https://digitalcommons.brockport.edu/pmp_research/1001/thumbnail.jp

Footer, Dawn

Hattery, Michael R

Watt, Celia A.

English

The College at Brockport, State University of New York: Digital Commons @Brockport

The College at Brockport: State University of New York
Digital Commons @Brockport
Public Management Program Applied Research &
Policy PMP Applied Research And Policy
2019
Policy Issues for Local Governments in New York
State
Michael R. Hattery
State University of New York College at Brockport, mhattery@brockport.edu
Celia A. Watt
State University New York, Brockport, CWatt@Brockport.edu
Dawn Footer
The College at Brockport
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.brockport.edu/pmp_research
This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the PMP Applied Research And Policy at Digital Commons @Brockport. It has been accepted
for inclusion in Public Management Program Applied Research & Policy by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @Brockport. For more
information, please contact ccowling@brockport.edu, digitalcommons@brockport.edu.
Repository Citation
Hattery, Michael R.; Watt, Celia A.; and Footer, Dawn, "Policy Issues for Local Governments in New York State" (2019). Public
Management Program Applied Research & Policy. 1.
https://digitalcommons.brockport.edu/pmp_research/1
  
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 
Introduction  
In the summer of 2019 the Public Management 
Program at the College at Brockport conducted a 
survey of New York State’s chief elected officials 
(CEOs). The survey was sent to town supervisors, 
village and city mayors, and the chairs of county 
governing boards. More information about the 
survey and survey respondents are included in 
2019 Survey of New York’s Local Chief Elected 
Officials: The Details.1 This policy brief explores 
findings on policy issues of importance to local 
elected officials.  
Pressing Issues for NY Local Government 
Table 1 depicts the 22 separate issues included in 
the 2019 survey. The respondents were asked to 
identify, on a scale from 1 to 4, how pressing each 
issue is for their municipality. The table shows the 
percent of CEOs that viewed issues as important 
or pressing by selecting a 3 or 4 on the four point 
scale (hereafter referred to as pressing issues). 
The table also provides data on CEOs’ responses 
from two previous surveys conducted in 2000 and 
2009. Not all issues were surveyed previously 
therefore some cells are intentionally left blank. 
In the 2009 survey, across all policy issue items, 
CEOs indicated an average of 45% of these items 
were pressing issues. This average dropped to 
30% in 2019. In 2009 local officials were 
responding in the midst of a recession with fiscal 
pressures coming from all sides. It is not  
 
surprising that 6 of the 11 most pressing issues 
for local officials in 2009 were in the Revenue and 
Finance area. Need for increases in unrestricted 
state aid (72%), need for increases in state 
highway aid (80%) and concern over access to 
stimulus package funds (70%) ranked highest 
among the six. The need for reform of property 
tax administration (66%) and assessment (59%) 
both were among the high priority issues in 2009. 
In 2009, two of the human resource issues ranked 
among the 11 most pressing issues also have a 
link to recessionary fiscal pressures.   Prevailing 
wage restrictions for construction projects (65%) 
and pension costs and rates of increase (74%) 
were a serious concern for New York local 
governments in 2009. 
Ten years later in 2019, local officials expressed 
diminished concern on many fiscally related 
policy issues. For example, concern about 
increased use of fund balance to meet operating 
budget obligations fell from 47% to 27% between 
2009 and 2019 among responding CEOs.  
Statewide figures (Office of the New York State 
Comptroller, 2016:7) tend to confirm an easing of 
financial pressure since 2009. The Comptroller’s 
office reports that Total (General Fund) Fund 
Balances grew substantially for local governments 
over the period from 2009 to 2014. Only Towns, 
as a class of local government, showed a loss in 
fund balance over the 2008-2014 period.  
 
  
Policy Brief 2019:02  
By Michael Hattery, Celia Watt, and Dawn Footer* 
Policy Issues for Local Governments in New York State 
1Polling results are often reported with a qualification noting the degree of accuracy or margin of error. Based on the respondent sample size of 493, 
the total percentage estimates reported for survey items in this study have a maximum margin of error of plus or minus 3.7% (at a 95% level of 
confidence) around the reported percent figure. The margin of error for reported subgroups (e.g. village mayors) are generally larger and depend on 
several factors including the size of the sample subgroup and the size of the subgroup total population. (See Survey Details at: 
https://digitalcommons.brockport.edu/public_management.) 
- 2 - 
 
Policy Brief 2019:02— Policy Issues for Local Governments in New York State 
 
 
Table 1: Priority Policy Issues Comparison: 2000-2019 
Percentage of CEOs selecting 3 or 4 on the 4-point scale for “Important” or “Pressing” Issues 
  
