Columbia University Libraries Digital Collections: The Real Estate Record

Real estate record and builders' guide: [v. 97, no. 2512: Articles]: May 6, 1916

Text version:

REAL ESTATE EitlP AND NEW YORK, MAY 6,1916 RESULTS OF 1916 LEGISLATION LEAVE CITY IN WORSE PLIGHT THAN LAST YEAR Bills Detrimental to Interests of Municipality En¬ acted, While Favorable Measures Go By the Board (Special to The Reeord a Guide.) .\ll.iany. May 5.—.\fter the debris left by the Legislature has been cleared away, not much of the original program of the Tax Reduction Committee has been found to remain. Most of the bills favored by the administration have gone by the board and a great deal of legislation detrimental to the interests of the municipality has been enacted into laws. .\t the present time the bills passed by the Legislature are in the hands of the Governor, who will have until May 20 to sign any measure he wishes to place on llie statute books. All bills not signed by him prior to this date fail of enact¬ ment. Asked Reduction. The Tax Reduction Committee of the City of New York yesterday presented to the Governor a petition asking for the elimination of millions of dollars appro¬ priated by the Legislature. The argu¬ ments submitted by the committee are based on a scientific study of the budget needs, and each item which is unneces¬ sary for an economical administration of the State's affairs was pointed out to the Governor. The chief objection to a budget of $60,000,000 was containeci in the statement that the appropriations will exceed the estimated revenues of the State by nearly $10,000,000, and a direct tax will have to be imposed thus plac¬ ing another burden on the real estate owners of New York Citv, who will have to contribute nearly $7,000,000 of this deficit. One of the greatest disappointments to the people of the metropolis must be the realization of the truth that the Legislature at no time had any desire to extend Home Rule to the City of New York. Not even a semblance of autonomy has been granted by this year's le,gislation, and a pseudo-measure which was introduced by Senator Elon R. Brown for the purpose of removing distrust and silencing the outcry of New York City's population against the heavy burdens imposed upon the taxpayers by rural le,gislators. was defeated in the closing hours of the session. This Home Rule measure, insufficient as it was, would have proved the entering wedge of New York City for a greater share of local autonomy. It was heralded as the greatest achievement of the Joint Legislative Committee appointed to in- ciuire into the finances of the City of New York; and Senator Brown, who was at the head of this investigation, prided himself on having provided the proper solution of the problem. Lost in the Shuffle. The bill was adopted by the Senate and was supposed to have passed the .Assem¬ bly. It was nearly a week after ad¬ journment that the discovery was made of the failure of the lower house to take a vote on Brown's Home Rule amend¬ ment. The measure had heen strangled in the rooms of the Committee on Rules. a tribunal composed in its majority of un-State law-makers who disdain to cater to the wishes of New York City, no matter how meritorious the demand¬ ed legislation may be. -•^nd in order not to leave any room for doubt as to its temper, the Legisla¬ ture gave to the Home Rule principle the most effective blow within its power by overriding the veto of Mayor Mitchel on the bill permitting municipalities in Westchester County to tap the mains of the New York City water supply. The Mayor contended that the metropolis had spent untold millions of dollars in providing its citizens with sufficient water and none of the supply could be spared. It has been many tJecades since a Legislature dared to override a Mayor's veto, but the opportunity to emphasize the utter impotence of a great city was not to be permitted to go unnoticed. Both houses jumped at the chance to apply the boot to Home Rule and passed again the bill rejected by the Mayor. What has been left of Senator Brown's promises can be recited in short order. In his report on the financial situation of the City of New York the Senator had stated that "it is hoped the results of the investigation will tend to remove misapprehension, to discover a standard of just distribution of tax burdens_ and to strengthen a sense of mutual inde¬ pendence between State and city." Excise Licenses. The largest single item of additional revenue belonging to the city but kept by the State was the surtax on excise licenses. Senator Brown had stated that the city might expect a reduction in its tax levy as compared with the levy of 1916 from the added income of its share of this additional excise tax, amounting to the sum of $1,000,000. The surtax was passed by the Legislature and not a penny of its revenue will go to the city this year, the entire amount having been appropriated for the State Treas¬ ury. Ill its place a bill was passed prohib¬ iting further construction by the .State of roads in cities, and also prohibiting the maintenance of county roads by the State. This bill will make a saving of $170,000 to the taxpayers, while the other bill, introduced by Senator Wag¬ ner, would have done away with the pork barrel, known as State aid and kept many millions in the treasury. Normal School Question. A promise was made by Senator Brown that the normal schools of New York City should receive financial sup¬ port in the same manner as in other communities, and he figured a reduc¬ tion of $500,000 in the citv's tax levy by reason of this relief. The bill sup¬ posed to grant this relief was never passed, and thereby another promise went by the board. .A saving of $2,500,000 in bringing county government under city control was contained in Brown's program. The bill for this econoniv was likewise kill¬ ed. A bill giving the local authorities power to consolidate departments, there¬ bv reducing the city's pay-roll, was also killed. .\ number of other bills, one of them to create a Central Purchasing Bureau in New York Citv, another to place control of all expenditures by tho Water Supply Board in the hands of the Board of Estimate, and still anoth¬ er giving the Mayor authority to ap¬ prove or veto bills affecting county af¬ fairs, never had any chance of enact¬ ment. Let us now examine the other side, the bills enacted into laws. The first two measures passed were as follows: 1. Changing the time for collec¬ tion of taxes from May and No¬ vember to January and July. 2. Enacting the "Pay-as-you-go- Policy" into law. Both of these bills were disapproved by the Real Estate Board and many other civic bodies. Nevertheless they were forced through both houses and adopted. Other Opposed BUls. Two other bills, political in their na¬ ture and intended for partisan purposes only, and likewise opposed by the Real Estate Board, were passed. They are: 1. Changing the Department of Bridges to a Department of Plant and Structures. 2. Empowering the Commissioner of Water Supply, Gas and Elec¬ tricity to make rules and regula¬ tions for consumers. Other important measures passed are: 1. Charging the State with the regulative expenses of the Public Service Commission of the first district. This law will not go into effect until next year and the sav¬ ing to the citv will not amount to more than $150,000, as 70 per cent, of this expenditure has to be con¬ tributed under all circumstances by the city and the State Treasury. 2. Dividing the tax with the various counties. Senator Elon R. Brown is of the opinion that the city will derive a revenue of $400.- 000 annually from this source. His colleague. Senator Bennett, is of the opinion that the city will be a loser on this deal to the extent of $300,000. 3. Sheriff's fees of New York County to be turned into the City Treasury. This will go into eflfect January 1, 1918, and is one of the few noteworthy measures enacted for the benefit of the taxpayers, without string or boomerang. 4. Permitting a referendum on the question whether the city or the Legislature shall have power to fi.x salaries. The city's share of the surtax for excise licenses in the amount of $1,000.- 000 has been withheld for the coming year. There was an express promise by Senator Brown to give this revenue to the citv for the reduction of the tax levy of 1916. No Other Relief Passed. No other legislation for the financial relief of the city has been passed. .\ few bills affecting real estate ownership, which have merit, are now in the hands of the Governor, and will become law. One of these bills has to do with the centralization of buildin,g insoection: an¬ other modifies the present Torrens law and regulates the registration of titles of real pronerty. .All in all. the harvest is nothing to boast of. The Legislature has been" true to its traditions, not to give the City of New York anything which would deprive the rural lawmak¬ ers of their control over the richest cornmunity in the country, S. L. S.