Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tax Levy Cap topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mineola business official outlines tax‑levy cap calculation, warns pilots create long‑term volatility
Summary
Assistant Superintendent for Business Will Herman walked the Board of Education through the districttax‑levy cap calculation, showing a projected maximum levy increase of about $1.7 million (roughly 1.95%) under current assumptions and highlighting uncertainty from newly negotiated payments‑in‑lieu‑of‑taxes (PILOTs).
Get email alerts on the Tax Levy Cap topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Will Herman, the districtassistant superintendent for business and operations, presented the Mineola Union Free School Districttax‑levy cap calculation and walked the board through the variable elements that determine the districtmaximum allowable levy.
Herman told the board that the statetax cap statute, enacted in 2011, creates voter thresholds rather than a hard ceiling: "If a district is to go to the maximum levy limit or below, it requires a simple majority vote of 50% plus 1. You can pierce the tax cap or go beyond that levy limit if you obtain a supermajority vote of 60%." He added that the commonly cited "2%" rule is an oversimplification: "It can be presented that way ... it's not quite that simple."
The presentation laid out the district's current assumptions and arithmetic. Using the district's adjusted prior levy and the allowable growth factor capped at 2%, Herman computed a notional maximum levy of $88,921,363, which he said would represent roughly a $1.7 million increase over the current year, or about 1.95%.
Herman emphasized two items that move the calculation materially: pilot revenue (payments in lieu of taxes, or PILOTs) and capital exclusions for debt service. The district's working estimate for PILOT revenue in the coming year was approximately $3.8 million, though Herman called that figure an estimate because several agreements are new and payment schedules are not finalized. He described the capital exclusion as an approximate $1.3 million figure after deducting expected building and transportation aid.
Board members pressed on how PILOTs affect long‑term budgeting. One trustee urged the district to consider setting aside PILOT receipts in reserves so the budget does not experience a sharp drop when a PILOT schedule ends. Herman and trustees explained that many local PILOT agreements escalate payments over 15–25 years and then terminate, producing a later-year "cliff" of lost revenue; the district could file a revised calculation after PILOT figures are finalized. He noted the district must file its tax‑levy cap calculation by March 1 but can submit revisions through approximately April 1 as state data and PILOT schedules come into focus.
Herman offered the board further detail on components used in the capital exemption calculation (bond debt service, bus lease payments, an energy performance contract, and the district's share of BOCES debt) and said some of those values remain estimates pending final BOCES figures.
The presentation concluded with an invitation for additional questions and a pledge to return with any revised PILOT numbers and updated calculations.
Why it matters: The levy calculation sets the ceiling for property tax revenue the district may seek without a supermajority vote. Large, temporary revenue streams such as PILOTs can permit lower levies in the short term but create budgetary pressure later when payments stop, which may force either service reductions, use of reserves, or higher levy increases.Evidence: Presentation by Will Herman and board discussion during the meeting.

