Reaction to CGR’s survey on mayoral control, conducted with partner Metrix Matrix Inc (MMI), has reinforced what the survey revealed: Our community cares deeply about this issue and the education of our city’s children. The only prior test of community sentiment was a relatively small telephone survey of parents. Yet parents-to-be, grandparents, resident property owners, renters, and resident business owners all have a stake in the effectiveness of the schools. And all can vote in Board of Education and mayoral elections.
The results of village elections on March 16 cast a ray of hope that perhaps New Yorkers are finally willing to take responsibility for deciding the future of local governments across the state. In five villages, from Port Henry in the east to Randolph in the southwest, voters went to the polls to decide whether or not to dissolve their village and merge with the town. Four villages – Seneca Falls, Perrysburg, East Randolph and Randolph – chose to dissolve, while voters in Port Henry elected to keep their village government. In addition, voters in the Village of Saugerties agreed to dissolve their police department and consolidate with the town police department, and Village of Medina voters chose to abolish their court and merge with the town courts.
The December 8 election for fire district commissioners is a date to remember for taxpayers who are interested in reducing local property taxes. By state law, fire districts are separate and independent units of local government, typically governed by five to seven commissioners who are elected by voters within each fire district. Terms are staggered so that changing a board requires several elections. From the perspective of taxpayers, the key point is this – fire commissioners develop and approve the budget for their district and determine the property taxes needed to support their budget. Thus, if taxpayers want to reduce their fire district property tax, taxpayers need to convince their fire commissioners to reduce the district budget, or elect different commissioners at the next election.
New York swept the annual property tax competitions sponsored by the Census Bureau. Scored by the Tax Foundation, New York counties dominated the competition in the “property tax as a share of median home value” event, capturing all of the top ten places. Camden, New Jersey was pushed off the top ten after a spirited showing from New York’s Chemung County. Newcomer to the Top Ten, Chemung ranked #16 in 2007.
In the “property tax per dwelling” event, New York’s perennial champions, Nassau and Westchester counties, took the top two spots with Rockland and Putnam counties also placing. The remainder of the Top Ten was dominated by New Jersey, always a contender in the nation’s tax competition.
What a contest to win! Is there hope of ever losing this competition? What must we do to cut the cost of state and local government? Does it matter?
Consolidating local governments in New York is a hot topic across the state. Proponents maintain consolidation is a way to make local governments more efficient and less costly. Opponents argue that services will be cut, local representation will be lost, and savings will be minimal at best. Every week, I receive calls from local government officials across upstate asking what is involved in studying how to share or consolidate services. Almost invariably, the caller starts out by saying, “I’m not necessarily in favor of dissolving or consolidating, but I feel it is my responsibility to the taxpayers to look at every avenue to reduce our local taxes.”
In unprecedented numbers, communities across the state are looking at the potential for consolidating government services, either through shared service agreements or outright merging of governments. Why? Because citizens have reached the point where the high cost of local taxes has motivated them to stand up and ask that governments reconsider in fundamental ways who should deliver services, and how.
Study after study makes it clear that consolidation is not a magic bullet for drastically reducing costs and can’t provide the 10% to 30% immediate savings that many taxpayers want. Rather, research suggests that consolidation realistically reduces total costs by 2% to 5%, which critics use to raise the question – why bother? Based on 10 studies over the past three years where the Center for Governmental Research examined shared services and consolidation in towns, villages, cities and school districts across New York, I suggest five reasons why consolidation should be considered.
“We’re all keeping up with the Syossets. One school installs FieldTurf; now we’re all installing FieldTurf.” This comment, from a participant in a Long Island forum on school property taxes, holds more truth than we care to admit. The athletic facility improvements are the most obvious—but the same principle applies to class size, science labs, technology, even our approach to special education. Confronting a lawsuit on the funding of education in NYC, various groups tied themselves up in knots attempting to develop guidelines on “necessary” school spending. Studies aside, parents apply a relative standard—my kids deserve the same as the kids in the next district.
Rochester’s economy has suffered the loss of many jobs at one of its best-known employers. While many predicted doom and gloom, Rochester has survived, even thrived, in the wake of these dramatic losses. In fact, many of you reading this don’t know that General Dynamics ever had a presence in Rochester at all.
Government can not grow an economy—only private enterprise can do that in our market-driven system. The role of the public sector is to facilitate and guide private sector development by creating a fair and functional business environment and by removing obstacles to growth. Governor Spitzer’s promise of $50 million for the demolition of Midtown would remove a very significant obstacle to Rochester’s development. The private sector had reached an impasse on this complex problem. With market rents per square foot in the low double digits, neither renovation nor demolition made financial sense. For a less significant property, the buildings might properly have been padlocked and allowed to slowly decay until some change in circumstance presented a solution that did not require taxpayers to foot the bill. Midtown Plaza, however, is rightly “too big to fail,” a property so large and so central that it holds downtown’s future hostage.
Reaction to CGR’s survey on mayoral control, conducted with partner Metrix Matrix Inc (MMI), has reinforced what the survey revealed: Our community cares deeply about this issue and the education of our city’s children. The only prior test of community sentiment was a relatively small telephone survey of parents. Yet parents-to-be, grandparents, resident property owners, renters, and resident business owners all have a stake in the effectiveness of the schools. And all can vote in Board of Education and mayoral elections.
Monthly blog by senior staff on public policy + updates.
Enter your email address.
The results of village elections on March 16 cast a ray of hope that perhaps New Yorkers are finally willing to take responsibility for deciding the future of local governments across the state. In five villages, from Port Henry in the east to Randolph in the southwest, voters went to the polls to decide whether or not to dissolve their village and merge with the town. Four villages – Seneca Falls, Perrysburg, East Randolph and Randolph – chose to dissolve, while voters in Port Henry elected to keep their village government. In addition, voters in the Village of Saugerties agreed to dissolve their police department and consolidate with the town police department, and Village of Medina voters chose to abolish their court and merge with the town courts.