RR logo

Front Page
Contents
Search
Back Issues
Classified Ads
Masthead
Links
Subscribe

LiGreci to challenge exemptions

By DAVID HULSE

GLEN SPEY — Frustrated by what he called lack of support from state and county officials, Lumberland Supervisor John LiGreci on August 8 said he challenges the property tax exemptions of some local not-for-profits by means of local law.

Reporting to the town board last Wednesday, LiGreci said his layman’s research of state law seemed to indicate that the town has some powers to remove exemptions by local law. “I intend to give them a tax bill,” he said to applause from the audience. The supervisor said he anticipated that his action would lead to a court challenge from the tax-exempt property owners.

LiGreci said he hoped to make enough noise to lend support to Senator John Bonacic’s plan to bring debate on reform of state property tax exemption laws to the floor of the Senate. “I will not stop. I have an obligation to the people of this town,” LiGreci said.

Town Attorney Brian Edwards was on hand, but did not comment on LiGreci’s plans.

Sullivan County Legislator Kathy LaBuda (D-2) was also in the audience. LaBuda recalled the Town of Fallsburg’s failed efforts to tax the tax-exempt Siddha Meditation Ashram. “The judge ruled in favor of the ashram. You’re going to spend a lot of money,” she warned.

Commenting the following day, County Attorney Ira Cohen said that “as much as I’d like to think [LiGreci] is right, he’s wrong,” about his interpretation of the law.

Cohen also disputed LiGreci’s charge of non-support from the county. Months ago, when LiGreci first began crusading for loopholes to change tax-exempt law, Cohen said he telephoned the supervisor, saying, “We [Sullivan County] agree with you and we would be happy support you.”

“He promised to stay in touch, but I’ve never heard from him since then,” Cohen concluded.

Town Clerk Christina Bodnaruik found LaBuda’s warning about Fallsburg appropriate. She said Lumberland has attempted at least one similar tax action in the past, about 10 years ago, with a religious group who owned property on Mohap Road. “We spent three years in court and lost. It was very expensive,” she said.


  What do you think?
Talk about it on the discussion board!

 
  Front Page| Current Issue| Back Issues| Search
Problems? Comments? Contact the Webmaster.
Entire contents © 2001 by the author(s) and Stuart Communications, Inc.