Governor Nixes Restoration Of City Tax Assessor Oath;
Sees Flaw in Bill's Language
By TOMMY HALLISSEY

Governor Paterson July 21 vetoed a bill that would have brought back the tax assessor oath for property tax collection in New York City.

DAVID MOOG: Questions Governor's veto.

The bill, which passed the State Assembly by a margin of 60 to 1, would have clarified who needs to take an oath regarding the accuracy of a tax roll. The city is unique because it is one of the few jurisdictions where the person responsible for property tax collection is the same person in charge of assessing property. The bill, sponsored by State Sen. Frank Padavan, would have assured that a process for assessment verification existed separately from collection.

A Means for Accountability

It would also have compelled tracking and verification of assessments by holding any assessor accountable for making unauthorized charges and creating appraisal standards. "This last benefit works in conjunction with the new certification standards that all New York City assessors are required to meet by 2009," Assemblyman James F. Brennan wrote in support of the legislation.

Mr. Paterson vetoed the bill because, he wrote, it would "require all of New York City's 141 assessors to personally appear and swear to the completeness of the entire New York City assessment roll, even though each assessor will have been responsible, at most, for only a portion of that roll."

FRANK PADAVAN: Will try again next year.

He said that if tax assessors failed to appear before the Commissioner of Finance and take the required oath, the entire assessment roll would be unverified and vulnerable to legal challenge. John Googas, Chief of Staff for Mr. Padavan, said that in principle the Governor supports an oath for tax assessors but is concerned about the vulnerability of the assessment roll. "The way the bill was drafted there was some ambiguity, which could have caused problems with enforcement," he explained.

David Moog, president of Accountants and Actuaries Local 1757 of District Council 37, faulted Mr. Paterson for vetoing a bill he said would curtail corruption. "The interpretation taken by the Governor's Office is disingenuous," he said. "After the oath was eliminated [in 1992], corruption was able to become widespread throughout the city."

Senator Padavan's office will continue to work with Local 1757 to draft new legislation on this oath. Mr. Moog promised a new bill in January that followed the original oath bill to the letter.

"Assuring the accuracy of assessment rolls is of paramount concern to the property taxpayers of our State," Mr. Paterson wrote. "However, this bill would impose an inordinate burden on New York City without any showing that doing so would improve the accuracy of the city's assessment process."

In 2004, the tax assessors' union released a report charging that the city was losing up to $2 billion annually because of under-assessment of apartments and commercial buildings. In 2002, the City Assessors were tarnished by a scandal in which a former Assessor made payoffs to employees over a 30-year period to gain reduced valuations for his clients' properties, thus saving them millions in real-estate taxes. "This bill would have helped to eliminate suspect values which impact the city greatly," Mr. Moog said.