Deadline reminders for tax grievances – assessment reviews

Feel like your paying too much town & school tax? April 30 is the deadline for filing your Nassau County Assessment Review. The Assessment Review Commission – ARC – acts on appeals of county property assessments. ARC’s services for homeowners are available online. You are not required to have a lawyer represent you. You may file your own appeal.

Public information, registration, appeal tracking and the residential sale locator are all available on the Nassau county website. Use it to find other similar properties to yours. If they are assessed at a lower value, you can use that information as the basis of your appeal.

You can file online. It’s free, and it’s easy to do.

Use this link and follow the “AROW”

================================================================

If you requested a review of your Sea Cliff Village taxes (February 18 was the deadline) and were denied, you still have another opportunity. You must file a Small Claims Assessment Review RPTL – 730, available online here.

Instructions for Small Claims Assessment Review.

The  form must be taken in person (with one extra copy) to the Nassau County Clerks Office (240 Old Country Road) along with a check, cash, or credit card payment for $30.00.  April 30 is the deadline. The clerk will file your claim and give you an index number. You will get a hearing date in the mail.

NY POST: Dozens of LI school districts use software to ‘rig’ elections

‘Vet’ out the vote

Dozens of LI school districts use software to ‘rig’ elections

  • By SUSAN EDELMAN
  • Last Updated: 3:57 AM, April 21, 2013
  • Posted: 12:18 AM, April 21, 2013

EXCLUSIVE

Taxpayers in dozens of Long Island school districts have been footing the bill for a computer system that can help rig elections to pass school budgets.

Bold Systems LLC, based in Bellport, LI, sells software that lets school districts track votes in real time on Election Day and identify which parents, district employees and 18-year-old students have not yet voted. The districts, it says, can then generate “call lists” to urge those voters — who are most likely to support a budget increase — to get to the polls.

But under state law, this is illegal “electioneering.”

‘FIXED’: Bold Systems LLC touts its software’s ability to swing an election, which dozens of Long Island school districts have bought into.

‘FIXED’: Bold Systems LLC touts its software’s ability to swing an election, which dozens of Long Island school districts have bought into.

School districts can’t spend money to steer an election. They can urge citizens to vote, but are forbidden to call “a selective list” of cherry-picked voters.

School districts upstate and in Long Island hold yearly elections — the next set for May 21 — in which voters approve or reject proposed budgets.

Districts need more than 50 percent yes votes to pass a budget, or 60 percent if the budget exceeds a state tax-levy cap.

In most districts, elections can be close, with retirees on fixed incomes and homeowners without kids in school more likely to vote down big budget hikes.

Yet many of those budgets have passed in the past few years — including increases of about 7 percent in Sayville and West Islip.

“Nothing empowers you to get out the YES votes you need like the EMS Election Management System from Bold Systems,” the company claims on its Web site.

“If your budget votes are too close to call, EMS can provide the edge you need.”

The company says 110 New York school districts use its software.

The basic system simply computerizes the voter rolls. But the upgrades Bold has sold since 2006 “enable you to compile lists of parents, in-district staff and eligible students.”

Lists can even be segmented into key groups (such as PTA members, families with kids in athletics, or by school) to help get out the votes or conduct registration drives.

Robert Vomastek, Bold Systems’ inventor and former owner, explained: “As each voter signs in, their name is automatically removed from the call list. They can run the call list four or five times during an election.”

Asked why districts would target parents and staff, Vomastek said, “They want a higher turnout from that demographic, obviously.”

A parent who blew the whistle on the system is appalled.

“You don’t need a Ph.D. in political science to understand that this service is an unethical manipulation of the electoral process,” said Noel Feustel, a dad in the Bayport-Blue Point school district.

Through a Freedom of Information Act request, Feustel learned that 35 school districts in eastern Suffolk County have each paid up to $22,700 a year, depending on the number of registered voters, for Bold Systems — and 12 pay $2,600 extra for an upgraded version and add-on features that include categorizing voters.

The districts buy Bold at prices negotiated by Boards of Cooperative Educational Services (BOCES). Goods and services bought through BOCES are partly reimbursed with state taxpayer funds.

A day after The Post called Gary Bixhorn, chief operating officer of Eastern Suffolk BOCES, he ordered Bold to yank its Web site.

