By JUDY RATTNER
In an unusual show of bipartisanship, the Republican-led Senate approved the bill, which was drafted by Democratic Gov. David Paterson and recommended by a special property tax relief commission led by Nassau County Executive Thomas Suozzi, also a Democrat, by a vote of 38-20, with several Democratic legislators joining Republicans in supporting the measure.
"Enacting a property tax cap is a good starting point, but it is only one piece of the puzzle," said Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos in a written statement released Friday. "We also passed measures to provide help for school districts who are dealing with rising costs that force property taxes to increase - including rising pension and energy costs. New Yorkers are facing challenging economic times. The measures we passed today in our special session will provide much-needed relief to taxpayers and is the beginning of the process of reducing property taxes."
But despite its popularity on both sides of the aisle, there are questions about how the bill will fare in the Democratic-led Assembly, and it has been opposed by labor unions, including powerful teachers' unions.
Rockville Centre school district officials are among those who are not as enthusiastic about a tax cap. "I guess I'm disappointed that the Senate and the governor are looking at a tax cap to solve a much more complicated financial problem," said Dr. William Johnson, Rockville Centre school superintendent. "It truly puts at risk the future of our public schools in New York state."
"It's not going to achieve its intended purpose," Board of Education President Mark Masin said of the legislation. "It has the potential to disrupt and dismantle public education in New York state."
The legislation would limit yearly school tax levy increases to 4 percent, or 120 percent of the Consumer Price Index, whichever is lower, unless at least 55 percent of voters in a district approve higher spending. In districts that receive an increase in state aid of more than 5 percent, 60 percent of voters would need to approve a budget increase of more than 4 percent.
The legislation would also enable voters to approve stricter tax caps in their school districts. An "under-ride" proposal could be put on the ballot by voters who wish to adopt a tax increase that is smaller than the cap, or no tax increase at all. School districts that approve an increase of less than 4 percent would be authorized to "bank" the difference - up to 1.5 percent - for tax increases in future years.
If the legislation is signed into law, its effects would not be felt until late next year, and it would not reduce current property taxes, but rather limit new increases.
Senators also passed a bill containing several additional savings proposals and offering relief from the unfunded mandates school districts often point to as a drain on resources. The omnibus legislation includes provisions intended to provide relief from increasing pension costs, increased aid for construction of "green" schools and energy conservation improvements, incentives for school districts to consolidate services, school superintendent sharing in small districts, a ban on unfunded mandates and a two-year moratorium on property reassessments.
Senators also passed a resolution calling on the federal government to provide financing for its unfunded programs, including the No Child Left Behind Act, which requires school districts to meet costly testing and reporting requirements.
Johnson and Masin further explained their doubts about the legislation. "All of the cost savings they propose are something that we would certainly support and would help us lower our costs, but they don't come close to matching the lost revenue," Johnson said. "The state won't be able to come up with enough aid to cover loss of revenue, especially in this financial climate. I think the intention is a good one -- which is to provide relief to local homeowners - but I think that the long-term consequences could do more damage to our economy by damaging the schools. If the problem is costs, then take them head-on. Items like negotiations, retirement, health, transportation, energy, special education and English as a Second Language - those are the real cost drivers. Just don't solve a problem with another problem."
"I haven't seen the bill, but I certainly would have some questions," Masin added. "The Senate says they have proposals to deal with unfunded mandates, but many of those have been generated by the federal government. With respect to state mandates, I'd need to see details as to how they're going to provide relief to the taxpayer.
"It's indicated that the state would take over a greater portion of the costs," Masin continued. "We certainly don't want the quality of education in our district to suffer at all, but that may be the unintended effect. As special education costs continue to rise through additional state policies and regulations, those costs would need to be addressed. The surcharges we're experiencing from fuel costs on heating and transportation - the district continually takes measures to reduce costs by conservation.
"Our goal has consistently been to preserve the core of our educational program. It's our hope and desire that this new piece of legislation would not have any negative effects on our achieving that goal. This legislation should only be one facet of what I hope will be a more comprehensive series of legislative acts to provide true taxpayer relief where it's needed."
But Jack Talty, a Rockville Centre resident who is active in a group called Taxpayers for Responsible School Spending (TRSS), echoed what appeared to be a more popular view. "The cap is supported by the governor and by 74 percent of New Yorkers, according to a Siena College survey I read," Talty said. "And it passed with the support of several Democrats in the Senate. The feeling is it will be defeated in the Assembly because the teachers' unions are very much opposed to it. I think this is tragic because our property taxes are 79 percent higher than the national average. And the cap would not affect the people in the big cities. We're in a situation where we have a runaway school tax that no one has been able to control, and it's forcing people to leave Long Island."
Catherine White, who is also active in TRSS, said, "I support the 4 percent cap, but I'm dubious that the Assembly will go along with it. Teachers and other powerful unions are against it. I'm concerned that the promised state aid will be cut, since the governor has said that nothing is sacred, including education, in order to balance the budget. Therefore our school tax will be higher than expected."
Comments about this story? RVCeditor@liherald.com or (516) 569-4000 ext. 208.
