Final Tax Assessment Meetings This Week in Buffalo, New York

If you own a home or property in the City of Buffalo, check your calendar.

The last three community meetings on the city’s proposed tax reassessment program, which is expected to take effect in January.

In May, during his State of the City address, Mayor Byron Brown said the city was “strong,” but added that property taxes could need to be increased by as much as 9 percent in the coming year. Buffalo properties have not had their tax assessments updated in five years.

In budget discussions that followed the proposal’s release in May, the mayor and city council approved a budget that included a lower property tax increase of 4.19 per cent, or an increase of $72 per year, or $6.03 per month, for what was described as an average city home valued at $160,700. For commercial properties, the tax levy is 7.5 per cent.

In total, the mayor’s originally proposed budget of $618 million has been reduced by more than $2.3 million, to $615,616,500.

The city held meetings in each council district to allow residents to ask city officials questions about what the reassessment program will mean for them and their communities.

This week, public meetings will conclude, with three meetings scheduled this week.

Here are the remaining public information sessions:

• Monday, July 29, starting at 5:30 p.m., in the Niagara District at the Richmond-Summer Senior Center, 337 Summer Street
• Tuesday, July 30, starting at 5:30 p.m., in the North District of West Hertel School, 489 Hertel Avenue; and
• Thursday, August 1, starting at 5:30 p.m., in the Delaware District at the North Buffalo Community Center, 203 Sanders Road.

In total, nine meetings are planned this summer, since July 8, with dozens, even hundreds of citizens present and asking questions to elected officials and representatives of the City.

Meanwhile, Our City Action Buffalo has been asking who will actually pay the biggest bill and who will be allowed to pass the buck to others.

The group claims that “payments from major taxpayers, National Fuel and M&T Bank, have declined significantly” and “payments from wealthy property owners have declined significantly,” while those with large properties have filed lawsuits against the city to challenge their assessments, which helps keep their tax bills lower, and developers already benefit from several significant tax breaks to keep their businesses and investments active within city limits.

“Although the city has raised taxes four times in recent years, an analysis of property tax data suggests that the city’s largest and wealthiest taxpayers are actually paying significantly less in municipal property taxes today than they did in 2019,” the group said. “Many wealthy real estate developers are also receiving significant tax breaks on their properties.”

By charging a third less than the city’s set commercial tax rate, the city loses about $6 million a year, the group said. In addition, several developers “appear to have obtained significant tax breaks through lawsuits … and all have obtained tax reductions of between 40 and 60 percent. The wealthy owners of Rivermist Dr., for example, sued the city and saw their tax bills reduced by as much as 50 percent.”

The biggest tax breaks go to some developers who have secured tax exemptions through payment-in-lieu-of-tax (PILOT) programs at rates of 40 to 60 percent, while “others are paying PILOTs into an infrastructure fund to improve city infrastructure in the immediate vicinity of their properties.”

While homeowners generally pay the same tax rate on their properties, their individual tax bill depends on the assessed value of their home. “For reasons that are unclear, the assessed value of expensive homes (with an assessed value over $400,000) increased much less overall than the assessed value of mid-range homes (with an assessed value of $100,000 to $400,000) following the 2019 reassessment. As a result, the amount of taxes paid by high-end homeowners decreased significantly, on average. Rates went down, but their assessments didn’t go up by the same amount. Ultimately, it wasn’t a fair process for everyone.”