The residents in the Mohon School District are not very happy with the school's decision not to invoke the Homestead Act. I can't wait to see what if anything the town does now that the residents are up in arms about their tax bills when the town said that the tax increases would'nt be as high as they are. The tax rate is where the problem lies, where is all the extra money that was levied by the taxes going to be used?

http://www.dailygazette.com

Quoted Text

Town taxes are not school taxes.....I dont remember a conversation about the school tax levy....everyone kept talking about the TOWN TAXES.....you know paving, sewers, lights and other services......when us folks were all talking about our tax bills it was for the taxes the town/county/fire take....not the school tax levy....am I missing something here......

the school tax is for the school board to handle following STATE mandates, UNION mandates and the damn NYS LOTTERY and the STAR(STATE TAXES APPLIED RECTALLY)......SHOW ME THE $$ TRAIL........

The bottom line is that the school taxes are too high.

Quoted from Shadow

The bottom line is that the school taxes are too high.

or....mismanaged.....although a learning institution is only as grand as those who are involved either inside or around in the community....

Quoted Text

Adopted an employer contribution rate applicable to 2007-08 payrolls and collected during the 2008-09 school year of 8.73%.

Quoted Text

The New York State Teachers' Retirement System (NYSTRS) provides retirement, disability and death benefits to eligible New York State public school teachers and administrators.  NYSTRS is the second-largest public retirement system in the state and one of the 10-largest systems in the nation.

http://www.nystrs.org/main/boardmins/brdmins7-2007.html

interesting very very interesting

BTW their portfolio shows alot of investing in California.....NYS tax payers pay them and contribute....no wonder the learned leave

I believe it was MC1 who said to go to the school board and find out exactly what it is they spend this money on. And MC1 is correct. I know that the schools have budget meetings and I, for one, have never gone to one.

I have just always figured that it was a 'given' and paid the damn taxes. Now that it is brought more to light, I question it more in detail. I want to know more!

Quoted Text

And I do not have a problem with that. What I do have a problem with is that they STILL receive a rebate check. For what? They have paid nothing toward the school tax burden

There was a politician, I believe from downstate, who proposed legislation that renters should also receive a property tax refund.  Figure that one ...

Clearly another attempt at the redistribution of wealth.

Quoted from 38

There was a politician, I believe from downstate, who proposed legislation that renters should also receive a property tax refund.  Figure that one ...

Well, when you really think about it, renters to pay property tax, sort of.  They pay the rent to the landlord and the landlord writes out a check for the property taxes.  But I'm sure that when the landlord files his income tax return (as a business I'm sure), he deducts the property taxes from his income.  But surely he wouldn't pass that "share" on to the tenant.

There is no easy way to determine how much if any a renter would get for a property tax refund.  If it is owner occupied and the owner gets enhanced STAR program, then looking at very detailed records would be required.   And I'm sure that there is not a landlord around that earmarks certain percentages of the rent to various things (taxes, maintenance, etc).  So how much property tax did the tenant pay?

As renters don't directly pay property taxes, I don't believe them to be entitled to a refund.  The suggestion that because they pay rent to the landlord who pays the taxes, the tenants are entitled to the tax refund would suggest that they would also be entitled to claiming mortgage interest, homeowner insurance, capital improvements, etc. as deductions.

There are benefits to which property owners are entitled that renters are not.  There are also costs and risks associated with property ownership.

I agree with Zim.  The renter has not taken on the burden of going and paying the mortgage (and in some instances, utilities, etc.) and/or the taxes themselves.  They have agreed on a monthly price that will be paid for a specific time.  They are doing just that, renting, not buying.  This goes to the people who actually pay the taxes.

Dont worry the state will soon come up with some kind of system for renters to have to file the amount paid for rentals and the landlord to report his/her collection of such monies......you know there will always be someone who thinks they deserve more from the government.....you know the "if they can get it, I should get it too" folks........not to mention better tracking and collecting....unlike NYRA's job with the 'tracking', gambling, collecting and pay-outs.....

if there is a decrease (which we all know is just fantasy) in taxes then who gets the windfall? the landlord and the tenant or just the landlord???? In NYS I'm sure this will never happen......no such thing as a tax decrease......just rebates........

Well, as far as that goes, the owner would be expected to pass on the savings to the renter, but you know that wouldn't happen.

Quoted from 38

As renters don't directly pay property taxes, I don't believe them to be entitled to a refund.  The suggestion that because they pay rent to the landlord who pays the taxes, the tenants are entitled to the tax refund would suggest that they would also be entitled to claiming mortgage interest, homeowner insurance, capital improvements, etc. as deductions.

There are benefits to which property owners are entitled that renters are not.  There are also costs and risks associated with property ownership.

That is very true.  And that miccro-record keeping and the logic that would have to be applied of who really pays what, etc is why there should not be any STAR benefit assigned to the renter.  STAR of course is to benefit owner occupied who are people who have a stake in their own property and their own community while perhaps having one or two apartments in the building from which they can supplment their income, the typical two family homes around, which I think were, in the olden days, a means where a kid grew up, married, moved into the other flat and houses stayed in the families for a couple generations.

NY state however as something I think on the tax form.  I know there's the house hold tax credit.  And I don't know if there still is such a thing, called Real Property Tax Credit, it required some math and I think geared toward lower income people.  It may have been a "benefit" of sometihng like $50 give or take.

I do not believe that renters should have the same benefits as a homeowner, such as a tax rebate. Actually, the state is making money off the renters. If a renter pays a security deposit, than by law the landlord must bank that money so it can gain interest. Then, in turn, the renter must claim and pay taxes on the interest earned. Although we are in a time where money isn't getting the highest interest rate, it is still money the state surely is not ready to give up by sending them rebate checks. Then the state would be losing money...and that ain't gonna happen.