Public Meetings - Syracuse, New York

The Syracuse Common Council held a special meeting on February 13, 2025, to interview candidate Chaila Sarat for a vacant councilor-at-large seat. Councilors questioned Ms. Sarat on her policy positions, experience, and vision for the city. The meeting included opening and closing remarks from the candidate, followed by rounds of questions from each councilor.

On February 12, 2026, the Syracuse Board of Assessment Review convened at 9:15 AM to hear multiple property tax exemption applications. The board, chaired by Joe Saya, considered nine cases involving not-for-profit organizations seeking full or partial exemptions. No votes were taken; all decisions were deferred pending further review, with notices to be sent the first week of April. Discussion Items 133 West Pleasant Ave – Community Garden Exemption - Charles Matlaw, representing the Soar and Growth Scholar Program, requested a full exemption for a vacant lot purchased from the land bank for $1. The lot is intended for a community garden serving McKinley Brighton school and neighbors. Construction has not yet begun. The city assessor expressed concern about insufficient specifics and will review further. The board deferred a decision. 109 Bird Street & 908-12 Montgomery Street – Morrisville Auxiliary Corporation - Jennifer Bowden, representing the nonprofit, sought exemptions for two parcels. The lot at 109 Bird Street is vacant and not used for exempt purposes; the warehouse at 908-12 Montgomery is used for construction and woodworking classes five days a week. The board requested an inspection of the warehouse and noted the vacant lot likely does not qualify. Decision deferred. 830 James Street – Helio Health (Former Hearth) - Robert Seigart, Consuelo Lickstein, and Brethren Marine presented the case. The property is a care home purchased in July 2025. Currently 49.7% is occupied by residents and staff; the remainder is under renovation with full occupancy expected by November 2026. The board requested an inspection before making a decision. Deferred. 205 West Newell Street – By His Spirit Ministry - Vicky K. Hammer, founder, described the ministry’s use of the house: an office, monthly meetings, a summer program, and storage. A tenant pays $860/month, covering utilities and taxes. The board requested income/expense documentation. Deferred. 601 Irving Ave – Church Property - Dolores Rogers, representing the church, stated the property is under contract for sale to a Jewish community, pending Attorney General approval. Until then, services are held three times a week. The board acknowledged the ongoing use and appeared satisfied. Decision deferred. 127 West Brighton Ave – Islamic Center - The petitioner (identified as Secure) confirmed the property is used as a religious community center with daily prayers. The board verified there is only one kitchen (not four apartments) and concluded the property qualifies. Deferred. 3429 James Street – Liberty Resources - Kelly Wolf explained the property is a crisis respite residence undergoing renovation, with construction expected to complete by May 6, 2026. Residents were temporarily relocated. The board noted visible progress and accepted the explanation. Deferred. 1323 North Salina Street – Unity Firm - The petitioner (name not given) addressed a missing question on the application regarding property use and a mailing address issue. The board requested the form be completed and updated the address. Deferred. 527 Oak Street – Interfaith Works - Patricia J. Reddell, CFO, described plans for a six-unit apartment building (two wheelchair-accessible) for refugees, with temporary housing of about one year. Renovation cost $1.9 million, expected completion by July 2026. The board requested an inspection. Deferred. FINS (Le Moyne College) Properties – 20 Parcels - Kathleen Bennett, Don Sheniken King, and John Brouwer presented a legal argument under Section 420A of the Real Property Tax Law. The properties are used for student housing with programmatic elements (e.g., HEOP, athletic theme houses). The board questioned why properties are titled in FINS rather than Le Moyne College. The board indicated that retitling to Le Moyne might resolve the issue, but the city assessor (Matt, absent) needed to review the law. No decision reached; board will consult with corporation counsel. Key Outcomes - All applications were deferred until the board’s review and possible inspections are complete. - Notices of decisions will be mailed to petitioners the first week of April 2026. - The board will coordinate with the city assessor and corporation counsel on the FINS/Le Moyne legal question. - The next meeting (scheduled for February 13, 2026) will be held in ILAB due to a conflict, with recording available afterward.

