New York Assembly Bill A10162

New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/12/26
• Refer: 2/12/26
• Report Pass: 5/5/26
• Refer: 5/5/26
• Report Pass: 5/12/26
• Refer: 5/12/26
• Report Pass: 5/14/26
• Engrossed: 5/14/26
• Refer: 5/14/26
• Engrossed: 6/1/26

Caption

Extends limitations on the shift between classes of taxable property in the town of Orangetown, County of Rockland

Summary

This bill amends the Real Property Tax Law to extend a local limitation on how much the tax burden may shift between classes of taxable property in the Town of Orangetown, Rockland County. Under the bill, for the specified assessment rolls, the current base proportion of any property class may not increase by more than one percentage point over the prior year’s adjusted base proportion or adjusted proportion, whichever applies, so long as the town has adopted a local law, ordinance, or resolution authorizing the limitation. The measure applies to Orangetown’s approved assessing unit and updates the list of assessment rolls covered by the existing rule to include the 2026-2027 roll. If the normal calculation would exceed the one-percent cap, the town’s legislative body must adjust the class proportions so the total remains equal to one. The bill takes effect immediately and is a narrow, locality-specific extension of an existing property tax allocation rule.

Impact

The bill changes state law by amending section 1903 of the Real Property Tax Law to continue a special assessment limitation for Orangetown. Its practical effect is to constrain annual shifts in the distribution of property tax responsibility among classes of taxable property, such as residential and other property classes, within that town’s approved assessing unit. The bill does not alter statewide tax rates or assessment rules generally; it extends a local option already recognized in state law for a specific municipality.

Sentiment

The available legislative history suggests the bill was noncontroversial and received favorable treatment. The Assembly Real Property Taxation Committee reported it out favorably with a 9-0 vote, indicating unanimous support among those voting. The bill later passed the Senate, and there is no recorded committee transcript showing opposition or significant debate.

Contention

No major points of contention are evident in the available record. Because the bill is a targeted extension affecting only Orangetown, any concerns would likely center on local tax equity, the distribution of tax burdens among property classes, and whether continuing the cap limits revenue flexibility for the town. However, the committee vote and subsequent passage suggest those issues did not generate notable opposition in the legislative process.