To the Editor:

With the imminent payment of property taxes creeping ever closer I wanted to respond to several public points having been made recently about the financial issues facing the village of Potsdam. As a town of Potsdam resident I worry that over the course of the next few years we may see the “fading away” of village fiscal responsibilities only to have them added to the financial burden of the residents of the town who do not receive any direct benefit from these services.

With 69 percent of the village exempt there has to be an alternative to the current way that business is being conducted between the holders of that 69 percent and the village. Recently Syracuse University (holds 51% of the exempt property in the city) came to a deal called a “services agreement” (one of three contracts) with the city of Syracuse. In which the university has agreed to pay $500,000 each year for the next five years, this money can be used for any purpose the city deems necessary. This in addition two other agreements which will yield more than $700,000.

Additionally, the city of Boston has been working to try and increase its revenues from nonprofits and came up with a guideline that would ask nonprofits to contribute 25% of their property tax liability. The city of Pittsburgh has suggested imposing a 1% tax on the tuition students pay. The city of Baltimore proposed a $350 bed tax on each bed at hospitals and universities. Princeton University is being sued by the local residents for their tax liability on properties which are not directly related to the college’s educational mission. In essence the village of Potsdam is not alone in its fight to remain a viable “college town.”

With the rise in anti-tax sentiment the issue of vast amounts of real estate being exempt cans no longer stand. There must be some form of relief for those who are left the financial burden of providing services that are used by entities that are financially more able to pay and should pay.

In response to Mr. Fish’s, CFO at Clarkson, comment about “faculty and staff that live in the village personally contribute to the local tax base….” Of the 978 employees at Clarkson less than 13 percent of the faculty and staff own property with in the village. The total assessed value $15,264,580.00 at $16.32/thousand assessed value equates to just under $250,000. And approximately only 24 percent own property in the township.

Let’s look at the village collecting a bed tax for each student. Hotels in the county currently collect 3% bed tax that goes to the county to be dispersed. Currently Clarkson’s student population is about 3247 students, SUNY Potsdam has about 3868 students. We will assume that all students are living on both campuses, the village would be able to generate funds based on the number of beds available. Yearly Clarkson charges on average $3862 for room, SUNY Potsdam charges $6770 for room.

At a modest 1% bed tax, it would look like this; $125,399.14/year from Clarkson and $261,863.60/year from SUNY. Canton Potsdam Hospital has 94 certified beds, on average 63 beds are filled, according to the daily census; the average cost per stay is about $3700 this would equate to $850,815.00 yearly.

Or if a flat rate such as $350 per bed were applied CPH with its’ 94 Certified Beds would be contributing $32,900/year, Clarkson $1,136,450.00/year, and SUNY $1,353,800.00/year respectively.

What if Clarkson, SUNY and CPH were required to pay tax on 25% of their assessed value? This is what we would have, $268,719,800.00 from Clarkson, $169,295,700.00 from SUNY Potsdam and $387,841.54 (at current cost per thousand).

It would be imperative that any monies collected should remain in the village not paid to the county to be dispersed. (That’s a whole other cat.)

Here I will note the following; Clarkson contributes to the village, as “gift” $34,000 through the Shipley Center. SUNY Potsdam does not “gift” any monetary support, nor does CPH. All three do pay for water and sewer.

Noted recently is the issue with effective and accurate monitoring of water as suggested by DANC. Thus far, Clarkson has agreed to pursue DANC recommendations and SUNY Potsdam has yet to respond to the recommendations. Should the DANC recommendations come about it is my understanding that Clarkson has agreed to follow through with its part.

Additionally, Clarkson has an electrical agreement with the village that supports the villages power generation, participates in a team approach to GIS mapping and provides graduate students to partake in engineering projects.

Overall, it’s time for all constituents to come to the table and hash out some monetary agreements that will benefit the maintenance of a healthy village and community. No one entity is to blame for the current state of financial woes; it’s been developing over the years. The village should be compensated for the lack of taxable assessed property held by nonprofits in some form. And hindsight may be of little help here, but a cap should have been placed on the percentage of nontaxable assessed value any one entity can hold in a village, town or city.

Working together there can be a solution that will be of benefit now and secure a better future. If the village becomes a derelict ghost town consisting of empty brownstone storefronts, fast food and various other eateries, bars, and abandoned homes there won’t be much attraction for anyone other than students and their four year stint in a college town.

Tracey Haggett-Sloan

Potsdam