New Haven Independent

Posted by: Joe | April 25, 2007 7:01 PM

How will the tax breaks be compensated for? Who's going to make up the difference? Is the mayor taking a pay cut? Will some city services be eliminated? Will financially struggling young and middle-aged families have to dig deeper into their pockets?

Posted by: Hank | April 26, 2007 10:12 AM

Unless the budget (including the cost to administer this program) will be reduced by an equal amount then this is just socialism at it's "finest". Take from one member of society and give to another.

Posted by: A Different Joe | April 26, 2007 12:59 PM

Joe:

WE pay for it. Why? Because of the simple fact that poor fixed income seniors cannot afford to keep their houses as taxes continue to rise. Why do we care? Because 1) we as a civilized society prioritize taking care of our elders, and 2) because we recognize that seniors are an essential part of our neighborhoods - that we will lose if we don't act (I can think of 2 such couples on my street - where assessments have doubled). Anyway, personally I'm willing to pay the $10 or $20 a year if it will help keep our seniors around and engaged in our communities.

Posted by: Tim Kane | April 26, 2007 3:48 PM

I like and respect that the Mayor and Board of Aldermen are honoring the Greatest Generation with the tax freeze. However, and with all due respect (and that is shrinking by the day), what about the rest of the homeowners living in New Haven? Are we the ones who are ultimately going to pay for this initiative? The City of New Haven has been spending and spending, with no regard to cost. When I was growing up, my parents taught me a very simple rule of thumb: If you don't have the money, you can't buy it! As I became an adult, that rule of thumb underwent some refinement: If you work efficiently, and don't waste your money on frivolous purchases, a little can go a long way. Come on, folks! I've lived in New Haven for 25 years. I'm raising my kids here, I coach baseball here, and I volunteer at the school where my children go. I stand to pay $3,000 more per year at the end of this 'phase-in' period for property taxes. Board of Aldermen, just say NO! to spending as usual. Say NO! to this budget as it stands, and make New Haven a place where a homeowner actually has a say.

Posted by: wjoyner | April 26, 2007 6:48 PM

The issue here is that the Mayor's ordinance
provides $450.00/yr. relief to the elderly over 70. While passing the cost on to us and the other elderly, age 62- 69. The other elderly is the much larger group.

Also you most remember that the $450.00/yr. is X 5
='s $2250 x 2715 persons =$6,108,750 over the 5 yr. phase-in, and the rest of the suckers will pick it $ up!!!! SORRY your it. :+(

Posted by: look at south 99 south end rd | April 26, 2007 6:53 PM

Good for DePino,

But she allowed and supported the sale of land next to my house that was illegally built on. The city had over $30,000 in debt on it. The person that built illegally on it, didn't bid at the auction becuase he knew he'd get it for pennies. Guess who advised and supported him Arlene. Just another lie by a BOA member that the mayor backs. Don't be fooled by these corrupt New Haven politically connected con artists. Why didn't she push for the freeze for anyone whose taxes exceed 8% of their income? She knew it was in the Conn. Gen. Statutes, but Johnny told her not to work on that. This city is ripe with corrupt peole at every level. I pray we can get them all out this year. They are liars!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And for those that want facts look at the sale mentioned, then look at how the BOA forgave almost $70,000 to a pharamceutical company in 2005, and ask why we spent an extra $100,000 to delay reval from 2005 to 2006 becuase the mayor didn't want reval during the gov election. DePino supported both of the mayors choices. Next look into Corporation for Urnban Homeownership, CUHO, and you will see they got most Fair Haven lots for next to nothing, paid little or no taxesm, becuase Rizzo's department gave building permits to them on land never transferred. The transfer from the city to CUHO is recorded on the same day CUHO was selling the new modular crap house to some unknowing buyer and pushing values thru the roof in Fair Haven. The look at Star Supply deferral, even Perez knew about this scam, but Ude lied becuase John said to. That's why the report that called for Ude's removal was requested changed, via email by karen Walton.

Come on NHI do some homework...this is all public record and being handed to you on a silver platter. The city has been cheating the little guy for years, but no media has the nerve to report it. LCI has the land disposition agreements, Tax office has the foreclosed properties and associated costs to the city. Clerk's office has land transactions and, again, dirty Rizzo's department has permit info. In fact, take a look at estimated costs on building permits. You can get a permit citing the cost as 3,000 to 5,000 and then do 100,000 worth of improvements? What an inspector doesn't notice the work exceeds the indicated cost. I can't get a roof on my house for $3,000. Time to scurtinize these blatant violations of the obligation to serve the public interest. These are facts, and are available witgh very little research. I won't even go into fair hiring especially after the rash of blatant disregard by Tina Burgett of HR and Ude. But the fire department hiring gets all kinds of attention. How did Smuts and the now departed Slapp get their leave of absence, when any 844 union member could never get that without using all sick and vacation time? Why no report on that? Please don't tell me NHI is acting like the Register now.