The City of Syracuse Board of Assessment Review held a public hearing on Wednesday, February 11, 2026, beginning at approximately 1:25 PM. The board considered multiple property assessment appeals, most of which are in litigation. No final decisions were made; the board will review submitted materials and issue notices in the first week of April. For several properties, additional documentation was requested by February 20, 2026. Discussion Items 319-325 North Salina Street (Mixed-Use) - Petitioner Michael Spellman (representing owner) argued for a reduced assessment based on an income capitalization approach, citing persistent vacancies and disruptive behavior from the adjacent Helio Health facility. The building has 25 apartment units and 4-5 retail units; 6 apartments and 2 retail spaces are currently vacant. - The property was purchased for $1.5 million on May 31, 2018. The current assessment is $1,141,000, with a petitioner-suggested fair market value of $496,087. The property is in litigation for tax years 2024 and 2025. - The board accepted rent rolls and income/expense statements and will review further. 3068 Erie Boulevard East (AutoZone – Commercial) - Petitioner Natalie Macintosh requested a rollback to last year's assessed value (fair market value of $1,001,739) due to an increase from the equalization rate change. Not in litigation. - Board noted the city may discuss with the commissioner. 308 North McBride Street (Parking Lot) & 600 James Street (Apartment Building) - These properties are treated as an economic unit. 600 James is a 7-story, 63-unit apartment building. Petitioner seeks a 10% value for litigation purposes. In litigation. - Board requested actual profit and loss statements (not averages) and comparable sales. 132 Highland Avenue (Vacant Lot), 941-47 James Street (82-unit apartment), 923 James Street (53-unit apartment) - Treated as one economic unit. In litigation. Petitioner presented no new information; board requested actual income/expense data. 807-809 Lodi Street, 805 Lodi Street (Vacant Lots) & 753 James Street (Skyline Apartments) - Skyline is a 12-story, 367-unit high-rise that has been 100% vacant for at least two years and is undergoing repairs. The only income is from a cell tower. In litigation. - Board requested confirmation of cell tower income and actual financials. 420 Jamesville Avenue & 438 Jamesville Avenue (Apartment Complexes) - Two complexes with 267 total units, 100% vacant and not ready for occupancy. No rent rolls available due to renovations. In litigation. - No new information presented; board will review any submitted comps. 825-29 Butternut Street (Former KFC – Vacant Building) - Petitioner Tuan Wynn (representing owner) described ongoing issues with homelessness, vandalism, and interior cleanup. The board expressed disappointment that little progress had been made since a $50,000 reduction three years ago. The land value is $100,000; building value only $50,000. - Board indicated it is unlikely to grant another reduction and urged the owner to either renovate or sell. The property was purchased for $175,000 in October 2020. Not in litigation. 201 Montgomery Street (Surface Parking Lot) - Petitioner Christopher Montante (owner of adjoining Hills building and parking lot) purchased the parcel from the city for $240,000 in April 2025. A deed restriction requires providing 10 free parking spaces to the city indefinitely, reducing the usable spaces from 21 to 11. - Montante argues the assessment should be reduced to $100,000 based on income capitalization, as the restriction reduces net operating income by 60%. He noted the original RFP did not include the free parking requirement. - The board will review the original RFP and confer with city commissioner Matt (who is out sick). 407 James Street (7-Eleven with Gas Station) - Petitioner Nicholas Connolly provided a lease and valuation analysis showing a market value of $1.19 million, compared to the current assessment of $1.67 million. Owner-occupied, wholesale-run store. In litigation. - Board requested actual income and expense data by February 20. 1000 West Genesee Street (7-Eleven) - Owner-occupied convenience store with 12 fuel pumps. Petitioner’s analysis values at $2 million vs. assessment of $2.115 million. In litigation. - Board requested actual financials by February 20. 1625 Erie Boulevard East (Price Rite Supermarket) - 36,360 sq ft leased supermarket. Provided lease and sublease. Petitioner’s analysis values at $2.9 million vs. assessment of $6.7 million. In litigation. - Board will review provided materials. 403 East Fayette Street (ATT Communications) – Withdrawn by petitioner. 314-16 Ainsley Drive (Self-Storage Facility) - 740 rental units. Provided 2025 rent roll and income/expense showing net operating income of $504,000. Petitioner uses 10% of assessed value for litigation. Status of litigation unclear; board will confirm with city assessor. 394 Elasco Road (Walgreens – Partially in Gates) - Petitioner Nicole Forcelli submitted comparable sales and noted Walgreens’ financial struggles, store closures, and declining rents. For the portion in Syracuse, she requests a fair market value of $1.3 million (AV $676,000) vs. current AV $1.3 million. In litigation. 