All In The Family At Tax Appeals Board

One week after allegations of nepotism at the Board of Assessment Appeals were revealed, aldermen revealed what they called yet another suspicious connection among the board’s members and its clerical staff.

In addition to one board member being a tenant to the other, and a relative being hired as a clerk, the board’s two support staff were going home together to the same apartment on Barnes Avenue.

That information came to light at Tuesday night’s meeting of the Board of Aldermen’s Tax Abatement Committee.

“What’s really embarrassing about that [the possible nepotism] is everyone in the assessor’s office knew about it,” remarked West Rock Alderman Darnell Goldson.

The aldermanic committee has been engaged in an ongoing inquiry into allegations of impropriety at the mayorally appointed Board of Assessment Appeals, the body charged with helping taxpayers when they believe they’ve been overcharged in their property taxes.

The appeals board has been accused of failing to meet in public, not meeting some of the most basic thresholds of competence, and otherwise not carrying out its legal duties. Taxpayers have reported a variety of troubling problems in dealing with the appeals board. In some cases taxpayers said they were told their appeals were granted, only to receive subsequent letters from the tax office saying the opposite.

Taxpayers have also complained of wrongdoings at the assessor’s office, including rude conduct and arbitrary property valuation increases of thousands of dollars, and increases in the value of used cars.

Tuesday’s was the latest in a series of hearings that have turned the city’s eyes to this once obscure aldermanic committee, as it investigates tax shenanigans. (Click here to read Betsy Yagla’s New Haven Advocate story that first reported the appeals board improprieties.)

After failing for weeks to appear before the Tax Abatement Committee to answer to complaints, assessment appeals board Chair Michael Newton finally came before the board — under subpoena — at a hearing last Tuesday. He there admitted that he was a landlord to co-member Jacqueline Harris, who defied a subpoena with her absence at the hearing. Newton also admitted that Harris and he had hired Harris’ son, Jame Harris III to work as clerical staff for the board.

On Tuesday night, the ​“incestuous” — in the words of Alderman Goldson (pictured) — nature of the appeals board was further revealed in an announcement that Harris and his fellow appeals board clerk, Maritzea Burrell, were living together in Unit F of 182 Barnes Ave. during the time they worked for the appeal board. That’s according to the city’s official pay documents. See them here.

Goldson said that his Facebook research further found that both Jacqueline and James Harris have many Burrells listed as their Facebook friends. That led him to speculate that James and Maritzea may be married or in a relationship. Goldson said last week that Facebook had indicated that Harris III was not even in Connecticut when he was supposedly collecting pay from for the appeals board.

The fact that James Harris III and Maritzea Burrell shared an address and may have had a relationship raises even more questions of nepotism in the Board of Assessment Appeals than previous revelations. It’s especially troubling that aldermen have not been able to get any information about the work of the appeals board, despite all the clerical hours that Harris III and Burrell were paid for, Darnell said. Aldermen have been unable to obtain a list from the board showing how many appeals were heard last year and what the outcomes were.

Official pay documents show that Harris III received $5,480 in fiscal year 09 – 10, which ended June 30. Burrell received $3,430 in the same period.

According to the ​“Code of Conduct Policies” for city employees, put out by the Department of Human Resources:

“Relatives of City of New Haven employees are eligible for employment at the City. However, to insure that the professional integrity of the City is maintained, the employment of relatives should NOT:

1. Create a direct supervisory relationship between relatives;
2. Allow one relative to influence job assignments, promotional opportunities, compensation, discipline, and performance review of another relative;
3. Allow one relative to approve compensation of another relative.

Appointing authorities are advised to seek opinion from Ethic Commission in instances where they are approving employment of a relative.”

See the whole page here.

At last week’s meeting, Newton said that he and Jacqueline Harris signed off on timecards for clerical staff, including Harris III.

3.5 Hours

At the end of the lengthy committee meeting, Chair Alderman Michael Smart announced the beginning of a collection of recommendations for reform of the tax assessor’s office and assessment appeals board processes. Specific reforms have not yet taken shape, but they could include getting rid of tax assessor Bill O’Brien, increasing the size of the appeals board and exerting more aldermanic control over it, and clarifying the assessment and appeals processes for taxpayers. (See discussion of that starting at 9:30 p.m. in the live-blog below.)

