DOCSLIB.ORG

Town of Hempstead Nassau County, New York

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Town of Hempstead Nassau County, New York PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT DATED JANUARY 20, 2021 le would be SERIAL BONDS RATING – MOODY’S INVESTOR SERVICE: “ ” BOOK-ENTRY-ONLY BONDS See “Bond Rating”, herein In the opinion of Bond Counsel to the Town, under existing statutes and court decisions and assuming continuous compliance with certain tax covenants and certifications described herein, (i) interest on the Bonds is excluded from gross income for federal income tax purposes pursuant to Section 103 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), and (ii) interest on the Bonds is not treated as a preference item in calculating the alternative minimum tax under the Code. In addition, in the opinion of Bond Counsel to the Town, under existing statutes, interest on the Bonds is exempt from personal income taxes of New York State and its political subdivisions, including The City of New York. See “TAX MATTERS” herein. The Bonds will NOT be designated as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" pursuant to Section 265(b)(3) of the Code. such offer, solicitation, or sa TOWN OF HEMPSTEAD NASSAU COUNTY, NEW YORK (the “Town”) $22,280,000* PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT REFUNDING SERIAL BONDS – 2021 (the “Bonds”) t notice. Under no circumstance shall this Preliminary Dated: Date of Delivery Principal and Interest Due: As shown on inside cover s, in any jurisdiction in which SEE BOND MATURITY SCHEDULES HEREIN The Bonds are general obligations of the Town of Hempstead, Nassau County, New York (the “Town”), and will contain a pledge of the faith and credit of the Town for the payment of the principal thereof and interest thereon and, unless paid from other sources, the Bonds are payable from ad valorem taxes which may be levied upon all the taxable real property within the Town, subject to certain statutory limitations imposed by Chapter 97 of the New York Laws of 2011, as amended (the “Tax Levy Limit Law”). (See “Tax Levy Limit Law” herein). The Bonds are subject to redemption prior to maturity at the option of the Town, in accordance with terms described herein. (See “Optional Redemption” under “THE BONDS,” herein). The Bonds shall be registered in the name of Cede & Co., as the partnership nominee for The Depository Trust Company, New York, New York (“DTC”), which will act as securities depository for the Bonds. Beneficial owners will not receive certificates representing their interest in the Bonds. Individual purchases may be made in denominations of $5,000 or integral multiples thereof. A single bond certificate will be issued for each maturity of the Bonds. Principal of and interest on said Bonds will be paid in federal funds by the Town to Cede & Co., as nominee for DTC, which will in turn remit such principal and interest to its Participants (as herein after defined) for subsequent distribution to the beneficial owners of the Bonds as described herein. Transfer of principal and interest payments to Beneficial Owners (as hereinafter defined) by Participants of DTC will be the responsibility of such Participants and s of such jurisdiction. other nominees of Beneficial Owners. The Town will not be responsible or liable for payments by DTC to its Participants or by Direct Participants (as hereinafter defined) to Beneficial Owners or for maintaining, supervising or ed ed herein are subject to change, completion or amendment withou reviewing the records maintained by DTC, its Participants or persons acting through such Participants. (See "DESCRIPTION OF BOOK-ENTRY SYSTEM" herein). ion ion of an offer to buy, nor shall there be any sale of the Note Sealed bids for the Bonds will be received at 11:00 A.M. (Prevailing Time) on January 28, 2021, in accordance with the Notice of Sale dated January 20, 2021. The Bonds are offered subject to final approving opinions of Phillips Lytle LLP, Bond Counsel to the Town, and certain other conditions. It is expected that delivery of the Bonds in book-entry form will be made through the facilities of DTC in Jersey City, New Jersey, or as otherwise agreed to by the Town and the Purchaser on or about February 16, 