From:
Susan Kniep, President
The Federation of
Connecticut Taxpayer Organizations, Inc.
Website: ctact.org
860-528-0323
January 6, 2004
HAPPY NEW YEAR 2004
WELCOME TO THE NINETEENTH EDITION OF
TAX TALK
Your update on what others are thinking, doing, and
planning
Send your comments or questions to me, and
I will include in next week's publication.
Please note that TAX TALK is now on our Website
Thank you to those who contributed the
following to this week's edition of Tax Talk. Subjects include Update on RHAM Budget/ Referendum, Superintendent of Schools
Sells Vehicle for $1, and State of Connecticut Blue Ribbon Commission Report on
Property Taxes and Smart Growth
I look forward to seeing you all at the January
15 FCTO meeting.
Please let me know if you would like to add an Item to the following
Agenda. Also, have you determined what month would be convenient to hold
a FCTO meeting in your area. Pick a month and we can discuss the
agenda and marketing campaign to generated interest in the meeting and
FCTO.
AGENDA
January 15 FCTO Meeting
7:00 TO 9:00 PM
Riverside Health Care Center
745 Main Street, East Hartford
Park Across the Street in Town Hall Parking Lot (740 Main St)
Opening Remarks by Susan Kniep
Roll Call
Membership Drive
2004 Issues Calendar
2004 Meeting Calendar
Marketing Campaign
Status Binding Arbitration Responses
Financial Report
Opportunity for Taxpayer Groups to Speak - Approx 5 Mins
each
Closing Remarks by Susan Kniep
**************************************************************************************************
hebrondollarsandsense@hotmail.com
Subject: Update on RHAM Budget/Referendum
Hebron Dollars and Sense
Jan 6, 2004
The RHAM Board of Education
cut the FY 2003-04 budget by $143,360 on Tuesday night (January 6). The
budget now stands at $16,998,167, which is a 9.15% (with bond) increase over
last year’s budget (4.88% operating cost increase). The $143,360 in cuts was
achieved in 21 different categories/line items, and the complete list will be
available on the www.HebronDollarsandSense.com
web site tomorrow morning. When they questioned how these cuts were
derived or discovered, the Board was told that since the school is midway
through the fiscal year, some items were discovered to be over budgeted.
A few line items were reductions in spending. The largest cuts
were: $32,000 (Instructional Supplies), $15,000 (Custodial/Maintenance
Supplies), $15,000 (Meetings and Conferences), $10,000 (Administrative Costs – RHAM/COC),
$10,000 (Team Travel), $8,412 (Professional Development), $7,300
(Professional/Technical Services), $6,648 (Curriculum Writing), $6,000 (Office
Supplies), $6,000 (General Supplies), and $5,000 (Software). In addition, the
Board held discussion on the COC budget to be discussed in the next week or
two. Board members (with one dissenter) recommended no salary increases
for COC administrators for next year. However, RHAM comprises only one-half of
the COC, so it will be interesting to see if that recommendation is carried
forward. The date of the RHAM XI referendum was set for Tuesday, January 20,
from 6:00 a.m.
until 8:00 p.m. at the usual polling places. Some people had hoped for
a Thursday, January 22 date, but by state statute, the latest date for the next
referendum is the Tuesday, January 20th date. Check the newspapers Wednesday
and this weekend for additional details.
*************************************************************
Matt Paulsen, Map569
Bethel Action Committee
Subj: Superintendent of
Schools Sells Vehicle for $1
Date: Jan 5, 2004
/5/2004 3:38:54 PM
Pacific Standard Time
HI Susan - Thought I'd keep you in the loop with Bethel's
scandal of the week. Supt of Schools selling a town owned vehicle for $1
to a school employee. No one else was given notification it was up for
sale. With all the complaints about the need for more money, you would have
thought they would put it out to the highest bidder...it certainly would have
gone for more than $1. Regards, Matt Paulsen
Chairman, Bethel Action Committee (and protege of
Billy Michael!)
Sale
of vehicle by district angers activist
By Marietta Homayonpour ,THE NEWS-TIMES
BETHEL — Should the school district have sold a 1989 Jeep Cherokee station
wagon to a district employee for $1 or was the sale improper? According to the
district, the car didn’t run and the employee towed it away for nothing when he
bought it more than a year ago. But resident Matt Paulsen said the car — if it
worked — would have been worth between $1,900 and $3,400 and even as scrap,
could have brought in several hundred dollars. He claims several irregularities
in the sale and has filed a complaint with the town’s Ethics Commission. The
commission will meet Monday night to determine if there is cause to investigate
the allegations. When told of the circumstances of the sale, a car dealership
in Danbury and a car parts business in Norwalk said the district made the right move.
"It wouldn’t have a lot of value,” said Norman LeBlanc, who owns the
50-year-old LeBlanc’s Auto Parts in Norwalk. "I charge to pick up any car over
10 years old.” He added that it costs money to dismantle cars before selling
the used parts. Mark Regner of Regner’s
Auto Sales in Danbury agreed. "They did the right thing,” he said of the
school district’s decision. "It’s too much work to find other avenues of
value.” Schools Superintendent Gary Chesley said the
employee who bought the car — supervisor of facilities and operations Robert Geminaro — did the district "a favor.” Chesley said it would have cost about $3,000 to get the
Jeep running, and another $125 to have it towed and scrapped at a junk yard.