Posted by: wjoyner | April 26, 2007 9:08 PM

The main issue here is that the Mayor's ordinance provides $450.00/yr.to elderly persons 70 & over. Unfortunately, the elderly 62-69, which is a much larger group, will share the cost with all other taxpayers.
Specifically, the $450.00/yr equates to:
$450.00 x 5 yr. = $2250.00 x 1735 persons = $3,903,750.00, over the 5yr phase-in.

Sorry....... :+

Posted by: Gary Doyens | April 26, 2007 10:21 PM

That's nice they are all celebrating. They are paying for the freeze by passing on the taxes of the those people to me and my family and to everybody else who isn't 70. When we can't pay our taxes...the city will come and foreclose on my house and take it. So it's nice that those seniors can keep their house...many others will lose theirs in the process. The city budget proposed by Mayor DeStefano is a disgrace with all its new programs, expansive spending and huge tax increases. Pls note that Ina and DePino say it's the proudest moment of their six years on the board. It's their proudest moment because it's the first time anybody has gotten tax relief out of this mayor or this board. It's way past time, the rest of us get tax relief too. It starts with severe cutbacks in spending and no new programs without the cash in the bank. Period. It is that simple. I'm tired of having my family's hard earned money frittered away and given to other people.

Posted by: Joe | April 26, 2007 10:50 PM

Socialism, IMO, is far superior to American capitalism. My problem with the elderly tax break is that there are so many younger people who make far less than 50 grand a year and have children to raise. If the mayor (can you say "election year ploy?") wants to do city residents a favor, make taxes more affordable for everyone. It's not only seniors who are on fixed incomes. Many people are. In fact, Social Security goes up a little (yes, just a little) every year while many workers don't see raises at all. Plus they have to pay for health insurance, if they can get it at all.

Posted by: Brad | April 27, 2007 7:43 AM

A $50,000 annual income limit is too high. There are young and middle-aged couples that are struggling making less than $50,000 who will receive no tax relief. Some too have lived in their New Haven homes for more than 10 years. What's more, they have to subsidize the taxes of other seniors, who could possibly be earning more. So, for example, a late-30's couple supporting two children and paying a mortgage with a household income of $42,000 will receive no tax relief, but an elderly couple with no children to support earning $49,500 will receive tax relief.

I like the idea of a tax freeze for seniors, but why not a $20,000 or $30,000 income cutoff? Most seniors that qualify for this relief are no longer paying mortgages, supporting children, etc.

Posted by: Brad | April 27, 2007 10:28 AM

... and isn't the purpose of this ordinance to allow seniors to stay in their homes? My guess is that most seniors 70 and older who have lived in their home for at least 10 years own or at least have significant equity in their homes (considering the extent to which property values increased in the past decade). A reverse mortgage would allow most, if not all, of these individuals to stay in their homes until death, pay taxes, cost other taxpayers nothing, and would leave them with additional spending money. Now, I understand that seniors would cry foul at this proposal, but we need to remember that the purpose of the senior tax freeze ordinance was to allow seniors to stay in their homes - not their children, grandchildren etc. I do not think the younger generations should be subsidizing seniors' homes so that such homes can be kept in their families with full equity for future generations.

Posted by: FIX THE SCHOOLS | April 27, 2007 10:55 AM

Having a meaningful discussion about New Haven's fiscal condition without focusing on wasteful education spending is like the U.S. congress talking about deficit reduction without tackling social security.

If you're serious about taxes you should consider the following:

* The education budget = roughly 50% of the total.

* The city spends nearly $13k per student per year, not including debt service on all of the new school construction. Most of that comes from the State.

* >90 administrators make over $100k per year.

* New Haven has some of the worst school performance results in the state.

* While private sector productivity in the U.S is way up over the last decade (longer hours, increasing use of technology), school still consists largely of 6 1/2 hour days with summers off.

* While Destefano was running for Governor and begging for the support of the statewide teachers unions, the city rolled over during the last AFT negotiation.

Conclusion: If you want to pay $5M, $6M or $7M in property taxes per year, why don't you at least ask the mayor how he can get some better results for > $300 million of public money.

Posted by: josh erlanger | April 27, 2007 2:40 PM

Stop crying its a couple of dollars out of your pocket to make sure people who have been living in the city there entire life and who only have a few years left to live don't have to mortgage there homes in order to afford heat.

I couldn't help but notice most of you talk about being young to middle age with kids. How can you complain when almost half of the budget goes to the schools. Maybe the elderly and people without kids should not have to have to pay for that part of the budget.

