Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tax Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ardsley mayor asks Greenburgh board to waive penalties on village‑owned property taxes
Summary
Nancy Guilian, mayor of the Village of Ardsley, asked the Greenburgh Town Board to consider waiving accrued interest and penalties on a village‑owned parcel under Real Property Tax Law §11.82; the board asked the town attorney to research precedent and requested updated payoff figures before deciding.
Get email alerts on the Tax Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Nancy Guilian, mayor of the Village of Ardsley, asked the Greenburgh Town Board on April 22 to waive interest and penalties that have accrued on taxes tied to a parcel the village purchased (220 East — the highway garage). Guilian said the village accepts it owes the underlying tax (about $73,000) but asked the board to cancel penalties and interest that she said have roughly doubled the bill; she told the board the penalties and interest were about $69,000 as of March 31.
Guilian cited precedent she said the board has used in the past and asked the town to exercise discretion under New York’s Real Property Tax Law §11.82, which allows a taxing jurisdiction to waive penalties in certain circumstances. "We recognize we owe the taxes," she said, adding the village only recently learned of the lien and has been trying to resolve it.
The town attorney told the board that while §11.82 authorizes waivers "if it is in the best interest of the taxing jurisdiction," prior waivers handled by the town were fact‑specific (for example, bills that should not have been issued). Board members expressed concern about fairness to town residents and the fund‑balance impact, and asked staff to locate prior resolutions (including a 1997 Irvington case) and to return with the legal history and relevant documentation.
Board members and the mayor discussed conditional options; one member proposed a quid pro quo—town access to the village property for a recycling center—as a possible public benefit that could weigh in favor of a waiver if legally permissible. The town attorney said legality needs review.
The board asked the tax receiver to calculate an updated payoff amount and asked staff and the attorney to report back quickly with precedent and a recommended approach. No vote or formal waiver was taken at the meeting.
