State looks at centralizing tax offices on county level - Sweeton says plan would eliminate local offices and service

Warwick — “Beware.” That’s the word Warwick Town Supervisor Michael Sweeton uses when talking about the state’s plan to consolidate tax services and put them on a county level. “Their goals are all very admirable,” said Sweeton. “They want a tax system that is transparent, fair and efficient. They are all good goals. Nobody can argue with wanting to avoid duplication. The town and villages share many services. We share policing with the Village of Warwick. We share equipment and facilities with all of the villages. “But in my experience it is much more difficult to deal with an issue when the county or state is involved,” he added. In the announcement, which came from Geoffrey Gloak, director of public information for the state’s Office of Real Property Services, various models are being considered to improve equity and efficiency. They include county-run assessing, municipal-run systems where communities contract with the county for support services such as appraisal and municipal-run systems, where communities contract among themselves to treat all parcels identically. Grants of $50,000 were awarded to 41 counties to study collaborative property tax administration and 31 counties for tax collection. Orange County received both grants. Sweeton, though, said that assessing and tax collecting are very small parts of the town’s nearly $16 million budget. Ridding the town of these departments, he feels, would have little financial impact on local taxpayers but may have big ramifications should an issue arise for the residents. “The tax collector’s budget is approximately $80,000. The assessor’s office is about $250,000,” said Sweeton. “Out of a controlled budget of $16 million, the savings are insignificant, pennies per thousand of assessed value.” More importantly, he continued, is the service received from a local entity rather than a centralized county department. “We had an elderly couple come in last week,” Sweeton said. “They needed last year’s tax bill. We got them a copy right there. I don’t know how it would have worked out if they had to go and get through that maze of Goshen. I don’t think it would be as efficient or effective.” Sweeton said this is part of a greater attempt to eliminate levels of local government in New York State. He questions the state’s expertise on these matters. “Who is to say New York State has the wisdom to decide these issues. This is probably the most dysfunctional government in the United States,” said Sweeton. “Villages exist because people choose to have villages. They can go to referendum tomorrow to dissolve them but they don’t.” Sweeton said he has attended many municipal seminars about tax reform and would welcome a real effort to control property taxes. That, he said, would have to involve financing for education. “When you talk about property tax reform, if you are serious, you would have discussions on financing schools,” Sweeton said. “You hear about rebates, caps. I’ve found it disingenuous. New York State, as part of its constitution, requires a free education to all of its citizens. But they don’t finance it. The state used to fund 50 percent; now it is down to 35 percent, on average, over the last 10 years. “When you hear Albany talk about eliminating functions performed by your town or village, think about what would be involved if you had to contact bureaucrats in a state or county agency to ask a question about your tax bill or how your home is assessed.”