401 West Seneca Turnpike (Walgreens – Subleased to Dollar Tree) - Annual rent from Dollar Tree is $145,000. Petitioner argues value should be significantly lower due to reduced income. In litigation. 2329 James Street (Walgreens) - Similar arguments, with 9-10 comparable sales showing values around $2 million. Current assessed market value is $3.75 million. In litigation. Key Outcomes - No decisions were made on any property during the hearing. The board will review all submitted materials, including new financials and comparable sales. - For properties where additional information was requested (3068 Erie Blvd, 600 James/308 McBride, 132 Highland/941-47 James/923 James, Skyline, 407 James, 1000 W Genesee, 314-16 Ainsley), the deadline to submit is Friday, February 20, 2026. - Notices of the board’s determinations will be mailed to petitioners in the first week of April 2026. - Four remaining properties were postponed to Friday, February 20, 2026. - The property at 403 East Fayette Street was formally withdrawn.

A public hearing was held on February 10, 2026, at 5:30 PM to receive comments on the city's Year 52 (FY 2025-2026) HUD Entitlement Grants, including CDBG, HOME, and ESG funding. Staff members Tani Eastman, Sue McMahon, Renee Schwonier, and Sophie Fisher were introduced. Speakers were allotted three minutes each, and written/electronic comments were accepted until March 5, 2026 at 11:59 PM. A second public hearing will be scheduled by the Common Council. Public Comments & Testimony - Marquita Heatrington (Blueprint 15, 819 South Salina St, Syracuse) expressed gratitude for being considered for FAI program funding, noting she has created three new homeowners and served over 115 people. She hopes to expand services to Spanish and other languages. - James Negrone Carter (Home Headquarters, 625 Erie Blvd W, Syracuse) spoke both as an employee and as a program user, supporting SHARP and CDBG Urgent Care funds. He stated these programs help income-eligible homeowners with critical health and safety repairs, prevent displacement, and preserve housing. - Chrissy Rizzo (On Point for College, 224 Harrison St, Syracuse) thanked the city for considering their CDBG funding proposal for career services, including workshops, internships, and job shadowing, which help students gain a competitive edge. - Talisha Black (Home Headquarters, 625 Erie Blvd W, Syracuse) reported that nearly 900 people participated in their program last year, with 257 homebuyers facilitated, over half of whom identified as minority or low-to-moderate income. CDBG funds support homeownership counseling and credit analysis. - Brian Faye (Syracuse Northeast Community Center, 716 Holly Ave, Syracuse) expressed gratitude for the partnership with NBD, noting they serve 8,000+ neighbors through housing support and services that build self-reliance and reduce crime. - Crystal Cosantino (Rescue Mission, 155 Gifford St, Syracuse) supported the ESG allocation of $33,000 for the Homeless Intervention Services (HIS) team, which served 106 individuals last year. She noted 75% self-report a mental health diagnosis and 60% a substance use concern, and the team provides outreach and supplies in all weather. - Sharon Sherman (Greater Syracuse Tenants Network, 731 James St, Syracuse) criticized the plan for lacking an analysis of subsidized housing, urging the city to preserve existing Section 8 housing and examine the needs of tax-credit properties. She listed seven buildings her organization works with, noting challenges like rising insurance costs and staffing shortages. - Priscilla Sanchez (Home Headquarters) shared a personal story of becoming a homeowner at age 30 through Home Headquarters programs, supported by CDBG funds. She emphasized that such programs change lives and create strong communities. - John Tamino (In My Father's Kitchen, 501 Holly Ave, Syracuse) thanked the city for ESG support, reporting an active caseload of over 90 individuals in summer and over 40 in winter. The funds enable outreach with food, supplies, and medical services to help unsheltered individuals come indoors. - Bob Sakowski (Empire Housing and Development) objected to a proposed 55% funding cut ($61,000), noting the agency has completed approximately 600 affordable homeownership projects over 31 years, leveraging $17 million in non-city funds. He argued that cutting a reliable partner during a housing crisis is poor policy and threatens their ability to serve clients. - Bill DeMaro (Empire Housing) listed 25 clients by first name, describing them as primarily single heads of household, seniors, and families, to illustrate the people served by their programs. - Andre (Dunbar Center) thanked the council for supporting the Dunbar Center, which provides safe spaces and programs to reduce isolation among seniors and youth. Key Outcomes No decisions or votes were taken at this hearing. The public comment period remains open until March 5, 2026 at 11:59 PM. Comments may be submitted electronically to nbd@syr.gov or in writing. A second public hearing will be scheduled by the Syracuse Common Council at a date to be determined.

