Papers Filed To Dismiss Nassau Lawmakers’ Property Data Suit

LEVITTOWN, NY — The Nassau County Attorney’s office is seeking to dismiss a lawsuit brought by two legislators seeking the inclusion of tax saving exemption information on residents’ online property tax records, citing their request is already a work in progress.

The lawsuit stems from the addition of a new tax exemption that would phase increases over a five-year period and how it appeared in online property tax records. County Executive Laura Curran approved a resolution in December that would place the information back on the county’s website, but it was still not restored by mid-January.

An article 78 lawsuit was filed against her administration soon after by legislators John Ferretti (R-Levittown) and Steven Rhoads (R-Wantagh) who challenged the removal of the information from the county’s website.

In a motion to dismiss filed last week, County Attorney Jared Kasschau asserts the legislators “lack standing” to pursue the case, which is not ripe for judicial review, and “inappropriately seek to dictate how the information can be posted” on the Department of Assessment’s Land Review Viewer. The county intends to calculate the information so that it is a “more accurate, and not misleading,” estimate of the tax savings achieved as the result of the exemption which is the subject of the county’s discretion to determine, Kasschau wrote.

In a statement to Patch, Ferretti said Curran “needs to dedicate more of her time fighting for a life-saving vaccine and less time resisting providing transparency to residents, most of whom are facing massive tax hikes due to her disastrous reassessment."

Curran’s office did not respond to Ferretti’s statement.

In an affidavit filed with the papers, Deputy Assessor Robert Miles stated many residents were confused by the estimates of tax savings due to the phase-in exemption because the estimates were “significantly higher” than the actual tax savings, which made it “appear” that “but for the exemption, their taxes would have increased by an unexpectedly high amount.”

That happened because the “wide applicability” of the tax exemption — to about 50 percent of the parcels — required the actual tax rates be adjusted significantly in order to meet the tax levies of local school districts and other taxing jurisdictions, Miles’ affidavit states. The estimates were so “misleading and confusing” that the assessor directed the information to be taken down in lieu of a more accurate method of determining tax savings, his affidavit states.

In order to more accurately estimate the tax savings from the exemption, the county would have to run a pseudo-tax roll, and then calculate the tax savings under the exemption based on the tax rates that would have been applied to each parcel, but for the exemption, according to Miles.

It would be a “time-consuming task” performed by “highly skilled” county employees, Miles continued, “however, the work to accurately determine the true tax savings attributable to the exemption will be posted on the Land Records Viewer when complete.”

Attorneys for both sides will appear back in court this Wednesday.