Finance boss may testify in tax assessor scandal.

Martha Stark, New York's finance commissioner, might be forced to take the witness stand in the tax assessor bribery case.

The case, which has been brought against the City of New York by real estate owners and involves widespread corruption at the Finance Department, has been pending in court for some time.

Last week, Stark was subpoenaed to testify before Justice Doris Ling-Cohan, of the First Judicial District.

Uncovered in the summer of 2001, the tax assessor bribery case involved systemic underassessment of some of the city's best-known properties. Encouraged by real estate consultants and former tax assessor Albert Schussler, the staff at the city's Finance Department accepted bribes in exchange for undervaluing the properties of Schussler's clients.

Now, more than 1,200 property owners are claiming that they were the real victims of the scam, as they were forced to pay higher taxes in order to make up the difference.

According to Jeffrey Golkin, the lawyer representing the plaintiffs, the subpoena is bound to bring some kind of a resolution to the case, which he claims has been stalled by the city. Golkin and his clients believe the city's administration was aware of the abuses at the Finance Department and chose to ignore them. In their view, the Commissioner's testimony would either strengthen their case or force the city to offer a settlement in order to avoid potentially embarrassing revelations.

"One of the most important aspects of the case is the testimony by the Commissioner--she has spoken before the New York legislature, she has spoken before the Bar Association, but she won't speak to the taxpayers," said Golkin.

"We believe that her testimony will open the door to new discoveries and might lead to testimony from former Finance Department Commissioners. The city knew that this was happening, the city knew that this was systemic and didn't do anything about it. There has been no reform or mechanism put into place that would correct the erroneous assessments that have occurred over the past 30 years."

As evidence of the city's reluctance to make its corruption records public, Golkin cited a case recently brought to court by Donald Trump, which claimed that a tax assessment on his property was higher than it should have been, disqualifying him from a tax exemption. The city chose to settle the case with Trump earlier this year. According to one of Trump's real estate lawyers, however, Golkin and Iris clients might have a harder time because of the more ambiguous nature of their claim against the city.

"I think their case against the city is rife with many hurdles that they would have to [overcome]," said David Scharf, partner in the litigation department of Morrison, Cohen, Singer & Weinstein, LLP. "They are seeking to cast a very broad net and claim a longstanding conspiracy.

"It is easier to be able to prosecute a lawsuit that is specific and targeted like the one Mr. Trump has brought. It is much more difficult to convince the judge of a long conspiracy pattern and demonstrate that it has caused harm to the plaintiffs. The taxpayers' greatest burden is to establish that they were proximately harmed by the conspiracy."

Though Scharf doubts that the City would allow Stark to testify, he thinks her reputation for integrity might actually help its case.

"It is very likely that the Commissioner will not be the one who testifies. I would venture to guess that the city will seek to squash the subpoena and offer up someone who's had more intimate knowledge of the case," he said.

"But because of the magnitude of the case and because of charges of extensive fraud, the city may seek to have someone with good credentials testify. The Commissioner has an excellent reputation for integrity and public service, so her testimony might work to the city's benefit."

Vicent D'Orazio, who is representing the City of New York in the case, did not return calls.