Potsdam residents express anger over 50-100% assessment hikes
Apr. 10—POTSDAM — With the deadline now passed to challenge increased property assessments through the company responsible for the town-wide revaluation, frustrated property owners voiced their anger once again before the town board.
GAR Associates, based in Clifton Park, raised property assessments for homes and businesses by 50 to 100%, leaving residents facing a much steeper cost of living in Potsdam. Many property owners say the company has been unresponsive and difficult to contact. Some reported that GAR representatives have been entirely unreachable.
The town contracted GAR in 2023 for $385,000 to conduct the reassessment. The updated property values were mailed out in early March.
Residents were instructed to speak with GAR representatives and complete a form by the end of March if they wanted to request a reduction in their assessments. However, many homeowners reported dissatisfaction with how their concerns were handled. Numerous residents said their assessments contained inaccurate information about home size, features, and property characteristics, often inconsistent with similar homes in the area.
Property owners will still have an opportunity to formally challenge their new assessments with Town Assessor Danielle Mitchell on Grievance Day, scheduled for the end of May.
During the town board's regular meeting on Tuesday, residents filled the meeting hall and voiced their frustrations directly to officials.
Homeowner Bill Paige described GAR's reassessment of his property as "false."
"I brought pictures of my property in and I brought the assessment that was sent by GAR to my place. I updated it because it was false. I give it to the assessor. I've heard nothing back," Paige said.
He added that since early March, he has visited the assessor's office twice and made multiple calls to GAR with no response. "They won't answer my call and I want to know what the status of my property is," he said.
Paige, who lives in a capped basement with his medically disabled wife and relies on Social Security, said he originally intended to build a ranch house but couldn't afford to complete it.
"The cost of living goes up two, two-and-a-half percent a year. I've got a 300% increase on my property and I live in a capped cellar that I had appraised back the last time at $70,000 and now it's $232,000. I don't think it's fair," he told the board. "I don't think I'm getting the help I need to get it moving."
"The roof needs replacing, the bathroom needs redoing, the bees are coming through in the upstairs. And I brought that in, they had the size of the house wrong," Paige said. "Nobody is going to give me $232,000 for my property no more than they would give me $100,000."
Another homeowner, Tracey Haggett-Sloan, submitted a packet to the board that raised questions about GAR's methods and procedures. She accused the company of failing to adhere to state-mandated ethical standards, which require objectivity in assessments.
"Are they not biased in favor of the township to raise the assessment and increase the LOA and try to capture unrealized capital gains for the purpose of taxes? Wouldn't that be considered biased? That's against the conduct," she said. She claimed GAR was specifically hired to increase property values. "Didn't GAR rely on the unsupported conclusion that the town had to raise assessments?"
Haggett-Sloan said the process was sloppy and unfair to property owners. She noted that residents requesting records of comparable sales that informed their assessments were not provided with that information. During her floor time — and using time donated by other attendees — she criticized GAR's approach, saying the company lacked the "geographic competency needed" under state law to conduct accurate assessments in Potsdam.
She cited incorrect square footage and missing details or photos in assessment documents. "To date I have not received any tangible information as to the type and or extent of the analysis utilized by GAR," she said. She also criticized the online complaint form used by GAR, which she said many residents struggled to use effectively.
According to Haggett-Sloan, the assessments were supposedly based on local property sales, but only 161 properties were sold last year — just 0.3% of all parcels in Potsdam. Only 36 of those sales were over $250,000, or 2% of sales and 0.07% of total properties. She also cited the town's poverty rate of 17.3% and questioned whether GAR considered that in its valuations.
She said state law restricts property assessment increases to 6% annually or 20% over five years — far below the increases announced by GAR.
"Are we little more than in-service to the tax?" Haggett-Sloan asked. She said she plans to speak with Canton Town Supervisor Mary Ann Ashley about reconsidering the use of GAR for a similar project in that municipality.
Several other property owners echoed these concerns, sharply criticizing both the town officials and GAR. Some pointed out that Waddington chose to delay implementing its reassessment due to similar issues and suggested Potsdam should do the same. They also cited complaints from Troy and Ogdensburg about GAR's work and questioned the company's credibility.
Others claimed GAR used outdated satellite imagery rather than up-to-date property information. Some reported that structures no longer on their land were still listed, including misidentified "patios" that were actually old concrete pads from removed mobile homes.
The final assessment roll is available to view online at wdt.me/3wZcuN
The town's Board of Assessment Review will meet around May 27 to hear unresolved grievances from property owners. The final assessment roll is scheduled to be submitted on July 21.
