 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1
.
OPINION
|
EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
AUTHORITIES PUBLIC AUTHORITIES PUBLIC AUTHORITIES LAW BENEFIT ASSESSMENT DISTRICT DORMITORY AUTHORITY APPELLATE HYDE PARK WATER EXEMPT RPTL METHODOLOGY LEGISLATURE RESPONDENT APPELLATE DIVISION YORK TRUSTEES PROPERTY OWNERS TAXATION REAL PROPERTY HYDE PARK FIRE JUDGE PROVISION CONSTRUCTION DETERMINATION ACCORDANCE TAXES CHARGES FACILITY |
IN THE MATTER OF NEW YORK STATE DORMITORY AUTHORITY, APPELLANT, v. BOARD OF
TRUSTEES OF THE HYDE PARK FIRE AND WATER DISTRICT, RESPONDENT.(AND 15 RELATED
PROCEEDINGS.)
86 N.Y.2d 72, 653 N.E.2d 1159, 629 N.Y.S.2d 989
June 29, 1995
2 No. 141 (1995 NY Int. 162)
Decided June 29, 1995
_________________________________________________________________
This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before
publication in the New York Reports.
Jon Holden Adams, for Appellants.
Thomas S. D'Antonio, for Respondent.
KAYE, CHIEF JUDGE:
Public Authorities Law § 1685 provides that, because "the creation of
the (dormitory) authority * * * is in all respects for the benefit of
the people * * * the state of New York covenants with the holders of
the bonds that the (dormitory) authority shall be required to pay no
taxes or assessments upon any of the property acquired by it or under
its jurisdiction, control, possession or supervision." The primary
issue before us is whether the term "assessment" as used in this
provision includes a "s pecial assessment" of the kind issued against
appellant Dormitory Authority by respondent Hyde Park Fire and Water
District.
The Appellate Division held both that the Dormitory Authority is not
exempt from the special benefit assessment under Public Authorities
Law § 1685 and that the assessment methodology was valid and proper.
Although we agree with the Appellate Divis ion concerning the
propriety of the methodology used to assess charges against Hyde Park
property owners generally, we conclude that the Dormitory Authority is
exempt under Public Authorities Law § 1685, and therefore modify the
Appellate Division or der.
In 1986, after being directed by the New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation to halt discharges of certain compounds
from its aging water plant, respondent Hyde Park Water District, an
independent entity created by the Legislature before the Civil War,
decided to construct a new drinking water treatment facility using the
Hudson River as its source. The District's Board of Trustees
considered three financing alternatives for the design and
SNIPPETS:
|
|
|
| | | |
|
|
