Tuesday, January 23, 2007

Sr Tax Relief Report

The Town Council's Budget and Ordinance Review Committees will meet next Monday, January 27 at 7pm in Town Hall to discuss the report & recommendations of the Elderly Tax Relief Study Committee. The two committees (Budget - Ecke, Esty, White; Ord Rev - Ecke, Esty, Orsini) will make a recommendation to the Council. If you're available, please attend the meeting. The text is as follows:

The Elderly Tax Relief Study Committee was formed by the Cheshire Town Council through the approval of Resolution 102606-1. The Town Council formed this Committee after over 1,760 residents of the Town of Cheshire supported a petition for a tax freeze for eligible residents.

The sole purpose of the study Committee is to review the current elderly tax relief ordinance and to make recommendations for changes, if any, to the existing ordinance along with making recommendations for the adoption of new or additional ordinance.

The Town of Cheshire has offered an elderly tax relief program since 1989. The current program consists of a tax credit program along with a separate tax deferment program. Applicants of the local credit and deferment programs may also be eligible to apply for the State of Connecticut Elderly Tax Circuit Breaker Program which is available to residents who are at least 70 years of age and that meet qualifying income requirements.

Applicants of the local tax credit program must be age sixty-five (65) or over, or under age 65 and be eligible for disability benefits under Social Security. The amount of the local tax credit is dependent upon their qualifying income of the applicant along with their period of residency in the Town. The qualifying income levels are adjusted annually to equal the qualifying income levels of the State circuit breaker program. The Town has also added two additional income levels, which are greater than the State qualifying levels for single and married applicants. The additional two income brackets have actually allowed an additional 125 applicants into the program. The local tax credits are normally adjusted annually but that is left to the discretion of the Town Council.

Qualifying residents may also choose to defer up to 75% of the payment of their real estate taxes until their home is sold or the death of the applicant. The applicant’s home is subject to a lien by the Town and interest accrues monthly at a rate of ½ percent per month on the balance of the taxes that are deferred.

The tax relief programs that are presently in place have become base for which this study group has developed its recommendations. The study group over a very short period of time has had to analyze the present programs and develop recommendations and form a consensus about those recommendations. This group has worked very hard to accomplish a difficult task in a short time frame and we are proud to present the following recommendations:

Local Tax Credit Program:

A.) Adjust the local qualifying income categories to conform to, the recently adopted State circuit breaker qualifying income revisions, along with proportionately increasing the local upper qualifying income categories.

B.) Increase the tax credits for all income categories for each of the next three fiscal years by 8% to 12%.

C.) Establish new residency criteria for new applicants to the program:

1.) 1 to 5 years 20% of the available credit.
2.) 6 to 10 years 40% of the available credit.
3.) 11 to 15 years 60% of the available credit.
4.) 16 to 20 years 80% of the available credit.
5.) 21 years or more 100% of the available credit.

Current participants of the program would be grandfathered in under the current residency criteria.

D.) Consider a bonus tax credit for residents of 25 years or more.

E.) Consider re-evaluating the upper qualifying income limits of the program.

Tax Deferment Program:

A.) Revise the current tax deferment program ordinance to allow qualifying residents the ability to defer any amount of the net real estate taxes that are owed after the application of all local and state tax credits, 75% of the total tax bill may be deferred. (Recommendation is to offer dual programs – tax credit and deferment.)

B.) Consider lowering the rate of interest charged.

C.) Retain the tax lien provisions of the present ordinance.

Tax Freeze Program:

A.) Adopt the State age, income and residency guidelines.

B.) Establish an asset limit:

1.) Asset limit of which does not include applicant’s principal residence.
2.) Assets to be included would be the values of all bank and credit union accounts, stocks, bonds, mutual funds, individual retirement accounts (including ROTH IRA accounts), 401(k) plan accounts, tax deferred annuities, second residences and any other asset category that the Town Council might consider.

C.) Consider a tax lien provision.

Medical Hardship Waiver:

A medical hardship waiver should be established that would help applicants who may be excluded, upon reapplication, from the tax relief programs due to an increase in their income which was the direct result of the applicant drawing upon their retirement savings to pay for medical expenses.