2021, in New York, New York. This cover page contains information for general reference only. It is not intended as a summary of this transaction. Investors are advised to read the entire Official Statement to obtain information essential to making an informed investment decision. FOR A DESCRIPTION OF THE TOWN’S AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE CONTINUING DISCLOSURE FOR THE BONDS, AS DESCRIBED IN RULE 15c2-12 OF THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, SEE “DISCLOSURE UNDERTAKING” HEREIN. , 2021 *Preliminary, subject to change. This Preliminary Official Statement and the information contain unlawful prior to registration or qualification under the securities law Official Statement constitute an offer to sell or the solicitat TOWN OF HEMPSTEAD NASSAU COUNTY, NEW YORK $22,280,000* PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT REFUNDING SERIAL BONDS – 2021 BOND MATURITY SCHEDULE Dated: February 16, 2021 Principal Due: August 15, 2021-2037, inclusive Interest Due: August 15, 2021 and semiannually thereafter on February 15 and August 15 in each year to maturity Yield or Year Amount** Rate Price CUSIP # 2021 $4,190,000 2022 4,300,000 2023 4,335,000 2024 4,375,000 2025 4,415,000 2026 45,000 2027 45,000 2028 50,000 2029 50,000*** 2030 55,000*** 2031 55,000*** 2032 55,000*** 2033 60,000*** 2034 60,000*** 2035 60,000*** 2036 65,000*** 2037 65,000*** *Preliminary, subject to change. ** Amounts are subject to adjustment by the Town following the sale, pursuant to the terms of the Notice of Sale relating to the Bonds, to achieve substantially level or declining annual debt service as provided in Section 58.00 (c)(2) of the Local Finance Law. ***Subject to prior redemption TOWN OF HEMPSTEAD NASSAU COUNTY, NEW YORK 1 Washington Street Hempstead, NY 11550 Telephone: 516/489-5000 TOWN BOARD Donald X. Clavin, Jr., Town Supervisor Dorothy L. Goosby – 1st District Thomas E. Muscarella – 2nd District Bruce A. Blakeman – 3rd District Anthony P. D’Esposito – 4th District Christopher Carini – 5th District Dennis Dunne, Sr. – 6th District John A. Mastromarino, CPA, Town Comptroller Kate Murray, Town Clerk Jeanine C. Driscoll, Receiver of Taxes Charles Kovit, Acting Town Attorney * * * BOND COUNSEL Phillips Lytle LLP Garden City, New York * * * MUNICIPAL ADVISOR 12 Roosevelt Avenue Port Jefferson Station, N.Y. 11776 (631) 331-8888 E-mail: [email protected] Website: http://www.munistat.com No dealer, broker, salesman or other person has been authorized by the Town to give any information or to make any representations, other than those contained in this Official Statement and if given or made, such other information or representations must not be relied upon as having been authorized by the Town. This Official Statement does not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy, nor shall there be any sale of the Bonds by any person in any jurisdiction in which it is unlawful for such person to make such offer, solicitation or sale. The information set forth herein has been obtained by the Town from sources which are believed to be reliable but it is not guaranteed as to accuracy or completeness. The information and expressions of opinion herein are subject to change without notice and neither the delivery of this Official Statement nor any sale made hereunder shall, under any circumstances, create any implication that there has been no change in the affairs of the Town since the date hereof. The order and placement of materials in this Official Statement, including the Appendices, are not to be deemed to be a determination of relevance, materiality or importance, and this Official Statement, including the Appendices, must be considered in its entirety. This Official Statement is not to be construed as a contract or agreement between the Town and the purchasers or holders of any of the Bonds. CUSIP (Committee on Uniform Securities Identification Procedures) numbers on the inside front cover page of this Official Statement are copyright 2012 by the American Bankers Association, CUSIP data herein is provided by Standard & Poor’s, UCSIP Service Bureau, a division of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. This data is not intended to create a database and does not serve in any way as a substitute for the CUSIP Services. This Official Statement contains certain “forward-looking statements” concerning the operations and financial condition of the Town. These statements are based upon a number of assumptions and estimates which are subject to significant uncertainties, many of which are beyond the control of the Town. The words “may”, “would”, “could”, “will”, “expect”, “anticipate”, “believe”, “intend”, “plan”, “estimate” and similar expressions are meant to identify these forward-looking statements. The achievement of certain results or other expectations contained in such forward-looking statements involves known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause actual results, performance or achievements described to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. The Town does not plan to issue any updates or revisions to these forward-looking statements if or when changes to its expectations, or events, conditions or circumstances on which such statements are based, occur. References to web site addresses presented herein are for informational purposes only and may be in the form of a hyperlink solely for the reader’s convenience. Unless specified otherwise, such web sites and the information or links contained therein are not incorporated into, and are not part of, this final official statement for purposes of, and as that term is defined in, SEC Rule 15c2-12. IN MAKING AN INVESTMENT DECISION, INVESTORS MUST RELY ON THEIR OWN EXAMINATION OF THE TERMS OF THE OFFERING, INCLUDING THE MERITS AND RISKS INVOLVED.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 1976/10/20 HR9719 Payments in Lieu of Taxes (2)” of the White House Records Office: Legislation Case Files at the Gerald R
    The original documents are located in Box 67, folder “1976/10/20 HR9719 Payments in Lieu of Taxes (2)” of the White House Records Office: Legislation Case Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. Copyright Notice The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald R. Ford donated to the United States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections. Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. Exact duplicates within this folder were not digitized. Digitized from Box 67 of the White House Records Office Legislation Case Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library 94TH CoNGREss } REPORT 2d Session HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES { No. 94-1106 PAYMENTS IN LIEU OF TAXES ACT REPORT OF THE COM1.IITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS . •. ' ~ ! ' .; · together with ADDITIONAL AND SEPARATE VIEWS TO ACCOMPANY H.R. 9719 MAY 7, 1976.-0rdered to be printed U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 57-Q06 WASHINGTON : 1976 COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS HOtJSll: OF REtRESENTATIVES JAMES A. HALEY, Florida, Chairman Y '·•·All TAYLOR, North Carolina JOE SKUBITZ, Kansas, Ranking Minoritv ; ·'~ ROLD '1\i:!.OHNSON, California Member ,· MORRIS K. 'f;}>AI.L, Arizona SAM STEIGER, Arizona CONTENTS f.j,j PHILLIP BURtON, California DON H.
    [Show full text]
  • E Ts in E of Taxes July, 2013
    Town of Andover, Massachusetts Pll e ts In e of Taxes July, 2013 Tax pt Property in 1. 2. unidpal Pl in Massachusetts 5. 3. illi Acade PILOT Payments & Agreeme 7. assachusetts State Owned la PILOTs Page 5. nding Legislation Authorizing 6. Exa Municipal PILOT Policies and Agreements PILOT Reports - Worcester and Boston IUWH UI ~llUUY•r ...,. r:aump1rrupuny •t"T4U1" ~n,. ....... --.· 1<t1tt1maTan 1R••1 UWl\ll!f - ll ..... PHltllPS ACADEMY TRUSTEES OF 126 $193,752,100 $2,811,343 $187,034,700 $2,713,873 ,__TOWN OF__ ANDOVER 521 AUGUSTINlAN COLLEGE/ THE MERRIMACK VALLEY 13 . Si8,726..300 $416,819 COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSffiS I 24 $22,527,100 $326,868 GREATER LAWRENCE REG voe /TECH HIGH SCHOOL 3 $22,222,900 $322,454 USA GENERAL SERVICES ADMIN /INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE 2 $21,782,800 ANDOVER HOUSING AUTHORITY 19 $20,932,100 m ANDOVER VILLAGE IMPROVEMENT SOCIETY (AVIS) 152 $20,488,600 $297,290 ROMAN CATHOLIC ARCHBISHOP/ OF BOSTON - 18 $13,066,800 $189,599 S OF FRIARS OF 0 OF ST FRAN 3 $11,135,300 $161,573 PIKE SCHOOL INC 3 $10,695,700 $155,195 MASS SCHOOL OF LAW AT /ANDOVER INC 1 $7,559,000 $109,681 TRUSTEES OF RESERVATIONS 29 $7,111,400 $103,186 $93,864 CHRIST CHURCH ____ , 4 $6,468,900· SOUTH CHURCH !NC 4 $4,574,300 $66,373 ~ElMARK NEW ENGLAND INC 3 $4,517,800. $65,553 CONGREGATION TEMPLE/ EMANUEL. OF LAWRENCE 1 $3,937,000 $57,126 WEST PARISH CHURCH/ OF ANDOVER 3 $3,067,200 $44,SOS LAWRENCE YOUNG MENS/ SHRISTIAN ASSOCfATIO_fi._ ___ 1 $2,630,100 $38,163 FREE CHRISTIAN CHURCH ~-- 4 $2,429,300 $35,249 ~FOUNDATION/ CONSERVATION FUND INC 11 $1,973,700
    [Show full text]
  • Why Read This Report - - - I-Iii
    The Finances of Nonprofits and Public Policy: What Do We Need to Know – and Change – to Do Better? A report from ARNOVA’s Symposium held in June 2011 with leading scholars, practice-leaders, policy makers and regulators who are experts on the nonprofit sector and public policy. The report describes the questions, discussions, and findings of their examination of the challenges now facing nonprofits in the realm of public policy, especially as they pertain to the financing of nonprofits presently and in the future. The report outlines an agenda for research needed to develop a better understanding these challenges and issues. The Financing of Nonprofits and Public Policy: What Do We Need to Know – and Change – to Do Better? A Report on the Proceedings & Findings of ARNOVA’s nd 2 Symposium on Nonprofits & Public Policy Table of Contents Executive Summary – Why Read this Report - - - i-iii Introduction – Background and Rationale for the Symposium - 1-4 Proceedings of the Symposium – Narrative - - - 5 – 33 – Overview of the Proceedings - - - 5 – Locating the Line between Public & Private - - - 6 – Government Funding: Levels and Forms - - - 11 – Tax Exemptions, Deductions & Incentives - - - 20 – Governments Extracting Revenues - - - 25 – Refining Issues & Framing Research - - - - 29 Findings & Research Needed to Form Better Policy - - 34 – 36 Specific Research Goals & Projects - - - - 36 – 37 End Notes - - - - - - - 38 Bibliography of Resources on Research on Public Policy & Nonprofit Issues - - - - - - 39 Roster of Participants - - - - - 43 Acknowledgements - - - - - - 44 The Financing of Nonprofits and Public Policy: What Do We Need to Know – and Change – to Do Better? An Executive Summary & Invitation Why Read this Report? Nonprofit organizations in the U.S., particularly public charities, now confront difficulties more severe than any seen for decades.
    [Show full text]
  • Payments in Lieu of Taxes by Nonprofits: Which Nonprofits Make Pilots and Which Localities Receive Them
    Payments in Lieu of Taxes by Nonprofits: Which Nonprofits Make PILOTs and Which Localities Receive Them Adam H. Langley, Daphne A. Kenyon, and Patricia C. Bailin © 2012 Lincoln Institute of Land Policy Lincoln Institute of Land Policy Working Paper The findings and conclusions of this Working Paper reflect the views of the author(s) and have not been subject to a detailed review by the staff of the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. Contact the Lincoln Institute with questions or requests for permission to reprint this paper. [email protected] Lincoln Institute Product Code: WP12AL1 Abstract This report provides more information than was previously available in any single source on the individual nonprofits that make payments in lieu of taxes (PILOTs) and the localities which receive them. PILOTs are voluntary payments made by tax-exempt private nonprofits as a substitute for property taxes. While the term PILOT can refer to many different types of payments, this report imposes a consistent definition that excludes any payments from for-profit companies or public entities (e.g., housing authorities) and any payments from nonprofits that are not voluntary, such as fees. Data came from a 2011 survey of local government officials in 599 jurisdictions with the largest nonprofit sectors and a three-year data collection project. Key findings from the study are: • PILOTs have been received by at least 218 localities in at least 28 states since 2000; these payments are collectively worth more than $92 million per year. This is a much greater number of PILOTs than identified in previous studies, with the increase due to a more expansive methodology.
    [Show full text]
  • Payments in Lieu of Taxes: Calculating the Fiscal Impact of Boston’S PILOT Program Emily K
    Payments in Lieu of Taxes: Calculating the Fiscal Impact of Boston’s PILOT Program Emily K. LaClair Executive Summary Over the past decade, revenue pressures have motivated local governments throughout the country to introduce fiscal policy aimed at reducing the impact of nonprofit organiza- tions’ property tax exemptions on city revenues. In many instances, cities have implemented voluntary payment in lieu of taxes (PILOT) programs, which are premised as an avenue through which nonprofit landholders contribute toward the cost to the city of providing these organizations with public services. PILOT programs are typically developed through unique agreements between a city and individual area nonprofits. As a result, the programs are rarely systematized and while they offer additional revenues, it is difficult to assess the degree to which those revenues match the cost of public service provision to participating nonprofit organizations. Using the city of Boston, MA, a leader in PILOT program implementation, as a sample, this paper seeks to assess the effectiveness of PILOT programs as a revenue supplement for municipalities with high concentrations of nonprofit landholders. The paper employs fiscal impact analysis to determine the public costs associated with nonprofit organization land- holding in Boston and compares those cost estimates with PILOT payments made by the city’s institutions of higher education and medicine. The following analysis will show that without a systematized process, PILOT payments represent an inequitable and inefficient method of revenue generation. Payments in Lieu of Taxes, Emily K. LaClair 1 Introduction The city of Boston, MA has long been known for its institutions of higher education, nonprofit hospitals and healthcare providers, and arts and cultural organizations.
    [Show full text]
  • Agreement for Payment in Lieu of Taxes for Real
    V02152019 AGREEMENT FOR PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES FOR REAL PROPERTY AND PERSONAL PROPERTY among SYNCARPHA HALIFAX, LLC; GREEN APPLY FARMS IV, LLC and THE TOWN OF HALIFAX (For a Large Solar Array, Located at 269 Franklin Street) Dated FEBRUARY ____, 2019 THIS TAX AGREEMENT FOR PAYMENT IN LIEU OF TAXES FOR REAL PROPERTY AND PERSONAL PROPERTY (the "Agreement" or "PILOT") is made and entered into as of January ____, 2019 by and among SYNCARPHA HALIFAX, LLC, a limited liability company organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, and registered as a foreign limited liability company under the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, having a mailing address of 250 West 57th Street, Suite 701, New York, NY 10107 (the “Developer”), GREEN APPLE FARMS IV, LLC, a limited liability company organized and existing under the laws of Delaware, having a mailing address of 250 West 57th Street, Suite 701, New York, NY 10107 (the "Property Owner") and the Town of Halifax, a municipal corporation duly established by law and located in Plymouth County, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 499 Plymouth Street, Halifax, MA 02338 (the "Town"). Developer, Property Owner, and the Town are collectively referred to in this Agreement as the “Parties" and are individually referred to as a "Party". WHEREAS, Developer is a “generation company” or “wholesale generation company” as such terms are defined in G.L. c. 164, § 1, and is otherwise an eligible counterparty to this Agreement under G.L. c. 59, § 38H(b); WHEREAS, the Developer plans to build, own
    [Show full text]
  • Land Lines, July 2016
    Sustainable Housing Solutions Skinny Homes and Other Affordable Infill Housing Community-Driven Buyouts in Flood Zones Nonprofit PILOTS (Payments in Lieu of Taxes) JULY 2016 1 Contents JULY 2016 | VOL 28 | NO 3 EDITOR Maureen Clarke FEATURES DEPARTMENTS PRD ESI ENT & CEO George W. McCarthy 14 Gentle Infill 2 Message from the President CHAIR & CHIEF INVESTMENT OFFICER Kathryn J. Lincoln Boomtowns Are Making Room for Toward a Theory of Urban Evolution De SIGN & PRODUCTION Skinny Homes, Granny Flats, and Other George W. McCarthy Sarah Rainwater Design Affordable Housing www.srainwater.com 7 Policy Brief PUBLI CATIONS COORDINATOR As housing costs spike in tech hubs and other Susan Pace thriving U.S. markets, three cities are loosening Nonprofit PILOTS (Payments in regulations to “restore the missing middle”— Lieu of Taxes) permitting internal conversions and medium- Daphne Kenyon and Adam Langley THE LINCOLN INSTITUTE OF LAND POLICY is an independent, nonpartisan organization density development to create more low- whose mission is to help solve global economic, and moderate-income housing, foster growth, 9 Muni Finance social, and environmental challenges to improve prevent displacement, and preserve the historic Verifying Green Bonds the quality of life through creative approaches fabric of neighborhoods. to the use, taxation, and stewardship of land. Christopher Swope, Citiscope As a private operating foundation whose origins Kathleen McCormick date to 1946, the Lincoln Institute seeks to inform public dialogue and decisions about 14 12 City Tech land policy through research, training, and effective communication. By bringing together Subsidized Uber in the Suburbs scholars, practitioners, public officials, policy Rob Walker makers, journalists, and involved citizens, the Lincoln Institute integrates theory and practice and provides a forum for multidisciplinary New Publications perspectives on public policy concerning land, both in the United States and internationally.
    [Show full text]
  • Payments in Lieu of Taxes on Federal Real Property
    What is ACIR? The Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations (ACIR) was created by the Congress in 1959 to monitor the operation of the American federal system and to recommend improvements. AClR is a permanent national bipartisan body representing the executive and legislative branches of Federal, state, and local govern- ment and the public. The Commission is composed of 26 members- nine representing the Federal government, 14 representing state and local government, and three representing the public. The President ap- points 20-three private citizens and three Fed- eral executive officials directly and four gover- nors, three state legislators, four mayors, and three elected county officials from slates nom- inated by the National Governors' Association, the National Conference of State Legislatures, the National League of Cities/U.S. Conference of Mayors, and the National Association of Counties. The three Senators are chosen by the President of the Senate and the three Con- gressmen by the Speaker of the House. Each Commission member serves a two year term and may be reappointed. As a continuing body, the Commission ap- proaches its work by addressing itself to specific issues and problems, the resolution of which would produce improved cooperation among the levels of government and more .effective func- tioning of the federal system. In addition to deal- ing with the all important functional and structural relationships among the various governments, the Commission has also extensively studied criti- cal stresses currently being placed on traditional governmental taxing practices. One of the long range efforts of the Commission has been to seek ways to improve Federal, state, and local govern- mental taxing practices and policies to achieve equitable allocation of resources, increased efficiency in collection and administration, and reduced compliance burdens upon the taxpayers.
    [Show full text]
  • Progressive Policies for Raising Municipal Revenue
    Progressive Policies for Raising Municipal Revenue April 2015 A Strategy Report From This report was co-authored by Shawn Sebastian and Karl Kumodzi of the Center for Popular Democracy. Local Progress is the policy network for elected officials from cities and counties around the country united by their commitment to shared prosperity, equal justice under law, sustainable and livable cities, and good government that serves the public interest. Hand-in-hand with community-based organizations and progressive unions committed to advancing a social justice agenda, the elected officials and staff of Local Progress are building the network to facilitate a genuine “inside/outside” strategy to reforming municipal policy and politics. LocalProgress.org The Center for Popular Democracy works to create equity, opportunity, and a dynamic democracy in partnership with high-impact base- building organizations, organizing alliances, and progressive unions. CPD strengthens our collective capacity to envision and win an innovative pro- worker, pro-immigrant, racial and economic justice agenda. PopularDemocracy.org TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Executive Summary ........................................................................................................ 1 II. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 3 A. The Current Crisis .........................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Payments in Lieu of Taxes Balancing Municipal and Nonprofit Interests
    Policy Focus Report • Lincoln Institute of Land Policy Payments in Lieu of Taxes Balancing Municipal and Nonprofit Interests D a p h n e a . Kenyon an D a D a m h . L a n g L e y Payments in Lieu of Taxes: Balancing Municipal and Nonprofit Interests Daphne A. Kenyon and Adam H. Langley Policy Focus Report Series The policy focus report series is published by the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy to address timely public policy issues relating to land use, land markets, and property taxation. Each report is designed to bridge the gap between theory and practice by combining research findings, case studies, and contributions from scholars in a variety of academic disciplines, and from professional practitioners, local officials, and citizens in diverse communities. About This Report In recent years, local government revenue pressures have led to heightened interest in pay- ments in lieu of taxes (PILOTs), which are payments made voluntarily by tax-exempt nonprofits as a substitute for property taxes. This report provides case studies of several municipalities that have pursued PILOTs in the past decade, as well as a broader picture of PILOT use in the United States. While PILOTs can provide crucial revenue for municipalities with large nonprofit sectors, there are also major problems with how they are currently collected in many places. To avoid these problems, the report provides general guidelines for when municipalities should consider PILOTs, highlights the importance of municipal–nonprofit collaboration on PILOTs, and outlines alternative ways to raise revenues from tax-exempt nonprofits. It also offers more detailed recommendations for how to design PILOT programs that are fair to nonprofits while raising meaningful revenue for municipalities.