Aldermen also lashed out at colleagues who Monday put forward a proposal to review the workings of the Tax Abatement Committee. Allegations of wrongdoing at the assessor’s office and at the Board of Assessment Appeals should be investigated, not the Tax Abatement Committee, said Goldson. (See 9:30 p.m., below.)

The four-hour meeting began with public testimony about new problems with seemingly arbitrary assessment increases and other tax problems. One couple spoke about a threefold increase in their property taxes for a house that no even complete. (6:43 p.m.)

Another taxpayer complained that his daughter was being charged taxes on two vehicles that were scrapped last year. (6:14 p.m.) A discussion of proof led Aldermen Goldson to question why an affidavit is acceptable when assessor O’Brien needs to prove he lives in New Haven, but not when a taxpayer needs to prove he got rid of a car. (6:30 p.m.)

Aldermen handled several appeals from elderly citizens, some of whom were quite confused about the process of tax abatement. (7:27 p.m., for example.) That led to a discussion of how to make the process clearer. (8:42 p.m.)

While Aldermen approved most requests for abatement, they did not look favorably on the application of a man who wanted forgiveness for 15 years of sliver lot taxes, plus a deal to get a new sliver lot. (8:08 p.m.) That item split the committee and prompted the evening’s only non-unanimous voting. (9:00 p.m.)

Live Blog

Live blogging from the meeting commences below. Text in quotations is directly quoted. All the rest is paraphrasing. Observations and reportorial comments are in brackets, mostly. Names are spelled correctly or best-guess phonetically.

6:10 p.m.: Chair Smart is calling the meeting to order by reading the agenda. He’s joined by Aldermen Arlene DePino, Gerald Antunes, Darnell Goldson, Claudette Robinson Thorpe, and Charles Blango. There are a little over a dozen onlookers in the gallery. This meeting is less well-attended than previous meetings, maybe because the committee won’t be hearing subpoenaed testimony.

6:14: Smart says we’ll start with public testimony. First up is Anthony Vitolo (pictured). He says he’s here on behalf of his daugher. He tells the story: Last week I went to pay his daughter’s car tax. There were two vehicles my daughter turned the plates and the titles into the state in March 17 2009. I showed the tax assessor receipts from the turn-in. The tax assessor said they were still accruing interest. He said he could save me $100, but needed to know where the vehicles are now.

DePino: Did you pay taxes last year?

Vitolo: We payed everything last year. O’Brien [the tax assessor] came out and said he needs to know where the vehicles are. He said the tax bill would go away at the end of the year.

Blango: Why is he accumulating interest if he’s turned the tags in and no longer owns the car?

Aldermanic Staff: He’s responsible for the taxes from last year. You’re not paying taxes ahead, you’re paying taxes behind.

Blango asks for the dates. Smart: He turned in his plates in March 2009. They made him pay.

Aldermanic Staff: They are incorrect.

Roger Palmer, representing the assessor’s office is called up. He’s the assistant assessor. He says he lives in Middletown.

Smart: Mr. Vitolo went down to the pay the bill with proof.

Palmer: By state law we need to tax the vehicle, not the registration. This tells us only that the registration was cancelled. ​“We need proof as to what happened to the car.”

Smart: He was told to get this receipt. Why?

Palmer: We require the plate return receipt. Then we need proof of who the vehicle was disposed of.

Vitolo: We told him they were junked. … Why doesn’t it matter when the tax year is over?

Palmer: An affidavit is not acceptable proof.

Goldson: I think that the gentlemen here just asked a good question. What happens at the end of the year.

Palmer: We get a list of registered vehicles in New Haven from DMV. [Palmer says he can’t accept the receipt as proof now, but he can in October.]

DePino: Did you pay?

Vitolo: I paid cash.

Blango: ​“I’m getting a whole new education myself.” I want to be clear. Even if he produced the two documents that he no longer owns the car, it will not be accepted?

