Though he had long pushed for a cap on property taxes, Gov. David Paterson recently decided to drop the proposal from his agenda for the New York legislature’s special session on Nov. 15.
The originally proposed cap would limit property taxes to 4 percent or 120 percent of inflation, whichever is lower. As Paterson’s term is due to end Dec. 31, it is unlikely that a vote on the tax cap will take place before he leaves office.
The property tax cap was a hot-button campaign issue, in large part because of the high tax burden on New York State property owners. According to a resolution by the advocacy group New York State Association of Counties, property taxes in the state of New York are 80 percent higher than the national average.
Freshman Marty Rogachefsky, a member of the Geneseo College Republicans, said he was concerned that high taxes may have a detrimental effect on state commerce. “Businesses are … constantly being driven out of New York State because they can’t afford to make a living here,” he said. A representative of the Geneseo College Democrats could not be reached for comment.
Political science professor Marilyn Klotz said she feels that Paterson’s removal of a tax cap proposal does not necessarily indicate that the issue is off the table for good. “Almost all counties outside of [New York City] are lobbying hard for a property tax cap,” she said, “so the issue is likely to be considered again.”
“A tax cap certainly sounds like a good idea,” said Republican Geneseo Town Supervisor William Wadsworth, “but New York State has nine mandated programs that have to be funded, and these account for 90 percent of the tax levy.”
These programs include Medicaid, child welfare, preschool special education and pension contributions. After these mandated programs are paid for, the remaining portion of raised taxes go to local programs.
According to Wadsworth, if property taxes were capped, the mandated programs would become more difficult to fund. County and municipal governments would either have to cut back on their local programs or request permission from the state government to raise taxes above the capped level, he said.
For these reasons, a resolution was submitted to Paterson and members of the New York State Legislature by NYSAC in September outlining an alternative solution to the tax cap. That resolution concludes that local governments should be offered greater authority over their own spending, and that if the state does pass a tax cap, it must coincide with a decrease in the scope of the nine mandates.
“Cutting these programs might be difficult politically due to … public opinion,” Klotz said. “These are social welfare programs for the least fortunate in society … Who wants to campaign on the slogan that they cut pension benefits for firefighters and police disabled in the line of duty?”
Because of the difficulty of cutting mandated programs in size, Wadsworth maintained that they are problematic for local governments. “They put the counties in a real bind,” he said.
Both Wadsworth and Klotz said that they feel that a property tax cap will continue to be an important issue for governor-elect Andrew Cuomo, the Democrat who will succeed Paterson in 2011. The two also agree that the problem may not be an easy one to solve.
“Unfortunately, really addressing the issue is unlikely until the state addresses its overall structural budget problems,” Klotz said.