Proposed legislation would allow fire districts to tax otherwise tax exempt properties in their districts

[DCJPells 29]

A00772 Summary:

BILL NO A00772

SAME AS Same as S 257

SPONSOR Gunther

COSPNSR Galef, Carrozza

MLTSPNSR Boyland, Calhoun, Crouch, Miller, Molinaro, Sayward, Scozzafava,

Thiele

Amd S490, RPT L

Authorizes fire districts to impose ad valorem levies and special assessments

on otherwise tax exempt real property.

________________________________________

A00772 Actions:

BILL NO A00772

01/07/2009 referred to real property taxation

________________________________________

A00772 Votes:

________________________________________

A00772 Memo:

BILL NUMBER:A772

TITLE OF BILL: An act to amend the real property tax law, in relation

to authorizing fire districts to impose special ad valorem levies and

special assessments against otherwise tax exempt real property

PURPOSE:

To allow fire districts to levy a tax on tax exempt properties.

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS:

Section 1- amends section 490 of the real property tax law, as amended

by chapter 87 of the laws of 2001 to add special ad valorem levies and

special assessments for a special district improvement or service levied

by a fire district on a property in a fire protection district or a

property receiving fire protection services.

Section 2-contains the effective date

EXISTING LAW:

Section 490 of the Real Property Tax Law provides for the exemption from

special ad valorem levies and special assessments. Currently, fire

districts cannot levy taxes on tax exempt properties.

JUSTIFICATION:

Not-for-profit entities receive real property tax exempt status under

the sections 420-a and 420-b of the Real Property Tax Law. However,

section 490 of the Real Property Tax Law provides that county and town

charges for capital costs of sewer systems, water supply systems, water-

ways and drainage improvements, and streets and highways, plus special

assessments for indebtedness contracted before July 1, 1953 can be

levied on tax exempt properties. Fire protection is a vital service

that is provided to all residents and businesses in a community. Taxes

are levied in these districts to pay for these services. Not-for-profits

benefit from these fire protection services and should pay this special

district tax. In some areas, certain tax exempt organizations do provide

a contribution to their local firehouse, but with rising property taxes,

the burden of this service should be borne by all the property owners in

the community.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:

2007-2008: A1250 Died in Assembly Ways & Means 3/2/2006 A10141 Referred

to RPT Committee

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

To be determined.

LOCAL FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

By spreading the costs around to all the properties within a fire

district, savings would be realized by those who currently pay fire

district taxes.

EFFECTIVE DATE:

This act shall take effect immediately and shall apply to special ad

valorem levies and special assessments imposed on or after such effec-

tive date.

[DCJPells 29]

All New York State Fire District should contact their Assemblyman and Senators to ask that this be passed. Fairview Dutchess is an example of tax exempt gone wild as is Arlington's dealing with Vassar College.

[ajsbear 11]

The Senate won't vote on a bill until it passes the Assembly and unless there is something in it for Sheldon Silver, it'll never come out of committee.

[gamewell45 258]

The Senate won't vote on a bill until it passes the Assembly and unless there is something in it for Sheldon Silver, it'll never come out of committee.

Good luck getting the bills passed; you'll have lobbyists coming out of the woodwork on behalf of every college, house of worship and every other not-for-profit organization. Even it it were passed, it would be in the courts for years. BTW i think your right; unless there's something in it for Shelly, it'll never come out of committee.

[Oswegowind 17]

This is a very interesting idea and seems awfully well thought out. Even properties that are "tax exempt" need protection. And fire districts taxes are your payment for that protection. So, I believe this is a concept that should pass. No offense to any religions, but how many "churches" have we seen burn down in the past 5 years. They should be paying their fair share, granted that the members of the organization may pay their own property protection taxes, this separate property should be required to pay some sort of monetary amount for protection. I am sure that there is some scale for residential and commercial properties and this should be a 3rd division of that scale. Considering that churches are not inhabited (well, not all) and are vacant more of the time than other types of properties should have effect on how much they pay. Also, some churches and organizations have other properties such as living quarters and these too require protection. In other words, if I had a vote...I would vote Yay!

[helicopper 1,050]

The bill should be amended to include all emergency services: police, fire, and EMS and all types of municipalities not simply fire districts. This way all properties are assessed equally for provision of police, fire, and EMS services to them.

Great idea but sadly I don't think it will make it either.

[fdny2817 6]

The bill should be amended to include all emergency services: police, fire, and EMS and all types of municipalities not simply fire districts. This way all properties are assessed equally for provision of police, fire, and EMS services to them.

Great idea but sadly I don't think it will make it either.

Well, something has to happen. The State says it's a local issue, the County says it's a Town planning and zoning issue. But the planning and zoning boards are following state regulations.

This will affect alot more fire departments than you think, just look into your own departments and add up the churches, schools, town property, state property, county property, boy & girl scout camps. you will be amazed at how much it adds up. Then look at how many runs you have to these places, what equipment you had to purchase to protect them, training. All i can say is brothers do the math.

[helicopper 1,050]

Well, something has to happen. The State says it's a local issue, the County says it's a Town planning and zoning issue. But the planning and zoning boards are following state regulations.

This will affect alot more fire departments than you think, just look into your own departments and add up the churches, schools, town property, state property, county property, boy & girl scout camps. you will be amazed at how much it adds up. Then look at how many runs you have to these places, what equipment you had to purchase to protect them, training. All i can say is brothers do the math.

