Syracuse Board of Assessment Review hears grievances on dozens of properties; many tied to ongoing litigation

The Syracuse Board of Assessment Review heard extended presentations from property owners, lawyers and city staff about tentative property assessments on dozens of parcels across the city, including retail sites, apartment complexes and vacant lots. Petitioners supplied leases, income-and-expense statements, CoStar/LoopNet reports and sale information and asked the board to lower tentative assessments; city staff and counsel said some cases are in litigation and others can be resolved through additional data or negotiation.

The hearing covered many properties grouped by ownership or similarity. Two AutoZone retail sites were among the first cases discussed: 3068 Erie Boulevard East (owner listed in the record as Rockland ET LLC) had a tentative full assessed value the petitioner described as $650,000 (land value $292,500); the petitioner argued the fair market value is substantially lower (owner estimate provided). A second AutoZone at 1900 Grama Boulevard carried a tentative full assessed value the petitioner listed at $920,000 (land value reported at $277,825); counsel for the property told the board the matter had been the subject of litigation, was settled last year, and the petitioner asked that the record be dismissed with prejudice (the board did not record a formal ruling at the hearing).

A large set of properties owned by the group repeatedly described in the hearing as part of the Greens/CIG portfolio – including multiunit buildings identified in the record as Skyline (753 James Street and nearby parcels), Vincent (addresses discussed on Jamesville Avenue), and several James Street and Highland Avenue apartment properties – were described by petitioner representatives as recently purchased from a distressed seller, some presently vacant and some occupied. City counsel and petitioner agreed those properties are, in many cases, the subject of litigation (petitions filed in 2024 was cited repeatedly). Petitioners supplied rent rolls, 2024 income-and-expense (I&E) sheets, appraisal material, and sale information (a sale price near $12 million was mentioned for one large building). City staff said litigation limits what the board could do immediately but took the submitted materials for further review.

Other items handled during the session included: - 403 East Fayette Street (telecom equipment / AT&T): the petitioner withdrew its grievance at the hearing and the board noted the withdrawal. - Multiple convenience-store-with-fuel properties (examples at 407 James Street, 1000 West Genesee Street, and similar): owners submitted income-and-expense statements and sale comps; staff noted these properties have seen recent reassessments and asked for time to review P&Ls and rent rolls. - Wakefern/Price Right supermarket (1625 Erie Boulevard East): the petitioner supplied the lease and sublease documentation and an opinion of value; staff acknowledged a pending petition for 2024 and said the city will continue to confer with counsel.

A prolonged, substantive public presentation came from an owner of a mixed-use building on North Salina Street (presented as the owner/operator of 319–25 North Salina / adjacent parcels). The owner described persistent criminal-activity externalities — drug use, people sleeping in hallways, repeated property damage and multiple eviction proceedings — that the owner said have depressed rental income and made units hard to lease. City staff and counsel acknowledged the property’s vacancy and high turnover, noted a prior reduction in the assessment in the previous year, and confirmed that petition is now in litigation; staff said that limits what the board may do at the informal hearing stage but took the updated I&E and vacancy information into the record.

Several petitioners and counsel said they are willing to keep negotiating: where a property is not currently in litigation, city staff said it would pursue follow-up review of submitted leases, ground leases, CoStar reports, rent rolls and three years of income statements. For matters that are in litigation, both sides said they would continue counsel-to-counsel discussions and that court or settlement processes would determine next steps. The board repeatedly reminded attendees that the city sends official notices in April and that proposed changes based on additional documentation may be reflected there or handled in subsequent proceedings.

The board recorded withdrawals, requests to dismiss related to prior settlements, and a number of petitions that remain active. No formal vote to change an assessment was recorded at the hearing; the session functioned as a data-gathering and record-building step in advance of possible stipulations or litigation proceedings.

What happens next: city staff will review the submitted documentation, counsel will exchange outstanding items (leases, P&Ls, ground leases), and the board’s formal recommendations or stipulations – where offered – will be reflected in the next steps of the grievance or litigation process, or in the city’s mailed notices in April.