The Syracuse City Board of Assessment Review convened on February 10, 2026, at 1:25 PM (13:25:49 UTC) to hear petitions from property owners challenging their tentative assessments. The meeting, chaired by Joe Saya, included three hearings, one of which was adjourned due to the petitioner's absence. No formal decisions were announced; notices will be mailed in early April. The board also reminded petitioners about potential exemptions and directed concerns about city service fees to the Common Council. Discussion Items (Individual Hearings) 2020-22 Bellevue Avenue – Two-Family Residence - Petitioner (owner-occupant of the first floor) argued that the second-floor apartment is not habitable (no kitchen, no electric meter, disconnected furnace) and that the property should be assessed as a single-family home. He also disputed a sidewalk fee, stating he has no public sidewalk. - Assessor (Mike Small) defended the current tentative assessment of $90,000 (full market value $173,077), noting the property was purchased for $58,500 in 1997 and has had a new $8,000 driveway. He provided comparable sales showing similar properties selling for well over $100,000. He stated the non-use of the second floor is the owner's choice and does not warrant revaluation. - Board discussion: The board considered reclassifying the property to single-family but the petitioner declined, fearing it would reduce marketability. No change in classification was made during the hearing. The board requested additional comparables from the assessor but noted the current assessment stands. 134-136 West Ostrander Avenue – Two-Family Residence - Petitioner (retired pastor, age 62) explained that his son, who suffers from mental illness, lives on the second floor and cannot live with others. The first-floor apartment is vacant due to past tenant conflicts and damage; utilities (gas, electric) are turned off. He requested a lower assessment because he receives no rental income. - Assessor stated the tentative assessment increased from $41,000 to $47,000 as part of a neighborhood adjustment. Comparables supported a market value in line with the assessment. - Board response: The board acknowledged the difficult personal situation but noted that personal circumstances, including income or health, are not criteria for adjusting assessed value. The petitioner mentioned recent roof and electrical work. No decision was reached. 51-05 Skyline Drive (Attached Parcel) – No Show - Petitioner did not appear. The board read in the property: tentative assessed value of $300 (land only), full market value $577. The petitioner had claimed a fair market value of $174. The assessor provided comparables supporting the current assessment as appropriate. The hearing was closed in the petitioner's absence. Key Outcomes - No decisions were rendered during the open session. The board will deliberate in executive session and mail notices to petitioners during the first week of April 2026. - Suggestions: The board advised the first petitioner to contact his Common Councilor regarding sidewalk and street-sweeping fees, and to check with the assessor’s office about additional exemptions (senior, military, enhanced STAR). The second petitioner was similarly encouraged to explore exemptions. - Future proceedings: The board announced it will reconvene the following morning (February 11, 2026) for additional hearings.