Palmer: No. If he submits a junk receipt we can do a pro-ration and a refund can be given.

Blango: So he needs to go to the junkyard and get a receipt.

Goldson: Where do you get the authority to ask for what forms?

Palmer: General statutes.

6:30: Goldson: Would an affidavit be acceptable?

Palmer: Corp counsel would have to make a judgment. But generally we don’t do that, because in the past people have signed affidavits and then re-registered the vehicle. We need authoritative documentation.

Goldson: But there may be cases where that doesn’t exist. Sales on Craigslist, for example. Shouldn’t we trust the taxpayers until they’re proven to be liars?

Palmer: We hold all taxpayers to the same standard of proof.

Goldson: The mayor accepted Bill O’Brien’s affidavit of where he lives. ​“If it’s good enough for the assessor why is it not good enough for the taxpayers?”

Palmer: There is the Board of Assessment Appeals, which holds a meeting in September. [Some snickers in the room.]

Goldson: The assessor used that exact same document to get out of paying taxes in New Haven. I would encourage your office to reconsider that policy.

DePino: Mr. Vitolo, when you went into the office, was this information communicated to you? ​“It almost sounds like you got a flip answer.”

Vitolo: O’Brien appeared, looked at what I had, said he could give a rebate, but ​“I gotta know where those cars are.”

DePino: That’s different than ​“We need a receipt.” … This information should be posted where people can see it.

Palmer: ​“Alderwoman, your concerns have always been duly noted.” We do have written guidelines that are always handed out.

Smart: Were you handed that sheet?

Vitolo: No.

Smart: He had to go to the DMV and pay $20 apiece for sheets proving the car registration had been canceled.

Vitolo: I don’t know what happens if you get rid of a car in the middle of a tax cycle. ​“Kiss the money goodbye? Is that it?”

6:39: Antunes asks Palmer for the state statutes covering this situation. He promises to get them

6:40: Vitolo is done. Andy Consiglio of North Haven is next up. He says he owns a lot of property in New Haven. He says: When tax bills are sent out, there should be more information about the proof needed when you get rid of a car. It’s not just canceling your registration. You need a receipt from the junkyard. The general public doesn’t know that.

6:43: Antonio Bell (at center in photo) of Arch Street takes a seat. In a Carribean accents he says: I’m hear about property tax. I bought my house from City of New Haven in 2005. It was abandoned and I’ve been fixing it. I was paying $3,000 a year in taxes. This year they moved it up to $9,000.

Katina Bell (at right) says: ​“We was in shock. The house we’re working on is incomplete. You can’t live in it.” There’s no kitchen no bathroom. The neighbor’s taxes didn’t change. ​“We’re completely confused.” We went to the assessor’s office. Someone came out to look. They said we had a garage. There’s no garage. They said we had an enclosed porch and shingles. ​“None of this stuff is matching.” We spoke to a man named Frank from LCI, which sold the property. He refused to change things. We sent in an appeal in early August and haven’t heard anything. ​“We don’t know what to do.” Antinio bought the house on the condition he would fix it up and sell it as low income housing. He’s paying for everything. … How long have we been paying for stuff we don’t have. I was told it doesn’t matter that they said we have shingles and an enclosed porch.

Blango calls up Palmer (at left in photo above).

Blango (pictured): Are you familiar with this statement that the house was 3,000 and has ​“jumped up to 9,000.” [Blango asks to look at pictures presented by the Bells.]

Blango: My question is that you have a $3,000 house to a $6,000 house, how do they make this assessment with shingles and a garage?

Palmer: I’m not familiar with the specifics on this property. When properties are inspected we look to see what has changed. We try to look inside and out. We try to arrange an appointment to look inside. Was your mailing address correct with the assessor’s office?

Antonio: Yes.

Goldson: It looks to me if you look at the picture on the website that you used to assess it, that there’s an enclosed porch there. Was there an enclosed porch when you bought it?

Katina: Yes. We tore it down, with permits. The building inspector looked at it.

Goldson: Has the assessor been to the house since?

Katina: No.

