Bethpage-Tribune_1990-01-25

              BETHPAGE 9 * !
• C \
fsland Trees
YOUR OFFICIAL HOMETOWN NEWSPAPER
serving
Plainedge Seafocd Old Bethpage Plainview
vol. 23 NO. 11 JANUARY 25-31, 1990 25 CENTS
'STERLIMCS
THE ANSWER TO TAX RELIEF
OR WAS BORELLA FIELD
AN IRREVERSIBLE MISTAKE?
Although Bethpage residents are
concerned with a multitude of problems
the Grumman Sterling Center project will
have on the community of Bethpage the
issue of taxes seems to be of primary con­cern.
Will the Sterling Center project re­duce
our taxes? Will our taxes stay at their
present level? Well, the answers to these
questions are quite complicated .
Presently all factors point to a contin­ued
rise in our taxes despite the Sterling
Center proposal. And why? Well there are
many factors which impact our taxes. In
recent years sale of school land and com­mercial
development have acted to reduce
our taxes while the school budget and
changes in the tax law have acted to in­crease
the share of taxes the individual
homeowner pays. This year for example
the new teachers contract will increase the
budget by a sizeable amount without tak­ing
maintenance and improvements into
consideration. Conversely the sale of
Borella Field, which was defeated by a
534-288 vote in October , would have
translated into extra dollars to reduce our
tax bill.
Over the last 6 years, sale of school
land has resulted in the lessening of the lax
burden. This was effectuated by a system
called , which acts to return
the revenue of the sale of the property to
taxpayers in increments. The last incre­ment
of $300,000 was returned to the tax­payer
in the 89-90 school year. Presently,
there is approximately $200,000remaining
in reserved funds. The Borella Field sale
would have contributed 4.5 million into
the system, yet it was defeated. Many
rumors have indicated that the sale was de­feated
because residents felt that the Grum­man
proposal would be the answer to their
tax problems. However, this rumor re­sulted
in even more misinformation. The
fact is that Grumman's presentation to the
community in regards to tax reduction was
lacking a firm grasp on reality as it didn't
consider tax increases , tax classifications
and simply reflected a 32% reduction by
the year 2005. Not true.
In exploring this topic we were again
and again referred to Dr. John Sommi,
Superintendent of Schools for guidance
and information. He has a firm and thor­ough
understanding of the tax system and
laws and we found no better place to begin,
than with an excerpt from the presentation
Dr. Sommi made at the January 10th Scop­ing
Hearing on the Steriing Center pro­posal.
the Real Property Tax Law, originally
adopted in 19HI .which created four classes
of property assessments and shifts the tax
incidence away from Class IV. Commer­cial
and Industrial Property, to Class I, one
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
1984-85 1989-90
•
HOMEOWNERS TAX RAT£ PER
$100 OF ASSESSED y^M
COMMERCIAL TAX RATE
PER $100 OF ASSESSED VALUE
20.86 ,
21.67
<>
o
28.544 27.279
1995
37J27
Old Tax Law in Effect After Change In T ia Law —-
*Projection based on Grumman completing one third of the Sterling Center project with an estimated
assessed value of $10,000,00 dollars (per Grumman figures). Note the projected assessed value of
the entire plan due to be completed in 2005 is $30,000,000
Dr. Sommi first addressed his con­cerns
for the safety and well being of Beth­page
students and then went on to say:
Fiscal impact of Sterling center is a
second major concern facing Bethpage
Schools. The project will ultimately gener­ate
considerable tax revenue if constructed
in the scope as presented.
Of immediate concern is the question
of decreased assessment as a result of the
closing of the Airport this spring and pos­sible
demolition of some structures on the
proposed site. What is the actual assess­ment
of the property in question? How
much of the reduction in asses.sments will
occur before offset hy new construction.?
What will the annual estimated deduction
from or additions to the assessments over
the proposed life of the project? This must
he known if the school district is to plan
responsibly and advice voters at the an­nual
budget meetings of the projected school
year.
What will be the continuing impact of
and two family homes. For example, in
1988. Class IV contained 42.9^5% of dis­trict
total assessments, hut only paid
40.80743% of the tax levy, creating a tax
rate of $25,222 per hundred of assessed
valuation. Class! paid 56.340 % of the tax
levy, although containing only 54.340% of
the district's assessed valuation. For Class
/ the rate was $27,436 per hundred of
assessed valuation.
In 1989, Class IV property increased
to 46.322% of district total assessments,
hut paid only 43.18899% of the tax levy,
with a rate per hundred of a.sscs.smeni of
$25.434. Once again the impact of the Real
Property Tax law shifted a portion of the
tax incidence to Class f which, while con­taining
51.545% of'iaxiihleproperty, paid
53.93593%' of the tax levy, or $28,544 per
hundred of a.ssesstnent.
I would further note that Clas.ses II
and III paid onh $523,138 or 2.87% of the
tax levy of the $18. 195,600.
Due to the impact of Real Property
Tax Laws governing preservation of class
shares and adjusted ba.se proportions, while
Class IV a.sse.s.sments grew hy $3,961,301.
a 12.8% increase, the tax rale consequently
grew only 0.8%. in comparison with Class
I assessments which grew by $313,919. or
2.9%. and had a 4.0% increase in its tax
rate or $1,108 per hundred. The grttwih in
a.s.sessments in each class is kept .separate
from all other i lasses of property and there­for
tax rates are similarly treated..
The Real Property Tax Law was
amended again in 1989, which will shift the
determination of the base percentages to
(Coaimmd oa pa^ ^
JOIN T H E B I T H P A Q E TRIBUNl and
BOWL AGAINST DYSTROPHY
Help fight neyromuseuter lUseim® «Mi parttoipite
in tii# Betliii^e Tril»un«'s First AnniMi
BOmfL.JkTHOM
peMiiiiiiiYa.t99ii
Woodbury Lanes - Hicksville
Nostalgia Night - 10:M p.m.
Call Unda at M1-W40 tor morif infornfiation