Bixhorn also said he would “disable” Bold features that track selected voters because they can be used “in a manner that violates the spirit and letter of the law.”

Several Suffolk district superintendents said they never used the software for prohibited purposes, just to tally votes.

Yet Nassau BOCES, which covers 56 school districts, touts Bold on its Web site, saying “a variety of useful reports can be generated on Election Day, such as up-to-the-minute reporting of who has voted, call lists of parents and staff who have not yet turned out to vote . . . and poll lists on the spot for poll watchers.”

Thomas Rogers, district superintendent of Nassau BOCES, told The Post he will also disable such features.

“These actions are long overdue,” said Bill Milligan, a Bayport-Blue Point school-board trustee. “I was stunned by the vendor’s marketing tactics and by BOCES’ failure to fully vet the product.”

NEWSDAY: State probes school budget voting for illegalities

State probes school budget voting for illegalities

Published: April 22, 2013 10:31 PM
By JOHN HILDEBRAND  john.hildebrand@newsday.com

Noel Feustel holds a printout of the website

Photo credit: Newsday / Thomas A. Ferrara | Noel Feustel holds a printout of the website for Bold Systems LLC in front of his Bayport home. (April 21, 2013)

State education officials are investigating reports that more than 60 Long Island school districts used the services of a Bellport data-systems company that advertised it could help maximize their “yes” vote during budget elections — an activity that, for districts, is banned.
SEACLIFFPOC Commentary: The North Shore School District also used BOLD Systems voter data to conduct real-time “get out the vote” efforts on election day with volunteers in past years, according to a inside source.

Ken Slentz, the state’s top official for elementary and secondary education, said his office was checking with two regional BOCES here, which helped districts establish “cooperative” contracts with the company, Bold Systems.

The purpose of the inquiry, Slentz said, is to determine if any BOCES contracts or other documents indicated that Bold Systems had detailed services that schools are not legally authorized to use.

BOCES executives declared, meanwhile, that they had ordered a halt to any such potentially illegal activity last week, as soon as they were alerted to the problem.

“Had I known about it earlier, I would have stopped it immediately,” said Gary Bixhorn, chief operating officer of the Eastern SuffolkBoard of Cooperative Educational Services, headquartered inPatchogue.

Bixhorn said he ordered Bold Systems to stop marketing its ability to give districts an electoral “edge” and to disable a computerized system with the potential to provide real-time lists of parents and district employees who had not voted on school budgets during May elections. The BOCES executive added that he was alerted to the issue Wednesday, in a call from the BayportBlue Point district.

Eastern Suffolk BOCES records show that 35 districts in that county paid a total of more than $400,000 to the Bellport firm last year. Agency staffers added that Bold Systems had provided cooperating districts with voter data for more than five years.

Under law, districts are encouraged to combine in purchasing services through BOCES on the assumption that this saves money.

Nassau BOCES chief Thomas Rogers said he also had taken “aggressive” steps to halt any potential impropriety.

The Education Department surveyed all BOCES districts about the Bold Systems product, spokesman Tom Dunn said. “It is our understanding that it has not been used outside of Long Island,” he said, adding the department is examining the extent to which any districts used the voter-targeted component.

Brian Jusas, owner of Bold Systems, said Monday that, in response to the BOCES actions, he deleted website advertising of the company’s ability to provide districts with specific “call lists” of voters considered apt to support budgets. Jusas said his company provides many useful services to school districts, including computerized lists of registered voters and their addresses, mailing labels andabsentee voter reports.

“There are a lot of positive things in the system that people don’t talk about,” he said.

Pressures to pass spending plans have increased since Albany last year first imposed caps on tax increases.In addition, districts face a challenging administrative task in keeping accurate track of registered voters, a job that Bold Systems assumes for many.

Noel Feustel of Bayport, a real estate broker and civic activist, helped touch off the investigation when he got BOCES records through the state’s Freedom of Information law.

Vincent Butera, superintendent of Bayport-Blue Point schools, said Monday that his district used Bold Systems data for analytical purposes, not for electioneering.

