Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Nonprofit Assessments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves new five‑year ‘meds and eds’ assessment agreements totaling about $48 million; some officials cite process concerns
Summary
The city law department presented 14 assessment agreements with nonprofit hospitals and colleges that will raise assessment payments from roughly $6 million in FY27 to $12 million by FY30 and total about $48 million over five years; the Board of Estimates approved the agreements amid comments about process and community input.
The Board of Estimates on Oct. 15 approved a package of assessment agreements negotiated between the city and a group of nonprofit hospitals and colleges commonly described as the "meds and eds." The law department said the agreements require the institutions to begin annual special assessments in fiscal 2027 and that total payments over five years will be approximately $48 million.
Matthew Bradford, chief of staff in the City's Law Department, told the board the item seeks approval for 14 assessment agreements. "These agreements will require the institutions to pay annual special assessments starting in FY '27," Bradford said, describing a negotiated set of factors that led to the new payment amounts: prior assessment levels, other taxes and fees the institutions pay, services the institutions provide to city residents, the services the city provides to those institutions, and the uncertain financial climate.
Bradford said the 2016 memorandum of understanding that governed the prior arrangement was set to expire; the new agreements are shorter and change the revenue profile, with the city projecting payment increases from an estimated $6 million in FY27 to roughly $12 million by FY30 and an aggregate contribution near $48 million over five years.
Comptroller Bill Henry and other board members praised the results but voiced public‑process concerns. The Comptroller's office and the finance department had previously modeled the institutions' fiscal impacts and cited figures city staff summarized during the discussion: finance staff estimated the institutions' potential property tax impact if their property were taxable at roughly $100–$120 million and estimated the city services cost impact in a range near $47–$50 million. Several members of the board and the city administrator urged better community engagement in future negotiations.
Director of Public Works Matthew Garbark noted the agreements cover general fund assessments only and do not affect utility bills paid by the institutions.
Outcome: The board moved and approved the package by voice vote. The law department and administration described the measure as a compromise intended to increase city revenue from major nonprofit institutions while continuing other lines of engagement.
Why it matters: The agreements raise multiyear revenue expectations from the city's largest nonprofit hospitals and colleges and may inform broader conversations about public‑private fiscal arrangements and community involvement in future negotiations.
Details: The law department said the new agreements were negotiated after discussion of multiple factors and that the five‑year structure accelerates collections within the window to generate roughly $48 million in contributions over five years. The law department said the total payments under prior agreements had ranged between $1.4 million and $6 million annually in earlier deals.
