SULLIVAN COUNTY — Thanks to a low inflation rate figured into the formula, the state's property tax levy increase cap fell to .73 percent for the 15 townships in Sullivan County, cheering strapped taxpayers but making the 2016 budget planning season particularly challenging for local municipalities.

And if they didn't come in under that cap, their resident homeowners risked losing a state reimbursement for the increase in property taxes on primary residences.

So how did the towns do?

Bethel

Despite an initial insistence that meeting the tax cap was “practically impossible,” Bethel officials managed to wrestle the 2016 town budget down to that threshold.

Supervisor Dan Sturm said town officials reworked the numbers and found they could adhere to the cap and still keep personnel and services - and even make room for another constable and replacement patrol cars.

Callicoon

Callicoon will be a good deal past the cap for 2016, estimating a 1.79 percent levy increase.

“The board chose not to stay under the .73 percent cap,” said Supervisor Tom Bose. “We felt it would not be responsible.”

Staying under the cap would have drained fund balances and prohibited the highway department from replacing a 10-year-old pickup truck, said Bose.

Cochecton

Cochecton Supervisor Gary Maas said taxpayers will see at least a two-cents-per-$1,000 of assessed value reduction in their town tax bills.

Cochecton didn't have to exceed the tax cap because “we've been having surpluses over the last two years, so we did some cutting - just a little bit, not a lot,” Maas explained.

It also helped, he added, that the assessed value of properties townwide rose 1.2 percent.

Delaware

Delaware's board approved a tiny .07 percent levy increase, well below the .73 percent cap.

Supervisor Ed Sykes said while several small cuts were made, no personnel or services will be reduced.

Fallsburg

Town of Fallsburg officials voted to exceed the tax cap, because according to Town Comptroller Scott Dubois, “anything over .08 percent would have exceeded the cap.” Fallsburg residents are looking at a 2.8 percent tax levy increase, which is due largely to increases in contractual costs. Health insurance, union contract requirements and road salt are the three factors fueling the increase in the budget. “The contract for salt comes in September,” explained Dubois. “It's gone up over 20 percent from last year, which is a significant increase.”

The 2.8 percent increase works out to be a $44 increase per $100,000 of assessed property, said Dubois. While the town used the fund balance last year to help balance the budget, there are no plans to for 2016. “Since the tax cap has been instituted, we have used over half of our fund balance. We're trying to get away from relying on it, or there will be nothing left.”

Forestburgh

Forestburgh couldn't quite reach the .73 percent mark, instead exceeding the cap with a .75 percent increase.

Forestburgh Supervisor Bill Sipos said that's due to an assessment settlement with Eagle Creek, the company which runs the hydroelectric facilities at the Mongaup Falls, Swinging Bridge and Rio reservoirs on the western end of town.

The town's ongoing attempt to revalue its properties also contributed to the increase, he said, though the $1.8 million budget does put more money into town reserves.

Fremont

Fremont Supervisor George Conklin said his town passed a 2016 budget that was right at the .73 percent cap.

But since that figure may fluctuate and ultimately be slightly over the cap, he said the board had previously voted to override the cap.

Highland

The Town of Highland will be exceeding the tax cap with a 1.68 percent increase in the tax levy, a significant decrease from last year's whopping 8.8 percent increase.

According to Deputy Supervisor James Gutekunst, this increase does not take into account the increase in the taxable land rates. “The increase in taxable land rates, which occurs from new building and home improvements is anticipated, and when blended with the tax levy increase, will soften the increase to between $3.00 and $3.50 total for a $100,000.00 market rated property. The Town of Highland remains one of the least expensive town governements in Sullivan County.”

Gutekunst pointed out that had the board stayed at the prescribed .73 percent tax levy increase presented by New York State, the town would have only been able to increase the tax levy by $12,000. “We feel we created a responsible budget that satisfies the needs for all appropriate departments and services in the town, while still being sensitive to our taxpayers.”