The car had a broken sleeve on the steering column, a leaking oil seal on the
engine, and a leaking master cylinder for the brakes. The district bought the
Jeep in 1998. Gerd Fagerholm,
the school business manager at the time, sold it to Geminaro
in December 2002 after it had sat unused in the Municipal Center parking lot for six months. "It was
becoming an eyesore, a nuisance,” said Geminaro.
"I restore cars as a hobby.” He also has a 1953 Chevy and 1957 Buick at
his Bethel home. Paulsen’s complaint is against Chesley and Geminaro. He alleges
among other things that the Board of Selectmen wasn’t informed about the sale
and that no one else in town was given the opportunity to buy the Jeep.
"It was a conflict of interest,” according to Paulsen, who said the sale
should be nullified. Chesley, however, pointed to
school board regulations which allow the superintendent to discard
"material” that is "out of date” or "inaccurate or in an
unusable condition.” School board chairman Matt Knickerbocker
agreed, calling the complaint "personal harassment by Matt Paulsen against
the superintendent.” "This is more of Matt’s (Paulsen) usual nonsense,”
according to Chesley, who said the complaint is
another attempt by Paulsen "to destroy my career.” Over the past few
years, Paulsen, an activist and head of the taxpayer watchdog group Bethel
Action Committee, has filed several complaints against Chesley
with state commissions, such as Elections Enforcement and Freedom of
Information. Some were dismissed. Some proved to be correct. "If Dr. Chesley chose to abide by the codes, he wouldn’t have
anything to worry about,” said Paulsen, adding the superintendent "has the
obligation to set a good moral example.”
*************************************************************Robert Young, ryoung0@snet.net
Wethersfield Taxpayers Group
Subject: State of
Connecticut Blue Ribbon Commission Report on Property Taxes and Smart Growth
Jan 5, 2004
In today's Sunday
Hartford Courant several articles had discussion on Smart Growth, Sprawl and
Property Tax Reform. Back in December 2003, I attended the Blue
Ribbon Committee meeting at the Hartford Library and below are my comments of
that meeting. The
next Blue Ribbon Committee is scheduled at the Middletown CT City Hall at 6:30 pm on Thursday evening for citizens input on
Smart Growth, Sprawl and Property Tax Reform. I am encouraging everybody to attend this
meeting for the sake of self education and voicing your concerns or comments to
the committee. The following are my personal notes of the Hartford
Meeting. Attended the BLUE RIBBON Committee Meeting, hosted by State
Senator John Fonfara and Representative Lou Wallace
both from the State Planning &Development
Committee. At this meeting Fonfara
and Wallace each gave less than a five minute recap on Smart Growth, Sprawl and
Property Tax Reform, then opened the floor to anyone wanting to speak. It
appeared numerous individuals already knew each other and were lobbying for the
need of Smart Growth State Wide.Several speakers were
affiliated with the Interfaith Council and supported a dual-tax structure as a
means to put pressure on vacant and blighted property owners to either shape up
or sell their property to someone who would put the property to a better
use. This dual-tax is designed to place a higher mill rate on the less utilized
property wners and a lesser millrate
on the better developed property owners. I questioned the speaker
on the proposal for a dual-tax, something I was totally unaware of and
mentioned that it sounds unamerican.
Fonfara spoke how he had pushed this dual-tax in the
assembly last year, but it died. He/they plan to bring
it up again this year and this meeting was to find citizens who would
support and speak in favor of the tax before committees at the legislative
building. When it was my turn to speak, I opened that I favor
the Adam Smith theory of free and open markets and I added especially for those
who may own property in a proposed Smart Growth neighborhood.
Governmental officials who determine what a private property owners land can be
utilized for has been going on in cities for years and just look at
New
London, CT, as an example. A targeted
Smart Growth area could come under governmental control resulting in the
property owners losing their private property under eminent domain or another
taking method, which appears to be the new wave of government doing business
and I would strongly oppose it. Furthermore, I went to say that the
real root of Smart Growth and Sprawl are the direct results of 1.)
