Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tax Policy Pilot topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public questioning of 15-year solar PILOT schedule precedes Greene County approval of pilot agreement
Summary
A public question-and-answer exchange about a proposed 15-year solar PILOT—covering whether a public hearing was required, how payments are allocated and why a comparison schedule was not provided—preceded the Greene County Legislature’s vote to authorize a PILOT agreement with New York County Road 67 and Majorana LLC.
A member of the public, introduced in the meeting as representing Catskill, asked detailed questions about a proposed 15-year solar payment-in-lieu-of-taxes (PILOT) pilot that includes the town of Durham and the Greenville School District alongside Greene County.
The commenter asked whether the pilot required a public hearing; a county official replied that, “by statute,” it was not required and that the item is approved by roll-call vote. The commenter also asked whether each participating entity must approve the pilot for it to apply to that entity; the official answered that the pilot applies only to the entities that approve it—if one entity votes no, the pilot would not exist for that entity.
The public questioner highlighted the pilot’s payment schedule, noting the Greenville School District appeared to receive a large upfront payment of roughly $142,000 and asked whether that schedule was the result of a negotiated agreement between the project developer and the school district; staff said the schedule reflected an agreement with the school district.
The questioner also asked for an alternate schedule showing what taxes would have been without the pilot; staff acknowledged the schedule did not include a pre-pilot tax comparison and that such an alternate schedule was not provided in the materials.
During the same meeting the legislature voted on a resolution authorizing the chairman to enter into a PILOT agreement with New York County Road 67 and Majorana LLC. The legislature recorded the motion and the vote as carried.
The public exchange referenced “Real Property Tax Law at ’47” when discussing the statutory framework for solar exemptions; staff described the 15-year exemption timeline when explaining how such projects receive tax treatment under the cited real-property tax law provision.
No changes to the pilot’s schedule were recorded during the meeting; the resolution authorizing the chairman to execute the agreement with the project developer was carried by the legislature during the session.