The Syracuse Common Council held its regular meeting on February 9, 2026, at 5:55 PM. The meeting began with the Pledge of Allegiance and an invocation by Pastor Dan, who leads a church on James Street and shared his personal story of transformation. The roll call showed Councilors Cogwell, Wright, Nave, Moore, Williams, and Mato present, with Councilor Michelle and Councilor Jones-Rouser absent. The minutes of the previous meeting (January 26, 2026) were approved unanimously. The meeting proceeded through committee reports, communications, and a series of resolutions, with notable discussion on the Axon contract and the payroll modernization project, and an interruption from audience members during the vote on item 39. Consent Calendar - Approval of Minutes: Minutes from January 20 and January 26, 2026 were approved unanimously. - Appointment of Commissioners of Deeds: Item 7 (or equivalent resolution) was approved unanimously. - Resolutions 10–26, 28, 30–38, 40–50: All passed unanimously except where noted. Items included routine approvals and adoptions. Items 29, 44, 51, and 52 were held or tabled. - Emergency Adjournment: A brief adjournment was granted before item 30 for clarification. Public Comments & Testimony - Reference to Prior Hearing: The president noted that a public hearing on the battery energy storage system had been held on January 26, 2026, with several speakers. - Audience Disruption: During the vote on item 39 (Axon contract), audience members stood and voiced concern. The president explained that the meeting was not open for public discussion but invited them to speak with councilors afterward. The room was cleared when disturbances continued. The president emphasized that the Axon contract includes clear revocation terms and that the council has been careful with surveillance technology. Discussion Items - Payroll Modernization Project (Items 40–43): Councilor Williams introduced the items and expressed concern about allocating additional funds to a project that has been on the agenda since late 2024. While the council has had hesitation, Williams noted that the city must move forward and urged the administration to prove the project can be completed successfully. The items passed unanimously. - Axon Contract (Item 39): The president explained the contract, which includes a new vendor for license plate reader (LPR) systems. After months of discussion, the council is comfortable with the contract, which is designed to be easily revocable if Axon oversteps. The item passed despite audience disruption. - Item 27: Passed on a 7–1 vote (Councilor Wright voted no). No further details were provided in the transcript. - Item 29: Introduced and tabled per local law. - Items 44, 51, 52: Held (no action taken). Key Outcomes - Approved Resolutions: All items not listed as held or tabled were adopted. Specific votes: Item 27 passed 7–1; all others unanimous. - Held Items: Item 44 (Councilor Jones-Rouser), Items 51 and 52 (Councilor Monto) were held for future consideration. - Tabled Item: Item 29 was introduced and tabled. - Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned by motion following the final items. No further dates were announced.

The Syracuse City Council held a study session on February 9, 2026, to review numerous agenda items, most of which were deemed ready for approval without discussion. The primary debate centered on items 30, 31, and 32 regarding electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure, a grant opportunity, and a proposed waiver of the standard RFP process. Discussion Items - EV Charging Infrastructure Items (30-32): Planning and Sustainability staff presented three items related to applying for a state grant (up to $400,000-$500,000) to install EV chargers at a public park. Staff recommended a waiver of the RFP process to work with a specific pre-approved vendor who would provide services at no upfront cost. Councilor Caldwell expressed strong concerns about fairness, equity, and the lack of outreach to other vendors on the approved list or local minority-owned businesses. Staff (Owen and Michael) explained that the grant deadline was February 27, leaving insufficient time for a full RFP (typically 4-6 months), and that the vendor was unique in offering no-cost grant writing and technical expertise. Councilor Monto and others debated the balance between seizing the opportunity and upholding competitive bidding practices. It was noted that only vendors on National Grid's approved list could participate, and no local vendors were on that list. - Other Items: Items 33-38, 40-43, and 44-50 were presented as ready with minor adjustments (e.g., correction on item 40's expiration date). Items 44, 51, and 52 were held for further financial review. Key Outcomes - Items 30-32: The council decided not to withdraw these items. Staff will attempt to expedite a limited solicitation among approved vendors and report back. The items will remain on the next agenda, potentially requiring another waiver to be added due to time constraints. Council President indicated they would "hustle like heck" to see if a quick RFP could be run. - Held Items: Item 44 (Counselor Joe Rouser's item) and items 51 and 52 (both held by Councilor Monto for financial questions) were set aside for future discussion. - Adjournment: The meeting adjourned after all items were addressed.