Mitchell, the town assessor, holds office hours from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, at 18 Elm St. She can be reached at 315-265-2810.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Medicare go-broke date pushed up three years in latest trustees report
This story was originally published on Healthcare Dive. To receive daily news and insights, subscribe to our free daily Healthcare Dive newsletter. A key trust fund underpinning Medicare's hospital benefit will go broke three years earlier than previously expected absent congressional action, threatening benefits for seniors, according to the Medicare trustees' annual report released Wednesday. The Medicare Hospital Insurance trust fund will be depleted in 2033, instead of 2036, as Medicare spending continues to outpace the program's income, the trustees — a group comprised of the HHS, Treasury and Labor secretaries, along with the Social Security commissioner — warned. The bleaker outlook is due to higher-than-expected spending for hospital care, hospice services and physician-administered drugs. The trustees called on Congress to act quickly to stabilize Medicare, though near-term action is unlikely as the Republican majority focuses on advancing their reconciliation megabill. Medicare has been teetering on the edge of insolvency for a while. But the latest report from Medicare's trustees is more dire than last year's, which projected Medicare would become insolvent in more than a decade. Now, Medicare's hospital trust fund will start running out of money in eight years — when today's 57-year-olds first become eligible for the program. The looming go-broke date is a result of the fund's substantial shortfall as Medicare costs continue to grow rapidly, trustees said in the report. Medicare costs are expected to increase from 3.8% of the gross domestic product in 2024 to 6.2% in 2050 before reaching 6.7% in 2099, the report projects. Costs to another fund that pays Parts B and D, called the Supplemental Medical Insurance trust fund, are also climbing, increasing pressure on beneficiary budgets and the federal budget. (Though, the Supplemental Medical Insurance trust fund is largely funded by premiums and general revenue that resets each year and doesn't face the same solvency concerns.) This year's estimates, which are based on current payment rates, could be conservative, trustees said. Under an alternate scenario, in which provider payments grow at a rate more consistent with underlying medical costs — a change aggressively lobbied for by physician associations — Medicare spending will rise to 8.8% of the GDP in 2099 rather than 6.7%, according to the report. The precarious footing of the federal insurance program, which covers almost 69 million people in the U.S., is due to the country's underlying demographic shifts, according to experts. More and more Americans are aging into Medicare, while at the same time the number of workers paying into its trust fund is dropping. More seniors are also selecting privatized Medicare Advantage plans, which are more expensive than traditional Medicare coverage. If and when the U.S. hits Medicare's go-broke date, the hospital trust fund, which pays hospitals and providers of post-acute services and also covers some of the cost of private Medicare Advantage plans, will have inadequate income to fund those benefits. Medicare payments would immediately be cut by 11%, according to the report. Those cuts would grow over time, likely disrupting services for seniors and reimbursement for providers. It's worth nothing that there's a significant degree of uncertainty in trustees' projections, which vary based on macroeconomic forces in a given year. For example, in 2020, in the early throes of COVID-19, the board predicted the hospital trust fund would run out by 2026. That deadline was pushed back to 2028 and then 2031 in subsequent years' reports, amid a broader economic rebound and more care shifting to cheaper outpatient settings. Still, the fund hasn't met the trustees' test for short-range financial adequacy since 2003, and has triggered funding warnings since 2018. To date, Congress has not allowed Medicare to go under. But legislators' lack of action despite years of warnings is a source of heartburn for budget hawks, Medicare advocates and physician lobbies. Experts say lawmakers need to act soon given many reforms to stabilize Medicare could take a few years to go into effect. 'The projections in this report show that change is needed to address Medicare's financial challenges,' the Medicare trustees wrote in their report. 'The sooner solutions are enacted, the more flexible and gradual they can be.' According to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, restoring Medicare solvency would require Congress to boost the payroll tax rate by 14% or reduce Medicare spending by 9% — both politically unappetizing proposals. Other reforms that could curb Medicare spending, like implementing site-neutral payments or reducing overpayments in MA, have more bipartisan support but aren't a policy priority on the Hill. Republicans are currently focused on hammering out legislation to extend tax cuts from President Donald Trump's first term, cut green energy programs, fund border control and curb Medicaid spending. 'We are running out of time to phase in changes gradually and avoid harsh cuts, sharp tax increases, or unacceptable borrowing. Demagoguing this issue may be politically expedient, but it will ultimately prove ruinous for the tens of millions of Americans that rely on the programs,' Maya MacGuineas, the president of the CRFB, said in a statement Wednesday. Recommended Reading Medicare go-broke date extended to 2036, but warning bells continue ringing
CNET
an hour ago
- CNET
Social Security June 2025: The Last Payment of the Month Is Headed Out