Liberty

For the second year in a row, Town of Liberty residents will barely notice an increase in their taxes, according to Supervisor Charlie Barbuti. “While the State would permit us to increase our levy by as much as .73 percent, Liberty's budget will fall well below that cap. This is the second year in a row that revenue in the budget to be raised by property taxes will be very near zero. The 2015 tax levy had no increase as well.”

Barbuti said the Town Board, with the assistance of Town Budget Officer Cheryl Gerow, scrutinized the budget line by line to find savings and reductions. That, coupled with use of reserve funds and the benefit of lower employee retirement costs this year helped stabilize the tax levy. “The board is in agreement that taxes are the number one concern of Liberty's residents. We are committed to stopping or at least slowing tax increases. Minimizing growth of property taxes should result in more investment in the town which is the solution to higher tax rates.” (from press release)

Lumberland

Lumberland adopted a budget with a zero-percent increase for 2016, thus coming in under the cap.

Mamakating

The Town of Mamakating will not be exceeding the state prescribed tax cap of .73 percent, said Supervisor Bill Herrmann, thanks to a thoughtful budget process and in-depth scrutiny of the town's finances by Town Council members.

“We're spending only what is needed and we've had the entire board, every two weeks, looking at the budget and past budgets,” explained Herrmann. “We did cost analysis to trim down in areas that we were able to in order to get a more accurate picture of what we had to work with. We're setting up a long-range plan for capital projects and equipment replacement and trying to be thoughtful in everything we do.”

Herrmann says he feels the town is better prepared to deal with future tax cap requirements since they have been working diligently on a realistic budget. “If we have to go above the cap next year, we'll have the facts and figures to back it up, and be able to show areas of need. We're trying to set a course so future administrations can navigate more smoothly.”

Neversink

Technically, the Town of Neversink's 3 percent increase meets the requirements of the State mandated 2 percent tax levy cap. Confused?“When a town stays below the prescribed tax levy cap in the prior year this is what happens,” explained Town of Neversink Book keeper and Budget Officer Teri Lockhart.

“We had a carry-over that was a part of the calculation on the tax cap that was allowable,” explained Lockhart. “That amount, $69,224, is why we were able to meet the tax cap requirement.”

The town will still be relying on the fund balance to help offset the levy and will spend $330,000 to do so.

What does this mean to taxpayers in Neversink? “They can expect to see a $3.48 increase per 1,000 of assessed property valuation on their tax bill,” said Lockhart.“The Board understands that we continue to be in hard economic times and works hard each year to keep costs and taxes as low as possible.”

Rockland

“We were not able to stay under the cap,” Rockland Supervisor Rob Eggleton noted.

“Four of the five board members went to a special training class on budgeting, offered by the Office of the NY State Comptroller,” he added. “We learned a very valuable point. If you're not able to stay under without depleting your fund balance, then budget accordingly.

“Our contract with the union for our highway workers had a 2.25 percent increase this year, as well as health insurance projections of 5 percent,” Eggleton explained. “We still have ongoing flood mitigation efforts that will require some portion of a match from the town. We are receiving and working on additional grants and funding to help with these projects.”

Thompson

“We did not exceed the tax cap,” said Thompson Supervisor Bill Rieber, who credited a portion of that success to revenue from the big construction projects under way in town (i.e., the casino and Veria).

“Fortunately we budgeted conservatively on revenues,” he noted, “and we had some extra revenues through the year.”

That allowed the town to hire five new employees, yet stay under the tax cap.

Now Rieber hopes for an uptick in small-scale development, like single-family homes.

“We're kind of watching that quite a bit and hoping that part of the market picks up,” he said, adding that the town board remains cautious where it spends money.

Tusten

Tusten came in under the tax cap, according to Supervisor Carol Ropke Wingert.

“The Town of Tusten 2016 tax levy is $22,940 below the tax cap,” she affirmed.