Archive: News

I've been thinking about the Town budget meetings, and how their big problem is whether to reduce the town tax rate 44.15% or 33%.  I know that board members have expended a lot of thought over this, and have seen them express a lot of emotion.  Should they reduce it the full 44.15%?  How about a safer 33%?

Lansing Community Council President Ed LaVigne put this in perspective for me when he commended the board for reducing the taxes drastically at a time when they can, but don't have to.  He said most people would be thrilled with a zero percent rise.

He's right.  Can you imagine how thrilled we would be if the school district or the county offered a zero percent rise?  I have to say that makes the town tax debate a cupcake in the middle of a plate of burnt toast.  In these stressful financial times here's a municipality -- in New York State, no less! -- that has so reduced its expenditures that it can take in at least a third less taxes than last year, and maybe even less.

County legislators, including Lansing's representative, recently voted to keep the option to supersede the misleadingly named 2% tax cap (they only need nine votes), and school officials have said that they think they have the votes in the district to supersede it (they need 60% of district votes).  Those are the problem taxers.

Long-term responsible taxing authorities barely raise taxes, or keep them +-3% year after year.  I always site the Lansing Fire District as being the most responsible because their 20 year fiscal plan is the most impressive thing I've ever seen, especially because with only minor annual tweaking, they keep to it year after year.  But the library and the Village are in this category.  The Village just finished a DPW capital project, and is about to build a new municipal office building.  They save for what they want to buy, and then pay cash.  Wow, a government that doesn't incur debt... maybe they're doing it wrong!  (No, they're not!)

Then comes the Town of Lansing, which I loosely grouped with the conservative ones, giving residents more for less, keeping tax rises reasonable,and in the past four years actually reducing taxes, though not by a lot.  Now they've paid off the town tax, have plenty of money to pay for things and give a gift to taxpayers in the form of a very significant tax rate drop.

Some people may interpret this as a catch-up move after hoarding taxpayers' money.  But think about it -- most municipalities reducing taxes will generally do it in low single-digit increments.  This municipality has had significant reductions in expenses for a variety of reasons over the past three or four years.  They reviewed the numbers carefully this year and their first idea was to give back nearly half of it.  Their second idea is to be a little conservative about that, just in case.

They're not talking cost of living.  They're not talking zero percent.  They're not talking minus two or three percent.  At the moment they're talking 33%.  This town is talking about a 33% drop being a conservative tax break.  I can't believe I just typed that sentence!

As a rather small percentage of the total property taxes we pay, that's not going to amount to enormous savings per taxpayer.  Maybe a nice dinner out or two for the average household.  Or a couple of weeks worth of gas.  Or a very small fraction of county and school taxe payment...

But it's the principal of the thing.  We live in a state that is hemorrhaging residents who are chasing jobs and a lower cost of living in other states because Albany is a fiscal mess and a political plane full of snakes, and taxing authorities lower in the pyramid are generally scrambling to maintain services, and pay for mandates.  The Town of Lansing is looking pretty good right now.

v7i40