Brewer and Lee read questions on residency data, state information sharing, and 17,000 notices
The chairs ask why the burden of proof is on residents when DOF had existing data from STAR, veterans, and co-op abatement programs. They ask whether DOF requested state information sharing and request detailed data on the 17,000 notices including response rates and pending applications.
Seven, the state law allowed finance to make an initial determination of primary residency based on information available to the apartment.
Despite this, long-time residents received a letter from finance.
A, why is the burden to prove primary residency left to long-time residents when finance already, this has been asked a lot today, had information to determine
which properties would be exempt from the tax based on other filings in relation to STAR, the veterans exemption, and the condo co-op abatement?
B, what were the criteria used by finance for determining the latter list?
C.
Did finance utilize any other exemption data that would indicate primary residency, such as STAR or co-op and condo, to avoid sending letters to constituents that are known to the department as primary residents?
D.
State law expressly authorized information sharing between the state and the city for purposes of implementing the tax.
Did finance request information from the state to identify owner occupancy prior to sending the letters?
If yes, when, what, and how was it incorporated into determination?
If no, why not?
Okay, regarding the 17,000 properties that were notified, how many of the owners who received letter notices currently receive the cooperative and condominium property tax abatement, veterans exemption or STAR or other benefit for which primary residency is relevant?
Of the owners who have already successfully established primary residency in response to the letter notice, how many were already receiving one of these benefits?
How many have responded so far?
Of those, how many has DOF determined are not subject to the tax?
C, how many applications remain pending?
D, how many have been denied?
E, how many of the properties does DOF currently estimate will ultimately be subject to the tax?
F, how many of the initial determinations were based on affirmative evidence that a property was not a primary residence versus an absence of information demonstrated?
It was a primary residence.
G, can you provide this committee with the list of 17,000 properties that mailings were sent to?
And H, can you provide this committee with a sample letter that was sent to the 17,000 properties, including any different notices used for Class 1 properties, condominiums, and cooperative units?