Monroe Township Ordered to Undertake Revaluation

by: Anthony F. Della Pelle
9 Nov 2010

The Tax Court of New Jersey recently granted an application by approximately 1,000 Monroe Township property owners which will require the Township to undertake a municipal property tax revaluation.  The plaintiffs claim that the “Chapter 123” equalization ratio for the Township is skewed and discriminatory based on the Township’s failure to properly categorize sales between 2001 and 2005.  Monroe Township argued that the plaintiff’s complaint should be dismissed because they failed to exhaust their administrative remedies with the County Board of Taxation.

The Tax Court analyzed the twelve criteria for when a revaluation may be required as summarized in Totowa Borough v. Passaic County Bd. of Taxation, 23 N.J. Tax 466 (Tax 2007), against the undisputed facts presented by both parties.  First, the court noted that seventeen years had passed since the last municipal revaluation.  Next, the court noted that the ratios had been skewed by the Monroe Township assessor’s office failed to correctly categorize “unusable” sales between 2001 and 2005.  Further, the court found that the coefficients of deviation were well above the 15% acceptable range.  The court also noted that Monroe Township had failed to maintain adequate property record cards for new construction between 1993 and 1996.  Finally, the court examined the claim that the Township was losing revenue due to successful appeals.

Monroe Township was ordered to conduct a revaluation to be effective for the tax year 2012, and the Township must submit a plan and schedule for the revaluation by December 1, 2010.

The Tax Court’s opinion in John E. Keane v. Twp. of Monroe, ___ N.J. Tax ___ (Tax 2010), may be found here.

For more on how other towns are handling revaluation issues, see the following posts on this blog:

Municipalities Reassessing Properties Despite Recent Revaluations

Tax Court Remands Revaluation Order 

The author wishes to acknowledge the assistance of Cory K. Kestner, Esq., of McKirdy & Riskin, PA, in the preparation of this article.

 

Related Links:

See Melanie Lefkowitz’s article in the Wall Street Journal: Paying the Piper in Maplewood; or

Ricardo Kaulessar’s article in the Hudson Reporter:   Reval pain from 1988 still lingers What does the past predict for the future?

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail