Islip, Oyster Bay criticized for swiftly passing tax hikes

Islip and Oyster Bay officials came under fire last week for raising the town portions of the property tax. It wasn't so much what officials did, but how they did it.

In Islip, a last-minute amendment to the budget came up and passed after most of the public had gone home. Even then, there was no public discussion of a tax increase, or of how large the increase would be.

In Oyster Bay, while a motion to pierce the state's tax cap was on the public agenda, the town board passed through an increase, quickly and quietly.

Just four minutes and 31 seconds went by between the time the town clerk called the first of 112 resolutions until each one -- including two budget resolutions and the property tax cap override -- passed with no discussion.

That's not the way it's supposed to go. In fact, that's not the way it's ever gone with a town budget in recent memory.

When it comes to raising property taxes in one of the highest-taxed regions in the nation, Long Island residents get antsy.

That's why keeping tax rates steady is wildly, albeit unrealistically, popular -- and why politicians always sweat the tax stuff.

Municipalities across Long Island at one time routinely passed tax hikes after officials won re-election, a tactic so toxic that Nassau County -- as part of a charter revision -- forced lawmakers to approve budgets before Election Day.

With last week's actions, however, Oyster Bay and Islip created a new beast: The Stealth Tax Increase.

Boo!

The silent treatment may make life easier for some elected officials, but it's unfair to residents. It denies them the chance to say no, to ask why and to offer potential alternatives.

And for elected officials, such sneak attacks insulate them from an essential part of their jobs -- justifying their thinking and their actions, in real time and before real constituents.

On Friday, Steve Flotteron, the Islip council member who offered the tax-hike amendment -- which did not appear on the meeting agenda -- said he did so because the budget submitted by outgoing Supervisor Tom Croci further depleted the town's rainy day fund and relied on uncertain, one-time-only revenues.

"It wasn't going to work and I didn't have a lot of time to fix it," Flotteron said. "I didn't want to depend on revenues that might not come in, and since the bond-rating agencies were looking at our reserve fund, I wanted to increase the fund balance."

OK, but how about some public notice? Or, better, some discussion in a meeting room that just moments before had been packed with residents for a hearing on raising backyard chickens?

In Oyster Bay, Supervisor John Venditto offered support for the increase -- the third in three years -- which will disqualify town residents from receiving next year's scheduled state rebate for municipalities staying within the state tax cap.

Over the past few years, the town's Wall Street bond rating has fallen eight times, leaving it two steps above junk.

"I had been saying for some time that this was the year when we would turn it around," Venditto said. But after reviewing the preliminary budget, he determined -- on the Friday before Tuesday's vote -- that the increase was necessary.

OK. But why not put the words "tax increase" on the agenda, and discuss the rationale before voting?

Venditto said he had received calls and faxes from some town residents angry about the increase. He said he's reached out, or left messages, for them all, explaining details of the increase.

But really, wouldn't it have been easier, and more transparent, to do that once, during a meeting, in public?