My property taxes went up again this year, and instead of fleeing (just yet), I decided to fight. To understand how assessments are calculated, I filed a FOIL (Freedom of Information Law) request this past August. I asked for three things: the raw data used to generate assessments, the modeling methodologies, and whether the modeling is conducted in-house or outsourced. What followed was a months-long bureaucratic obstacle course. First, I was told the request would take up to eight months to fulfill. Then I was informed I would need to pay $376 for 1,500 printed pages. Only after pushing back and citing the law was I permitted to bring in a thumb drive and receive the 1,500 pages electronically. To decipher what I received will require spending an entire weekend (at least) parsing the documents through ChatGPT, then manually verifying every interpretation. Fellow citizens, that’s not transparency. That’s obstruction. And it’s what compelled me to attend a recent Civic Association meeting featuring Greenburgh’s longtime town assessor, Edye McCarthy, as guest speaker. I was hoping for clarity and, instead, found deeper cause for concern.
One would think that a large—curious if not angry—crowd would have been in attendance. Instead, the meeting featured two obsequious moderators, a single town board member (Francis Sheehan), and twelve residents. And yet, what unfolded offered a revealing glimpse into a deeply flawed property tax system that affects thousands of homeowners. The assessor, who has held her role for nearly four decades, gave a well-rehearsed presentation, painting a picture of professionalism and fairness. She detailed her team’s use of the CAMA system—Computer-Assisted Mass Appraisal—to determine the value of homes based on dozens of parameters. Their findings, she then explained, are verified externally by (unnamed) third parties. But when the floor opened for questions, it became clear that behind the veneer of precision lies something far foggier.
I asked Ms. McCarthy why the assessed values in Hartsdale continue to rise despite a stagnant housing market. According to broker-reported sales activity, the average sales price in 2025 remained virtually flat compared to 2024 ($946,412 vs. $942,828), while the median price declined. Yet the 2025 Market Trend Map on the assessor’s site shows every neighborhood in “growth mode.” So even though her office implies to have access to current data—albeit questionably sourced or interpreted—her answer to my question was that assessments are based not on current-year sales, but on sales from up to two years prior. In other words, 2025 property taxes are pegged to values from 2023. This introduces an automatic lag into the system that all but guarantees upward drift. When the market softens, residents are still taxed at inflated rates until the lag eventually—if ever—catches up.
Even more revealing was her admission that there simply aren’t enough annual sales to support a valid statistical model in certain parts of town. Hartsdale had just 70 single-family home sales in 2023, 74 in 2024, and 22 so far in 2025 (likely due to incomplete data). Statistically speaking, these are paper-thin samples—nowhere near the scale needed to build robust, predictive models with meaningful p-values or confidence intervals. The assessor conceded this point, adding that in such cases, the science stops, and the “art” begins. This art, as she described it, involves her team stepping in to manually adjust values when the model falls short. Sometimes it’s based on neighborhood buzz—“things I hear,” she said. Other times it reflects broad judgments about desirability. For example, she noted that swimming pools didn’t used to be worth much but now “add a lot of value.” These judgments are not always integrated into the modeling software; they’re done by hand, by a team that now works year-round addressing grievances—because they are running a subjective and error-prone process rather than a neutral, data-driven one. This is how even homes like my parents’—which have not undergone a single renovation in 30 years—still see regular tax increases. If the average is based on lagging data, fragile models, and discretionary tweaks, and if most homes are nudged upward, then nearly everyone ends up paying more.
There are additional inequities that should concern all residents of unincorporated Greenburgh. The town assessor confirmed that a disproportionate share of the Town’s tax-exempt properties—such as religious institutions, public facilities, and other nonprofits—is concentrated in unincorporated Greenburgh. These properties are exempt from paying taxes, yet they still rely on municipal services funded by the rest of us. We are carrying this load—without any compensatory relief. To make matters worse, certain neighborhoods within unincorporated Greenburgh have never received meaningful remediation for chronic flood zones, rendering some homes effectively unsellable. These properties lose market value, yet continue to be taxed as if the flood risk doesn’t exist. And I won’t even get into school taxes—except to say that they increase every year, with no accountability. Thanks to the perennial decisions of the Board of Education, our tax burden continues to climb, even as the chronically under-performing Greenburgh Central School District further drags down property values. In short, we pay more and get less—less equity, less transparency, and less return on our community investment.
There is a larger sociological problem here. The town’s tax system, as it currently functions, is killing the host. Longtime residents are not selling their homes. They are not realizing the supposed gains in value that rising assessments assume. But they are being taxed on those paper gains just the same. Seniors and working families alike are being squeezed by a process that is inconsistent, and largely immune to scrutiny. Official inflation for 2025 is around 3%, but the U.S. dollar has also weakened by 10% against foreign currencies, raising the price of imported goods. Meanwhile, local wages are mostly flat, while housing costs—prices, taxes and mortgage rates—climb.
And all of this is happening under the watch of a single assessor who has been in office for 37 years and a town supervisor who is once again running unopposed. There is no check on this system. No rotation of oversight. Just a bureaucratic machine that lumbers on, adjusting its numbers by ear and squeezing ever more from residents—residents who are left with no choice but to comply or leave. It is time to demand more. Not just transparency, but reform. Not just models, but fairness. Not just polite meetings with twelve attendees—but real civic engagement.
— Tanya Dragic
No comments:
Post a Comment