The waiver would be granted to an applicant whose qualifying income has increased to a level which now excludes them from the State tax circuit breaker program. If the applicant can sufficiently prove to the Town Assessor that the reason for the increase in their income was related to the payment of medical expenses, the additional income associated with this medical expense can be deducted from their qualifying income (e.g. liquidation of an IRA, sale of stock, etc.). An increase in an applicants income which results in moving up into a higher qualifying income category, would not be considered a hardship if the applicant was still receiving State tax circuit breaker benefits.

The medical hardship waiver would only apply to the local tax credit; due to the fact that the State does not presently have a medical hardship waiver.

Sunset Provision:

The Town Council should establish a sunset provision for the adopted tax relief programs, after a three year duration, so that a program re-evaluation can be conducted in conjunction with the upcoming property revaluation. The sunset provision that would be adopted should also address future property revaluations, so that the Town Council can have an opportunity evaluate future costs of the programs and allow for realignment of benefits.

Cap on Program Costs:

The Town Council should develop a formula for the establishment of an annual cap on the overall cost of the tax relief programs. The establishment of an annual cap on the cost of the programs is also fiscally responsible and is needed to protect the Town residents and businesses who are not involved with the tax relief programs.

Public Information Efforts:

During the period that this study group has met it has become apparent that there continues to exist confusion or a lack of awareness about the tax relief programs. The Town has made a concerted effort to inform the public, but we recommend that the Town expand its public information efforts.

Establish a Tax Relief Study Group During Future Revaluation Periods:

The general consensus of the members of the Study Group is that the Town Council should establish a Tax Relief Study Group during future revaluations to re-evaluate the program.

State Legislative Initiatives:

The study group feels strongly that the Town Council along with the Town Manager’s office should pursue the following legislative initiatives:

A.) Complete funding of the tax circuit breaker program by the State.
The Town presently receives reimbursement of approximately 89% from the State for benefits provided under the circuit breaker program, which equates to a shortfall of roughly $30,000. The State should fully fund its programs as the annual shortfall to the Town could be used to help provide additional benefits to residents who need them.

B.) Increase the tax circuit breaker credits
The State of Connecticut has not increased the tax credits offered under the circuit breaker program since 1991. An increase in the credits is needed so that the State will begin to share more of the burden in providing property tax relief to the residents of Connecticut.

C.) Establish a medical hardship waiver
The State of Connecticut presently does not offer any type of medical hardship waiver in conjunction with the circuit breaker program, we feel that this waiver is not only needed at the local level but also at the state level. Applicants that qualify for circuit breaker benefits are at low income levels, and should not be penalized when a medical emergency occurs.

D.) 50/50 Sharing in the cost of the tax freeze program
The State of Connecticut with the passage of the recent tax freeze legislation has saddled the municipalities of the state with an unfunded program which will be funded by the residents and businesses who do not qualify for benefits under the legislation. We feel that it is the obligation of the State to initially reimburse municipalities at least fifty percent of the tax revenue lost related to a tax freeze, this reimbursement rate should increase over time until full funding is achieved.

Property Tax Reform Proposal developed by State Representative Timothy O’Brien:

State Representative Timothy O’Brien of New Britain has developed a property tax reform proposal which we feel the Town Council should review and consider supporting. The proposal is available on Representative O’Brien’s website.

Items Requiring Further Research:

A.) Re-evaluate possible inequities that may exist in qualifying income categories and tax credit benefits.

B.) Re-evaluate the definition of “Adjusted Gross Income” in determining an applicant’s income category.

C.) Consider developing a catastrophic hardship waiver.

And a special thanks to the members of the committee: Beth Tannenbaum, Rebecca Simpson, Dave Pelletier, Derf Kleist, Ed Hines, Wayne Winters and Paul Bowman.

Comments? I don't have time to comment on this right now... gotta get to bed and still want to do something on tonight's lifestyle center meeting.

Tim White
Town Council, Budget Committee

25 comments:

Anonymous said...