2019 
Rank 
2019 
Total 
2009 
Rank 
2009 
Total 
2000 
Rank 
2000 
Total 
Revenues and Finance             
Distribution of sales tax revenue within the county 10 30% 10 53% 23 40% 
Need for growth in general state aid (Aid and incentive 
for municipalities, AIM) 
2 65% 3 72% 2** 67% 
Need for increases in state highway aid (CHIPS) 1 69% 1 80% 1* 69% 
Absence of PILOTs on state owned land 18 18% 20 20%     
Absence of PILOTs on community residences 21 14% 21 18%     
The need for reform in the administration of property 
taxation 
6 34% 4 66% 
10**
* 
50% 
The need for reform in real property assessment 12 28% 8 59% 
10**
* 
50% 
Inability to recoup costs for municipal services provided 
to tax-exempt properties 
8 32% 9 50%     
Increased use of fund balance to meet operating budget 
obligations 
13 27% 11 47%     
Declining property tax base 14 24% 12 45% 
19**
** 
43% 
Impact of property Tax Cap on raising needed revenue 5 41% 23       
Fees             
Exclusion of cellular services from the Utility Gross 
Receipts Tax 
11 29% 14 36%     
Inability to impose fees for Volunteer Emergency Rescue 
and Ambulance Services 
17 19% 17 23%     
State restrictions on where Official Notices can be 
published (for example permit legal notices to be 
published in free papers or on municipal website) 
16 20% 18 22%     
Procurement             
Competitive bidding limits that are set too low on 
purchasing goods and on construction contracts 
15 22% 13 45%     
Wicks Law requirements for construction projects 7 33% 6 62%     
Public Works and Public Safety             
Inadequate funding for local water or wastewater 
infrastructure 
4 45% 7 61%     
Restrictions on local governments to reclassify local roads 
as minimum maintenance or low volume 
19 17% 16 24%     
Prevailing wage restrictions for construction projects 3 48% 5 65%     
Other Items            
County responsibility for the Pre-School Special Education 
Program 
22 13% 19 21%     
Cost of providing post-employment benefits for local 
government retirees 
9 31% 2 74%     
Limitations on admission to promotional civil service 
exams 
23 13% 22 16%     
Legal framework for collective bargaining 20 14% 15 31%     
The language in the original 2000 Policy Issues varied as follows:  
*The need for reform in state highway aid 
**The need for reform in state revenue sharing 
***Reform in the administration of the property taxation and assessment 
****Large loss of property tax base 
- 3 - 
 
Policy Brief 2019:02— Policy Issues for Local Governments in New York State 
 
In 2019 only two fiscal policy issues were 
considered pressing issues by over 50% of 
responding CEOs (more regarding those under 
State Aid below). Three policy issues were 
considered pressing by more than 40% but less 
than 50% of CEOs responding the survey. The 
three were: Prevailing wage restrictions for 
construction projects (48%), Inadequate funding 
for local water or wastewater infrastructure 
(45%), and Impact of property Tax Cap on raising 
needed revenue (41%). The property Tax Cap 
item was the only newly surveyed policy issue in 
the 2019 survey. 
Table 2 provides a breakout of the responses on 
policy issues/concerns by municipal type; county, 
city, town, and village.  The level of policy concern 
varies across type of local government, but with 
some notable exceptions this variation is not 
substantial.  
Worthy of note, city CEOs expressed higher levels 
of concern than other CEOs about recouping the 
cost of providing service to tax exempt properties 
(67%), state restrictions on where official notices 
can be published (58%), prevailing wage 
restrictions for construction projects (63%), and 
limitations on admission to promotional civil 
service exams (54%). County CEOs expressed 
higher levels of concern than other CEOs about 
the impact of the property Tax Cap on raising 
needed revenues (71%), Wicks Law requirements 
for construction projects (76%), prevailing wage 
restrictions for construction projects (76%), 
county responsibility for the Pre-School Special 
Education Program (71%), and limitations on 
admission to promotional civil service exams 
(53%). 
State Aid to Local Governments 
Two policy issues have persisted as pressing 
concerns for two thirds of local CEOs across all 
three surveys - covering nearly twenty years. The 
two policy concerns involve intergovernmental 
revenue flows between the state and its localities; 
(1) need for increases in State Highway aid and (2) 
need for growth in general state aid (Aid and 
incentive for municipalities, AIM). In addition, 
Table 2 reveals that the current (2019 survey) 
strength of these policy concerns for these two 
issues is shared by officials across counties, cities, 
towns, and villages. 
On the general issue of state aid, CEOs were also 
asked the additional question in 2019:  
“General purpose state aid to local governments 
in New York has declined as a percent of local 
revenues overtime. Do think there is a need for a 
broader policy assessment of state aid to local 
governments in New York State at this time?” 
  