June's Social Security payments are here. Here's the full payment schedule for the month. CNET If you haven't received your Social Security payment for the month of June yet, you'll be getting it this coming week. The fourth and final round of payments is set to be sent out in just a few short days. If you just applied for benefits or aren't sure when you should expect your monthly payment, we have you covered. Social Security benefits are sent monthly to people who've applied for their retirement, survivor or disability benefits. The payments are sent in waves throughout the month. When you receive your Social Security check is determined by how long you've been receiving benefits, whether you receive additional government benefits or the day of the month you were born. Not sure when you should be receiving your payment? We break it down, below. Read on to find out how your payment date is determined, when you should receive your check, and the full payment schedule for the month of June. For more, don't miss why paper Social Security checks will stop being sent out soon. This is when you'll receive your Social Security check Want to know which day of the month you'll receive your check? This is the Social Security and SSDI payment schedule for June. Social Security payment schedule for June 2025 If you have received Social Security since before May 1997 June 3 If your birthday falls between the 1st and 10th of any given month June 11 If your birthday falls between the 11th and 20th of any given month June 18 If your birthday falls between the 21st and 31st of any given month June 25 How to determine your Social Security payment date Social Security payments are typically paid out starting on the second Wednesday of the month. The remaining two payments will be paid out on the following two Wednesdays of the month. Which week you receive your payment depends on your birthdate. There is one big exception, which we'll cover below. Birthdate between Social Security check date 1st and 10th 2nd Wednesday of the month 11th and 20th 3rd Wednesday of the month 21st and 31st 4th Wednesday of the month Other federal benefits will not be sent the same day If you've received Social Security benefits since before May 1997, or receive Social Security and Supplemental Security Income, your payment schedule isn't determined by your birthdate. Instead, payments are paid out every month on the same date with a couple of exceptions. Social Security payments will be sent out on the 3rd of each month, while SSI payments are sent out on the 1st of each month. These dates will sometimes change if the 1st or the 3rd of the month falls on a weekend or holiday. For example, March 3 of last year fell on a weekend, so Social Security recipients received their March payments two days early, on March 1. The only benefits that are paid on the same schedule are Social Security and Social Security Disability Insurance. Paper Social Security checks are going away soon An executive order from the White House will end the use of paper Social Security checks on Sept. 30. This means all payments after that date will be sent digitally, including direct deposits, debit and credit cards, digital wallets and other real-time payment systems to reduce the overall cost of sending physical checks to beneficiaries. The decision is not surprising when you consider that only 485,766 Social Security checks are mailed each month, which pales in comparison to the 68,104,184 direct deposit payments made each month. While this will undoubtedly be an adjustment period for those people who have been receiving physical checks, moving mailed benefits payments to digital forms will increase security. It's important to note that some exclusions will be made for certain individuals. A missing Social Security check? Try these steps If your check fails to arrive when it's supposed to or not at all, the Social Security Administration suggests waiting three additional mailing days before contacting it. After that, you can call the national toll-free number: 1-800-772-1213. The SSA notes that "wait times to speak to a representative are typically shorter in the morning, later in the week and later in the month." If you're having trouble reaching the SSA through the national number, you can use its office locator to find a local office. For more, see how to apply for Social Security benefits for eligible children and how to apply for Social Security Disability Insurance.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Social Security's 2026 Cost-of-Living Adjustment (COLA) Estimate Is Getting a "Trump Bump" -- Here's How Much Extra You Might Receive
As many as nine out of 10 retirees rely on their Social Security income to cover some portion of their expenses. Estimates for Social Security's 2026 cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) are climbing, and President Trump's tariff and trade policy looks to be the culprit. Though an above-average COLA for a fifth-consecutive year would be welcome on paper, retirees continue to get the short end of the stick when it comes to annual raises. The $23,760 Social Security bonus most retirees completely overlook › Last month, Social Security's retired-worker benefit made history, with the average payout topping $2,000 for the first time since the program's inception. Although this represents a modest monthly benefit, it's nevertheless proved vital to helping aging workers cover their expenses. In each of the prior 23 years, pollster Gallup surveyed retirees about their reliance on the Social Security income they're receiving. Between 80% and 90% of respondents noted it was a "major" or "minor" income source. In other words, only around one in 10 retirees could, in theory, make do without their Social Security check. For an overwhelming majority of Social Security beneficiaries, nothing is more important than knowing precisely how much they'll receive each month -- and that begins with the program's annual cost-of-living adjustment (COLA), which is announced during the second week of October. This year's COLA announcement will be of particular interest, with President Donald Trump's tariff and trade policies expected to directly affect how much Social Security beneficiaries will receive per month in 2026. But before digging into the specifics of how President Trump's policies are expected to impact the pocketbooks of seniors, survivors, and workers with disabilities, it's important to understand the building blocks of what Social Security's COLA is and why it matters. The program's COLA is effectively the "raise" passed along on a near-annual basis that accounts for the impact of inflation (rising prices) on benefits. For example, if a large basket of