The entire process of the senior Tax relief Study Group missed a wonderful opportunity to make things better. From the inception of choosing the members to the report filed to the Town Council it was a process driven by the Town Manager and only driven by what it will cost the Town. The "findings" wre based on what the Town Manager instructed the conclusion to be. Do not let the program cost more than $500,000. Make no mistake, that is how it was done. So for all of you Council members who think this is a good idea, do us a favor and do not run for re-election. That will save the embarassment of getting defeated.

Anonymous said...

You can split that 500k up among the 35-45 year olds....can you do a direct deposit? I'll take it.

Anonymous said...

Duh, and former Town Councilor Paul Bowman.

Anonymous said...

It's not surprising that the whole process was driven by the town manager.
Tim, can you give an example of what a new tax credit would be for a typical senior verses what their credit was before. I'm just trying to get an idea of what the increase credit (on average) would be.
I hope also that if the BOE gets their 3 million and whatever amount the town side of the budget goes up, that the additional tax increase just doesn't become a "wash" against the elderly's new tax credit.

Anonymous said...

Senior will never be happy until they have to pay no taxes. Do us all a favor, leave town we'll deal with more students. Your ideas payed well in Southington and you're nuts if you think the results would be different in Cheshire.

No matter what is done it is never enough. If it's $500K it should be a $1m, if it's $1m it should have been $2m. Stop you are making fools of yourselfs.

Anonymous said...

the seniors have done much to hurt themselves this time around-they came across as greedy and selfish and not in keeping with the community spirit. they may have a very difficult time with the $$$ but when offered some additional help them seemed ungrateful

Anonymous said...

The real issue many of the Seniors have is the ability to pay their tax bill. The median value of their home is $136,000 and their tax bill is $3660 annually. The income ranges of the current program are from ) to $41,000 dollars. The lower your income the higher the tax credit you
get.

The problem seniors have is the inability to increase their income annually. Granted they get Social Security increases but a 3% increase on $13,100 is not much. If a senior cannot afford to pay their taxes today with the credit, how are they expected to pay a higher amount going forward even with a higher credit. As tax rates increase the credits increase, but the only matter is available dollars to pay the taxes. Cutting spending is one way to pay for the tax program. If the Town would stop paying overtime for the Public Works guys on Saturday to build sidewalks and stone walls, that would pay for the program. The other taxpayers do not have to pay for the senior tax relief, spending cuts will pay for it.

Anonymous said...

And if we had an outside contrator do the work it would cost more. Money saved

Anonymous said...

anon 8:37 I think you need an English class - maybe you should sign up for an adult ed class or try a summer school class.
I do know what you mean about not being enough. ie - If it's 3 million more that they want, they'll want another 3 million next year. The year after that it will be another 3 or 4 million - it goes on and on. They want more and more...the boe that is.
And your move out of town remark makes me think you must be that women on the council who once said the exact same thing!

Anonymous said...

Education costs money, it always has. Of course the Seniors had their children's education paid for by others without the help of relief. Now with relief, it is too much for them. Cheshire Seniors with more home and boats that want a free property tax ride are just greedy.

I paid my property taxes for years with no children in the schools and now that mine are there they don't want to pay, is that fair? I paid for theirs and now they don't want to.

Let the voters decide we will see how that goes, ask your friends to our north.

Anonymous said...

anon 2:25 What you say makes a lot of sense. Anon 5:04 should reread your comments instead of coming out with the ridiculous remark that seniors are greedy and that they don't want to pay for his kids education. It does all relate to their ability to pay and they should be given reasonable credits or even a tax freeze (meaning their current taxes would not increase). Part of what they pay in taxes would still be going for your kids education..yours and many other kids. If the town and education budgets reduced some of their expenses, it could cover the credits (or maybe some of the town surplus could cover it).
I'm not a senior but have been paying taxes for 30 years to this town. My kids are out of school, so I've contributed to their education through my taxes for 12 years and for the remaining 18 years I've been contributing to everyone elses kids education. I've got another 15 years to go before I'm 65 so I'll be contributing to your kids and many others educations. I hope I'll be eligible for a decent credit after 45 years of paying taxes to the town. And you're going to say I'm greedy? Or the seniors now are greedy? Come on, get real. Come back to the blog when you've paid taxes for 40 years or more to this town and let me know who's greedy.

