Local Government Publications

Local governments’ infrastructure needs are substantial and growing, while their ability to maintain their investments in capital programs is increasingly constrained. State policy changes could help reverse this trend..

Just as Niagara Falls seemed to be making headway in its financial struggles, a dispute between the Seneca Nation and the State of New York has resulted in the City losing as much as $60 million in revenue. The City’s 2013 executive budget proposal called for significant layoffs, program cutbacks, and property tax increases.

Salamanca unexpectedly lost revenues from the Seneca Allegany Casino due to a dispute between the Seneca Nation and New York State over exclusive gaming rights. Although Salamanca aggressively responded to this revenue crisis, the City could run out of cash before the fiscal year ends on March 31, 2013.

Chapter 128 of the Laws of 2012 amended sections 10 and 11 of the General Municipal Law (GML) to authorize local governments to use “reciprocal deposit” programs for their deposits and investments. The purpose of the amendment is to provide an additional option to local governments for obtaining coverage from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) to secure their public deposits and investments.

This bulletin provides updated information on the definition of the financial reporting entity, superseding an earlier bulletin on this topic issued by the Office of the State Comptroller for local governments in New York State. All applicable previous guidance has been incorporated into this bulletin.
Updated October 2012 (Originally Issued July 2012)

This report seeks to inform that debate by examining the economic and fiscal histories of these other cities between 1980 and 2010, a period characterized by divergent trends for different groups of cities in the Empire State.

This report describes the fiscal oversight OSC provides to local governments faced with the serious fiscal challenges of budgeting with fewer resources to fund rising expenditures, all while staying within the recently enacted property tax cap.

School districts can use EBALR moneys to make cash payments to employees for accrued leave time due to them when they leave school district employment. OSC certified the excess EBALR funds that school districts had reserved, but could not legally use, so district officials could put these moneys to productive use to pay for operating costs.

In 2010, the 114 active IDAs located throughout the State supported 4,444 projects and provided total tax exemptions of nearly $1.3 billion.

This report briefly describes that the average allowable levy growth is 3 percent, rather than the 2 percent voters may be expecting.
All tax cap elements, as reported by school districts to the Office of the State Comptroller, are provided in the accompanying tables. Tax Cap Elements by County [xls] | Tax Cap Elements by Region [xls] | Tax Cap Elements by School [xls]

This report briefly describes the impact of the housing market crisis on New York State. The report also highlights the results of a survey by OSC on whether local officials are utilizing the 2009 law requiring foreclosing lenders to maintain vacant or abandoned properties.

Deficiency notes may be issued during a fiscal year to finance a deficiency in any fund or funds arising from revenues being less than the amount estimated in the budget for that fiscal year. The deficiency notes may not exceed five percent of the amount of that same year’s annual budget.

Chapter 56 of the Laws of 2011 amended Article 23 of the Tax Law to, among other things, exempt public schools and BOCES in the Metropolitan Commuter Transportation District (MCTD)1 from the Metropolitan Commuter Transportation Mobility Tax, effective April 1, 2012. In addition, the payroll threshold and payroll tax rates have been adjusted for all other local government employers within the MCTD.

Local sales tax collections grew by $650 million, or 5 percent, from 2010 to 2011, compared to a growth rate of 9.9 percent between 2009 and 2010. However, nearly a third of the 2010 growth was attributable to a sales tax rate increase in New York City. Without this, growth would have been about 7 percent. | [read county-by-county report - pdf]

Chapter 97 of the Laws of 2011 established a property tax levy limit (generally referred to as the tax cap) that restricts the amount of property taxes local governments (including counties, cities, towns, villages, fire districts, and special districts) and school districts can levy. Under this legislation, the property tax levy for affected local governments and school districts cannot increase more than 2 percent, or the rate of inflation, whichever is lower, with some exceptions. Local governments and school districts are permitted to override the levy limit if certain actions are taken. The law is effective for fiscal years that begin in 2012.
Updated January 2012 (Originally Issued December 2011)

Local Finance Law requires the State Comptroller to report on private bond sales conducted by local government entities from the effective date of the Act through June 30, 2011. Because these private sales may be economically beneficial to local governments, OSC recommends that the expiration provision on the statutory private sale cap of $5 million be repealed.

This report highlights the new fiscal realities facing local governments and school districts as they work to comply with the new property tax cap while grappling with the lingering effects of the recent recession. In addition, the report addresses recent audits and summarizes many of the services and activities provided by our Division of Local Government and School Accountability.

New York State’s population increased by 2.1 percent between 2000 and 2010 – the fifth slowest rate of growth among all states nationwide. Gains or losses in population cause a shift in the local tax base, drive adjustments in State and federal revenue allocations, and influence the demand for municipal services and infrastructure.

Along with technological advances comes the responsibility to protect confidential information adequately so that it cannot be accessed by unauthorized individuals. Failure to do so can come at a considerable financial cost.

New York’s 57 counties (excluding New York City), 61 cities, 932 towns, and 556 villages reported spending nearly $2.6 billion to maintain 187,000 highway lane miles in 2009. Highway maintenance is one of the largest categories of expense for local governments, representing 7.6 percent of total local government expenditures.