.

On Passing the 2 Percent Tax Cap

Sen. Martins says work will continue on mandate relief to local governments and schools.

I recently had the opportunity to gather with my colleagues from Long Island to urge the Assembly to pass a 2 percent tax cap, an initiative by that we with overwhelming bi-partisan support.

Our gathering took place at the modest home of a couple in Bayport – a Long Island suburban community, where they chose to raise their family.

Unfortunately, this couple is finding this basic mission increasingly difficult, as their property taxes have soared from approximately $6,000 per year when they purchased their home just eight years ago, to a level currently in excess of $11,000 annually.

Their story is sadly familiar to many of us in Nassau County.

I am pleased to report that on May 24, the Governor, Senate and Assembly agreed to a 2 percent cap on property tax levies that will go into effect for the 2012 fiscal year for local governments and the 2012-2013 budget year for school districts.

Like our state budget, this represents a bi-partisan effort to bring relief to our residents and business owners.

When I was sworn in to the Senate, I promised to work with my colleagues, regardless of party affiliation, to bring meaningful relief to our overburdened taxpayers.

Having realized our primary goal of passing the tax cap in the Senate, I have been working on several mandate relief measures intended to permit local governments and school districts additional flexibility and freedom from certain state requirements.

It is encouraging to see that, even in the absence of pressure in the form of enacted tax cap legislation, many school districts and local governments have been exercising the sort of fiscal discipline that is crucial to weathering this economic downturn – on their own terms and by their own hands.

Deep down, we all recognized that the disproportionate growth of property taxes on Long Island was unsustainable.  Now it has become the undeniable truth.

Regrettably, there are some who want to undermine our progress when it comes to easing the burden on our taxpayers.  Understand that those who would advocate against fiscal restraint, oftentimes are advocating for personal advantage.

The reality is that we made a commitment to close a $10 billion budget deficit by reducing spending toward more responsible levels.

The cycle of New York State routinely outspending its revenues and repeatedly turning to its taxpayers for more, simply must stop. 

While overall spending was cut, we were able to minimize the impact to education funding and other critical services. This is what is meant by responsible cuts - not cutting as deeply across the board as many would have liked.

That approach, although effective in the short term, could have resulted in unacceptable long-term harm, which the short term benefits would not have justified.

We all have to do our part to ease the burden on our taxpayers who have also had to tighten their belts.

That said, it is also important to allow a local community to retain the power to override the limitations imposed by the tax cap under appropriate circumstances, if they so choose.

The tax cap legislation includes such an option, although opponents of the tax cap rarely acknowledge this fact. As we have seen in our recent school budget votes, many school budgets across Long Island were approved with votes of over 60 percent despite increases in excess of the proposed cap.

The tax cap does not eliminate the possibility of such votes in the future, it merely ensures enhanced scrutiny in budgeting – which ultimately benefits everyone. 

This difficult time should be seen as an opportunity to reprioritize and increase efficiencies, as we strive to make our communities, which are already great places to live, affordable.

As always, thank you for the opportunity to serve.

 is the representative of New York's Seventh Senatorial District. He was elected to the State Senate in 2010 as a Republican from Mineola.

JPS May 25, 2011 at 07:22 PM
This is a start but by no means is going to address our problem of having the highest taxes in the country. They need to address the underlying problem which is the salaries, pensions, retirement age, retiree medical benefits, etc as well as eliminate redundancies. This can all be done while ensuring people are earning a living like everyone else and not erroneously affecting the education of the children.
Artie Barnett May 25, 2011 at 08:06 PM
Jimmy, I agree, but this cap puts the cart before the horse. Since all the things you listed still remain, how do you pay all those costs when you have just had your means cut off?
Patrick May 25, 2011 at 10:05 PM
The cap is like holding a firecracker in your hand and squeezing real hard, hoping that you'll be able to contain the violence about to unfold. You're right Artie, this is nothing more than another unfunded mandate. To think otherwise is foolish. The legislature needs to figure out how to remove the fuse. (hint: We live in a global society, stop doing things the way they were done 30 or 40 years ago.)
Artie Barnett May 26, 2011 at 12:39 AM
Patrick, 33 years ago to be exact. California's prop.13.
Carmine Festa May 28, 2011 at 05:58 PM
It is a 2 percent cap or runaway expenditures as in the past. Government has to learn how to live within a budget just like we all do everyday.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »