Town 2026 tax levy concerns addressed by Richardson

Supervisor Maureen Richardson addressed concerns about the 2026 adopted budget during the Jan. 20 Monroe Town Board meeting.

The adopted town budget, which Richardson and Councilwoman Mary Bingham voted against, had a negative 2.26 percent tax levy. Richardson said she and Bingham noted during budget sessions that a negative tax levy was an odd phenomenon and implied that the town would be giving out money. She said it is illegal to levy a negative tax and when the budget went to the county, the county finance department gave outgoing Supervisor Anthony Cardone the ability to zero out the number, leading to what she said was a tax rate increase of about 18 percent. By the time budget was submitted to county, there was no time for the board to reconvene, Richardson said.

Reiterating her position that this was a retaliatory budget, Richardson added that she spoke with the State Comptroller, neighboring supervisors, and department heads who agreed. She said she and Bingham asked for funds to be allocated differently and alternative tax rates to be set to achieve a balanced budget.

Richardson acknowledged residents’ concerns and said the new administration is doing what they can to restore essential services. She said while issuing refunds is not mandated by the county, nor feasible due to costs, the board plans to reallocate those monies.

“We just want to reassure people that while mistakes were definitely made in the outgoing administration, we’re doing everything that we can to fix it. And, we are just looking at restoring essential services that were cut by the outgoing administration or that intended to be cut by the outgoing administration where necessary and then allocating the rest of that fund back likely into savings so that we don’t have to raise taxes again for hopefully a while,” Richardson said.

During public comment, Cardone said he had multiple conversations with the county tax department about the negative tax levy, which he said was because of the $577,000 costs for improvements to Water District 14, to be paid by the residents of that district. He said that in several conversations with the county during September, he was informed that their new program does not acknowledge a negative tax levy. Cardone said that after correcting this negative, he was told the increase would be 12.5 percent. He added that by the time the tax bills came out there was not time to move forward to change the additional charges.

Cardone encouraged the board to either refund the taxpayers or set aside the money in a reserve fund to go against taxes next year.

“Anything other than those two I would question the integrity of the board and how they respect their taxpayers,” Cardone said.

Former councilwoman Dorey Houle, who also addressed the board during public comment, added that collecting an additional $500,000 from the taxpayers is going to be difficult for residents to accept. She said for modest homeowners, most of whom are seniors, this would amount to an extra $120 per household. She agreed with Cardone that the board should either refund the money or put it aside for next year’s budget.

Bingham countered that while she understood that an extra $120 would be difficult for some seniors to afford, members have the water district had to pay $2,400. She said she can understand why those residents are having a hard time, noting that she felt they understood why this increase occurred.

Elaborating further, Bingham explained that Water District 14 is an old system that was taken over by the town around 2010. Since that time, Bingham said, the town has tried to secure grants to fund improvements. Bingham expressed sympathy for the residents, noting the need for the town to maintain a safe water supply.

Richardson rebutted Cardone and Houle’s statements, adding comment that Cardone’s conversations with the county occurred in December, not September and that as the budget officer he should have known that the budget could not account for a negative tax rate. She said the county finance department made several calls to the town to get them into compliance leading to the outgoing administration agreeing to zeroing out the budget.

In other news, resident Ellen Devline asked the board about their position on the proposed Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention facility to be located in the Town of Chester.

Councilwoman Bethany Stephens said she felt ICE was important for national and local security but disagreed with how immigration enforcement is being conducted today. She alluded to ICE agents operating without warrants and stopping people without reasonable cause and spoke against the facility opening in Chester.

“I don’t want that here in my community. I support law enforcement. I believe we already have the law enforcement that we need to go after those criminals,” Stephens said. “If I’m uneducated on that, I’m always open to discussion. But I vehemently disagree with this ICE facility in Chester.”