- 4 - 
 
Policy Brief 2019:02— Policy Issues for Local Governments in New York State 
 
Table 2: Priority Policy Issues by Municipal Type: County, City, Town and Village - 2019 
Percentage of CEOs selecting 3 or 4 on the 4-point scale for “Important” or “Pressing” Issues 
  Rank Total County City Town Village 
Revenues and Finance             
Distribution of sales tax revenue within the county 10 30% 24% 33% 30% 32% 
Need for growth in general state aid (Aid and 
incentive for municipalities, AIM) 
2 65% 59% 83% 61% 71% 
Need for increases in state highway aid (CHIPS) 1 69% 82% 88% 66% 72% 
Absence of PILOTs on state owned land 18 18% 18% 29% 19% 14% 
Absence of PILOTs on community residences 21 14% 18% 25% 12% 16% 
The need for reform in the administration of 
property taxation 
6 34% 24% 46% 36% 30% 
The need for reform in  real property assessment 12 28% 37% 34% 27% 27% 
Inability to recoup costs for municipal services 
provided to tax-exempt properties 
8 32% 29% 67% 27% 37% 
Increased use of fund balance to meet operating 
budget obligations 
13 27% 29% 25% 25% 32% 
Declining property tax base 14 24% 35% 33% 21% 26% 
Impact of property Tax Cap on raising needed 
revenue 
5 41% 71% 46% 41% 37% 
Fees            
State restrictions on where Official Notices can be 
published (for example permit legal notices to be 
published in free papers or on municipal website) 
11 29% 12% 58% 24% 39% 
Exclusion of cellular services from the Utility Gross 
Receipts Tax 
17 19% 35% 8% 18% 20% 
Inability to impose fees for Volunteer Emergency 
Rescue and Ambulance Services 
16 20% 12% 17% 23% 15% 
Procurement            
Competitive bidding limits that are set too low on 
purchasing goods and on construction contracts 
15 22% 29% 13% 21% 25% 
Wicks Law requirements for construction projects 7 33% 76% 42% 29% 35% 
Public Works and Public Safety            
Inadequate funding for local water or wastewater 
infrastructure 
4 45% 65% 63% 42% 47% 
Restrictions on local governments to reclassify 
local roads as minimum maintenance or low 
volume 
19 17% 12% 25% 20% 9% 
Prevailing wage restrictions for construction 
projects 
3 48% 76% 63% 44% 51% 
Other Items            
County responsibility for the Pre-School Special 
Education Program 
22 13% 71% 4% 14% 5% 
Limitations on admission to promotional civil 
service exams 
9 31% 53% 54% 27% 32% 
Legal framework for collective bargaining 23 13% 18% 29% 11% 13% 
Cost of providing post-employment benefits for 
local government retirees 
20 14% 47% 42% 12% 11% 
 12 30% 40% 40% 28% 30% 
- 5 - 
 
Policy Brief 2019:02— Policy Issues for Local Governments in New York State 
 
Eighty six percent responded “Yes” to this 
question, only 5% indicated “No” with the 
remaining 10% not responding. This strong 
response to the need for a state level policy 
assessment was shared by CEOs from all four 
major local government types in New York (see 
Table 3). While the survey question refers 
specifically to general purpose state aid, the 
persistence of CEOs concern about state highway 
aid suggests that it may be an opportune time for 
a similar policy assessment of this state-local 
revenue partnership as well.  
The last two New York State Comptroller’s have 
called for policy reappraisal and increased state 
budget priority for general purpose aid to local 
governments in New York (Office of New York 
State Comptroller, 2005, DiNapoli, 2013). The 
state comptroller’s office has a unique vantage 
point - overseeing both local government finances 
and state budget priorities. 
Table 3 
Do you think there is a need for a broader policy 
assessment of state aid to local governments in 
New York State at this time? 
  County City Town Village Total 
Yes 89% 83% 83% 91% 86% 
No 6% 0% 5% 3% 4% 
No 
Response 
6% 17% 12% 6% 10% 
Total 100% 
 
State-Local Relations 
State aid to local governments is one important 
dimension of the broader partnership between 
state and local institutions in serving citizens. 
Some states have advisory commissions on state-
local relations to actively monitor the vitality of 
this partnership. In the 2019 survey, local 
government CEOs were asked if they thought it 
would be valuable to consider creating such an 
advisory commission in New York State.  
A majority of local leaders (56%) responded 
affirmatively to this question, a third (33%) did 
not think this was a good idea, and 11% did not 
respond. County, city, and village CEOs supported 
this idea much more strongly that town officials in 
the survey (see Table 3). 
Table 4 
Do you think it would be valuable to consider 
creating such an advisory commission in New 
York State? 
  County City Town Village Total 
Yes 83% 75% 47% 69% 56% 
No 11% 8% 40% 25% 33% 
No 
Response 
6% 17% 13% 6% 11% 
Total 100% 
 
Shared Services 
New York’s local governments have engaged in  
a range of shared service activities over time.  
Both local motivations and state law and policy 
influence local action in this area. Of the CEOs 
responding to the survey, 86% indicated that they 
participated in county shared services plans or 
planning efforts in compliance with the New York 
State Countywide Shared Services Initiative Law 
enacted in 2017.   
In the survey CEOs were asked to identify their 
reasons for entering into intergovernmental 
contracts for services (more than one reason 
could be identified). Table 5 summarizes the 
responses to this question.  
 