What if a property owner said, "forget it, I'm not paying taxes. Send me a bill for services if and when I actually use your department."

Sure it's a gamble but I bet the majority of the time, they'd be alright.

[Bnechis 3,961]

What if a property owner said, "forget it, I'm not paying taxes. Send me a bill for services if and when I actually use your department."

Sure it's a gamble but I bet the majority of the time, they'd be alright.

In the case of our "non-profits" for some it would be cheaper to pay the tax. We respond to one NP 85 times last year (we have 100's of NP's) and if we were to charge "at cost" which the law allows us to do on Hazmat its in the $800/hour range that's $34,000 for 30 minute average time per call.

[Goose 188]

I thought that FDs had the ability to bill repeat AFA offenders, just like some PDs bill home owners/businesses whose alarms go off constantly. I think i read this hear a while back, don't remember. But, something like your taxes covered 1 or 2 responses after which you would be billed.

[Bnechis 3,961]

I thought that FDs had the ability to bill repeat AFA offenders, just like some PDs bill home owners/businesses whose alarms go off constantly. I think i read this hear a while back, don't remember. But, something like your taxes covered 1 or 2 responses after which you would be billed.

We can bill, as a fine. But not the cost of the service

[DCJPells 29]

I thought that FDs had the ability to bill repeat AFA offenders, just like some PDs bill home owners/businesses whose alarms go off constantly. I think i read this hear a while back, don't remember. But, something like your taxes covered 1 or 2 responses after which you would be billed.

A Municipality may write something to collect upon those situations, a Fire District cannot. This also does not cover the numerous EMS calls that may incur. Some differences to be noted

A Municipal Fire Department (City) can bill for services such as Ambulance, Inspections. etc. A EMS District can bill but not tax. In our area. PD is not significantly impacted by the same tax exempt though some fees may be collected though citations.

[AFS1970 504]

I don't think this is a bad idea, but the rationale in the bill seems to allow the thought of eventually repealing tax exemption.

Since it uses the theory that these properties benefit from fir eprotection and therefore should pay for it, could not one argue that they benefit from just about any city service that are paid for with taxes? This is probably why the non-profits will lobby pretty hard against this.

[DCJPells 29]

I don't think this is a bad idea, but the rationale in the bill seems to allow the thought of eventually repealing tax exemption.

Since it uses the theory that these properties benefit from fir eprotection and therefore should pay for it, could not one argue that they benefit from just about any city service that are paid for with taxes? This is probably why the non-profits will lobby pretty hard against this.

Non Profits (501's under IRS) have restrictions against political activity and lobbying. This varies so they would need to be careful.

[firefighter36 52]

Having faced issues directly related to such legislation, I can say that though it would greatly help my district, I remain cautiously optomistic. There are a myriad of different interests in NY that would not like to see this bill get passed. Politics as usual I suppose.

As many of the posts have pointed, there are a number of different legal models on which fire protection can be delivered to the public. (Municipal, special district, etc.) Though the goal of protection is ultimately the same no matter what the model, the financial implications from funding to fines & billing, as well as enforcement vary greatly.

The bottom line: re-working the "system" opens up a pandora's box of issues with the state constituion and that is a politicial hot potato that no politician in Albany (at least one who would like to continue being a politician) would want to touch. Until our politicians decide that it IS an issue, and lobbies representing the various areas of the service get on the same page, I honestly don't know if much will change.

On the flip side, if this legislation was to pass, I have a feeling that those entities affected by it would be more than happy to fight a pricey legal battle to prove a point, even if it results in higher costs than if they actually stepped up and contributed.

[Bnechis 3,961]

I don't think this is a bad idea, but the rationale in the bill seems to allow the thought of eventually repealing tax exemption.

Since it uses the theory that these properties benefit from fir eprotection and therefore should pay for it, could not one argue that they benefit from just about any city service that are paid for with taxes? This is probably why the non-profits will lobby pretty hard against this.

Yes and no. For example we have 2 collages that are non profits. They do not pay property tax. The majority of the properties are self contained, PD does not patrol them (the do respond to incidents), DPW does not pick up garbage, recycling or maintain streets/plow them (private contractor or collage employees). They dont use city parks, recreation, youth or aging, the primary service that they use almost daily is fire protection.

[fire55 3]

Something to ponder on all of this. What happens when the fire district and/or fire company is a non-for profit and does not have to pay property tax and school tax. These entities might come after you now for taxes (school, town, county tax). What will you do then?? Alot of departments own alot of property and most are in commercial zones. Do you know how much they will kill you on these taxes. Might not be worth it!!! Something to think about!!

Just my 2 cents!!!

[DCJPells 29]

Something to ponder on all of this. What happens when the fire district and/or fire company is a non-for profit and does not have to pay property tax and school tax. These entities might come after you now for taxes (school, town, county tax). What will you do then?? Alot of departments own alot of property and most are in commercial zones. Do you know how much they will kill you on these taxes. Might not be worth it!!! Something to think about!!

Just my 2 cents!!!

First you need to know the difference between

1) Fire District

2) Fire Department

3) Fire Company

This bill only allows a Fire District to tax the tax exempt. A Fire District is not a non profit but a political subdivision of NY that can levy taxes.

A Fire Company is probably the non profit. Many lease/rent space, property, etc. to a Fire District. Thus, you cover that with a increase in rent.

Collectively, they are the Fire Department. again not a non-for profit.

This only covers Fire Districts as per NYS Town Law.