X

State reps bicker over tax increase proposal for St. Lawrence County

Posted 4/13/13

By JIMMY LAWTON The majority of St. Lawrence County’s state representatives now support a one percent increase in the sales tax, but disagreements regarding how to enact it are delaying the …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

Log in

State reps bicker over tax increase proposal for St. Lawrence County

Posted

By JIMMY LAWTON

The majority of St. Lawrence County’s state representatives now support a one percent increase in the sales tax, but disagreements regarding how to enact it are delaying the process.

County shoppers currently pay a seven percent tax on sales, with New York State collecting four percent. St. Lawrence County keeps half of the remaining three percent, with the rest going to the towns, villages and Ogdensburg.

County legislators have been debating the increase for some time, but came to a near consensus in favor of a tax increase after a 14 percent property tax levy hike this year added a new level of urgency.

Enacting an increase requires approval from state legislators, which has proven to be difficult for county lawmakers to achieve.

While Assemblywoman Russell has long supported the effort, Joseph Griffo and Patricia Ritchie have been weary of breaking the state’s vow of no new taxes. Griffo’s district includes Potsdam and Massena; Ritchie’s covers Ogdensburg, Canton and Gouverneur.

State vs. Assembly

Their long stance of opposition rescinded recently when both senators tried to include a measure in the final hours of the state budget preparations that would have given all counties the ability to raise sales tax up to 4 percent without state approval.

A prepared statement from Sen. Ritchie blamed the Assembly for delays.

“It is unfortunate that the Assembly would not include a provision to allow St. Lawrence County to raise their sales tax in the State Budget. The proposal included in the Senate spending plan would have given the county authority to follow through on its plan to provide significant property tax relief to its residents,” the statement said.

Sen. Griffo said that proposal would have required a super majority vote to enact the increase at the local level as well as for any extension of the tax.

“The Assembly blocked that. They refused to support it. Now we have to wait to get back into session and reassess the whole situation,” he said.

In the Assembly, Russell, who represents the river towns in St. Lawrence County, said she has been trying to move the legislation forward for more than three years.

She blamed the senate for inaction on the bill and said the county could have already benefited from the increase had the senate not dragged its feet on supporting legislation.

“I have been meeting with county officials since I took office regarding this issue. I believe they would have been able to keep taxes down this year if we could have moved this forward,” she said.

Russell said her proposal has been waiting for co-sponsorship in the senate for three sessions. She called the lack of support from the senate “unfortunate.”

What happens next?

Despite the delays, Russell said she believes the proposal will be passed.

She is currently waiting for the county to pass a resolution supporting her proposal. Her bill would give the local government the ability to raise the sales tax by one percent, but would not allow the county to enact future increases or allow the increase to be renewed without approval from the state legislature.

Sen. Betty Little, who represents southern St. Lawrence County towns, said discussions would continue April 15, when the next legislative session begins. She said she would have liked to see the senate version pass, since it would cover all of the counties rather than St. Lawrence, but added that she would support an individual bill.

“I have always supported the home rule in sales tax issues. We wanted to see it in the budget. We wanted to include a proposal that would allow the counties to increase it to 4 percent,” she said. “We have to do something for them this year. So, probably the best move going forward would be to go with individual bills,” she said.

Griffo was less optimistic an individual bill.0

“The problem is in the Senate there are independent voters. We warned them from the very beginning that there may not be support for an individual bill, just because local representatives are asking for it,” he said. “In the assembly they might March in step with the leader, but in the senate it doesn’t work that way.”

He said he isn’t sure what happens next.

“Bottom line here, right now, is we made the effort and it was blocked by the Assembly. When we get back we will have a conversation with ourselves and local officials about what to do next.”