Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ulster County committee amends ADU tax-exemption proposal and postpones vote over short‑term rental language
Summary
The Ulster County laws, rules and government services committee amended a proposed property-tax exemption for accessory dwelling units after county attorney edits and postponed the measure to March amid concerns that planning department language barring short‑term rentals may conflict with state law.
Get email alerts on the Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Ulster County laws, rules and government services committee on Feb. 13 amended a proposed local law that would create a real‑property tax exemption for accessory dwelling units, then voted to postpone the measure until the committee’s March meeting.
The committee chair said the county director asked for another postponement and that the county attorney had proposed changes to section J to align filing and form procedures with state taxation practice. “I think they’re very fair and reasonable amendments,” the Chair said during the meeting.
Why it matters: the proposal would affect property tax treatment for owners who add accessory dwelling units, a policy some members view as a tool to encourage affordable housing. Several legislators raised a separate concern: the planning department added a provision excluding units used as short‑term rentals, and members questioned whether that local restriction would be legally enforceable under New York state law.
During discussion, a committee member warned of a possible communication breakdown between the planning department and the legislature, saying, “I’m just worried that what’s actually happening here is a communication breakdown.” Another member pressed for legislative involvement to resolve the short‑term rental language, noting that the planning department had drafted the contested wording.
The committee voted to adopt the county attorney’s technical amendments. After further discussion about whether the local law could be made to ‘call back’ an exemption once granted, the committee moved to postpone final action to the March meeting so counsel and staff can clarify the legal constraints and the planning department can respond.
Next steps: the committee scheduled the item for consideration at its March meeting; sponsors and staff were asked to provide clarifying language and legal analysis before the measure returns to committee.

