from First Student, appeared to appeal the appraisals of 136 of the company’s fleet of 303 buses. He told the board that the company bought the buses last year for $2,000 less each than the city was appraising them for this year.

The company pays about $8.5 million in motor vehicle taxes to the city. A successful appeal would have take about $250,000 off that amount.

But it wasn’t to be. Despite what the company bought them for, the city is required by state statute to go by the NADA-listed value, Granoff said.

“You need to have a standard,” Granoff said after the meeting. That standard, as established by the state, is the NADA book.

He compared it to buying a car from someone you know, who gives you a great deal. That doesn’t mean the car is worth less, just because you got it for cheap, Granoff said. The city still has to tax you on the proper value of the car.

Of 20 non-corporate applications the board considered on Tuesday, it granted the appeals of 13 and denied the appeals of seven.

“We were fair,” said Mordecai. ​“That’s all everybody wants.”

The board adjourned until March, when it will hear real estate appeals. Granoff said he’s headed for Puerto Rico in the meantime, where he spends a good part of the year.

Live Blog

[The spelling of all names below is unverified, due to the demands of live-blogging.]

5:58 p.m.: The board is assembled and facing an empty room, apart from clerk Sarah McIver and your humble correspondent.

6:00: And we’re off! Granoff calls the meeting to order.

First applicant: Beatrice Washington. 1996 Honda CRV. ​“The board found to reject,” Mordecai says. All in favor? It’s unanimous.

Granoff: Having checked the NADA value for the vehicle. It was substantiated. The value has been decreasing.

Second applicant: Frances Ermoski. Mordecai: Board found to grant a decrease in the value.

Granoff: I think we should grant what you found.

Mordecai: We reduced the assessment to $6,125.

Third applicant: Stephen Culpepper. 2002 Toyota Tacoma and a 2002 Audi. Both granted due to excess mileage. It’s unanimous.

Fourth: Vincent Conte: 2003 Subaru Outback — reduction granted due to mileage. Also a Jeep Cherokee. ​“The board rejected that vehicle,” Mordecai said. Unanimous votes.

Fifth: Steven Ogden. 1999 Honda Accord. ​“The board rejected this request,” Mordecai says.

“You’re recommending it be rejected,” Granoff. 

Sixth: Melissa Haynes Buick LeSabre. Rejected. Mordecai: No evidence to support the lower value.

Seventh: Allan Case. Granted. Mordecai: He provided proof the vehicle was sold.

Eighth: Teresa Dillard 2002 Ford Explorer. Reduction granted based on high mileage.

Ninth: Wendy Bianca. 1999 Jeep Cherokee. Granted due to high mileage.

10th: Ibrahim Ibrahim. Rav4. The board rejects due to lack of evidence.

11th: Patricia Kane: 2003 BMW 325. Reduction granted due to high mileage.

12th: Diana Zellick: 1998 Chevy Cavalier. Reduction granted due to ​“inspection by the commissioner,” Mordecai says.

13th: Moses Boone: 1995 Toyota Camry. Rejected. High mileage, but not a factor in a car that age, Mordecai says.

14th: Kenneth Romans: Honda Civic. Granted.

15th: Emily Rozanski: 1999 Subaru Impreza. Granted due to high mileage.

16th: Charles [Something] : 2004 Honda Fit. Granted based on high mileage.

17th: Michael Makers: 2008 Chevy Silverado. Denied. The value was not substantiated, Granoff says.

18th: Ekakwe Ukamaka: 2000 Chevy Malibu. Reduction granted based on inspection.

19th: Demali Hicks. 2004 Mini Cooper. Granted due to high mileage.

6:16: Now on to the no-shows from the last meeting. ​“Because they were no-shows, their appeals will be rejected,” Granoff says. That’s by statute and can be appealed, he says.

The board goes through the no-shows one by one, reading the names, the applications, and voting to reject each one. The list includes two applications from Alderman Greg Morehead, who was appealing taxes on a 2008 Dodge Caravan and a 2007 Lexus.

6:24: Granoff calls for a break to hear an appeal from Gail Curran, who has entered the room. She wasn’t able to make the last meeting due to a serious family illness. He consulted the Freedom Of Information Act and determined it was OK to hear from her tonight.

Curran (at right in photo) is sworn in and promises to tell the truth, so help her. She has a 2000 BMW, manual transmission, no built in CD player. The value should be $8,300, her application says. Curran hands over documents that show the vehicle is a manual transmission. She also offers print outs from her online NADA research into the value of 2000 BMWs. Her car has 130,000 miles, she says. The car was assessed at $7,200 in 2008 and $10,000 in 2009, she says.

Granoff: The assessed value is 70 percent of the market value.

Curran: Why are gross and net the same?

Granoff: Because you have no exemptions.

Curran: I know it’s higher this year.

Granoff: Oh, here’s the 2009 tax bill. It says $7,000.

Curran: I bought the car with a CD player and had them take the CD player out and put in a cassette player.

Granoff: Thank you very much for coming in.

Curran: I appreciate you taking the time.

Granoff: We’ll break later to validate the information Curran gave us.

Curran departs.

6:38: Granoff: I would like to read into the record. I received two applications after the deadline.