Smart: Can we set up an appointment to inspect?

Palmer: Yes. We’d love to.

Katina: Cliff [Atkinson?] was there in July! … I opened it up for him to look. He marked it all down.

Goldson: How is it possible that an inspector would come out in July. There’s no enclosed porch. Then the report says there’s a porch.

Palmer: We base it on what we know as of Oct. 1, 2009.

Goldson: If an inspector comes out in July, what report has precedence, his or the one from October of the previous year.

Palmer: When we go out in July we apply that to the next grand list year: October 1 2010.

Goldson: Can you retroactively update that list?

Palmer: If it’s a clerical error.

Smart: So you’re going to follow up with him?

Palmer: Yes.

7 p.m. Giancarlo Accettullo steps up to sit down. He says he has a daughter who works full and part time and is behind on her car taxes. She’s afraid her car will be towed. Why can’t the city make arrangements with people who are behind on their car taxes to pay monthly?

7:03 p.m. Blango calls Maureen Villani, tax collector, to come up. She does. Blango asks if car tax monthly payment arrangements can be made.

Villani: Currently the bills are sent out once a year. Taxpayers do have them at least 20 days prior to July due date. They do not become delinquent until August. They could make partial payments up until that time. ​“There is basically a 75 – 90 day period before the city does go out and make whatever collection efforts need be.”

Goldson: Do you have the authority to make payment arrangements with taxpayers on automobiles?

Villani: No.

Goldson: Haven’t you done that before with people who’ve come before us? Is my memory wrong? Has that happened?

Villani: It was based on the committee’s decision. It was ultimately approved by the Board of Aldermen.

Goldson: Under the law, can you make arrangements without BOA approval?

Villani: Under state statute, yes.

Goldson: So this policy you’re referring to, not to do that, is this a written policy somewhere?

Villani: I’m not sure.

7:09 p.m. Giancarlo Accettullo is back. ​“If I may” we just heard from Ms Villani, the first time my daughter called me it was mid-August, I checked online to see if her car was to be towed. It wasn’t on the towing list until the second week of September. That only gave her 40 or 45 days.

7:11 p.m. Public portion of meeting is closed. Moving on to the main agenda. First item: Edna Mae Caldwell. [Aldermen are struggling with some terribly staticky mics.]

Robinson-Thorpe sits to speak for Caldwell, a constituent of hers. [Her sister? I think Smart said that.] She says: I went to request a veteran’s benefit in 2002, it was never done. So I’m requesting the benefit from 2002 to 2010.

Aldermanic Staff: In 2002 the assessor’s office told them to file with the City Clerk. That never happened. Last year they came up with a new form, a re-enlistment form, showing that you are eligible for the veteran’s benefit. But it was too late for this year. That’s when she came before the committee.

Goldson: So each year since 2002 Ms. Caldwell has asked for this?

Thorpe: 2002 she came we thought she was getting the benefit. Then she had a stroke, we took over her affairs in 2009. We realized the form had never been accepted. Each time she brought in the right form. I don’t believe the city knows which is the correct form.

Aldermanic Staff: The required from is DD2-14. This year was Navy form 5 – 16, I believe. It showed she served in Vietnam.

Goldson: Why do you need to bring new forms every year.

Staff: It was a mix-up between clerk and assessor’s office.

Goldson: Why are we still dealing with this?

Staff: We didn’t have the original DD2-14. Now we have it.

Thorpe: ​“I just would like to resolve this issue and put it to bed.”

Smart: Thank you for coming.

7:20: Blango sits to testify for Louise Jennett. 21 Hallock Street is HIS sister’s house. She had been out of work for three years. She was a single mother raising two grandkids because her son is incarcerated. Tax bills accumulated.

Smart: Thank you, sir.

Goldson: They meet income requirements?

Blango and Smart: Yes.

7:22: Jumping to Item 6: Francis F. McWeeney sits with her daughter Tracy. Alderman Marcus Paca has joined the committee.

McWeeney says: I live at 342 Grand Avenue.

Tracy: She’s 72. She lives with my handicapped brother. She gets disability but she can’t afford taxes. ​“She just can’t do it.”

