Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Couple of ideas - 1st, teachers compensation isn't funded almost 100% by the district's property taxes. It is a combination of property tax, federal, and state money. It all depends on what school district you work in. If you work in a poor district, most of the money comes from the state. Instead of funding money by property taxes, why aren't schools funded by the state only? The state takes in taxes as it always does and redistributes to the school districts based on size/need.
You are correct but many school districts on LI receive minimal aid (as a % of total operating expenses), that's why I said teachers compensation is funded almost 100% by district property taxes. In fact, you'd be hard pressed to find more than 2 hands worth of districts that have property tax receipts that are less than teachers' salaries. When comparing this to county government expenses (which was the point of the post since by your response you obviously missed it), the % of total operating expenses that property taxes cover for the county government is significantly less than the % of operating expenses of a school district that property taxes cover.
Couple of ideas - 1st, teachers compensation isn't funded almost 100% by the district's property taxes. It is a combination of property tax, federal, and state money. It all depends on what school district you work in. If you work in a poor district, most of the money comes from the state. Instead of funding money by property taxes, why aren't schools funded by the state only? The state takes in taxes as it always does and redistributes to the school districts based on size/need.
Then why do the poor districts on Long Island also have high property taxes? Especially compared to what their homes are worth?
Last I checked "federal" and "state" money comes from the same place property tax money comes from:
THE POCKETS OF THE TAXPAYERS.
So what is the huge distinction you are trying to make here?
The hamlets in TOB have been hit a bit harder than the villages, but both have seen huge increases. The TOB $$ amount in the villages isn't as high, but that is due to the villages providing some of the services. However, even for the villages the increases are rather stark and pretty much 30%+. I must have fat fingered the Block Blvd addy
The reason I use the Venditto comparison is because he is close allies with Mangano and Schmitt. Also at one of the early 09 tea party rallies in Massapequa, Venditto joined Mangano and Schmitt for slamming Suozzi for increasing Nassau property taxes by 3.9%, and that year the TOB property tax increase was 11%. So Veditto went off on Suozzi for a 3.9% increase when he had an 11% increase himself. It just shows how selective the outrage over the tax issue is. 3.9% increase over 7 years = bad, yet a 40% increase over 7 years = Praise the guy and slam the guy with the 3.9% increase.
Again, no, I have not seen a "huge increase". $130 in Massapequa Park village tax in 6 years is not something I'm too worried about, considering we have a surplus and run a tight ship here. I know the Mayor and Village Board are looking out for residents here, with no excessiveness in the budget or any major fiscal problems down the road.
So what you're saying with your vendetta against any politician with an [R] in front of their name is that we have no right to complain about excessive County spending because the TOB may be doing the same thing? I don't really buy that; and it's a (straw man / distraction) away from the real 800lb gorilla, the Unions and their stranglehold on Nassau County, and its massive deficit --which it appears the county problems will accelerate over the next 5 years unless we do something now. Increasing taxes just enables them to keep spending more money.
Quote:
So technically, county taxes have reallyincreased by $828 in your example (1,800 x 1.46)= $2628, if Mangano were to balance the massive deficits (left by the Suozzi/Gulotta camps) through increased taxes.
Well the proponents of maintaining the current police compensation structure often point to the fact that school district taxes are 70% of the property tax bill and that the police portion is so small it shouldn't be looked at. With an understanding of the other taxes that support the police, we get a better understanding of what the exhorbitant police compensation actually costs the taxpayers. Teachers' compensation isn't hidden because they are funded almost 100% by the district's property taxes.
Oh I totally agree about the complete absurdity of our self appointed PBA reps here on C-D constantly pointing to "the teachers!" "the teachers!" - although they would still do that with or without the property tax split (just like the teachers do to the cops, even with it in their favor).
Quote:
Originally Posted by PreciousMonster
Couple of ideas - 1st, teachers compensation isn't funded almost 100% by the district's property taxes. It is a combination of property tax, federal, and state money. It all depends on what school district you work in. If you work in a poor district, most of the money comes from the state. Instead of funding money by property taxes, why aren't schools funded by the state only? The state takes in taxes as it always does and redistributes to the school districts based on size/need.
Do you know where (or if) there is a breakdown of funding for individual school districts' budgets posted online? I've always assumed the schools get a fairly decent amount of state/federal aid... even the non-poor ones. I could be wrong, though.
