Rennhack for Legislator

Newsday Endorses John

2007-11-04T12:10:00.000-08:00

"Republican Peter Schmitt, 57, of Massapequa, has taken to his role as minority leader of the legislature with vigor. Perhaps too much vigor. While the job is to lead the loyal opposition, Schmitt has too often been an obstructionist, reflexively rejecting anything the Democratic majority proposed. He stands for everything that we found disappointing about the old, sclerotic Republican Party.

Democrat John Rennhack, 37, of North Massapequa, is a television broadcast satellite manager who wants to use technology to open up legislative operations to the public. And he would push Nassau to go green. Both are worthy ideas. But his anti-Republican rhetoric as an outsider and Web site operator has, unfortunately, sometimes been over the top. He needs to reject the hyper-partisanship that has characterized his opponent. With that caveat, Newsday endorses Rennhack."

Schmitt and the County Car

2007-10-25T12:20:00.000-07:00

League of Womens' Voters Guide 2007

2007-10-25T06:03:00.001-07:00

For the full Voters Guide, Click Here.

Here is How I answered the two questions...

1) Suffolk County is considering a proposal in which schools, towns
and other entities voluntarily pool their cash and long-term
investments into one fund to be controlled by the state comptroller,
thereby saving funds to all agencies in administrative costs. Do
you support such a plan for Nassau County? If not, explain.

The proposal in Suffolk is a good way to consolidate and save money but there are many variables that need to be checked. Will the Comptroller be able to deny “withdrawal” of funds? What controls will there be that a contributor does not “withdraw” more than it has contributed? The idea of consolidation is a smart one but I believe that local control would be preferable. Albany is too far removed from local interests.

2) When selling County property, how do you feel about a
portion of the property being used for affordable/
workforce/next generation housing as a condition of sale?

Affordable housing whether for senior or young people just starting
out is a necessity in Nassau County. I believe a binding, loophole- free condition of sale would be a wise move for the County. Developers must show a commitment to the future of Nassau and the County can and should control who it sells property to.

And here are Schmitt's Answers....

1) Yes.

2) Only where it fits, i.e., selling a piece of commercial or industrial
property – No.

John Endorsed By The Community Alliance

2007-10-25T05:45:00.001-07:00

I'm proud to receive the endorsement of The Community Alliance, a grass-roots civic group that works for the betterment of Nassau residents.

Click here to visit The Community Alliance.

Another Video

2007-10-19T08:39:00.000-07:00

The Republican Scam.... er Plan.

More Issues

2007-10-15T14:34:00.001-07:00

My first step is to open the process of the Legislature to the public. Unless you have the time to attend a meeting or hearing on a weekday during the day, which most people do not, you have to rely on a short newspaper account or a biased self-congratulatory mailing from your legislator. I want all meetings and hearings recorded and broadcast on cable and on the County website. I want transcripts available so that taxpayers know what is being said and done in their name. It has been said that if voters actually saw what went on in the legislature, they would want to disband it. Only true openness will help bring civility of discourse and honesty to County government.

We face the daunting task of keeping Nassau County finances in the black while avoiding increasing taxes and providing needed services. County mandated costs are spending that is required such as payroll, pensions, and medical insurance. Discretionary spending for the County is very low compared to the mandated spending. The rising cost of medical insurance will continue to be a problem for the County unless we address it now. I believe that it is necessary for public employees of the County to contribute to their medical coverage the same way that private sector workers do. At some point, a decision will have to be made on medical insurance coverage and its affordability for the County. I do not want County employees to lose any coverage and a way to do that is for them to contribute to their existing coverage. Otherwise, the County will have to either find some way to get more money to pay for the coverage (read: cut other services or raise taxes) or move to a less expensive insurance. Unfortunately, with rising medical insurance costs, we need to act NOW.

I have always stood fore-square against patronage and will do so in the legislature. Of course, positions in government are filled by friends of the powerful. But are those jobs needed? We have less patronage from the executive office than we had in previous administrations. Those costs are actually down. We need to look at qualifications and necessity when hiring. We also need to keep those salaries realistic. My opponent has a part-time spokesperson who was a defeated legislator, making more than the Presiding Officer of the Legislature and slightly less than the County Executive. It is a bi-partisan problem and as a true independent, I will make an issue of it.

Featured Video from 10/10/07

2007-10-11T20:32:00.000-07:00

Schmitt explains how using a county car is "more efficient."

