Why are these Lancaster residents paying $660 more in school taxes?

[WNYresident]

Why are these Lancaster residents paying $660 more in school taxes?

Patricia A. Skowron won't tell you what she said when she opened her Iroquois school tax bill and realized her taxes went up $660.

"It's unprintable what I said," she said. "I’ve never had that much of an increase. I didn’t really fall on the floor, but I almost did."

The Lancaster resident was convinced something was wrong. Previous tax bills had increases and decreases, but had not gone up more than $150 for her Hall Road home.

https://buffalonews.com/2019/10/12/h...box=1570967881

"Milk goes up, bread goes up, cars – forget it. You realize it's going to happen, it's a way of life," Skowron said.

People need to stop this type of thinking. It is only a way of life if you allow it to happen.

[grump]

WNY, I don’t read the article as saying that the school tax of every affected Lancaster resident went up $660. And what if her similarly situated neighbor down the road paid $590 more last year than is Ms. Skowron this year? Wouldn’t that mean that similar properties were now paying about the same tax this year? Wouldn’t that be fairness? There’s not nearly enough information in this article to make anything like an informed judgment about the relative fairness of the taxes imposed here. This is typical of the lazy ass reporting one finds all the time in our failing local daily that is designed to create trouble without reporting anything like a thorough story.

[Lee Chowaniec]

WNY, I don’t read the article as saying that the school tax of every affected Lancaster resident went up $660. And what if her similarly situated neighbor down the road paid $590 more last year than is Ms. Skowron this year? Wouldn’t that mean that similar properties were now paying about the same tax this year? Wouldn’t that be fairness? There’s not nearly enough information in this article to make anything like an informed judgment about the relative fairness of the taxes imposed here. This is typical of the lazy ass reporting one finds all the time in our failing local daily that is designed to create trouble without reporting anything like a thorough story.

Spot on!

Lazy ass reporting, indeed.

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

Spot on!

Lazy ass reporting, indeed.

The article was pretty clear that the increase of $660 was just for a specific home. Now, the BN sucks but how is that lazy ass reporting?


The only lazy ass is the owner here. This quote from her jumped out at me:

"I’m used to increases. Everybody is. It’s a matter of living," she said. "But $660, that was really an increase."

No, lady, not everyone is used to increases. Increases are not a matter of living. 1/3 of the homes in Charlotte had their taxes go down after our assessment. Why? Because of growth. It's this persons mindset of small increases, every. single. year. as being OK is why WNY is a pile a crap right now. It's this generation that ran the region into the ground.

[WNYresident]

It's this persons mindset of small increases, every. single. year. as being OK is why WNY is a pile a crap right now. It's this generation that ran the region into the ground.

Totally agree.

"It's only a little 3-4% salary increase...It's peanuts!" 10 years goes by any you just increased the budget 30 to 40%+ while losing net tax paying population. I don't agree with Mark Poloncarz that importing refugees is an economic plus to the community.

[leftWNYbecauseofBS]

Nothing describes WNY taxes better than a boiling frog.

[WNYresident]

I agree.

[grump]

The article was pretty clear that the increase of $660 was just for a specific home. Now, the BN sucks but how is that lazy ass reporting?


The only lazy ass is the owner here. This quote from her jumped out at me:

"I’m used to increases. Everybody is. It’s a matter of living," she said. "But $660, that was really an increase."

No, lady, not everyone is used to increases. Increases are not a matter of living. 1/3 of the homes in Charlotte had their taxes go down after our assessment. Why? Because of growth. It's this persons mindset of small increases, every. single. year. as being OK is why WNY is a pile a crap right now. It's this generation that ran the region into the ground.

Leftie, my comment was in response to WNY’s title to the thread. But perhaps I misunderstood his intent. It’s lazy reporting because it recites the $ amounts of tax increases without any context regarding whether these differences actually create tax equity among the taxpayers located in the different towns served by this school district. While it gives a very attenuated reason for the differences it manages to leave the scent of some unarticulated unfairness lingering in the air. And as always, it pits taxpayer against taxpayer over the assessment issue instead of addressing the ever upward spiraling tax levies that are the true cause of tax increases. One thing that one usually sees quoted and that you raise is the result of a full revaluation that typically leads to approx. 1/3 of assessments increasing, 1/3 decreasing and 1/3 staying about the same. Her problem isn’t the result of a full revaluation though. It’s the result, at least in part, of the failure to undertake regular full revals by many communities in western N.Y.

[Lee Chowaniec]

BN headline: Why are these Lancaster residents paying $660 more in school taxes?

These? The one individual and BN makes it seem like the majority of Lancaster property owners are paying the same increase. A lot of rhetoric and no specifics or data presented by the individual or School Districts.

