With local elections fast approaching, the time seems apt to highlight findings from our municipal budget research that may prompt voters to ask tough questions of incumbent office holders and may help candidates provide convincing answers.

We’ve compared data for 28 towns and ten villages in Columbia and northern Dutchess counties with the aim of identifying the best and worst municipalities in terms of their recent financial management, a crucial test for any elected official. The data, from the Office of the State Comptroller (OSC), provide preliminary answers to three basic fiscal questions: 1) How high are taxes in the town or village relative to its peer group; 2) How much have the municipality’s property taxes increased over the past three years; and 3) Are large future tax increases likely due to the town government’s failure to invest sufficiently in upgrading its highway department and road network, which typically account for two-thirds of town spending.

The results of our research, tabulated below, offer merely a rough sketch of fiscal performance, a handy reference guide for voters and candidates seeking to assess the strengths and weaknesses of current office holders.

High per capita taxes or a rapid increase in the tax levy does not necessarily mean incumbent officials have done a bad job managing their fiscal affairs. But those officials should try to clarify how and why their constituents have benefitted from a tax burden that is clearly heavier than in neighboring locales. For instance, voters in towns with the highest recent growth in taxes— especially New Lebanon, but also Canaan, Chatham and Germantown—should be seeking explanations from their incumbent officials. Likewise, towns with high per capita taxes despite relatively low levels of highway investment-- notably Greenport and, to a lesser degree, Ancram-- owe their constituents more fiscal clarity.

Conversely, a low tax burden per resident does not always indicate fiscal prudence. The Village of Valatie, for instance, has managed to keep its per capita taxes so low, in part, by borrowing more than $3 million in debt, or nearly $1,900 per resident, a far higher level than in any other nearby town or village. As another example, four of the five towns with the lowest per capita taxes have within their borders incorporated villages whose residents, in addition to paying village taxes, contribute levies to the town for services they may scarcely use.

A fully revealing profile of any government’s fiscal performance requires more in-depth analysis, such as we provided in our previous column, “A Tale of Two Towns,” and in the Budget Scorecard Database” .

Still, as a starting point for debate in the current campaign season, the rankings that follow might be helpful.

Current Tax Burden: Drawing on data from 2005, the latest year for which the OSC records are complete, this figure includes property, sales and other tax receipts per resident for all town and village services except fire protection.

Highest Level--Towns :Greenport ($597 per resident), Hillsdale ($541), Taghkanic ($512), Ancram ($453), Austerlitz ($433) Pine Plains ($423).

Lowest Level-- Towns : Kinderhook ($148), Red Hook ($164), Claverack ($192), Canaan ($216), Ghent ($221).

Average of 28 Towns: $325.

Highest Level-- Villages : Millbrook ($463), Chatham ($402).

Lowest Level-- Villages: Valatie ($181), Tivoli ($283).

Average of Ten Villages: $344.

Recent Growth in Property Taxes: The change from 2004 to 2007 in total municipal levies for fire, water and other special districts.

Largest Increase-- Towns: New Lebanon (114%), Canaan (76%), Chatham (62%), Germantown (61%), Claverack (49%).

Smallest Increase-- Towns: Gallatin (6% decrease), Ghent (7%), Stockport (8%), Washington (12%), Clermont (12%).

Average of 28 Towns: 30%.

Largest Increase-- Villages: Kinderhook Village (86%), Valatie (59%).

Smallest Increase-- Villages: Millerton (3%), Chatham (7%).

Average of Ten Villages: 24%.

Possible Future Tax Increases: For the 28 towns, we’ve taken OSC data on highway capital spending from 2001-2005 in an effort to identify which towns have over- or under-invested in their road infrastructure relative to the group average and are, therefore, more or less likely to see large property tax increases in the future. The most likely tax increases should come in towns which have spent substantially less than average on highway capital spending, while the least likely to see tax hikes have spent more than average over the period.

Most Likely Increases: Greenport (spent 42% below average), New Lebanon (41%), Milan (39%), Washington (38%), Clinton and North East (36%).

Least Likely Increases: Claverack (spent 116% above average), Rhinebeck (91%), Austerlitz (68%), Red Hook (44%), Livingston (27%).