Again, no, I have not seen a "huge increase". $130 in Massapequa Park village tax in 6 years is not something I'm too worried about, considering we have a surplus and run a tight ship here. I know the Mayor and Village Board are looking out for residents here, with no excessiveness in the budget or any major fiscal problems down the road.
So what you're saying with your vendetta against any politician with an [R] in front of their name is that we have no right to complain about excessive County spending because the TOB may be doing the same thing? I don't really buy that; and it's a (straw man / distraction) away from the real 800lb gorilla, the Unions and their stranglehold on Nassau County, and its massive deficit --which it appears the county problems will accelerate over the next 5 years unless we do something now. Increasing taxes just enables them to keep spending more money.
I think what he meant was that places in the Village of Massapequa Park may have seen less of a numerical gain (though similar %) in the town portion of the taxes since you're paying the village for the functions they handle instead of the Town of Oyster Bay, unlike unincorporated areas that are solely reliant on the town for all those same functions... not that your village taxes have increased dramatically instead of your town taxes.
I don't think Smash255 has a vendetta against any [R] politician. He's been here a long time and is VERY obviously a big [D] supporter, maybe to the point of being completely blind about it in his support, but he has also been openly critical of/dissatisfied with [D]'s on numerous occasions I can remember. Plus, I think he's right in this case... regarding the TOB tax increase. Are you really surprised or let down that (gasp!) a local politician has been hypocritical about something? It's not a big deal.
Oh I totally agree about the complete absurdity of our self appointed PBA reps here on C-D constantly pointing to "the teachers!" "the teachers!" - although they would still do that with or without the property tax split (just like the teachers do to the cops, even with it in their favor).
Do you know where (or if) there is a breakdown of funding for individual school districts' budgets posted online? I've always assumed the schools get a fairly decent amount of state/federal aid... even the non-poor ones. I could be wrong, though.
and finding each district's budget online, along with seethroughny. But where do we get more info on this and data on aid provided to individual districts is a good question.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sean sean sean sean
I think what he meant was that places in the Village of Massapequa Park may have seen less of a numerical gain (though similar %) in the town portion of the taxes since you're paying the village for the functions they handle instead of the Town of Oyster Bay, unlike unincorporated areas that are solely reliant on the town for all those same functions... not that your village taxes have increased dramatically instead of your town taxes.
I don't think Smash255 has a vendetta against any [R] politician. He's been here a long time and is VERY obviously a big [D] supporter, maybe to the point of being completely blind about it in his support, but he has also been openly critical of/dissatisfied with [D]'s on numerous occasions I can remember. Plus, I think he's right in this case... regarding the TOB tax increase. Are you really surprised or let down that (gasp!) a local politician has been hypocritical about something? It's not a big deal.
Yeah, he's definitely leaning [D], no doubt. But when you use "stark" "huge increases" (even talking about %), they're really not when comparing to the county. Considering TOB/Villages usually don't borrow to avoid tax increases. And most of the TOB increases seem to be in Roads, Parks and the General fund (all three doubled in the last 6 yrs). Those seem like "QOL increasing" expenses, unless of course they merely went up to pay Parks/Road workers/General fund TOB employees $130k per year with crazy benefits and pensions. That, I would definitely not approve of. I know the villages are for the most part not doing that. The county expenses are more wasteful and really in dollar terms, going to cause 85% of our tax dollar increases over the next 5 years, in Nassau county anyway.
Why Smash is so against Mangano/Schmitt/Maragos for refusing to raise taxes and instead cut spending, is another baffling question I've had since I first started my duels with him last year.
I've never understood that. Am I missing something with the current admin's policy? I watched that video and think they make some good points in it.
My point about Venditto was quite simple. At one of the tea party/ campaign rallies in Massapequa in 09 he joined Mangano and Schmitt slam Suozzi over a 3.9% increase in property taxes for the county. Schmitt and Mangano also praised Venditto at that rally. Meanwhile the very same cycle Venditto chose to raise the TOB taxes by 11%. On top of that 3.9% increase came after holding the line on property taxes for five consecutive years prior. Meanwhile Venditto raised taxes 40% in the TOB in that time frame. The $$$ increase is obviously going to be a bit more in a hamlet than in the village because the village would provide some of the services, but the main point was you have someone who raised taxes by 40% over a 6 year period, 11% over that past year slamming someone for raising taxes by 3.9%. It was just Venditto being extremely hypocritical.