    [Show full text]
  • Payments in Lieu of Taxes by Nonprofits: Case Studies
    (C) Tax Analysts 2011. All rights reserved. does not claim copyright in any public domain or third party content. Payments in Lieu of Taxes By Nonprofits: Case Studies by Daphne A. Kenyon and Adam H. Langley services used by a nonprofit (for example, the number Daphne A. Kenyon is a visiting fellow and Adam H. of calls for police or fire protection) and the associated Langley is a research analyst at the Lincoln Institute of costs. The payments can go into a municipality’s gen- Land Policy in Cambridge, Mass. eral fund or be directed to a specific project or pro- The authors want to thank Patsy Bailin, Bethany gram. To further complicate matters, these payments Paquin, Joseph Small, and Joan Youngman for their helpful are sometimes called ‘‘voluntary contributions’’ or comments on previous drafts. ‘‘service fees,’’ even if we count them as PILOTs be- cause they are voluntary payments made by tax- exempt nonprofits. Also, we exclude other types of payments that are sometimes termed PILOTs, in- Properties owned by charitable nonprofits and cluding incentives that local governments sometimes used for a tax-exempt purpose are exempt from offer to businesses for which they make PILOTs in- property taxes in all 50 states. The type of nonprofits stead of paying full property taxes. exempt from property taxes is wide-ranging and includes private universities, hospitals, social serv- ice providers, art museums, retirement homes, Since 2000, PILOTs have been churches, and many more (Gallagher 2002). Munici- used in at least 117 municipalities palities that host these tax-exempt nonprofits re- in at least 18 states.
    [Show full text]
  • City Charter §1301(1)(B) FY 2016, Volume I
    Annual Investment Projects Report Pursuant to City Charter §1301(1)(b) FY 2016, Volume I January 30, 2017 NEW YORK CITY. MAKE IT HERE. 110 William Street New York, NY 10038 Table of Contents Executive Summary Chapter One: NYCEDC and Public Benefits from Investment Projects PAGE 1. Introduction 1 2. FY16 Reporting Requirement and Summary of Results 1 3. NYCEDC 3 4. NYCIDA/Build NYC Resource Corporation Financial Assistance 4 5. Energy Assistance 8 6. Sales and Leases of City-owned Land 8 Chapter Two: Overview of Public Benefit Analysis 1. Framework of NYCEDC’s Public Benefit Analysis 9 2.1 NYC-wide Results for Loans, Grants and Tax Benefit Projects 13 2.2 NYCEDC-wide Results for Sales and Leases of City-owned Land 20 3. Results by Financial Assistance Program 20 APPENDICES I. Cost/Benefit Model and Project Report Tables II. Project Indexes: a. Company b. Borough c. Council District d. Program III. City Charter §1301(1)(b) Statutory Language IV. Employment and Benefits Annual Reporting Forms V. Project Report Tables (Volume II) VI. Sales and Leases of City-Owned Land (Volume III) Executive Summary The following summarizes New York City Economic Development Corporation’s (NYCEDC) Fiscal Year 2016 (FY16) annual report on projects to support investment, job creation, job retention, and growth in New York City. This year’s report includes information on 554 projects receiving Financial Assistance in the form of loans, grants, and tax or energy benefits. The report also includes information on 46 sales and 89 leases of City-owned land. For the projects receiving Financial Assistance: I NYCEDC has been directing the majority of its investments towards boroughs outside Manhattan, where more than three-quarters (76.4%) of active projects were located during FY16.
    [Show full text]