More Bad Policy from Schmitt - The Gas Tax Cap

2007-10-11T06:27:00.001-07:00

Schmitt is always full of gimmicks and this time he is rehashing a gimmick he tried last year.... to cap the gas tax at $2.00.
The long and short of it is really that lost revenue from the $1.00 or so that the county makes on each fill-up will create a bad fiscal situation for the county.

What's worse than taxes?
A badly planned psuedo-tax cut.
Pataki and the NYS legislature passed a cap on gas tax which went into effect July 1st, 2006. The cap is set at $2.00/gallon.
Now Schmitt and his republican soldiers are proposing the same in Nassau.
"Minority Leader Peter J. Schmitt and members of the Republican Caucus to the Nassau County Legislature have filed a bill which would not only opt Nassau County into the elimination of State tax on gasoline passed over $2.00 a gallon, but also provides for Nassau County to eliminate its tax on gasoline over $2.00 a gallon.
Recent New York State legislation will cap the New York State Sales Tax on gasoline at $2.00 per gallon and Republican Legislators have introduced legislation to also cap County Sales Tax at $2.00 per gallon."
Sounds good right?
"Minority Leader Peter J. Schmitt stated, “We want to be ready to give much needed tax relief on the ever-increasing price of gasoline to our residents.”
“Legislation in Albany will soon be passed and we want Nassau County to be ready to not only join in eliminating the State Sales Tax over $2.00 a gallon but also the County tax on the same amount continued Schmitt.”
The higher price of gasoline has especially burdened Long Islanders who use their cars to commute to work. With the upcoming summer, residents are expected to vacation locally, and while good for the Long Island economy, they will be using their automobiles at a higher rate.
“If the Administrators of Nassau County would stop thinking about taxing our residents and proposing new tolls on our highways, they could begin to attempt to eliminate some of the taxes all our residents pay”, stated Legislator Schmitt."
Wow, a grand burden will be lifted from us taxpayers.
But Wait!
All is NOT what it seems.
While the proposed savings could be up to 8 cents per gallon, reality just happens to get in the way. Gas prices are still going up and the savings are lower than 3 cents per gallon if that at all.
But the the real problem is the cost - the REAL cost - to taxpayers.
It might make a nice sound-bite to motorists who are paying alot at the pump but a few pennies saved won't compare to the loss the state and the county will incur.
On the state level, Nassau is looking for more school aid which would bring down school taxes which are the bulk of our taxes. With this cap, the state will lose $450 million this year.
Wouldn't it be better to apply this $450million to alleviate school or property taxes instead of literally nickel and dimeing taxpayers with such a miniscule "tax cut" that will come to a few dollars over the year?
And where will the state make up this loss?
What gets cut next year and what gets increased?
Now Schmitt and company want to cap the Nassau portion of the tax.
We all know that the county, because of Schmitt and the Gulotta republicans, sank to near bankruptcy. Schmitt says “We want to be ready to give much needed tax relief on the ever-increasing price of gasoline to our residents.”
It's not the taxes but the actual cost of the gas that is hurting consumers. And by capping the Nassau portion of the tax, Schmitt will make the fiscal situation in Nassau worse.
Other counties in NYS are already seeing the problem with the cap "In Albany County, as Comptroller Michael Conners is prudent enough to point out, the loss of revenue is likely to be $2.7 million a year for the county itself, and $1.8 million a year in money the county shares with cities, towns and villages.

In Broome County "when (County Executive) Fiala found out the cap would cost the county about $2.3 million annually with current prices, she modified the proposed gas tax cap to $3 per gallon. That would help taxpayers if costs continue to rise at the pumps, although it currently affects only higher grades of gas.
Any county losses would have been made up by increasing property taxes, Fiala said.
"We didn't want to give with one hand now and take from the other later," she said."

Republican mayor Bloomberg in NYC said the city could lose up to $50million. From the Gothamist "Fifty million dollars a year is probably a thousand cops, close to a thousand cops, close to a thousand teachers," he said. "If we don't have the money, we can't have these things. What do we want to do without?
Reducing taxes when you're trying to end energy dependence on foreign cartels is not exactly a terribly smart policy
The long-term solution in this country, which nobody wants to hear, is to use an awful lot less energy and to get away from fossil fuels, particularly oil, that mostly comes from overseas."

What will Nassau lose? Tens of Millions of Dollars.
How much revenue that could go to funding youth programs, hire more police or keep property taxes stable will disappear for a cheap stunt pseudo-tax cut?
Wouldn't it be better to use the gas tax revenue to continue to revive the county?

