Newsday, Inc. v. Town of Huntington, 46 N.Y.2d 272 (1978): Interpreting Local Laws Restricting Tax Exemptions

Newsday, Inc. v. Town of Huntington, 46 N.Y.2d 272 (1978)

A local law or resolution restricting a tax exemption under Real Property Tax Law § 485-b will be interpreted narrowly, and its applicability is limited to the specific terms outlined in the law or resolution itself.

Summary

Newsday sought a partial tax exemption for its new publishing plant under Real Property Tax Law § 485-b. The school district passed a resolution to deny this exemption for properties constructed after the resolution’s date. Newsday argued their plant was built in reliance on the exemption. The court held that because Newsday’s plant was substantially (90%) completed before the resolution’s passage, it did not fall within the resolution’s scope, which applied only to properties “constructed, altered, or improved” after the resolution date. Thus, Newsday was entitled to the partial tax exemption.

Facts

Newsday, a Long Island newspaper, obtained a building permit in November 1977 for a $6.5 million publishing plant in Huntington. In September 1978, they inquired about a partial tax exemption. By April 9, 1979, the plant was 90% complete. Newsday filed for a partial exemption under Real Property Tax Law § 485-b on May 10, 1979. The town assessor initially indicated the exemption would apply to town, county, and special district taxes, but not school taxes because the school district adopted a resolution on April 9, 1979, that reduced the exemption to zero.

Procedural History

Newsday sued for a declaratory judgment stating its entitlement to a partial school tax exemption under § 485-b. The Supreme Court granted summary judgment to Newsday. The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court’s decision, with one Justice dissenting. The Town of Huntington appealed to the New York Court of Appeals.

Issue(s)

Whether Newsday’s publishing plant, substantially completed before the school district’s resolution denying tax exemptions for properties constructed after the resolution date, fell within the scope of the resolution and was therefore ineligible for the partial tax exemption under Real Property Tax Law § 485-b.

Holding

No, because the school board’s resolution, by its own terms, applied only to property “constructed, altered, or improved” after the date of the resolution. Given that Newsday’s plant was 90% complete before the resolution, it did not fall within the resolution’s scope.

Court’s Reasoning

The Court focused on the specific language of the school board’s resolution, which applied to properties “constructed, altered, or improved after the date of this resolution.” The court reasoned that the phrase “constructed” could not reasonably be interpreted to include Newsday’s plant, which was already 90% complete when the resolution was passed. The court emphasized the finding of fact that the plant was substantially complete and had received a temporary certificate of occupancy shortly after the resolution. Therefore, the assessor erred in denying Newsday the exemption based on the school board’s resolution. The Court avoided the broader question of whether the plant was entitled to an exemption due to reliance, stating there was no need to reach that argument given the resolution’s plain language. The court noted that while local governments can remove themselves from the tax exemption program under § 485-b, this specific resolution did not apply to Newsday’s project. The court stated that “exemptions existing prior in time to passage of any such local law or resolution shall not be subject to any such reduction so effected”.