Originally published: January 8, 2012 6:54 PM
Updated: January 8, 2012 7:29 PM
By BILL BLEYER bill.bleyer@newsday.com

A newly formed Sea Cliff taxpayers group is opposing the village board’s plan to approve exceeding, if necessary, the state’s 2-percent cap on tax levy increases in next year’s budget.

The village board will hold a hearing Monday at 8 p.m. on the waiver, which Mayor Bruce Kennedy said may not be necessary unless there is a large jump in expenses or an unexpected cut in state aid to the village.

Nonetheless, the Sea Cliff Property Owners Committee, recently formed by 20-year resident Anthony Losquadro, has mailed postcards to residents urging them to attend the meeting to oppose the exception.

“In 2011, Governor Cuomo enacted the 2% property tax cap,” the postcard reads. “In 2012, the Village of Sea Cliff wants to take it away.”

Sea Cliff is one of a number of Long Island villages considering such an action. Massapequa Park, Flower Hill and Bayville also are holding public hearings Monday night on exceeding the tax levy cap.

Sea Cliff’s Kennedy said, “In 2009 I was campaigning that you cannot raise people’s taxes — that it’s out of control. Since then I’ve held the line on taxes. In that same amount of time, state aid has decreased by over 20 percent and New York State-mandated costs have increased by over 40 percent.”

He said the village fiscal year begins June 1, “and it’s our intention to hold the line on taxes again, but I don’t know at this time what the village can expect from the state in the form of revenues and I’m not sure what to expect as far as our mandated costs. This being the case, I want to leave the option of increasing the tax levy over 2 percent.”

He said he would propose an increase of more than 2 percent only if it was required to maintain the current level of services. He said there should be a proposed budget in March followed by a hearing and final adoption.

Losquadro said, “The problem is that the tax cap was something that was given to all New Yorkers by Albany to give some protection to property owners.” He added that the village should not be challenging it in the first year it takes effect.

“I don’t buy that,” he said of the mayor’s explanation that the village should have the option to exceed the 2-percent cap if financial conditions warrant. “Their current budget shows no need for it,” he said. “Maybe some point down the road if the conditions warrant it.”