Here's an idea lets tax every parent the $1000 they get from the federal child tax credit and use that to lower the mil rate for everyone. I don't want money taken from me and given to you just because you wanted kids and on top of it I have to pay for there schooling. Seems unjust to me.

The point is government is there to protect its citizens in particular the ones who cant protect themselves so get some integrity and go back to crying about paying for bottled water for city employees.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | April 27, 2007 2:49 PM

Brad you hit the nail on the head!!! I was not really posting on this story because who wants to bash old people (Not I). But I think that your statement is what was my whole problem. 50,000 is way to high. I make a hell of alot less than that with 2 kids. What about the people with children in these stuggling times??

Posted by: Ben | April 27, 2007 3:31 PM

Taxes should be deferred for the elderly till time of sale or when passed on via will.

Posted by: Gary Doyens | April 27, 2007 4:47 PM

Josh and others who think this elderly push is no big thing: It will cost a minimum of $1.5 million per year. It could be much higher. The city was quite fuzzy on how they calculated the affected seniors. All any of us are saying is this: If the city was prudcent with its dollars and spending, these elderly would not be having a problem paying their taxes. Mayor DeStefano and this Board of Aldermen have squandered our money.

I agree -- let's look at the schools. There is a lot of waste there, no doubt when you're spending nearly $200 million a year. These new schools are beautiful -- but they are overbuilt, and it has not affected testing scores that I know of, as of yet.

But still...If DeStefano doesn't have the money, then why launch a program and stick it to home owners and renters to pay it? It's that simple. It is not at "The Other Joe" said: $10 or $20...it is multi-millions. Bottom line: We all need tax relief or we should vote in a new mayor and Board of Alderman who will give it to us.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | April 27, 2007 4:54 PM

gee now I feel quilty for even posting that thought out loud. :(

I get it the old people deserve a break. They have worked hard for what ever they have. What was the starting age on this 70 or 62?? I think that makes a difference to. beside they still have to pay the taxes somewhere down the line. It is not free it is just later.

So strick my last comment :)

Posted by: Robn | April 27, 2007 6:29 PM

Maybe if George Bush and his enabler Joe Lieberman weren't lighting bags of t-bills on fire and dropping them out of planes over Iraq, we wouldn't be in this mess. 40% of your federal taxes now go to paying for military past and present spending. Its insane. IN the past few years, federal assistance has dropped precipitously in our state where taxpayers are already getting ripped off...we only get back .73 cents for ever tax dollar paid (Missisippi gets 1.70 for every tax dollar paid).

By the way, if I haven't mentioned it before...thanks a LOT to all you so called Dems who voted for Ind Joe Lieberman. If Democratic candidate Ned Lamont was in office, we'd be much closer to a veto override and we'd get the troops home. (Sen Lieberman voted against the recent bill including a troop withdrawal timetable...George Bush is poised to veto it).

Posted by: wkjay | April 27, 2007 8:32 PM

Well people were're getting off the subject and now arguing each others point. At this time no one knows what the final cost will be,we are now working with the Mayor's estimate, that will be dependant upon how many elders apply and how many are accepted. Nevertheless, I agree with Gary, actual spending has increased $145M since 1998.
If you want to have a positive effect attend the finance committee meeting Monday April 30th @ 6:00PM. Again on Thursday May 17th. @ 6:00PM; the finality.
When the budget final recommendations leave the finance committee it's a DONE DEAL. SO GO>>>>>

Posted by: Edward_H | April 29, 2007 9:49 AM

I wonder how many of these seniors over the years have helped vote in politicians who spend without regard to tax revenues?

Posted by: mindoflen | April 30, 2007 4:53 PM

This is for Joe:
Yes, Joe, you middle aged and middle income taxpayers will help pay for tax breaks for the elderly, just as the elderly sucked it up for their parents when they were struggling middle-aged or middle income taxpayers. Those who will now get the breaks were the ones who walked the walk as well as talked. This is the generation that changed everything. As Dylan (one of ours) said, the old road is rapidly changing...the road of a few meek old-timers thanking younger people for their handouts. We've paved a new road since the '60s and, as Dylan says: Your old road is
Rapidly agin'.
Please get out of the new one
If you can't lend your hand
For the times they are a-changin'

Posted by: simple | May 19, 2007 12:05 PM

To All The Concerned Residents of Ward 22 will be sponsoring a Community Forum on "Taxes" on May 22, 2007 at Wexler-Grant Community School, 55 Foote Street, at 6:30 pm to 8:00pm...Come out and share your concerns with other tax payers that may not know what this proposed tax increase will do for low-to-moderate income families....Gary Doyens...your insight on this issue is a breath of fresh air...