Newsday “LI school districts bought software that could impact budget voter turnout”

LI school districts bought software that could impact budget voter turnout

Originally published: April 21, 2013 9:36 PM
Updated: April 21, 2013 10:21 PM
By LAURA FIGUEROA  laura.figueroa@newsday.com

Noel Feustel holds a printout of the website

Photo credit: Newsday / Thomas A. Ferrara | Noel Feustel holds a printout of the website for Bold Systems LLC in front of his Bayport home. (April 21, 2013)

More than a dozen Long Island school districts have spent thousands of taxpayer dollars to purchase computer software capable of influencing voter turnout in critical budget elections, according to district budget records.

Attempts by public bodies to selectively influence voter turnout is illegal under state election laws.

On May 21, Long Island voters will vote on the annual operating budgets for their local school districts, which require 50 percent approval to pass and 60 percent if the proposed budget exceeds the state’s 2 percent tax cap.

 

Software sold by Bold Systems LLC of Bellport allows districts to track voter turnout in real time, and gives districts the ability to generate call lists of key voting blocs, such as “PTA members, families with kids in athletics . . . to help get out the votes,” according to a description of the software on the company’s website, which has been deactivated.

“If your budget votes are too close to call, EMS can provide the edge you need,” reads the description, still accessible via archive website services. But spending public money to target particular voting groups before an election is against state law.

Bay ShoreBellportBlue Point, Connetquot, Harborfields,Hauppauge, Huntington, Mount Sinai, Riverhead, Rocky Point,SayvilleShelter Island, South Country and West Islip all paid for the software last year, according to documents obtained by a Bayportparent activist through a Freedom of Information Law request.

“My concern is that they are manipulating the electoral process,” said Noel Feustel of Bayport, who brought the issue to light with his records request.

The software was purchased by each district through the Board of Cooperative Educational Services, which negotiates prices for goods and services for the state’s hundreds of school districts.

In a joint statement issued Sunday, Gary Bixhorn, chief operating officer of Eastern Suffolk BOCES and Thomas Rogers, district superintendent of Nassau BOCES, who is also serving as interim superintendent of Western Suffolk BOCES, said they asked Bold Systems to deactivate any component of the program that potentially violates state law.

Both said that to their knowledge, all the districts that purchased the software “have conducted their budget elections in complete compliance with the procedures and policies of New York State.”

“When it was brought to our attention that Bold Systems LLC was marketing its services in such a way as to encourage school districts to target specific categories of voters and encourage a ‘yes’ vote on school budgets, [we] immediately terminated any aspect of the Bold Systems LLC that can be utilized in a manner that violates the spirit and letter of the law,” they wrote. The license to use the tracking software cost each district $6,300 a year, according to budget documents.

Robert Vomastek, who developed the software, declined to comment when reached by phone Sunday.Bold Systems’ website says 110 New York school districts use its software, which includes a simplified version that functions without the tracking capability.

North Shore School District Budget Update

The 2013-2014 North Shore School District budget has been passed by the school board on April 4. The budget will be put up for vote by the community on May 21.The budget will increase from $90,509,228 to $93,985,568, or approximately 3.5 million dollars. This represents an increase of 3.84%.

As i’m sure your aware the LIPA plant will be closing in the near future, leading to an eventual loss of tax revenue for the district. The Board has previously stated that despite the LIPA plant closing, they will cut not school district expenses to offset the loss of income from LIPA.  This budget increase of 3.84% reflects that policy.

Some interesting items in the school budget. The district employs 6 psychologists, at a cost of $832,000 to the taxpayers.  The district is also spending $223,000 this year to give iPads to  the incoming 6th & 9th grade. While presumably iPads could replace textbooks one day, the Board has stated only 2 text books are available on the iPads. Hence the taxpayers are paying for technology before it can be cost effectively implemented. One also has to question why expensive iPads are being selected instead of Kindle devices that are 1/3 the cost.

While the budget exceeds the 2% tax cap, the 3.8% increase is allowed due to loopholes in the tax cap that don’t require an override vote.

Please note we are now on Facebook at the Sea Cliff Property Owners Committee page https://www.facebook.com/seacliffpoc

Newsday: Sandy forces examination of trees, codes

SCPOC has long advocated giving property owners greater discretion on tree removal. Trees can endanger lives, houses, and the electric grid. Property owners should not be micro-managed on maintaining their land.

Sea Cliff residents were previously allowed to remove one tree per year without bureaucratic interference. The current code requires property owners to apply for “permission” to remove trees.

Property owners should not be discouraged from removing large dangerous trees, especially if such trees have the potential to endanger structures or the electric grid.

