George Kuney/Real Estate Attachement

Board Of Revision Of Taxes
Attention: Appeals Unit
Curtis Center, 3Rd. Floor
601 Walnut Street
Philadelphia, Pa 19106
 
==Attachment to the form titled "REAL ESTATE MARKET VALUE APPEAL FOR TAX YEAR 2010" ==
 
Property Address: 813 Morris Street, Property Owner: George Kuney
BRT Account Number: 01-2-3164-00
 
===OVERVALUATION===
 
My property at 813 Morris is little more than a shell and therefore worth significantly less than what it would appear to be as measured by “Comparable Properties”. I purchased this property for under $40,000 at Sheriff’s Sale with the intent of rehabilitating it; however, a serious motor vehicle accident left me disabled and in financial difficulty. The result is that this house has not been developed beyond the minimum requirements for occupancy.
 
Most of the walls, where there are walls, are without wallboard. Most of the ceilings are bare joists. There are only two interior doors in the house.
 
There are no cabinets installed in the area where a kitchen would be located. The sink in that area is a temporary installation consisting of a sink mounted in a piece of scrap counter top that is sitting loosely on two freestanding cabinets.
 
The bathroom has a bath tub and toilet installed, but there is no sink. The walls and ceiling are unfinished. There is no bathroom door. The floor is sealed plywood.
 
The Fair Market Value of $55,000 stated on the attached form is derived from comparing the FMV of shells with the same basic assets of general location, state of renovation, number of stories and construction. The following listings of properties sold are from the MLS. The actual price of sale on these properties was used to determine my estimate of the FMV:
 
--633 McKean St, Philadelphia, PA Sold for $45,000. This property was a shell in worse condition than my property.
--612 Dudley St, Philadelphia, PA Sold for $65,000. This property was a partial rehabilitation of a shell that was in superior condition to that of my property.
 
===NONUNIFORMITY===
 
The Philadelphia Tax Reform Commission established that: "Philadelphia’s property assessments do not meet industry standards for accuracy; all across the city, assessed values diverge widely from market values. Philadelphia’s property assessments do not meet industry standards for equity; properties in poorer neighborhoods are, on average, assessed at a higher percentage of market value than properties in more affluent neighborhoods. The inaccuracy and regressive nature of Philadelphia’s assessments violate standards of vertical and horizontal equity."
 
In his recent ruling in Clifton vs. Allegheny County, Judge Stanton Wettick found that 
"Using income tax terminology, one out of every four Philadelphia property owners was in a tax bracket of at least 3.35% and one out of every four property owners was in a tax bracket that did not exceed 1.42%"
 
Understanding that current assessments are flawed, the Board of Revision of Taxes (BRT) has invested significant public funds in an effort to correct its valuation system. However, it is clear that the proposed reassessment does not provide for uniform taxation of my property.
 
The BRT explains the definition of “Market Value” on its web site — "A current economic definition agreed upon by agencies that regulate federal financial institutions in the United States is: The most probable price (in terms of money) which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller each acting prudently and knowledgeably, and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus."
 
If, by law, all properties are to be assessed uniformly, then all properties should share the same basic relationship between their current potential resale value and their “Market Value” for tax purposes. But that is not the case in Philadelphia today.
 
While my property would probably sell for $55,000 my new assessment would estimate my home’s Market Value to $47,000 which would base my taxes on approximately 85 percent of its current value. However, other homes are valued for tax purposes at significantly different percentages of current value including: 
 
--809 Morris St., a 3 Story Masonry Row Home like mine most recently sold for $110,000 but would have a BRT market Value of $47,000 or only 42% of its most recent sale price.
--812 Morris St., a 3 Story Masonry Row Home like mine most recently sold for $217,250 but would have a BRT Market Value of $47,000 or only 21.6% of its most recent sale price.
--817 Morris St., a 3 Story Masonry Row Home like mine most recently sold for $30,000 but would have a BRT market Value of $47,000 or 156% of its most recent sale price.
--819 Morris St., a 3 Story Masonry Row Home like mine most recently sold for $29,600 but would have a BRT market Value of $47,000 or 158% of it’s most recent sale price.
--823-25 Morris St., a 3 Story Masonry Row Home like mine most recently sold for $165,000 but would have a BRT market Value of $49,700 or 30% of its most recent sale price.
 
The variances of value in the above referenced cases far exceed the 15% “maximum deviation” standard used by the Courts.
 
The Pennsylvania Constitution demands that “all taxes shall be uniform, upon the same class of subjects, within the territorial limits of the authority levying the tax.” The city is in comprehensive violation of uniformity and the most-recent assessments do not correct the problems. The assessment lacks uniformity with other properties within the taxing jurisdiction and is therefore illegal, improper and unjust. 
 
My increase should be rescinded and the city should complete a comprehensive and fair reassessment of properties so that assessments meet industry standards for accuracy and equity and the Constitutional mandate of uniformity.
 
===CONCLUSION===
 
If my property tax was based on the principle of uniform taxation of my property, as required by the Pennsylvania Constitution, that tax rate would “…be uniform, upon the same class of subjects, within the territorial limits of the authority levying the tax.” 
 
If such a universal standard was applied, it is my contention that my tax obligation would be equal to or less than amounts paid in previous years.
 
I therefore demand that the Board Of Revision Of Taxes cancel any proposed increase in my property tax.
 
Respectfully,
 
George Kuney
(215) 465-8541
813 Morris Street
Philadelphia PA 19148
 
MAIL TO:
Po Box 2503
Philadelphia PA 19147