Staff: She is getting both senior tax breaks.

Tracy: She’s never worked before and she takes care of my brother.

Goldson: Her income is $19,260?

Staff: Yes a combination of her and her son’s social security.

Goldson: What is the total annual taxes on the home.

Staff: With two breaks: $4,356.08.

Goldson: 25 percent of her income. With her current monthly expenses, would she be a candidate for tax forgiveness?

Smart: We can save that conversation for deliberation.

Staff: There is no policy for forgiveness of residential income taxes.

7:27: Smart calls the next item, number 7. Carolyn Chambers appears. She lives at 161 County St.

Chambers: I have high blood pressure, hypertension. [She doesn’t want to speak into the mic. Back and forth about that.] Last year I was in the hospital 7 times. I was having TIAs, which caused me short term memory loss. I don’t remember asking for an abatement.

Smart: Do you need one?

Chambers: I could use one. [Laughter.] … My grandson was discovered to have an abnormal growth in his brain last year. He had to have chemo. He’s been in intensive care for three months. I’m still having TIAs and I constantly pass out and I don’t know my relatives. ​“But I would like to pay my taxes.” An abatement would help me. I’m applying for a part-time job.

Smart: Do you understand what an abatement is?

Chambers: He said I could pay it back, not all at once.

Smart: It would go on a lien, it would be 6 percent as opposed to 18 percent. It would be liened for 2007, 08 and 09.

Goldson: It looks like she isn’t getting the low-income or elderly tax break. Why?

Staff: You have to be over 70. If you’re on disability you can request it. The deadline has already passed this year.

Smart: Can we hook her up with elderly services?

Staff: Yes.

Thorpe: What end of County do you live on?

Chambers: Across from the park?

Thorpe: Do you know your alderperson? It’s Katrina Jones.

Blango: Is anyone helping you out.

Chambers: My daughter. The house needs work. I’ve been talking with electric and gas companies. ​“I didn’t want to pay the gas all winter and a pipe busted.”

Smart: ​“We need to make sure she really gets in touch with elderly services.”

Staff: ​“I will notify them tomorrow. They can get LCI involved.”

Blango: ​“We just want to make sure that you get taken care of.”

7:39: Paca leaves the meeting.

Joseph Reeny, attorney for Eugene Johnson sits. He says: Johnson bought a house on Bassett street some years ago under a land disposition agreement. It’s so old that it’s not able to be brought to code. He lives in one half with another man, James Belcher, but they are not able to get the other side fixed. Their incomes combined are not enough to afford the taxes. Johnson has had a heart attack and has been in the hospital for six weeks. Belcher was also in the hospital.

[Thorpe has left the meeting. We’re down to Smart, Blango, DePino, Goldson (not officially a member of the committee) and Antunes (him neither)]

Reeny: They’re both on total disability. The deferral that you granted last year helped so much. They were able to get through, until they both got sick. Johnson’s health had improved, his ​“drinking” had improved. ​“It really improved his quality of life.” … He did get grants to help finish the house. He had three small amounts. LCI has helped.

Blango: I’m pleased that LCI has an energy assistance program to deal with the windows and the furnace.

Reeny: ​“The windows are bad, that I do know.”

[Attorney Mike Jefferson, who has been in the gallery, leaves after passing a packet of documents to the chair, who recognizes his departure.]

7:49: Goldson: I see that the house is assessed at $63,000. Has he filed an appeal of that assessment, since one side of the house is essentially condemned.

Reeny: I believe they’re only taxing it as a one family house.

7:52: Aldora Nelson of Daisy Street sits: ​“I’m here to get an abatement, to pay off all my debts.”

Blango: You fell on hard times?

Nelson: Yes, very hard. My taxes went up to $3,000 in July and $3,000 in January.

Nelson is dismissed.

7:54: Eunice W. Johnson, of 59 Judwin Ave. comes up. She says she doesn’t know why she’s here.

Goldson: This is back here to settle the question of tax abatement versus tax forgiveness, so that we could have that discussion. I have question for staff: What is the income level to get a tax abatement?