It seems SCPOC was ahead of the curve pre-Sandy, and now other municipalities are understanding our position.

Sandy forces examination of trees, codes

Originally published: December 1, 2012 6:15 PM
Updated: December 1, 2012 8:59 PM
By CAROL POLSKY  carol.polsky@newsday.com

Ronkonkoma house destroyed by a tree after Hurricane

Photo credit: Ed Betz | Ronkonkoma house destroyed by a tree after Hurricane Sandy rolled through the area. (Oct. 31, 2012)

Long Island homeowners are considering whether to put the chain saw to some once-beloved trees after superstorm Sandy’s violent gusts toppled tens of thousands of them, smashing houses and cars, ripping down power lines and costing lives.

Tree service companies, still busy removing trees felled by the Oct. 29 storm and the nor’easter that followed, are fielding anxious calls from homeowners for inspections and removals. Some villages and towns with strict tree preservation codes, such as Munsey ParkOld BrookvilleEast Hills and the Town of Oyster Bay, are considering loosening them to allow cutting down healthy but potentially hazardous trees.

“There is definitely a real awareness of what can happen living underneath something that weighs 30,000 to 40,000 pounds,” said David Cion, owner of Long Island Lumberjack Tree Service inPatchogue, who recently took down two mature oaks from a Lake Ronkonkoma property where debris from a tree smashing through the roof briefly knocked out an 11-year-old boy.

“We’re hearing, ‘Oh, I want to take more trees down, I’m worried they’re going to fall on my house,’ ” said Thomas Golon of Wonderland Tree Care in Oyster Bay. “People are nervous, and I can understand why.”

He, like most arborists, tries to calm homeowners, assuring them they can preserve most trees to withstand typical storms through regular inspections, pruning and care.

Sandy’s ‘significant’ effect

But they agree that all bets are off in a storm as fierce as Sandy, whose gusts of up to 90 mph caused devastation to trees that was historic in scope. Some compared it to Hurricane Gloria in 1985, others to the Great Hurricane of 1938. On Long Island, three people died under falling trees in the storm, and two more died clearing damaged trees.”This absolutely had by far the most significant effect on trees in my lifetime,” said Doug Akerley, vice president of operations at Hicks Nurseries in Westbury. He has worked in the business almost 40 years.

Old oaks that had survived half a century of storms and wind and ice were leveled in this one, he said. “I saw some areas in Brookvillethat were totally wooded properties that will be fields next year.”

In Huntington, town officials said Sandy felled 2,500 town trees — more than double the 1,100 lost to Tropical Storm Irene in 2011. Islandwide, officials estimate the losses as likely in the tens of thousands.

Sandy claimed not just weak or decayed trees, but the healthy and robust, too, toppling thick-trunked oaks by the roots and snapping pines in half.

“The best trees came down, the best trees with the fullest canopies, the densest crowns and the tallest height,” said Dwight Andrews, an arborist and landscape designer in West Islip. “They tended to catch the most wind.”

Josh Spinella, 11, won’t soon forget what he went through: He was briefly knocked out by falling debris when a massive oak crashed into an upstairs bedroom of his family’s Lake Ronkonkoma home.

His siblings, ages 12 and almost 5, had just left the room. “He had to crawl his way out, he was hysterical,” said dad Paul Spinella, 45.

The fallen tree was removed, along with two other massive old oaks near the house.

“My partner didn’t want any of these trees from the minute we moved in 12 years ago, and I said, ‘I love them, I want them,’ ” Spinella said. “The tree that fell down is older than the house; it’s 150 years old. . . . When it fell and almost killed our son, I conceded that big, old trees might be dangerous.”

Before Sandy, towns and LIPA faced criticism for backlogs in tree-trimming and removal of potentially vulnerable trees on public lands. But a utility spokesman asserted that tree trimming may not have helped much in this superstorm, in which tree damage was a prime culprit for prolonged outages.

“These were whole trees being uprooted,” said spokesman Alberto Bianchetti.

Most of the trees that fell, he said, were on private property or rights of way. LIPA officials say about 500 trees posing severe risks to wires are removed annually, with the permission of a town or property owner.

Preservation codes eyedIn the North Shore villages known for their strict tree preservation codes, there are new post-Sandy attitudes.

