Rockville Centre board OKs 6.8% tax hike

After months of debate, review and modification, the Rockville Centre Board of Trustees passed the 2012-13 village budget on April 24, with a 3-2 vote.

The $40.7 million spending plan will increase village property taxes 6.76 percent, raising the village’s portion of the average residential real estate tax bill by more than $200, to slightly more than $3,200 per year. Mayor Francis Murray, Deputy Mayor Nancy Howard and Trustee Michael Sepe voted for the budget, while Trustees Kevin Glynn and Ed Oppenheimer voted against it.

The plan was discussed after a 4-1 vote by the board to override the 2.3 percent limit on the village tax levy increase that was allowed under the tax cap legislation passed by the state last June. Oppenheimer cast the sole opposing vote. The new budget will necessitate a village tax levy increase of nearly 5.5 percent — more than double the cap.

The final spending plan is $23,000 smaller than the tentative budget that was presented at the April 3 Board of Trustees meeting by Village Comptroller Michael Schussheim, which would have increased property taxes by 6.97 percent. The trustees vowed to re-examine spending line by line after Oppenheimer voiced concerns at the meeting.

The board members who supported the budget noted the difficulty of the current economy. “We have this reputation as an affluent community, but not everyone enjoys that, and we understand that people are suffering,” Sepe said. “The vast majority [of the tax increase] is just to keep up with the economic times and just to pay our bills.”

Glynn and Oppenheimer explained their opposition. “I am bound by my word to the voters of Rockville Centre that I would only support budgets that kept any spending increases under the rate of inflation, as determined by the [consumer price index],” Glynn said.

He drew a distinction between voting to override the tax levy cap and voting against the budget, noting that the cap has “too many potential pitfalls,” and could do taxpayers more harm than good.

For his part, Oppenheimer focused on what he considered the lack of appropriate cuts in services and the choice to raise taxes substantially rather than add fees to various village services. He called the $23,000 savings a “false token.”

“There really haven’t been cuts in services or programs, and I’m not saying there should be, but there haven’t been … and we can’t keep going in that direction,” Oppenheimer said. “We have to, as a village, either find outside revenue sources other than taxes, or we have to face the distinct possibility that we are going to have to cut services.”

There was a heated argument when Glynn criticized Oppenheimer’s recommendation to increase fees for unspecified departments of village government. Glynn insisted that the only departments that could charge higher fees would be Parks and Recreation and Senior Services. The Sandel Senior Center, he said, would begin to suffer from the “law of diminishing returns” if such a policy were enacted.

Oppenheimer responded that the suggestion to increase fees has been made by the Citizens Budget Advisory Committee nearly continually for the past 30 years. The mayor cut off the argument before Glynn could respond so that the trustees could vote on the budget.

The Budget Advisory Committee is a group of residents who examine spending proposals and offer suggestions to the Board of Trustees and the comptroller. “In my opinion, the trustees, working with the comptroller and department heads, are trying as best they know how to deliver the services that residents want and expect, at as low a cost as possible,” said the committee’s chairman, Jack Matthews. “The extra money that they found is nice, but it seems to me you’re just pushing the problem into the future. I believe most people in the village, if you deliver good services, they’re willing to pay.”