He reads them into the record. One was received Oct. 8. ​“It is rejected because it was filed after the deadline,” Granoff says. He says he spoke with the applicant and apologized and explained the process. The board votes unanimously to reject the application.

“The other application was just received today,” Granoff says. ​“That will be denied because it was not filed on time.” Unanimous vote.

6:43: Next up, multiple applications from Barry Siegel. ​“These are for Edart leasing company, LLC,” Granoff says.

It’s the 69 applications for trucks that the applicant said were taxed erroneously after being sold.

“The board rejected the applicants request on all of the vehicles,” Mordecai says.

Granoff: They were filing an appeal on 2008 tax bill, the board cannot hear 2008 tax bills. We can only hear appeals during the year the bill comes, which is 2009.

6:48: Granoff reads, for the record, the plate numbers for each truck. The board hears a motion, hears a second, and then votes, one by one, to reject each application.

The routine:

Granoff: [Reads the plate number.] Do I hear a motion?

Mordecai: Motion to reject.

Granoff: Second?

Janke: I second.

Granoff: All in favor?

All: Aye.

Granoff: All opposed?

Mordecai: Nay. [Mordecai keeps saying nay. I think he intends it to mean there is no opposition.]

Granoff: Petition denied.

The board runs through this script 69 times, passing folders and signing applications as they go.

6:52: They’re getting good at this, speeding up. Mordecai holds his hand up, ready to receive the folder from Janke, after his signature. They’re motioning and seconding as they sign, like a well-oiled paperwork machine. It’s nothing if not efficient. And thorough.

6:56: And they’re done with Edart. That was really something, process-wise. But now Granoff has to sign all the applications. He was busy reading the plate numbers and calling the votes while Janke and Mordecai were signing and voting.

6:58: Wait, more Edart applications have been discovered. Granoff is still catching up with his signatures.

“This is worse than a closing,” Mordecai jokes, about the number of signatures.

“Yes, worse than a closing,” Granoff says. [They mean the closing of a home sale. They’re both realtors.]

7:03: Busy with signatures, the board members have been quiet. Baseball flares briefly as a conversation topic, then dies.

7:05: For the remaining Edart applications, the board members switch roles. Mordecai reads. Janke moves. Granoff seconds. All vote in favor of rejection. None oppose. They quickly lock into a new rhythm of rejection, forming another appeal-processing machine.

7:11: They’re done. But wait, we’re just warming up! That group of 69 was just an appetizer. The next group includes 136 appeals on new buses from First Student.

Granoff: All the appeals are based on the same information. First Student said the gross assessment overstated the value of the vehicle. They said the town’s value was higher than the actual sale price. I’m going to make a motion to hear all of them at once and then read them into the record. The town’s assessment, based on the NADA book, was higher than the actual cost of purchase. I am going to recommend that they be denied, because we have a standard set in the NADA book, and the value from the assessor is not based on the sale price. Based on that, I recommend that all of them be rejected.

No further discussion. in a unanimous vote, all 136 appeals are rejected. Then the board has to go through them one by one.

The board moves back into rejection-machine mode: Granoff reads the plate numbers. Janke moves to deny. Mordecai seconds. All in vote in favor. Petition denied. Petition denied. Petition denied… Repeat ad infinitum.

7:19: Some bugs in the machine emerge, as it chugs on without end. Janke keeps saying, inexplicably, ​“I motion to deny.” And Mordecai continues to vote both ​“aye” and ​“nay” for each one.

7:20: Alderwoman Bitsie Clark, Doug Hausladen, and one other have entered from the Downtown/Wooster Square Community Management Team meeting, which has just wrapped up next door, to observe the action. Mystified, they look on as the rejection-machine inexorably marches on, denying everything in sight. They chuckle and leave after a reporter explains what’s going on.

7:27: The board takes a break to make some copies. They check in with your correspondent to see how he’s holding up. Fine. This is fascinating.

7:28: And they’re back at it. Petition denied. Petition denied. Petition denied… They’re unstoppable.

7:40: Whew… That was a breathtaking display of bureaucracy. The board just read out, moved, seconded, voted on, and signed 136 applications in about 30 minutes.

Granoff calls for a recess for five minutes to validate the information received from Curran. He leaves. Mordecai and Janke continue to sign the First Student applications.

7:42: Janke and Mordecai chat briefly with McIver about how much worse things are going to get with the upcoming property revaluation.

“How do you get one of those stamps for your signature?” Janke asks.

Janke mentions he was on the Colin McEnroe show yesterday, talking about his new business, The Grove. It’s a co-working facility at 71 Orange St.

7:49: McIver mentions that a letter will have to be sent out for each of the 139 applications, and a copy of that letter placed in each file. ​“Good grief,” says Janke, worrying aloud about how many trees will be killed. Mordecai has an 18-inch high stack of folders in front of him.

7:49: Granoff is back with some documents. Curran was citing the 2010 value, not the 2009 value, Granoff says. He calls the board back in session. The board votes to grant her appeal, since her car has no automatic transmission.

Granoff: Any other business?

No.

Granoff: I would like to thank the commissioners and our secretary. We will meet in March to hear real estate appeals. The meeting will be posted in the assessor’s office, the town clerk’s office, and online.

7:54: Meeting adjourned.