The code in Munsey Park — a North Shore village of 840 homes where 80 trees fell and five tree-damaged homes were condemned — requires permits to remove or even prune a tree. Healthy trees that don’t interfere with a property’s function are protected.

But Mayor Harry Nicolaides said the village board will consider changes to allow removal “of a perfectly healthy tree if it were replaced with a more strategically placed tree of a species less prone to damage” or with “a younger tree that hasn’t reached full maturity.”

In nearby East Hills, where hundreds of trees fell, the village board will vote on a similar revision to the local tree code this month, said Mayor Michael Koblenz.

In Old Brookville, an affluent village of large homes on large properties, almost two dozen houses were damaged by some of the hundreds of fallen trees. After Sandy, Mayor Bernie Ryba visited some of the damaged properties and spontaneously gave owners permission to take down trees that worried them — trees otherwise protected by a preservation code.

At his own home, narrowly missed by several falling trees, Ryba plans to remove a tall pine. “If it falls the right way, it’s going to go right through the house,” he said.

Even before the storm, the Town of Oyster Bay had begun a reassessment of its code to exempt homeowners desiring to remove a tree or two.

But in the Town of North Hempstead, Supervisor Jon Kaiman said that while it was time for “a healthy analysis of tree policies,” the leafy character of local communities had to be preserved.

“I don’t see us giving a green light to clear-cut yards,” he said, noting that if any tree deemed potentially hazardous could be removed, then “every tree within 80 feet of a house would be taken down and I don’t think that’s the answer.”

Preventing problemsAfter Sandy, one question is not just where trees should stand, but what kind.

Arborists said an individual tree’s fate often depended on soil conditions or its location in the path of a wind burst. But some species fared worse than others. Soft-wooded Eastern white pine trunks snapped in half. Branches were sheared off weak Callery pears, and shallow-rooted maples and spruces toppled, roots and all.

Dr. Jonathan Lehrer, assistant professor of ornamental horticulture at Farmingdale State College, said some of the damage reflects “poor practices going back in many cases decades.”

Tall, soft-wooded trees like white pines, he said, were put on small lots near homes. Silver andNorway maples — fast-growing and therefore weak-wooded — were planted en masse as street trees after World War II, and are now all aging and dying together. Confined curbside locations cramp root systems of large trees.

Homeowners can reduce risks by planting smaller trees near wires or homes. The Spinella family in Lake Ronkonkoma plans to follow such advice. “We’ll probably plant a weeping cherry or something that doesn’t get more than 20 feet or so,” Spinella said. “We’ll be regretting it in the summer when we have no shade.”

Phil Healey, superintendent of public works in Lynbrook, agreed the trade-offs can be tough.

“We all love the big trees in the summertime; you can’t beat them,” he said. “But you see the scope of the problem in a large storm. You see what happens if you don’t have the right tree in the right place or if you don’t care properly for the tree.”

Nicolaides didn’t expect wholesale removals, but said trees need to be assessed.

“If this became Munsey Meadow instead of Munsey Park, we’d have an even louder hue and cry,” he said, “but the reality is if we have aging trees, we owe it to ourselves to always take a second look.”

Village of Sea Cliff repeals unconstitutional code, opens discussion on tree regulations.

November 13, 2012

On Tuesday night, the Village of Sea Cliff Board of Trustee’s voted to repeal section 48-7 of the Village code. That section of the code authorized the Village Building Superintendent to search any property or building in the Village without owner’s consent, or, without a duly authorized search warrant.

This illegal section of the code prompted a lawsuit against the Village by SCPOC’s Anthony Losquadro. In July 2012, Supreme Court Justice Steven Jaeger agreed with us and declared section 48-7 “unconstitutional on its face.”

The Village Board vote to repeal 48-7 brought the Village code in compliance with the Judge’s order.

Mayor Kennedy commented that the Village intends to appeal the decision, although at this time the Village attorneys have not perfected an appeal with the appellate division.

Kennedy also mentioned that State Building code authorizes building inspectors  to search properties, therefore section 48-7 was in effect redundant, in his opinion.

SCPOC disagrees with the Mayor’s assertion, and we will be following up to ensure the Village’s code, regulations, and policies do not violate the constitutional protections of the residents.

Tree permit regulations may be re-visited?