uncontrollable crime such as we have in Hartford featuring murder and other violent acts
on the citizens, 2.) the inadequate city school system (Hartford) that does not teach children but are
nothing more than a warehouse system for students, and 3.) the
irresponsible local government (and I mentioned Hartford) that has no concept how to rein in
spending and reduce the fat in its ranks. I told the audience that Smart
Growth planners can build all the apartments they want and city people will
continue to flee to the suburbs. And for myself, I mentioned that
living in Wethersfield suburb of Hartford is not looking to good due to the
Hartford crime moving closer to us and a country home further out is very
appealing at this point.I told the panel (Fonfara and Wallace) that I enjoy coming out on a very cold
night to hear about Smart Growth and Sprawl and will go back home and reflect
on this evening of information and in the near future will attend another of
their meetings with more to say. Bob
Oct 20, 2003 Blue Ribbon Commission Report on Property
Taxes and Smart Growth (2003-R-0722) by Kevin McCarthy, Principal Analyst. SUMMARY of the report of the Blue Ribbon Commission on Property Tax
Burdens and Smart Growth Incentives. The commission addressed the issue of how
the state can have growth and be competitive with other states while
maintaining its identity. To address this and related issues, the commission
set up committees on the property tax and smart growth. The commission believes
these issues are linked, and that current laws lead to land use decisions that
are aimed at increasing grand lists. The Property Tax Committee sought to find
ways to reduce Connecticut's reliance on the property tax to fund
local public services. It noted that particular attention must be paid to
public education financing to achieve this objective, as it accounts for a
substantial part of local budgets. The Smart Growth Committee sought ways in
which growth management measures could address the negative impacts associated
with current land use practices in Connecticut. Each committee prepared a report on
their respective topics. The commission then reviewed, modified, and approved
the recommendations as its report to the legislature. The commission recommends
that the state increase its funding to local governments to reduce their
reliance on the property tax to fund public services. The commission also
recommends the establishment of additional regional and local revenue sources
for this purpose. The commission also recommends that the legislature adopt measures
to increase municipal fiscal accountability and ensure that property taxes are
reduced if new state revenues are provided to supplant property tax revenues.
With regard to smart growth, the commission recommends that the state (1)
generate information needed to make effective growth management decisions; (2)
develop meaningful state, regional, and municipal plans, containing specific
goals; (3) provide for stronger regional planning; and (4) provide education
for decision makers and youth on the need for and benefits of smart growth
measures. PROBLEM STATEMENTThe
report begins with a statement of the problems associated with current land use
and tax policies. It asserts that sprawl is a significant threat to the quality
of life in the state. In particular, it argues that sprawl is causing, among
other things: 1. the loss of farms, forests, and open space; 2. decline of
urban areas and resulting economic and racial segregation; 3. increased traffic
congestion; 4. unused infrastructure in metropolitan areas; 5. potentially
overtaxed water supplies and delivery systems; and 6. an inadequate supply of
affordable housing. The report argues that while existing planning laws and
programs contain elements that promote smart growth, e. g. , the state plan of
conservation and development, they have been inadequate to contain sprawl.
Another key issue is the state's reliance on property taxes, which the report
claims is a significant contributor to sprawl. It asserts that the reliance on
the property tax encourages municipalities to (1) limit residential
developments because they lead to increased public school enrollments and (2)
compete with each other for commercial and industrial projects. The report
notes that the property tax burden in Connecticut is the third highest in the nation and
tenth highest as a percentage of personal income. It asserts that the property
tax is not an accurate measure of wealth and does not reflect a taxpayer's
ability to pay. The report claims that land use policies are designed principally
to expand grand lists. This leads to continued outward growth of population,
and rising effective tax rates further sprawl. The report also asserts that the
reliance on the property tax increases the cost of doing business in the state.
PROPERTY TAX RECOMMENDATIONSThe commission recommends that the state take the
following measures to decrease reliance on the property tax: 1. fully fund a
modified Educational Cost Sharing (ECS) grant; 2. modify the ECS formula to
reflect differences in the costs of living within the state; 3. fund at least
50% of the municipal education requirement and the costs of special education
for public schools; 4. fully reimburse municipalities for property tax losses
under major state-mandated tax exemptions; and5. allow municipalities to
collect and retain or receive certain revenues other than property taxes,
including part of the sales and lodging taxes. The commission also recommends
that the legislature adopt measures to increase municipal fiscal accountability
and ensure that property taxes are reduced if new state revenues are provided
to supplant property tax revenues. The measures include a temporary spending
cap on municipalities to force a reduction in property taxes, more rigorous
financial reporting requirements, the creation of mechanisms for state
financial oversight if one or more financial "triggers" are exceeded,
and the provision of technical assistance by the state. The commission also
recommends that the state implement efficiency measures, particularly to reduce
the costs of public education. It recommended that councils of governments be
given new and expanded roles and that the state develop better data and tools
to improve the quality of its tax policy decisions. SMART GROWTH RECOMMENDATIONSThe
commission recommends that the state generate information needed to make
effective growth management decisions. These include (1) a geographical
information system that shows existing land uses, infrastructure, and natural
resources; (2) a statewide build-out analysis under current regulations; and
(3) a statewide evaluation of public costs associated with sprawl. Next, the
commission recommends that the state develop meaningful state, regional, and
municipal plans, containing specific goals. It argues for (1) integrating these
plans to promote consistency and having them incorporate smart growth
principles, (2) targeting growth on a regional basis; (3) coordinating
transportation, other infrastructure, and land use planning; (4) promoting
diversity in housing; and (5) providing financial incentives for smart growth.
The commission recommends that the state provide for stronger regional planning
by (1) strengthening regional planning organizations, (2) providing for
stronger regional plans of conservation and development, and (3) providing
funding and effective land use tools to ensure that regional plans are used.
Finally, the commission calls for more education for decision makers and youth
on the need for and benefits of smart growth measures. KM: ro