S T A T E   O F   N E W   Y O R K
________________________________________________________________________

                                 8649--A

                          I N  A S S E M B L Y

                             January 7, 2016
                               ___________

Introduced  by  M. of A. KOLB -- read once and referred to the Committee
  on Ways and Means  --  committee  discharged,  bill  amended,  ordered
  reprinted as amended and recommitted to said committee

AN  ACT  to  amend  the  general municipal law and the education law, in
  relation  to  the  real  property  tax  cap;  and  to  repeal  certain
  provisions of such laws relating thereto

  THE  PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEM-
BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

  Section 1.  Legislative intent. The legislature finds  that  when  the
property  tax cap was first enacted in 2011 that tangible mandate relief
is needed to be coupled with the cap in order  to  significantly  reduce
property taxes.  Since enactment, no substantial mandate relief has been
introduced  and property taxes throughout the state continue to be high.
The property tax cap has kept the growth in property taxes down but  has
done  little  in helping with providing the necessary relief to property
owners. On the other hand, without mandate relief, local governments and
school districts have been squeezed financially. They are now limited to
a tax cap that is tied to the Consumer Price Index  (CPI)  that  has  in
recent  years  been  low.  This  has forced local governments and school
districts to struggle with budget concerns and a potential tax cap over-
ride.  However, the current lack of taxpayer  appetite  for  a  tax  cap
override  at  the  school  district level has forced school districts to
potentially cut  services  in  order  to  pay  for  under  and  unfunded
mandates.  This bill would create a true two percent property tax cap by
removing the property tax cap being tied to CPI and would  allow  for  a
simple  majority  vote  to  override the cap. The legislature recognizes
that had real mandate relief been enacted when the cap was first enacted
these changes would not have been needed.  Further,  these  two  changes
would  also make New York's property tax cap consistent with neighboring
state's property tax caps. A true two percent cap would create  predict-
ability and fairness to local governments and school districts. Finally,
this  bill  would  provide  state  aid  to  local governments and school
districts equal to the year-to-year increase in levy  growth  under  the

 EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
                      [ ] is old law to be omitted.
                                                           LBD13280-04-6
              

A. 8649--A                          2

property  tax  cap; therefore keeping property taxes flat for homeowners
and small businesses.
  S  2.  Paragraph  (a)  of  subdivision 2 of section 3-c of the general
municipal law, as added by section 1 of part A of chapter 97 of the laws
of 2011, is amended to read as follows:
  (a) "Allowable levy growth factor" shall be  [the  lesser  of:    (i)]
EQUAL  TO  one  and two one-hundredths[; or (ii) the sum of one plus the
inflation factor; provided, however, that in  no  case  shall  the  levy
growth factor be less than one].
  S  3.  Paragraph  (d)  of  subdivision 2 of section 3-c of the general
municipal law is REPEALED.
  S 4. Paragraph a of subdivision 2 of section 2023-a of  the  education
law,  as added by section 2 of part A of chapter 97 of the laws of 2011,
is amended to read as follows:
  a. "Allowable levy growth factor" shall be [the lesser of:  (i)] EQUAL
TO one and two  one-hundredths[;  or  (ii)  the  sum  of  one  plus  the
inflation  factor;  provided,  however,  that  in no case shall the levy
growth factor be less than one].
  S 5. Paragraph f of subdivision 2 of section 2023-a of  the  education
law is REPEALED.
  S  6.  Subdivision  5  of section 3-c of the general municipal law, as
added by section 1 of part A of chapter 97  of  the  laws  of  2011,  is
amended to read as follows:
  5. A local government may adopt a budget that requires a tax levy that
is  greater  than  the  tax  levy  limit for the coming fiscal year, not
including any levy necessary to support  the  expenditures  pursuant  to
subparagraphs  (i)  through (iv) of paragraph [g] (G) of subdivision two
of this section, only if the governing body  of  such  local  government
first  enacts, by a vote of [sixty] MORE THAN FIFTY percent of the total
voting power of such body, a local law to override such limit  for  such
coming  fiscal year only, or in the case of a district or fire district,
a resolution, approved by a vote of sixty percent of  the  total  voting
power  of  such body, to override such limit for such coming fiscal year
only.
  S 7. Subdivision 6 of section 2023-a of the education law, as added by
section 2 of part A of chapter 97 of the laws of  2011,  is  amended  to
read as follows:
  6.  (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, in
the event the trustee, trustees  or  board  of  education  of  a  school
district  that  is  subject to the provisions of this section proposes a
budget that will require a tax levy that exceeds the tax levy limit  for
the  corresponding  school  year,  not  including  any levy necessary to
support the expenditures pursuant to subparagraphs (i) through  (iv)  of
paragraph  i  of subdivision two of this section, then such budget shall
be approved if [sixty] MORE THAN FIFTY percent of the votes cast thereon
are in the affirmative.
  (b) Where the trustee, trustees or board of education proposes a budg-
et subject to the requirements of paragraph (a) of this subdivision, the
ballot for such budget shall include the following statement in substan-
tially the same form: "Adoption of  this  budget  requires  a  tax  levy
increase  of         which exceeds the statutory tax levy increase limit
of      for this school fiscal year and therefore exceeds the state  tax
cap and must be approved by [sixty] MORE THAN FIFTY percent of the qual-
ified voters present and voting."

