NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF LEGISLATION submitted in accordance with Assembly Rule III, Sec 1(f)
 
BILL NUMBER: A1166A
SPONSOR: Jaffee (MS)
 
TITLE OF BILL: An act to amend the education law, in relation to
school district tax levies
 
PURPOSE OR GENERAL IDEA OF BILL:
To require a simple majority vote for approval of a school budget that
exceeds the property tax cap.
 
SUMMARY OF SPECIFIC PROVISIONS:
This bill would amend the property tax cap statute by requiring a simple
majority vote instead of a sixty percent supermajority vote to approve a
school budget that exceeds the property tax cap.
 
JUSTIFICATION:
In 2011, the Governor signed into law a two percent real property tax
cap for local taxing entities, including school districts, to control
the amount of property tax increases. In order for a school district to
pass a budget that is at or below the tax cap, only a 50 percent or
simple majority vote is needed. However, the vote required to pass a
school budget that exceeds the tax cap is a 60 percent supermajority.
The threshold of a 60 percent supermajority to override the tax cap is
problematic and unfair. According to the New York State School Boards
Association (NYSSBA), in 2012, among the 48 school districts that sought
a 60 percent supermajority vote to approve a budget that exceeds the tax
cap, 19 school budgets (40 percent) saw defeat and sometimes by a tiny
margin. For example, in the New Paltz school district in Ulster County,
where more than. 59 percent of voters supported the spending plan, the
budget was defeated by a mere 18 votes. Among the 19 defeated budgets,
there were eight that would have been approved if only the traditional
simple majority had been required. These results underline a fundamental
unfairness in the 60 percent supermajority requirement which makes the
votes of those who support an override much less powerful than the votes
of those who oppose an override. In effect, 41 percent of local voters
have more power than 59 percent of local voters. Even Massachusetts,
which has been looked at by New York and other states as a model for
property tax reform, only requires a simple majority vote for approving
an override of its tax cap.
Furthermore, evidence suggests that wealthier communities both attempt
more tax cap overrides and are more successful in passing them. NYSSBA
research shows that school districts where budgets passed with superma-
jority approval had higher average income and property values than those
that failed. Thus, the 60 percent supermajority requirement could lead
to even more educational disparities across the State between lower
income communities relative to their higher income counterparts. To
address these inequities, I am proposing this legislation to only
require a simple majority to override the property tax cap.
 
PRIOR LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:
04/19/14 Referred to education
01/08/13 Referred to education
 
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
None to the State.
STATE OF NEW YORK
________________________________________________________________________
1166--A
2015-2016 Regular Sessions
IN ASSEMBLY
January 8, 2015
___________
Introduced by M. of A. JAFFEE, SCHIMEL, CAHILL, DAVILA, ROBINSON,
CROUCH, GOODELL, STECK, LINARES, GOTTFRIED, DUPREY, BLAKE, KEARNS,
JEAN-PIERRE, ABINANTI, RIVERA, LIFTON, RUSSELL -- Multi-Sponsored by
-- M. of A. BLANKENBUSH, BRENNAN, MAGEE, SIMON, SOLAGES -- read once
and referred to the Committee on Education -- recommitted to the
Committee on Education in accordance with Assembly Rule 3, sec. 2 --
committee discharged, bill amended, ordered reprinted as amended and
recommitted to said committee
AN ACT to amend the education law, in relation to school district tax
levies
The People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and Assem-bly, do enact as follows:
1 Section 1. Subdivision 6 of section 2023-a of the education law, as
2 added by section 2 of part A of chapter 97 of the laws of 2011, is
3 amended to read as follows:
4 6. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, in
5 the event the trustee, trustees or board of education of a school
6 district that is subject to the provisions of this section proposes a
7 budget that will require a tax levy that exceeds the tax levy limit for
8 the corresponding school year, not including any levy necessary to
9 support the expenditures pursuant to subparagraphs (i) through (iv) of
10 paragraph i of subdivision two of this section, then such budget shall
11 be approved if [sixty percent] a majority of the votes cast thereon are
12 in the affirmative.
13 (b) Where the trustee, trustees or board of education proposes a budg-
14 et subject to the requirements of paragraph (a) of this subdivision, the
15 ballot for such budget shall include the following statement in substan-
16 tially the same form: "Adoption of this budget requires a tax levy
17 increase of which exceeds the statutory tax levy increase limit
18 of for this school fiscal year and therefore exceeds the state tax
EXPLANATION--Matter in italics (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
[] is old law to be omitted.
LBD06130-02-6
A. 1166--A 2
1 cap and must be approved by [sixty percent] a majority of the qualified
2 voters present and voting."
3 § 2. Subdivision 9 of section 2023-a of the education law, as added by
4 section 2 of part A of chapter 97 of the laws of 2011, is amended to
5 read as follows:
6 9. Nothing in this section shall preclude the trustee, trustees, or
7 board of education of a school district, in their discretion, from
8 submitting additional items of expenditures to the voters for approval
9 as separate propositions or the voters from submitting propositions
10 pursuant to sections two thousand eight and two thousand thirty-five of
11 this part; provided however, except in the case of a proposition submit-
12 ted for any expenditure contained within subparagraphs (i) through (iv)
13 of paragraph i of subdivision two of this section, if any proposition,
14 or propositions collectively that are subject to a vote on the same
15 date, would require an expenditure of money that would require a tax
16 levy and would result in the tax levy limit being exceeded for the
17 corresponding school year then such proposition shall be approved if
18 [sixty percent] a majority of the votes cast thereon are in the affirma-
19 tive.
20 § 3. This act shall take effect immediately; provided, however, that
21 the amendments to section 2023-a of the education law made by sections
22 one and two of this act shall not affect the repeal of such section and
23 shall expire and be deemed repealed therewith.