06/06/2026
Who is calling the shots in City Hall? It is a legitimate question because, based on what has been reported it is and has been the City’s position that the Schine Student Center should be taxed. The administration agreed as did the Board of Assessment review. When SU challenged that assessment, the City Attorney tried to convince the Common Council that the City’s position was wrong and that it should be tax exempt. The Common Council disagreed and SU brought a lawsuit challenging the assessment. After the City prevailed in the Supreme Court, SU brought its argument to the Appellate Division seeking to have the decision reversed. At this point, the Corporation Counsel fired the attorney that had been successful at the Supreme Court so he could not argue the case at the Appellate Division and then chose not to send any attorney at all to the Appellate Division to rebut the arguments being made by SU. Unsurprisingly, SU prevailed.
We do no not know which side is right or which is wrong but it seems that in this instance, policy on the tax-exempt status is being made not by the Mayor, not by the Common Council, but rather by the Corporation Counsel’s office. That is not how it is supposed to work. Perhaps rather than issuing statements for PR purposes, the City Auditor could look into the decision-making process on how the City defended its argument (or at least pretended to), that the Shine should be on the tax rolls.
A court ruled Syracuse University’s Schine Student Center is tax-exempt, overturning the city’s attempt to tax it after renovations.