And wouldn't it have been smarter for our state legislators to properly fund our schools instead of trumpeting a "tax cut" that will hurt us in the long run?

Schmitt's Re-Assessment Freeze Gimmick

2007-09-24T17:35:00.000-07:00

You can always count on Legislator Peter Schmitt to misinform and mislead voters. In the Nassau GOP press release, Schmitt says “The Republican plan will give Nassau’s hard-pressed taxpayers some relief by ensuring that the Nassau County Assessor cannot increase the assessed value of any residence in the county for the next five years.”
How exactly are taxpayers getting "relief?"
Taxes will not be cut or decrease with this assessment freeze.
In fact, taxpayers who do win a grievence to lower their taxes won't be getting as much of a decrease because the freeze will cut into tax revenue and the money has to come from someplace.
If you win a tax grievence on your 1 story Cape and a 2 story mini-mansion is not paying their full assessment for 5 years, your taxes have to make up for that loss of tax revenue. So when you could have saved X, it will be a lower Y because Nassau is back to the uneven and unfair assessment system.

The Press Release continues "Under the Republican proposal, the county would continue to conduct annual valuations of private residences and homeowners would benefit from a lower assessment if home values decreased. The county would be prohibited from increasing the assessment on homes that the county assessor contends have risen in value during the five-year freeze period."

So if you live in that 1 story cape and a neighbor adds another 1000 square feet to his house, you are paying the same tax he is. Is that fair to you?
Because of a 40+ year broken assessment system, Nassau taxpayers suffered. Now Schmitt and the gang want to bring that back.

Schmitt says “I am proud to introduce this group of candidates because they hold a key to Nassau County’s future and they will fight for our plan to stop the property tax nightmare and constant reassessments. Seniors and young people are moving away from Nassau County in droves due to the high cost of living.”

Let's see what the New York State Department of Real Property Services says:
"What Makes My Tax Bill Change?
Tax bills increase for one or more of the following reasons: bigger budgets are adopted, revenue from sources other than the property tax shrinks, the taxable assessed value of the assessing unit changes, or the tax levy is apportioned differently.

Taxpayers unhappy with growing property tax bills should not concern themselves just with assessments. They also should examine the scope of budgets and expenditures of the taxing jurisdictions (counties, cities, towns, villages, school districts, etc.) and address those issues in the appropriate available forums, such as meetings of the city council, or town, village, and school boards."

What was that again?
Oh yeah, "Taxpayers unhappy with growing property tax bills should not concern themselves just with assessments."

Yup, it's not the assessment that can raise your taxes, it's local taxing entities.
Schmitt and the republicans don't want to tackle the tougher issue of the local and school taxes that comprise 83% of your tax bill.
While the "freeze" is in place, your town, fire district, library district, water district, school district, sanitation district and whatever multiple layers of government you may have will continue to raise taxes if they need money.
Again, keep in mind that the County portion of your taxes is about 17% of your total tax bill. The rest is not controlled by the county. As I said in the Massapequa Post, "A property tax assessment freeze will do nothing to reduce property taxes.. Schmitt would do better to use his position as a platform to pressure school districts to reduce taxes."
It's time to have someone who will use his position to work on and hi-light important issues that may not be under direct county control. Schmitt won't do that.

In his own press release from March, Schmitt said "This is a win, win, win situation for all homeowners in Nassau County. The result is that homeowners can gain a sense of confidence and predictability in their tax bills by eliminating yearly reassessments and unpredictable increases, and we can make household budgets easier to control and anticipate,”

To that I say "Mr. Schmitt, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."

There will be "unpredictability" simply because all the special districts can raise taxes on thier own. Household budgets will not be "easier to control" because of the uneven assessments that will result from this.The tax revenue from houses with higher values that would have an increase that would off-set smaller houses lower values and lower taxes will be gone. The money to run the county/town/village/school etc has to come from somewhere. And taxes are not going to go down because of Schmitts plan.

The reason that assessed values increased so much was because the market which is not controlled by government was out of control. Homeowners were getting $500,000 for a house that a couple of years before would sell for $250,000. That means that the same house in the same area will be assessed higher. The sellers market we had was a boon for the people leaving but it did leave its mark on those who stayed. More from New York State Department of Real Property Services :"Remember that the real property tax is an ad valorem tax, or a tax based on the value of property. Two owners of real property of equal value should pay the same amount in property taxes. Also, the owner of more valuable property should pay more in taxes than the owner of less valuable property."
With the "freeze" that Schmitt wants, this will not happen.