During the discussion about Superstorm Sandy, which struck Long Island in early November, comments were made about the Village tree regulations.

Resident Phil Como stated that the code should be changed back to the old rules, where residents are permitted to remove one tree per year without a permit. Como said, ” We (property owners) want to be treated like adults.”

Mayor Kennedy seemingly agreed, stating, ” After Sandy, if trees were people, we would call them terrorists.”

We hope this opens a new discussion in the Village about restoring a property owner’s right to remove one tree per year without Village interference.

Sea Cliff POC supports Town of Oyster Bay’s efforts to cut down tree removal regulations.

The Town of Oyster Bay Supervisor John Venditto and the Oyster Bay Town Council have proposed to revise and eliminate some town codes governing the rights of property owners to remove trees. Sea Cliff POC attended the public hearing to lend support for the Town’s proposal.

At the hearing, Sea Cliff POC Anthony Losquadro stated, “Property Owners, as the ones paying the taxes and mortgage payments to their properties, should be allowed to maintain their property at their own discretion. What does it mean to be a landowner, if we need to request permission to merely remove a tree.”

Additionally, Losquadro went on to describe the time consuming, expensive, and bureaucratic regulations imposed by the Village of Sea Cliff with regards to tree removal.

http://www.newsday.com/long-island/nassau/oyster-bay-to-change-tree-ordinance-1.3951948

As reported by Newsday’s Emily Ngo,

 

Oyster Bay to change tree ordinance

Originally published: September 4, 2012 9:27 PM
Updated: September 4, 2012 9:36 PM
By EMILY NGO  emily.ngo@newsday.com

An Oyster Bay Town ordinance requiring permits for tree removal won’t be struck outright from the town code, but rather modified or replaced with another measure protecting trees, Supervisor JohnVenditto said Tuesday.

He called trees “a symbol of our suburban lifestyle” among testimony by civic and political leaders who opposed the proposed repeal of the ordinance.

“For those who were frightened by the word ‘repeal,’ don’t be frightened,” Venditto said.

Town officials Tuesday held the second of two public hearings on a bundle of code change proposals. Venditto said he was weighing adjusting the tree ordinance because permit fees, as much as $75 per tree, are a burden on homeowners and the permit and inspection requirements amount to “government intrusion.”

Since 2008, nearly 6,000 tree removal permits have been granted and about $272,000 in fees collected, officials said.

No vote was taken Tuesday on the ordinance. Venditto said a decision could be months away.

“There’s a very thin line between burden on the citizens and public welfare,” Sea Cliff Village resident James Foote said. “I encourage tweaking the ordinance . . . but not opening the flood gates for wanton development or destruction.”

Anthony Losquadro, also of Sea Cliff, said governments shouldn’t “dictate” what homeowners do with their properties, backing Venditto’s argument.

Nassau County Legis. Judy Jacobs (D-Woodbury), who’d advocated for the original tree ordinance as a civic leader, said destruction such as the retaliatory 1973 bulldozing of 15 wooded Woodbury acres by a developer must be avoided. She urged that “good heads get together” to craft a modification or replacement law. Several environmentalists, including representatives of Friends of the Bay and Save the Jewel by the Bay, Tuesday offered their services.

Sea Cliff POC interviewed by FOX 5 NY Linda Schmidt

On August 17, 2012, Sea Cliff POC Chairman Anthony Losquadro was interviewed on-air by Linda Schmidt of FOX 5 news NY for the 6pm broadcast.

Ms. Schmidt reported on the tree permit issue in the Village of Sea Cliff. Until recently, residents had the right to remove one tree per year without any permit from the Village. Subsequently, the Board of Trustees voted to enact a bureaucratic, costly, and restrictive tree permit scheme. In addition to costly permits, residents are now required to obtain permission from a “tree committee.” The tree committee usually demands that replacement trees be planted as compensation. This greatly and unnecessarily burdens the property owner, and diminishes his sovereignty over his own land.

Anthony Losquadro stated in the interview, “It is the property owner that makes the mortgage payments and pays the taxes, he should have discretion over the management of his own property. Additionally, as our entire power grid is above ground, every time a storm passes through our area trees inevitably come down, causing blackouts. Hence we should be encouraging residents to remove trees, not discouraging them!”

Reverting the tree laws back to the old code has been part of the Sea Cliff POC campaign platform.