goods and services increased in cost by 3% from one year to the next, Social Security benefits would need to climb by a commensurate amount, or buying power for Social Security recipients would decrease. In the 35 years following the issuance of the first retired-worker check in January 1940, COLAs were assigned at random by special sessions of Congress. Only a total of 11 COLAs were passed along during this timeline, with no adjustments made in the 1940s. Beginning in 1975, the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) was adopted as Social Security's inflationary measure that would allow for annual cost-of-living adjustments. The CPI-W has over 200 spending categories, each of which has its own unique percentage weighting. These weightings are what allow the CPI-W to be expressed as a single figure each month, which leads to crisp month-to-month and year-to-year comparisons to see if prices are, collectively, rising (inflation) or declining (deflation). When calculating Social Security's COLA, only CPI-W readings from the third quarter (July through September) are taken into consideration. If the average CPI-W reading in the third quarter of the current year is higher than the comparable period of the previous year, inflation has occurred, and beneficiaries are due for a beefier payout. Following a decade of anemic raises in the 2010s -- three years during the decade (2010, 2011, and 2016) saw no COLA passed along due to deflation -- beneficiaries have enjoyed four consecutive years of above-average cost-of-living adjustments and are hoping for this streak to continue. A historic increase in U.S. money supply during the COVID-19 pandemic sent the prevailing rate of inflation soaring to a four-decade high. This resulted in COLAs of 5.9% in 2022, 8.7% in 2023, 3.2% in 2024, and 2.5% in 2025, respectively. For context, the average annual increase in benefits since 2010 is 2.3%. While estimates for Social Security's 2026 cost-of-living adjustment came in below this average shortly after President Donald Trump took office for his nonconsecutive second term, the script has now been flipped. Nonpartisan senior advocacy group The Senior Citizens League (TSCL) was forecasting a 2.2% COLA for 2026 as recently as March. Meanwhile, independent Social Security and Medicare policy analyst Mary Johnson, who retired from TSCL last year, was calling for a 2.2% increase in April following the release of the March inflation report from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). After the release of the May inflation report from the BLS, both TSCL and Johnson are now forecasting a 2026 COLA of 2.5%. A 2.5% COLA would increase the average retired-worker benefit by $50 per month next year, as well as lift monthly checks for the typical worker with disabilities and survivor beneficiary by $40 and $39, respectively. This 0.3% increase in both forecasts over the past couple of months is estimated to boost the average Social Security payout (for all beneficiaries) by approximately $5.57 per month in 2026. This "Trump bump" is the result of the president's tariff and trade policies having a very modest inflationary impact on domestic prices. Charging a global import duty on all countries while imposing higher "reciprocal tariff rates" on dozens of countries that have historically run adverse trade imbalances with the U.S. can result in these higher costs being passed along to consumers. Though a lot can change with Trump's tariff and trade policy in the coming weeks and months, its current design points to a modest bump in the 2026 COLA. On paper, a fifth consecutive year where COLAs are above average (compared to the previous 16 years) probably sounds great. With the average retired-worker payout cresting $2,000 per month, an added $50 per month would be welcome in 2026. But the fact of the matter is that a 0.3% bump in COLA estimates since Trump introduced his tariff and trade policy doesn't remotely move the needle when it comes to what retirees have been shortchanged for more than a decade. Though the CPI-W is designed to be an all-encompassing measure of inflation, it has an inherent flaw that can be seen in its full name. Specifically, it tracks the spending habits of "urban wage earners and clerical workers," who, in many instances, are working-age Americans not currently receiving a Social Security benefit. Urban wage earners and clerical workers spend their money very differently than seniors. Whereas the former has a higher percentage of their monthly budgets devoted to things like education, apparel, and transportation, seniors spend a higher percentage on shelter and medical care services. Even though an overwhelming majority of Social Security beneficiaries are aged 62 and above, the CPI-W doesn't factor in this added importance of shelter and medical care services inflation. The end result for retirees has been a persistent decline in the buying power of a Social Security dollar. According to a study conducted by TSCL, the purchasing power of a Social Security dollar has dropped by 20% since 2010. A very modest "Trump bump" isn't going to offset this. What's more, the aforementioned two costs that matter most to retirees -- shelter and medical care services -- have had higher trailing-12-month (TTM) inflation rates than the annually issued Social Security COLA. The BLS inflation report for May showed TTM increases of 3.9% for shelter and 3% for medical care services, respectively. As long as the program's cost-of-living adjustment trails the annual inflation rate for these two key expenses, retirees will continue getting the short end of the stick. If you're like most Americans, you're a few years (or more) behind on your retirement savings. But a handful of little-known could help ensure a boost in your retirement income. One easy trick could pay you as much as $23,760 more... each year! Once you learn how to maximize your Social Security benefits, we think you could retire confidently with the peace of mind we're all after. Join Stock Advisor to learn more about these Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Social Security's 2026 Cost-of-Living Adjustment (COLA) Estimate Is Getting a "Trump Bump" -- Here's How Much Extra You Might Receive was originally published by The Motley Fool