The Lancaster Central School District (LCSD) budget increases by 1.90 percent and called for a tax levy increase of 3.66 percent for Town of Lancaster residents; 1.41 percent below this year's maximum levy cap (5.07).

My tax bill went up $90 because of the level of assessment (equalization rate) dropping to 77%. Elma's assessment level is 4.01% of market value.

I am able to look back at my tax bills and information provided by LCSD and determine that since the last reassessment:

2011-12 to 2019-20 budgets

Budget increased by $21,918,962; 25.02%. An annual average 2.78%.

Tax Levy increased by $10,782,013; 24.17%. An annual average of 2.69%.

My annual tax bill, over the same timeline, has increased by $154. But accumulating each year’s tax bill increase, I actually paid an increase of $309; an annual average increase of 2.8%.

I know my property’s market value, assessment level and reasons for tax increase.

None of this was presented in the report. The report was meritless (IMHO).

[Lee Chowaniec]

Totally agree.

"It's only a little 3-4% salary increase...It's peanuts!" 10 years goes by any you just increased the budget 30 to 40%+ while losing net tax paying population. I don't agree with Mark Poloncarz that importing refugees is an economic plus to the community.

It’s not only the county, it’s every municipality in Erie County.

In Lancaster, the proposed budget calls for only a 2.77% tax levy increase and a 2.09% tax rate increase ($19.96 per $100,000 of residential assessed property).

Sounds reasonable, right. Especially when the allowable tax levy increase could have been 4.79% (town growth, exemptions).

But is it when you consider the increase in outside revenue, town taxation value increase, sales tax increase, pension cost obligation reduction, etc. And yet there is the ever-increasing debt load and a flush fund / reserve balance.

A public hearing on the tentative budget will be held at the upcoming town board hearing. Will anyone make mention of the spending increases in the past two budgets - $1.62 million (4.94%) in the 2019 budget and $1.04 million (2.96%) in the proposed 2020 budget. Over the past two years 7 new positions were created.

Will anyone speak on the budget at the public hearing? Maybe Gorga. I have yet to hear from any candidate on this year’s budget. It’s the bottom line that counts, right? The 2.09% tax rate increase. Peanuts, right?

[Lee Chowaniec]

Better late then never!

Buffalo News Editorial

Mandate fairness

To avoid uneven tax increases, Albany must require accurate assessments
Patricia A. Skowron wasn’t the only one confused. Anyone dealing with tax bills and equalization rates would be. There’s a solution and it runs through Albany.

Skowron’s bill from the Iroquois School District was a horse pill: Her taxes had risen by $660, even as those at a nearby house of similar value went up less than $100. That disparity is a flashing signal of a skewed and unfair system.

Skowron’s circumstance is not uncommon. It happens when taxing districts cross municipal boundaries, when revaluations are not regularly conducted and property assessments reflect less than 100% of market value.

The Iroquois School Board had projected a districtwide tax increase of 2.77%, but the district covers six towns and, within them, the impact varied wildly, with increases ranging from 1.4% in Elma to 9.2% in Aurora to 17.8% in Lancaster. Skowron lives in Lancaster.

The percentage difference is based on several factors, including the equalization rate, which is the state’s method of measuring the level of assessment, or the value of homes, in a particular municipality.

The mere existence of the equalization rate underscores why revaluations are necessary, even if they are politically unpopular with some residents who mistakenly believe they will automatically push their taxes higher. Revaluation simply ensures that the tax burden is distributed equitably.

Take, for example, the nearby house from Skowron’s. Its full market value is similar to her home, but its taxes are rising only about $70. That house is in the Town of Elma, where the tax rate increased approximately 1.4%.

Why? For one thing, the assessments are out of date, as each town’s equalization rate documents: Elma’s 2019 equalization rate is 4.10 while Lancaster’s is 77. What that means is that, in both towns, total market value is greater than their assessed value. In Elma, the assessed value is 4.1 percent of market value.

The only way to get accurate numbers is to conduct a revaluation, just as the City of Buffalo is currently undergoing. Then, those numbers have to be kept current – at 100% of market value. That’s the way to make fair comparisons and guard against shocks such as the one administered to Skowron. It can happen in any school district whose boundaries bleed into multiple municipalities.

But if regularly updated assessments are necessary for fairness, they are not required and most municipalities are loath to undertake them. Elma hasn’t been reassessed since the 1960s, according to Cheektowaga Supervisor Diane Benczkowski, and Lancaster not since 2009. The town just cancelled a scheduled reassessment.

It’s a guarantee of unfairness, as Skowron has learned in about as painful a way as possible. And it’s avoidable. Since municipalities can’t be counted upon to keep their property assessments current and accurate, Albany should pass legislation to require it.