The Board of Assessment Review met on February 9, 2026, to hear two assessment grievances: a residential property at 104 Coffee Drive and multiple railroad parcels owned by the New York Susquehanna and Western Railroad. No formal votes were taken; the board expects to issue decisions after further review and a counter offer from the city. Discussion Items - 104 Coffee Drive: This one-bedroom, 568-square-foot rental was purchased by the owner about ten years ago for $10,000 with no major improvements. The current tentative assessed value is $56,000 (full market value $107,692). The petitioner believes the assessed value should be $15,600 (full market value $30,000). City assessor Ann acknowledged the property is very small and that the city's commissioner Matt is familiar with the case. The board will confer with Matt and send a notice to the owner by the first week of April. - Railroad Properties: Nolan Kakoris, representing the New York Susquehanna and Western Railroad, presented grievances on over 30 parcels. Under New York law, railroad assessments are capped by a state-determined ceiling. The petitioner argues that the actual full market value, based on an income capitalization approach using a 9% capitalization rate, is significantly lower than the current tentative assessments. For example, at 522 Renwick and Sizer Street, the current assessed value is $22,400, but the petitioner claims a fair market value of $3,584 (assessed value $1,864). City assessor Melanie noted that the city is aware of the pending litigation on these parcels and indicated that a counter offer will be made during the hearing session. The board discussed the possibility of separating income from billboards on some parcels for future assessments. Key Outcomes - No decisions were reached on either agenda item. - For 104 Coffee Drive, the city will confer with Commissioner Matt and notify the owner by early April. - For the railroad parcels, the city plans to issue a counter offer before the end of the hearing session. The parcels remain in litigation.

On February 6, 2026, the joint committee of Public Safety and Economic Development met in the afternoon to discuss the terms of a new contract with Axon for license plate readers (LPRs). The meeting was attended by Councillor Nave, Counselor Moore, Counselor Williams, President Paniagua, Joe Barry, Sue Katzov, and Chief Trudeau. The discussion focused on the capabilities, data ownership, privacy safeguards, and community concerns related to the proposed 26 LPRs. Discussion Items - Overview of LPR System: Chief Trudeau explained that SPD seeks 26 LPR readers (currently 13) for public safety and investigations. The cameras read multiple lanes of traffic at various speeds, compiling data into a system that allows SPD to search and assist in solving crimes. The data is solely owned and accessed by SPD, not the vendor. The system is closed, meaning only SPD has the data. - Use of LPR Data: LPR data is used reactively, not for live monitoring. Officers search the data after a crime is reported, using partial plates or locations to find leads. Chief Trudeau noted that almost all homicides involve a vehicle, and Axon estimates 70% of crimes nationally involve a vehicle. The LPR data is fact-based and helps generate leads for investigations. - Data Retention Policy: Bulk data not used in investigations is retained for 30 days, per SPD policy. Data that becomes evidence is archived and retained per state law based on the severity of the crime (e.g., indefinitely for homicides, shorter for misdemeanors). - Data Sharing with Other Agencies: SPD currently does not share LPR data with federal agencies absent a court order or subpoena. For local law enforcement, SPD may enter future memoranda of agreement (MOAs) to share data with guardrails, ensuring data is not further shared. The system is opt-in, not opt-out, preventing accidental sharing. - Community Concerns: Council members raised concerns about doing business with companies that also work with ICE. Chief Trudeau noted that many top law enforcement technologies are used by federal agencies, and limiting SPD's options would hinder public safety. The data is hosted on Axon's cloud, and liability for data breaches would be discussed in executive session. - Geographic Dispersion: The 26 LPR locations are spread across all quadrants of the city, focusing on major intersections and on/off ramps. A list of locations will be provided to the council. There is no correlation with Vision Zero data, though Chief Trudeau acknowledged that could be explored. Key Outcomes - The committee moved into executive session to receive legal advice on the contract terms. The motion was made, seconded, and approved by all present. No final decision on the contract was made during the open session. - The council requested and received assurance that the data is not shared with federal agencies without legal process, and that SPD is committed to privacy safeguards. Future discussions on inter-agency data sharing will involve further council review. Note: The meeting did not include public comments or testimony, and no votes were taken on the contract itself.