Originally Posted By: Oogie
Originally Posted By: cwjga
DO you know that property taxes are not paid on that house? Good question for the city. I would guess that the house is part of his salary and would be taxed as it is used for personal use. Or at least a part of it.

Indeed I do know, and the information is readily available to the public. You can confirm it yourself by visiting the Ontario County Online Resources site (http://oncor.co.ontario.ny.us/oncor/). The site loads very slowly, but if you use the "Search Map" feature you can fairly easily zoom into Geneva to visualize the property upon which sits the mansion (parcel 104.19-2-1.100, also termed "Pulteney/Main/ St. Clair"). After selecting that property, clicking on "Estimated Taxes" at the top of the page reveals that no taxes of any type are paid on that property. Further digging reveals for previous years that taxes have never been paid.

It doesn't matter that Mr. Gearan uses the mansion for personal or partially personal use: he pays no local taxes for his residence, and he never has. Mr. Gearan, the city, and HWS all believe that is perfectly fair. As a person required to pay substantial county/school/city taxes on my property, I believe otherwise.

Then the city is missing out. a private individual is using that house, property taxes as such should be paid. Even cassella pays property taxes to the local school district, in the form of an agreed to payment. Because it is a private company using public property.

Hobart should do no less. But if the city does not go after that, well----

Go to a flat income tax and problem is solved. Well as long as the city is not a sh-t hole that the employees of Hobart don't want to live in.