Staff: There is no income level. It’s a ratio of income to expenses.

Goldson: The Johnson’s don’t have the senior freeze or the low income break.

Staff: I spoke to Ms. Johnson about them. It was after the May 15 deadline.

Johnson: You see how I’m walking [with difficulty]. I’m my husband’s caretaker 24 hours a day, seven days a week. My husband’s pension is $206 a month, I’m embarrassed to say.

7:59: Next up: Lucius and Willie Mae Gatison, another elderly couple, like the previous several applicants. Willie Mae says: ​“The taxes are driving us crazy. … I just hope we get some help.”

… [Discussion of deadlines for applying for tax mitigation programs.] …

Willie Mae says she and her husband are thinking of selling the house, the taxes are so high.

8:08: Susan Renkun is up. Her father, Giancarlo Accettullo (pictured), steps up again. He says: Renkin is a teacher in Wallingford having student-teacher meetings tonight. This is a case of a sliver lot owned by the city that was given to us. We asked the city to abandon it because we bought a corner lot next to it 22 years ago. My wife got a construction mortgage. We built the house. Come to find out, this last January, we use the computer to check cars liabilities, I found out that they piece of land that the city abandoned to us, they set up a different tax account for that. We positioned the house to use the sliver lot. All of a sudden we’re confronted with a bill of some $4,000. Our position is, you gave us the piece of land at 95 Carrol St. and then the permits to build on it. We bought it in 1987 and increased the property taxes on it to $8200 dollars are year. ​“Ladies and gentlemen, $8200 a year.. … We’re talking about getting out of New Haven.” We’re still paying the mortgage.

Staff: I’ve done research in the land records. The property was sold to Renkuns in 1987 for $1. It was quit claimed to Giancarlo’s wife, who was taking out the mortgage. They need to show that they’re consolidating. That is not the city’s responsibility. I believe the mortgage is for both pieces of property. For whatever reason, the bank never paid taxes on the sliver lot. The residents thought they were paying the taxes because they were paying the mortgage. Overdue taxes do not include any amount over 15 years.

Blango: Do we have any documentation that this is for the house and the sliver lot and they were not merged?

Staff: There are currently two pieces of property taxed separately. They were never merged. The sliver lot has gone from $47 to $138 a year for the tax on that piece of property.

Maureen Villani sits down.

Goldson: I think I understand the issue. He bought the sliver lot for a dollar. He thought the city had combined the properties. Is he asking us to forgive the interest or the balance?

Accettullo: The balance.

Goldson: The city’s only charging you for 15 years of taxes. You haven’t paid any taxes on the sliver lot for 22 years.

Accettullo: But why don’t I pay 50 or 75 dollars a year, not $4,000.

Goldson: You’ve got 22 years of taxes, the city’s only asking you to pay 15 years. I can’t understand you saying you don’t owe this money. Can you explain that to me?

Accettullo: We bought a corner lot, the taxes are now up to $82000. If we know we had to pay another $50 a year, we would have paid it.

Goldson: Do you think it would be reasonable for us to forgive the interest and have you pay the principal?

Accettullo: We asked for the full frontage. They gave us half of it for a dollar, because the neighbors want the other half. The reasonable thing to do is wipe the slate clean, give me the other half, and negotiate a new tax, in light of the fact that we already pay $8200 a year. [Goldson laughs, incredulously.]

Goldson: We all pay too much taxes in this city.

DePino: Why would he get two tax bills?

Villani: That must have been the address that was given [the bank’s]. … I can’t answer that.

Smart: How far can we go back to collect?

Villani: 15 years is the state statute.

Blango says … that he can’t understand why this happened, either.

Smart: What can we do to help him?

Villani: If the committee was to waive the interest, I would sit down and work out a payment plan. The base tax would be $6,000.

Accettullo recounts the story of the winter night by the fire when he discovered on the computer that he owed this tax. He says again he hopes to negotiate a deal given that he pays $8200 a year in taxes.

Smart: What’s realistic?

Accettullo: Again, ​“wipe the slate clean” and sell or give me another sliver lot, I’ll then be paying more taxes.

