Four months after a Republican-led Legislature instituted the 1 percent real-estate-transfer tax to help close the county's budget deficit, the GOP lawmakers acted alone last Wednesday in repealing the unpopular tax.

The tax, initiated by County Executive Thomas Gulotta, was expected to yield $55 million for the county. All told, Nassau collected $2 million during the time the tax was in effect. Republican lawmakers, reeling from an upset at the polls in November which will put the Democrats in control of the Legislature in January, blamed much of their losses at the polls on this tax and said they were acting in response to the electorate.

"The residents indicated in a loud, clear voice: County government does not have the right to own one percent of a resident's home," said Legislator Peter Schmitt (R-Massapequa), speaking in place of absent Presiding Officer Bruce Blakeman.

Democrats, who had opposed the tax and vowed to repeal it if elected, abstained from the vote, leaving it 13-0 in favor of the repeal. The tax, which cost sellers of property a $1,000 fee for each $100,000 in sales price, was approved by all 14 Republicans in August.

Minority Leader Judy Jacobs called the move irresponsible and accused Republicans of taking its anger and frustration out on the people of Nassau County.

"[The people] no longer want irresponsible, seat-of-the-pants, arrogant governing that takes the people for fools at the same time it takes them for a ride, and they saw the transfer tax as the last straw that came on top of years of bad government and bad management," said Jacobs, who is expected to assume the presiding officer role in January. "Action now to repeal the tax without reasonable time for review will result in as much pain for the taxpayers as the imposition of the actual transfer tax."

Jacobs also warned that the county's bond rating could suffer because of the $55 million hole the tax is expected to leave in the budget.

Legislator Richard Nicolello (R-New Hyde Park) said the decision to repeal the tax was due to its immediate effect on residents.

"Basically, it was a continuous process, since we adopted it, of speaking to people about it, and after a while I realized I didn't have the answers to their questions," Nicolello said. "It hit a part of the population harder than the rest of the population and there was a real element of unfairness about it, which caused me to want to do something now rather than later. People selling homes need to be able to plan what they are going to do. In order for them to make their decisions, we had to clarify this issue."

According to Nicolello, there haven't been discussions yet on how to handle the budget hole. As it is, the tax is still in place, having not yet been signed by Gulotta. If Gulotta vetoes the bill, the Legislature would require a two-thirds vote to override it.

Nicolello did suggest that more cuts can be made in the existing plan, pointing to special service contracts with law firms and other consultants, which total between $50 and $100 million.

"We cut them by more than 10 percent there but I think we'll have to cut more there," Nicolello said. "But I do think we have to go into the departments themselves on the administrative level to find duplication."

Realistically, the Legislature wouldn't have been seeing a windfall from the transfer tax until the spring, when the real estate market picks up. However, real estate businesses breathed a sigh of relief. The New York Association of Realtors indicated that listings have been down.

The need for further cuts makes Civil Service Employees Union President Anthony Destino nervous. "My members are not going to be happy until you find the $55 million," he said.

Dagmar Karppi contributed to this story.