Oh, and btw...education doesn't necessarily have to cost more each year...especially this year when enrollment has dropped by 57. Obviously you haven't thoroughly reviewed their budget nor have you attended all the budget meetings.

Anonymous said...

Education always cost more do to contractual increases. Even with less students if you can't layoff a teachers since the decrease is not all in one grade. Teachers get a 4.5% increase education costs more. The teacher increases outpace inflation.

Anonymous said...

find me one school system in the sate that is going to actually reduce the amount spent on education this year
Oh thats right it was tried in cheshire that 0 growth budget year by our good friends and look how much that changed things
Another bad idea from the red hot crowd

Anonymous said...

Once again we have to mix up the senior tax relief with the education spending like we can't have a discussion of one without the other-seems like the seniors want not just a tax break but to make sure that young families don't get adaquate funding

Anonymous said...

Seniors in Cheshire have proven that they don't care about school funding. They would push through 0 increases every year. They just just want a freeze not based on income but just age, no matter what their income. It would be a shifting of taxes from the seniors to the younger families. Fair or not I am not sure.

Anonymous said...

I think the senior cause has made some good points above...I'm 40..I pay taxes and I guess I wouldnt mind paying some more if it was going to help someone who really needs help.....you dont want to have to move in your old age due to taxes do you???have a heart some of you guys....we do need the town to assure that only the needy get it though

Anonymous said...

anon 9:42 & 11:24 You are a superintendent's dream come true!
You'd go along with anything he told you!
Contractual agreements will always add to the budget, but w/decreasing enrollment there's no need to add 7.5 new teachers and another administrator. Even some board members don't agree w/the superintendent.
If you don't know the detail of the budget you shouldn't even comment on it because you're just showing your ignorance.

Anonymous said...

Abon 4:03 since you are such a close budget watcher I am sure you are aware that 7.5 positions will not be added becasue the BOE and Council will reduce the request. But you forgot to mention the $2m+ increase for the existing teachers or do we just lay off teachers until the budget increase is 0?

Anonymous said...

anon 3:11 I agree the seniors have some good points. Some of these posters are pretty brutal with their comments about the seniors. It's obviously all about them and their wants. They don't care about any senior that may be needy, because they are the ones that are really being greedy!

Anonymous said...

There are programs in place for those seniors that are needy and most of them do take part in those programs.

Anonymous said...

Look at the BOE budget. The majority of the increase is for contracted teachers salaries and medical benefits. The 7.5 teachers increase could not be justified by the Principals or anyone else from the school system. When confronted they provided no answer.

Have no problem with giving the school system money for instructional supplies, textbooks, curriculum materials, but 1 million increase for misstated medical benefits increase is just plain wrong. Anyone who thinks that medical benefits has a direct impact ontheir students learning experience is also incorrect.

What about the poeple who stand up and support the Supt's request, then after the meeting actually admit they have never read the budget. Blind ignorance, how sad.

Anonymous said...

Tim, do you think the councilors on the right side of the table will go along with a recommendation for a decent tax credit or freeze for the elderly? If they reduce the recommendation, they'll surely lose this fall.

Tim White said...

8:17... really don't know about this one yet. First Council meeting is tomorrow night @ 7:30pm in town hall. I hope you attend.

Anonymous said...

You all need a history lesson on this. The Senior program in town was never a republican issue. When the Dems. wanted to increase the funding they fought it, saying it was a give away that we could not afford. The program had two major funding increases both while the Dems controlled the council and the Rep. questioned if it the right thing to do. Now out of power and needing votes to get it back, it is their issue. The question should be if the Rep. will vote for it not the Dems they have always supported it.

Anonymous said...

8:42 I do recall during the last election that one women dem ran with the promise of much larger elderly tax credits, yet after the budget cycle they never materialized. I suppose it did help her get votes with promises like that. And we all know, as other posts here indicate, that this latest review of the credits is driven by the town manager and the result is already predetermined.