…[Discussion of building permit history]…

Smart tries one last time to make sure he understands just what Accettullo is asking for. Yes, it’s just as bold as it seems: Wipe the slate clean and give him another sliver lot.

8:32: Chris Randall, executive director of the new Haven Land Trust: We’re asking forgiveness for three lots on Quinnipiac Avenue.

Goldson: Is Mr. Randall asking us to forgive the $1200 in back taxes.

Randall: Correct we are a very small non-profit. It’s more than we can pay. … We filed for tax-exemption.

… [Discussion of future Land Trust requests.] …

8:42: The public portion of the meeting is closed. Deliberations begin.

-Item One, Edna Mae Caldwell’s veteran’s benefit problem: Aldermen discuss briefly, pass unanimously. A refund of $1,007 is granted.

-Item Two, Louise Jennett, Blango’s sister: Passes unanimously with no discussion. Blango abstains.

-Item Three, Fielding and Eunice Johnson:

Goldson: I wasn’t aware of the income level of the applicants previously. We should have a discussion about tax abatement vs. tax forgiveness. We should do that when you are looking at the committee rules. I would support this as an abatement, not a forgiveness.

… [Discussion of what helpful forms should be given to elderly applicants to assist them in knowing what they need to do.] …

Goldson: Some of these applicants tonight were clearly confused. We need to do more to help them. ​“There’s no reason why a person should come here by the second or third year and still not make the cutoff” to apply for mitigation by the deadline.

Blango speaks about the need to care for the elderly: We’ll all be old one day.

Goldson: I would like to have a discussion that Alderman Blango leads and bring the administration in and say how can we address this? ​“There shouldn’t be an elderly woman on County Street that doesn’t have running water and is still paying taxes.”

Staff: When I spoke to Chambers two months ago, she did not have this problem. She was not confused.

Goldson: ​“What this is about is those folks that don’t even get to this table” because they don’t understand the process.

9:00: Goldson: ​“Our job is not just to collect her taxes, our job is to make sure she has running water in her house.”

Blango: We need a ​“tracking mechanism” to follow letters that went out in Newhallville, Westville, etc. To see how we can better this process. This has nothing to do with staff. This has to do with how do we ​“prevent folks from getting three years behind.”

Goldson: We shouldn’t be spending a whole committee meeting looking at the committee rules. We should look at this process.

DePino: I have a list of my constituents with their birth dates. When they become eligible, I call them up.

Goldson: ​“I would love to be able to do that, but I don’t get paid enough. I have to work.”

[We’re still on Item 3. It passes unanimously.]

-Item 4: passes unanimously, no discussion.

-Item 5: passes unanimously, no discussion.

-Item 6: passes unanimously, no discussion.

-Item 7:

Blango: Elderly services needs to help this woman with a busted pipe.

Staff: I’ll take care of it.

Item passes unanimously.

-Item 8: passed over, the applicant didn’t show.

-Item 9: passes unanimously.

-Item 10: Passes unanimously.

-Item 11:

Blango: You had it for 20-something years without paying taxes. Even if it were a screw-up, we could forgive the interest. But it’s not like they didn’t get any use out of it. For this amount, it’s fair.

Passes: interest is forgiven, principal is still due.

Wait, they’re reconsidering. Goldson wants to hear Antunes.

Antunes: For 22 year, this gentleman knew he had the property. Why wasn’t he paying tax on it? He just ignored it, figured he’d get a free ride. I can’t see him getting off on the interest?

Goldson: Why would he bring it up to the city?

Antunes: ​“He said he was on the computer looking at car taxes. Car taxes don’t come out until June.” For 22 years you owned that piece of property and didn’t realize you had to pay taxes on it.

DePino: I own a sliver lot across from my house and I get a bill every year The city didn’t send him a bill. That’s whey I’m inclined to forgive the interest.

Antunes: This is attached to his property.

DePino: He assumed it was all together.

Goldson: Even though my taxes are paid through my mortgage company, we still get a tax bill every year. Is his story correct that he never saw a tax bill?