A. 8649--A                          3

  S 8. Subdivision 9 of section 2023-a of the education law, as added by
section  2  of  part  A of chapter 97 of the laws of 2011, is amended to
read as follows:
  9.  Nothing  in  this section shall preclude the trustee, trustees, or
board of education of a  school  district,  in  their  discretion,  from
submitting  additional  items of expenditures to the voters for approval
as separate propositions or  the  voters  from  submitting  propositions
pursuant  to sections two thousand eight and two thousand thirty-five of
this part; provided however, except in the case of a proposition submit-
ted for any expenditure contained within subparagraphs (i) through  (iv)
of  paragraph  i of subdivision two of this section, if any proposition,
or propositions collectively that are subject to  a  vote  on  the  same
date,  would  require  an  expenditure of money that would require a tax
levy and would result in the tax  levy  limit  being  exceeded  for  the
corresponding  school  year  then  such proposition shall be approved if
[sixty] MORE THAN FIFTY percent of the votes cast  thereon  are  in  the
affirmative.
  S  9.  Section 3-c of the general municipal law is amended by adding a
new subdivision 8 to read as follows:
  8. A LOCAL GOVERNMENT SHALL RECEIVE STATE AID IF SUCH LOCAL GOVERNMENT
ADOPTS A BUDGET THAT IS EQUAL TO OR LOWER THAN THE TAX LEVY LIMIT.  SUCH
STATE  AID  WOULD  BE EQUAL TO A LOCAL GOVERNMENT'S YEAR-TO-YEAR ADOPTED
LEVY INCREASE WITHIN THE TAX LEVY LIMIT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE STATE AID
FOR A LOCAL GOVERNMENT  EXCEED  THE  ALLOWABLE  LEVY  GROWTH  FACTOR  AS
DEFINED IN PARAGRAPH (A) OF SUBDIVISION TWO OF THIS SECTION.
  S  10.  Section 2023-a of the education law is amended by adding a new
subdivision 10 to read as follows:
  10. A SCHOOL DISTRICT SHALL RECEIVE STATE AID IF SUCH SCHOOL  DISTRICT
ADOPTS  A BUDGET THAT IS EQUAL TO OR LOWER THAN THE TAX LEVY LIMIT. SUCH
STATE AID WOULD BE EQUAL TO A  SCHOOL  DISTRICT'S  YEAR-TO-YEAR  ADOPTED
LEVY INCREASE WITHIN THE TAX LEVY LIMIT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE STATE AID
FOR A SCHOOL DISTRICT EXCEED THE ALLOWABLE LEVY GROWTH FACTOR AS DEFINED
IN PARAGRAPH A OF SUBDIVISION TWO OF THIS SECTION.
  S  11. This act shall take effect immediately; provided, however, that
the amendments to section 3-c of the general municipal law  and  section
2023-a  of  the  education  law  made  by sections two, four, five, six,
seven, eight, nine and ten of this act shall not affect  the  repeal  of
such sections and shall expire and be deemed repealed therewith.