Thomas MacMillan Photo
(Updated) This tax season, Vanessa Fasanella’s 1997 Chevy Lumina is a year older, with more miles and more scratches in the paint. But according to the city, the car is worth over $400 more than it was last year. That means a higher tax bill for Fasanella.
“This is just stupid,” Fasanella said. It doesn’t make sense for her car to have appreciated in value over the last year, she said. Last year, it was worth $1750. This year it’s worth $2160, according to the city.
Fasanella’s Chevy Lumina isn’t the only used car that’s gone up in value on this year’s tax bills. Her husband’s car, a 2003 Ford Crown Victoria, was appraised at $4,800 on last year’s tax bill. This year, the city says it’s worth $5,080.
Last week, in a letter to the editor in the New Haven Register, John J. Freeman, Sr. wrote in to complain that the assessed value of his 2008 Toyota Highlander went up $2,580, making it $1,530 higher than it was in 2008 when he bought the car new.
Fasanella, who lives with her husband and two kids in Morris Cove, said she’s spoken with a couple of other people who have also seen an increase in assessed value.
City spokeswoman Jessica Mayorga said the increase is due to a misinterpretation of tax bills and revisions in the car value guide used by the city for assessments.
The curious case of suddenly more valuable used cars became a subject for discussion on SeeClickFix, the community complaint site. This is the latest expression of taxpayer outrage, after citizens blasted the tax assessor’s office for allegedly arbitrarily raising property taxes on city artists. Meanwhile, an expose in the New Haven Advocate revealed citizens no longer have true legal recourse to challenge mistakes or arbitrary decisions by the assessor’s office, even though they’re supposed to by law.
When she got her tax bill last week, Fasanella did a double take. “I said, ‘No, no, wait. It’s so different!’”
“How are they valuing cars?” she said. “It doesn’t make sense.”
Fasanella said she plans on paying the tax bills, which are due on Thursday. “But I’m pissed. It’s ridiculous.”
Fasanella said she hasn’t contacted the tax office to complain. She said she didn’t think it was worth it, since she’s been so discouraged by previous attempts to communicate with the office. Once she called and let the phone ring 50 times before hanging up. She counted. (Consumer tip, for now: Call the mayor’s office first, then ask to be transferred to the assessor’s office. Your chances of reaching a human dramatically increase.)
Other times Fasanella has gotten answers that don’t make sense, she said. “Is anyone listening there anyway?”
She said she’d like an explanation of why her car’s value went up. “How can it appreciate?” she said. “I would like it to make sense.”
City spokeswoman Mayorga offered a couple of explanations. First, Following the recommendations of the state Office of Policy Management, the city uses a guide published by the National Automobile Dealers Association. “NADA has raised assessments of cars on a number of vehicles,” Mayorga said.
Mayorga said that increase accounts for the changes in the tax bills for Freeman’s Toyota and for a small part of Fasanella’s Chevy. The NADA value of her the Fasanellas’ Crown Victoria did not go up. Mayorga said she doesn’t know which cars in general have seen increases in assessed value.
“That still sounds like B.S. to me,” said Fasanella. How could her and two or three friends of theirs all have seen an increase in the assessed value of their cars? “Are we all just horribly unlucky?”
According to the NADA guide website, a 1997 Chevy Lumina with 132,500 miles on it, like Fasanellas, would be worth between $850 and $1,850 as a trade in, and $3,325 as a “clean retail.” Fasanella said her car is in far from perfect condition.
Mayorga’s second explanation is that in the case of Fasanella and her husband’s car, the increased assessment is due to the fact that last year’s bill was a supplemental bill in which the cars were assessed for only a portion of the full year. This year’s bill is for the full year.
“That is the same line the tax assessor gave me last year,” Fasanella said. She said she went through a tax assessing nightmare last year when she and her husband sold two cars and bought two new ones. She was sent an incorrect bill then too, she said.
The city’s explanation still doesn’t hold water, she said. Last year’s tax bill set the Lumina’s “gross assessment” at $1,750, she said. The bill then listed an exemption of $1,340, since Vasanella had only owned the car for part of the year. The gross assessment from last year ($1750) is still smaller than the gross assessment from this year ($2160).
Mayorga said that’s a misinterpretation of the bill. She said the gross assessment was in fact an assessment for only the period that Vasanella owned the car, and thus not the full value of the car. The exemption was a credit for having sold another car.
Mayorga said all residents with concerns about their tax bills can go before the Board of Assessment Appeals (BAA).
But as the Advocate reported last week, the appeals board lacks two thirds of members, the remaining member has revealed significant gaps in knowledge, and the board does not keep minutes. Citizens have reported being summarily turned down even in cases of obvious city mistakes — for instance, when a for-profit coffee shop was penalized for not filing a not-for-profit organizational declaration, or when a homeowner was charged for a building on his property that doesn’t exist. A mayoral aide told the Advocate: “It is clear that the BAA lacks the appropriate training on the proper recording of minutes for public minutes. As such, the BAA will receive appropriate training and supports will be put in place to ensure that the board is prepared to provide the accountability that residents expect and deserve,”