WPCNR SCHOOL DAYS. By John F. Bailey. March 10, 2005:  Common Councilwoman Rita Malmud endorsed Superintendent of Schools Timothy Connors’ call for an independent consultant study of the effects, relationship and the future of city commercial and residential assessments and economic policy on the White Plains residential taxpayers Wednesday evening.  

Ms. Malmud speaks out!  She was the only common Council member to attend last night’s final Annual Budget Committee meeting. (Superintendent of Schools Timothy Connors is just behind her, Marc Pollitzer seated looks on.) Ms. Amalmud  agreed a study was needed after watching the City School District present their latest revised Preliminary School Budget. The budget was trimmed $1.3 Million, leaving a projected budget of  $154.8 Million  for 2005-2006 that only adds .13% in new expenditures.  The new budget calls for a 9.91% tax increase in the property tax, the largest year to year increase in school taxes since 1993. Photo by WPCNR News.

$16 Million Lost in Assessments in Three Years = $6.6 Million Loss in Revenue

Mr. Connors had Mr. Schruers prepare a chart showing the plummet in assessed property values in the last three years during the White Plains Renaissance. The district has lost $16,000,000 in assessable property value since 2002-03, costing $6.6 Million in school tax revenue. Photo by WPCNR News.

Schruer's chart factored in that even with the added PILOT revenues of $4.3 Million from the new development in White Plains, there is a net loss of school tax revenues of $2.3 Million. Schruers' conclusion was that this has caused a $404 dollar increase in the Tax Rate (2%).

The audience of citizens, many of whom have been on the Annual Budget Committee for a number of years, were very concerned at this trend and expressed puzzlement.  Schruers' pointed out that when you add Tax Certiorari refunds for the last three years the loss of revenues to the school district, combining lost assessment revenues and certiori refunds (which are permanent losses) amounts to $9 Million.

Economic Relationship Between Sales Tax and Property Tax Puzzling.

Many said  that this relationship of assessments and PILOTs and the city’s economic direction needed explanation for the School District to budget efficiently in future years. Mr. Connors began the meeting with a call for a study by a consultant of what the school district can expect in future years.

Ms. Malmud, speaking after the presentation, said she supported the cost of a study of assessments because she said  on the subject of assessments and PILOTS “there is a lot of misinformation and ignorance. You don’t have the facts.”

She said the trend “to condemn isn’t valid.” She noted that the city “cannot impose our will on the state.” She blamed part of the long term drop in assessments over the last twenty years began when the state took away the special franchise and utility assessment costing the city $35 Million in assessments the late 1980s.

PILOTS Essentially Equivalent to Property Tax Levy,  Malmud Says.

She said PILOTS “are done to give a developer certain bonding and sales tax benefits that does not change the property tax levy. It’s pretty much the same as if he didn’t have a PILOT.”

She blamed the Equalization Rate for the assessment drop which she described as “how you say what things are worth.” She said the assessments of homes are based on “what homes are worth,” while commercial properties are assessed “based on the value of homes and commercial property. There’s not a lot we can do about it. It’s dependent on what the state is doing.”

Legislature to the Rescue?

It was pointed out in the course of discussion that White Plains legislators in Albany are attempting, along with Nassau and Suffolk Counties to have separate assessment rates set for commercial and residential properties to prevent the trend that is impacting the three counties of Westchester, Nassau and Suffolk. WPCNR points out that though Assemblyman Robert Sweeney’s bill doing just that cleared the Assembly in 2003 and 2004, it died in the rules committee in the New York State Senate.

More on the PILOT Puzzle.

Afterwards, WPCNR asked Ms. Malmud how the City Center PILOT works, whether the property is assessed as a whole in figuring the PILOT and what the PILOT was. Malmud said that the National Amusements part of the City Center was given “a very generous PILOT, since we (the council) felt it was important to bring movies to White Plains.” She said the other individual businesses in the City Center were each PILOTed separately, but did not explain the details. She recalled the City Center PILOT as going about about 15 years (from 2001), but was not sure of that. She also had no comment on how the North Tower, a rental building was contributing to the PILOT for the center, and noted that the South Trump Tower was a condominium that would contribute to the tax levy next year.

Al Dold, veteran Annual Budget Committee member, said that when The Westchester comes off the PILOT agreement, that will be a good indication of whether Ms. Malmud is correct that PILOTS match what the city would have collected anyway. It is reported by observers that The Westchester lease mix is turning over now that the Westchester has completed its first ten years, and a number of tenants are leaving. How that will effect assessments has not been projected.

SO HOW CAN WE IMPROVE THE PROCESS? Superintendent of Schools Timothy Connors listening to the ABC Committee commentary Wednesday evening. Photo by WPCNR News.

More Input Early On, Budget Committee Asks.

At the conclusion of the meeting, Superintendent of Schools Connors asked ABC Committee Members their feelings about the process of the Annual Budget Committee Process.

A number of citizens expressed the desire to be included on the budget process earlier on, saying they felt they were placed in the role of budget cutters, instead of budget crafters, then being asked to sell it to the public. Others felt the school district had to look at cutting staff. All expressed their staunch support of what the district is doing and what it stood for, a quality education for every child and that it was well worth the taxes it took to achieve that. The majority of sentiments said it was imperative that the District work with the city to get a financial handle on its future, to plan, as to whether tax burden would be eased as development flourishes, or whether it would continue its downward spiral.

Board of Education member, William Pollak, expressed the anxiety and passion of the Committee's comments best when he said

"We're all fighting for the same thing. Fighting for what we believe in, a quality education for every child. A tax increase higher than the cost of living, is relatively cheap compared to what neighbors (other school districts) pay. This is a School District that envisions certain family values. It ain't going to happen if you're not going to fight for it. We want our children to aspire to certain ideals we want our children to embrace. Our property values are determined by our schools. We need to fight for it."