Villani: His address for the bill is in Norwalk, the address of the bank he borrowed money from.

Smart: I think he’s extremely lucky to not have been taxed fro 22 years. I think he should count his blessings.

Goldson: ​“I was leaning towards forgiving this interest, but I don’t think the bank would get a bill for 22 years without forwarding it to him. But I would like to give him another chance to prove his case. I would suggest that we pass this over and ask him to get something from the bank confirming that they didn’t forward the bill.”

Blango: ​“I would not like to belabor this matter.” We should vote on it now. … I am still leaning towards forgiving the interest. If you got an $8,200 bill, you probably thought that it was merged.

Smart: ​“I still don’t see this as a hardship. That’s the only issue I have with it.”

Blango: I agree on paying the taxes. I’m talking about the interest.

Goldson: How do we go 22 years without foreclosing on the property?

Villani: It didn’t match the criteria.

Goldson: Why don’t we make him pay half the interest?

Smart: Let’s either vote it up or down.

Goldson: I move that we table this item and send the homeowner a letter telling him has 30 days to prove the bank never forwarded a bill to him. Then I’d be inclined to forgive the interest.

Antunes seconds. It’s voted down three to two (Antunes and Goldson).

Smart: ​“I feel that this is not a hardship. … I’ll fight for the taxpayers, but it has to be the right circumstances.”

Blango: I have a motion to pay the principal to pay taxes an waive interest.

Voting! It goes down two (Goldson and Blango) to three.

The item is given leave to withdraw.

Goldson: ​“So we’re ignoring this.” And he has to pay taxes and interest.

Others: Yes.

Goldson and Blango oppose the leave to withdraw. It passes 3 to 2.

-Item 12 passes unanimously.

9:30: Smart: The president sent out a letter asking rules to be reviewd. To me that’s a diversion from the work we’ve been doing. ​“That’s extremely premature…. I hope they reconsideer.” The timing, in light of what we’ve found out, is ​“quite troubling.” We will draft a letter on how to improve the appeals board and the assessor’s office.

Goldson: I support your position and what this committee has been doing. Instead of focusing on reforming the board of assessment appeals and the assessor’s office, instead we’re looking at the people who are looking at the problems. ​“We’ve just touched the tip of the iceberg.” [Another relative discovered?] It’s important this board not be distracted. We need to be talking about whether the administration helped us get subpoenas out. We should not stop the investigation.

Blango: Some people are not being malicious and have been supportive. We have rules and we want to not be in a position of not following them. ​“Other colleagues are by the book people. … They want to support this committee. … I’m not speaking for them. … What I don’t want to do is get sidetracked and … get into a fight with colleagues.”

Smart: In 2008 we went back and forth with the assessor about what was in our purview. There needs to be some discussion, my question is about the timing. We are hearing motor vehicles because we have an assessor that put us in this position. He needs to be removed. There is a dysfunctional Board of Assessment Appeals. ​“We’re hear to protect the taxpayers.” (To staff:) When is the first automobile tax abatement we did?

Staff: We’ve done only three. I can give you the exact date.

Smart: We have granted motor vehicle tax forgiveness in very, very extreme cases.

Blango: I agree with you…

Smart: We’ll have a discussion about the rules. That’s fine. It’s an opportunity to open Pandora’s box. That’s my concern with this whole issue. ​“They want to open up the whole functioning of the Tax Abatement Committee. It’s an attempt to clip our wings.”

Goldson: So many discoveries — O’Brien’s out-of-town home. Nepotism. It seems suspect to me that the first issue that comes up to the Board of Alderman is about whether or not this committee is following rules. Now we’re going to spend two weeks talking about that… What’s really embarrassing about that [the possible nepotism] is everyone in the assessor’s office knew about it. … We should talk about why we needed a volunteer lawyer to come in here and get a subpoena.

Smart: I’m very very disappointed with what’s going on in the assessor’s office. Nothing seems to have changed.

Goldson: ​“They have cameras now. And we get less information than we did before.” We still haven’t gotten a list of everyone who applied for appeals last year.

9:45: Meeting adjourned.