Now as far as Schmitt and Mangano and why I have issues with them. Well first of all Schmitt is probably the single most arrogant member on either side of the aisle, which I dislike, but my main issue is neither one have seemed to learn the mistakes of the Gullotta administration. They were both in the Legislature in the mid and late 90's and went along with virtually every bad Gullotta decision which resulted in the county's finances bond status being rated as junk. So my issues with the two of them go back to then.
However, I would have less of a problem if they seemed to learn from the mistakes, but they haven't. Increases in taxes are never good, no one likes them and they aren't a good move politically, but you can't exactly take them off the table completely. That is what happened under Gullotta, and we are repeating the exact same thing now. You can't run a government this size without ever turning to a tax increase. It sounds nice, but its just not possible or fiscally responsible. I totally agree that spending needs to be put into check, but nothing that has been proposed by Mangano and Schmitt will actually lead to any real decreases in spending, its basically hopes and wished, you need something more than hopes and wishes. Also we are currently in a situation where either tax increases or spending decreases isn't enough. Unfortunately, we need to do both.
The borrowing is another issue. This is something that has been going on for decades, and yes Suozzi did it as well, but the amount of borrowing Mangano wanted to do, the amount he wanted to increase it from the past was just staggering. Again its something not learned from the Gullotta administration. When Gullotta was in office the amount of borrowing to cover the budgets increased rapidly, its now increasing rapidly again.
Also the uncapped compensation for retiring officers. The compensation for retiring offices started to really increase under Purcell then skyrocketed under Gullotta. Suozzi was able to get some concessions and push through caps (which btw was still too high in some cases) and in order to try and get some cops to retire Mangano removed those caps. I can understand trying to give incentives for cops to retire so you can bring new ones in at lower costs, but it gets to the point where the compensation packages costs so much, any savings is washed right out. We are having some chiefs retiring with well in excess of $800,000 their last year on the force. That is just plain nuts. Not to mention much like when Gullotta was in office overtime (which Mangano said he had in control) is skyrocketing again. A few cops pulled over $100,000 each in ot alone, a bunch of cops raked in over $50,000 in OT. Its crazy.
Mangano and Schmitt are doing the exact same things that Gullotta did and are somehow expecting a different result. If anything the problem could get even more out of control now because the national economy is much worse than 10-12 years ago which impacts the sales revenue.
I actually like Mangano's tenacity and wish him well - I hope he does turn the county's finances around and gets re-elected... I don't wanna see him go down in flames. However, I think he got himself into a really stupid spot here not wanting to pull a GHB "read my lips..." scenario and played fast & loose with the budget because of it. This is going to hurt him more than if he had just raised the taxes in the first place, which is probably what will end up happening anyway. I wouldn't have lost sleep over it either way. Yeah it's not completely his fault, but if he was allowed to borrow what he wanted to borrow - the next guy's problem would be his fault. I think NIFA stepping in is the right move here, even if it hurts us a little more right now.
Nobody except [R] diehards are buying the conspiracy theory. I voted for Suozzi - who I thought was far from perfect, but I did favor his (horribly marketed) approach to bringing in tax dollars through development opportunities. Aside from him - other than judges, and whoever was running against Kate Murray - I don't think I've ever voted for another [D] in a local election. Not because I have anything against [D] or am a [R], just because I've favored the individual [R]'s on a case-by-case basis and that's the way it shook out.
I think Mangano has made so many boneheaded moves, and yet I still support him and have hope for him... however if he can't get someone who has historically voted [R], and fundamentally buys into what he's preaching on board - plus I'm willing to look past all his prior mistakes - I think he's gonna have a really hard time selling this nonsense and people are gonna get ugly if he tries to push the lawsuit through.
Pequa - The argument you're making about town vs. county taxes is the same argument you were just (rightfully) killing people for making about the police vs. teacher costs in this very thread!! There isn't as much of a "hidden cost" in the town taxes, but it's fundamentally the same exact thing ("oh well I don't mind paying this for xxx, cuz yyy is so much more expensive!") !! I have to side with Smash here, why not go after Venditto as well? Your town property taxes are still over $1,000 a year... that's not exactly chump change if he's planning on another 30%+ increase over the next 5 years.
I just added up my gross receipts from last year in QuickBooks, here's what my totals looked like:
$5800 School Taxes w.star $5471 County Taxes
It's closer to 51%/49% when you factor in sales tax and other miscellaneous charges. I didn't include the taxes I pay on gasoline and other hidden county taxes/surcharges/fines that I'm sure that will push it to 50/50. So there you go, it's really 50%/50%.