CEOs indicated that the top three reasons for 
entering into intergovernmental contracts  
were: 1) to save money, 2) to strengthen 
collaborative intergovernmental relationships, 
and 3) to promote higher quality/more effective 
service delivery.
  
- 6 - 
Policy Brief 2019:01—Local Governments in New York State: A Profile of Chief Elected Officials 
 
Table 5: If your local government participates in shared service arrangements, please check the reasons that 
motivate your government to enter into intergovernmental contracts: (Check all applicable.)
Motivation Rank Total  County City Town Village 
To strengthen collaborative 
intergovernmental relations 
2 53% 72% 67% 49% 58% 
To promote regional service integration 5 30% 39% 50% 28% 28% 
To avoid shedding services 7 17% 17% 29% 17% 15% 
To promote higher quality/more effective 
service delivery 
3 47% 50% 58% 46% 48% 
To achieve economies of scale 4 46% 61% 50% 45% 45% 
To access technical expertise 5 30% 44% 38% 27% 34% 
To save money 1 76% 67% 79% 73% 81% 
To take advantage of the opportunity 
created by New York State’s Countywide 
Shared Services Initiative law 
6 29% 44% 29% 28% 30% 
Other (Please specify.) 8 10% 11% 8% 11% 8% 
Number of Non-Respondents N/A 12% 11% 12% 14% 5% 
 
- 7 - 
 
Policy Brief 2019:02— Policy Issues for Local Governments in New York State 
 
Summary  
Local CEOs’ policy concerns decreased in their 
intensity over the decade between 2009 and 
2019.  The significant exceptions to this trend are 
the concerns about the need for growth in state 
general purpose aid and state highway aid. These 
policy concerns have been consistently strong and 
identified by approximately two thirds of local 
leaders as a pressing policy concerns for each of 
three survey in 2000, 2009, and 2019. 
Further, in 2019 86% of CEOs in the survey 
indicated that they “think there is a need for a 
broader policy assessment of state aid to local 
governments in New York State at this time.” In a 
related question about state-local relations more 
generally, 56% of CEOs in the 2019 survey 
indicated that they think it would be valuable to 
consider creating advisory commissions on state-
local relations in New York State. 
Finally, local governments were most strongly 
motivated by local factors in participating in 
shared service agreements. The motivations 
identified most often were: saving money, 
strengthening collaborative intergovernmental 
relationships, and promoting higher quality/more 
effective service delivery. 
References:  
DiNapoli, Thomas P. (2013). Comments on the 
Challenge of Fiscal Stress Facing Communities in New 
York State. Prepared Remarks Delivered at the 
Rockefeller Institute of Government, April 8, 2013. 
Hattery, M. (2001). 2000 Survey of New York’s Local 
Government Leaders: Policy Issues, Training Needs and 
Technology Use. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Local 
Government Program.  
Hattery, M. and Lindstrom, J. (2009). Local 
Governments in New York State: A Profile of Chief 
Elected Officials. Policy Brief 2009:02. Binghamton, NY: 
Binghamton University Center for Local Government. 
Office of New York State Comptroller. (2016). New 
York State School Aid: Two Perspectives. Albany, NY: 
Office of the New York State Comptroller. 
https://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/pubs/resea
rch/schoolaid2016.pdf 
Office of New York State Comptroller. (2005). Local 
Government Issues in Focus: Revenue Sharing in New 
York State. Albany, NY: Office of the New York State 
Comptroller.  
SUNY – College at Brockport 
Department of Public Administration 
Public Management Program 
161 Chestnut Street 
Rochester, NY 14604 
585-395-5564 
mhattery@brockport.edu 
Project co-sponsors:  
Association of Towns of the State of New York 
New York Conference of Mayors 
New York Municipal Insurance Reciprocal 
New York State Association of Counties 
 
*Michael Hattery, PhD, 
Program Coordinator 
Celia Watt, PhD, Professor 
Dawn Footer, MPA, MS 
Graphic Design by Kim Ross 


Policy Issues for Local Governments in New York State

https://digitalcommons.brockport.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1001&context=pmp_research

Policy Issues for Local Governments in New York State

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

The College at Brockport, State University of New York: Digital Commons @Brockport