We'll pay for good schools But LIers want to cut taxes, too.

BY LEONIE HUDDY | Leonie Huddy is a professor of political science and director of the Center for Survey Research at Stony Brook University

July 8, 2007

No one looks forward to paying taxes. But during the past few years, Long Islanders have become increasingly dissatisfied with the amount they pay in local property taxes. As a local resident, I feel the pinch, puzzling over the rate at which my property taxes rise each year.

As a pollster, I also have the opportunity to study local opinion to understand whether Long Islanders' complaints about their property taxes are reasonable. Do residents accept that less money in means less money out? Or do they unreasonably expect continued high-quality services while paying less for them?

In polls conducted by the Stony Brook University Center for Survey Research for the Long Island Index between 2004 and 2007, we have uncovered a noteworthy number of local residents who are willing to entertain reasonable solutions to the problem of rising taxes. When asked to make an explicit trade-off between keeping "taxes at the same level as last year even if it means cutting back on local services" or increasing "property taxes to keep local services at their current level," more than 3 in 4 choose to cut back on services.

But what services are Long Islanders willing to cut? There is little consensus. When asked to choose areas of low priority for future funding, some residents nominate the police, others mention parks and gardens, and still others choose garbage and sanitation services.

Residents are more united on the services they want to keep, and therein lies the rub. A near majority choose public schools as the local service with the highest priority for increased funding in the coming year. This choice is made even though most Long Islanders know public schools are the single largest budget item in local property tax bills. A reluctance to cut back on school spending generates mixed public reactions to proposals such as consolidation of school districts.

How do we get beyond this apparent impasse in which local residents are unwilling to entertain cuts to schools, the single largest property-tax budget item? The answer must lie with strong, local leadership.

Long Islanders need budgetary problems to be defined more sharply. What causes school budgets to rise inexorably? When asked, equal numbers of residents choose rising teacher salaries, escalating costs of teachers' retirement and health benefits, increasing building and utility costs, and rising salaries of administrators as the main reasons. But much of this is guesswork. More precise information would help people to make good choices on where to cut.

Strong local leadership is also needed to stand up to the vocal minority who are frequently opposed to any change. For instance, in the 2005 Long Island Index, 58 percent of Long Islanders thought it was a good idea to shift some "funds from wealthier to poorer school districts." This proposal was less popular, however, among homeowners paying in excess of $7,000 in annual property taxes; 53 percent of those thought it was a bad idea.

This is where leadership comes in. All Long Islanders, regardless of economic background, are concerned about the impact of rising costs on young family members. Politicians who are able to appeal to such common concerns as they develop solutions will more effectively overcome opposition from the vocal minority in order to satisfy the often silent majority who recognize the need for change.