Your point about high taxes here on Long Island is well taken. We are taxed in several directions at once and the school portion of the property tax portion is a very high profile tax. It is a sad commentary on the over-taxation that the onerous school tax does not even constitute the majority of the taxes we pay!
My point about Venditto was quite simple. At one of the tea party/ campaign rallies in Massapequa in 09 he joined Mangano and Schmitt slam Suozzi over a 3.9% increase in property taxes for the county. Schmitt and Mangano also praised Venditto at that rally. Meanwhile the very same cycle Venditto chose to raise the TOB taxes by 11%. On top of that 3.9% increase came after holding the line on property taxes for five consecutive years prior. Meanwhile Venditto raised taxes 40% in the TOB in that time frame. The $$$ increase is obviously going to be a bit more in a hamlet than in the village because the village would provide some of the services, but the main point was you have someone who raised taxes by 40% over a 6 year period, 11% over that past year slamming someone for raising taxes by 3.9%. It was just Venditto being extremely hypocritical.
I don't really have any interest in what happened at a tea party, or who said what etc. The fact is TOB is conservative in their spending AFAIK. Town of Oyster Bay Board Votes to Increase Salaries
Look at how little they are making compared. I'm not saying this is a 100% certainty, but I'm assuming that Vendittos increases are direct increases in QOL for TOB residents. Not to fatten up a huge union's salaries or pensions. Also, the TOB does not have the benefit of the county sales tax revenues. Yeah, they do get a portion, but not their fair share lately as the county has to cut back on aid to Towns & Villages to pay off the PD, county workers, fringes, welfare, debt service on the mess Suozzi left behind and other excesses. Why would Suozzi not first pay off the county debt, then start bargaining with the PBA?
Quote:
They were both in the Legislature in the mid and late 90's and went along with virtually every bad Gullotta decision which resulted in the county's finances bond status being rated as junk. So my issues with the two of them go back to then.
Could it be the economy was booming under Clinton up until about 1999-2001 when we contracted? maybe the prediction of future tax revenue, borrowing rates, etc was overly-optimistic, similar to how Suozzi was too optimistic when he locked us into overpriced union contracts in 2005-2006, that we're stuck with til 2016!!
Quote:
That is what happened under Gullotta, and we are repeating the exact same thing now. You can't run a government this size without ever turning to a tax increase. It sounds nice, but its just not possible or fiscally responsible. I totally agree that spending needs to be put into check, but nothing that has been proposed by Mangano and Schmitt will actually lead to any real decreases in spending, its basically hopes and wished, you need something more than hopes and wishes.
-610 fewer county employees on the payroll
-$15 Million hiring freeze
-streamlining technologies throughout the county to save a few million (VOIP and other)
-Cutting $1 Million from the exec's own dept
-Just got the CSEA to concede to $70 Million in county savings over 7 yrs.
+cut the regressive home energy tax to 0, from Suozzi's 2.5%
+did not raise taxes that Suozzi planned to do
How is that all hopes and wishes???
When do the budget numbers come out, February? If you are wrong and the budget is balanced and we ended with a surplus as Maragos has said, what will you say then about NIFA's motivation to do this?
Also the uncapped compensation for retiring officers. The compensation for retiring offices started to really increase under Purcell then skyrocketed under Gullotta. Suozzi was able to get some concessions and push through caps (which btw was still too high in some cases) and in order to try and get some cops to retire Mangano removed those caps. I can understand trying to give incentives for cops to retire so you can bring new ones in at lower costs, but it gets to the point where the compensation packages costs so much, any savings is washed right out. We are having some chiefs retiring with well in excess of $800,000 their last year on the force. That is just plain nuts. Not to mention much like when Gullotta was in office overtime (which Mangano said he had in control) is skyrocketing again. A few cops pulled over $100,000 each in ot alone, a bunch of cops raked in over $50,000 in OT. Its crazy.
It is crazy, I agree. That's why maybe citizens need to speak up, and come together at the grass-root level, to get the message out to the PBA that we're not going to pay these ridiculous salaries and fringes and that you're ruining this county.
On the early retirement packages, yeah it sounds crazy, and it sounds crazy in the private sector when they do this. But Again, I trust Maragos over anyone else's opinion here that thinks it won't work out to the county's benefit in the long run. Show me your math since you are claiming it is a bad investment, as you stated in another post. IMO, it's borrowing at 2.8% to realize immediate and future savings at a multiple of that % rate and borrowed amount.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
