Tax Officials — ​“AKA The Bad Guys” — Grilled

Mona Berman wanted to get to the bottom of a tax mystery: How come so many artists in town suddenly got identical $5,000 tax assessments this year, even if their property was worth as little as a few hundred dollars in the past?

Berman (pictured), an arts consultant, was one of a parade of business owners and politicians who lined up to blast city tax officials Tuesday night at an extraordinary hearing of the historically sleepy aldermanic Tax Abatement Committee.

They spoke at a hearing that lasted more than four hours and covered a wide range of accusations of incompetence, capriciousness, and cold-heartedness on the part of the city’s tax collector and assessor.

The collector and assessor showed up, too, and defended their work.

“He [Assessor William O’Brien] has assessed artists who have paint brushes and canvass, old stools and a dirty table [for] $5,000?” she asked incredulously. She was speaking about a tax mystery this year that first came to light in this New Haven Advocate article by Betsy Yagla

The committee also delved again into the city’s moves to foreclose on homeowners who haven’t paid their tax bills, without first notifying aldermen who might help the homeowners hold onto their property. Click here and here for previous stories.

Early on in the evening, aldermen questioned Tax Collector Maureen Villani about the city’s approach to foreclosure, running down a list of properties from around New Haven. They noted that some homeowners who owe as much as $12,000 were not foreclosed upon, while others who owe less, were.

Villani replied that some of the former had defaulted on payment plans; some filed appeals that were denied, in both cases delaying the process. West Rock Alderman Darnell Goldson went several civil but pointed rounds with her, trying to determine if the city has a written policy on how it pursues foreclosure. Finally, she said, ​“No,” and Goldson relaxed in his seat as if he’d just finished a marathon.

“So, there’s no favoritism going on?” questioned Committee Chair Mike Smart, who represents Wooster Square and was particularly concerned about an upcoming foreclosure sale on a property in his ward.

“None at all,” Villani answered.

Smart asked Villani if her office would notify aldermen when a foreclosure date is set on a property in their ward, and she agreed to do so.

Later, Tax Assessor William O’Brien was called to testify. He gave his name, then joked, ​“AKA the Bad Guy.”

Fair Haven Heights Alderman Alex Rhodeen (pictured) tried to clarify if the identical $5,000 assessment so many artists suddenly received this year represented a maximum or a minimum tax. ​“Is it a floor or a ceiling?” he asked. What followed was a series of contradictory answers from O’Brien that seemed to sew more confusion.

O’Brien then summed up the process taxpayers could follow if they are unhappy with their bill: They can go to the Board of Assessment Appeals, which he said is independent of his office, with members appointed by the mayor. If their appeal is denied, they can file a complaint in Superior Court. In between those two steps, he said they could come to him informally to seek redress.

Alderman Goldson later noted that those options make no sense for most taxpayers, because it would cost them more to appeal than just to pay the bill, even if it’s grossly inflated.

“It’s a hustle,” Goldson charged.
 

Nearly three hours into the meeting, Smart (pictured) summed up his view of the matter.

“Why not work with people? Why chase people out of the city?” he asked.

“I understand the city needs money. I feel like not working with people and having this hard-line approach is money-driven. Why encourage them to go to Superior Court? Who’s going to go to Superior Court for $200?”

That’s more or less the amount of taxes in question on a $5,000 assessment. Hiring a lawyer costs considerably extra; plus appelants lose work time.

O’Brien (pictured) denied his office’s policies are money-driven in any unfair way. ​“We do work with people,” he said. ​“I’‘ve got a real dirty job, and a lot of people don’t like the answers they receive.”

​“Including [this] committee,” Smart interjected.

“Including the committee,” O’Brien agreed. ​“Are their inequities in the system? You bet there are. But we don’t target anybody; we don’t force them out. This is a matter of equity to make sure that others that may be underreporting are up to reporting standards.”

That last sentence seemed to confirm what Mona Berman said she’d been told when she went in to the assessor’s office in the first place — that she and others were being taxed to make up for others who weren’t paying their fair share.

Berman, who works from a home office on Lyons Street in Smart’s ward in Wooster Square, said she never received a notice of assessment this year. ​“That’s why I went in” to the assessor’s office, she said. When she received her tax assessment of $5,000, she was dumbfounded, since it was so much higher than in the preceding years, for no apparent reason.

A committee member questioned O’Brien about the jump in assessments for many small business owners. He said he considers it suspicious for businesses not to increase in value over the years, so he determined to raise assessments when he thought it appropriate.

​“He certainly doesn’t know anything about art consulting in the 21st century,” Berman told a reporter after she testified. ​“The art business is not what it used to be, since 9/11. He has assessed artists who have paint brushes and canvass, used stools and a dirty table $5,000?”

She said O’Brien told her, “‘Everybody lies. Everybody cheats,’ and that’s why he was taxing me [on $5,000].” She called the assessment ​“despicable” and ​“illegal” and testified, ​“I want the committee to consider an abatement because I feel my rights were violated.”

Curtis Packer (pictured), owner of Bru Cafe on Orange Street, said he received a $40,000 tax assessment coupled with a $10,000 fine for late filing. He insisted he had filed on time. When he and his lawyer went to appeal, they found there was no paperwork in his file. ​“We subsequently found out that the paperwork we provided to the tax assessor that he stamped to formulate the appeal was then put into the file.” He said his appeal was denied.

He owes $2,600 in taxes, due July 1st. He said if he appeals in court, he must pay the late fine and the taxes first, and if he wins, the money is applied as a credit to future tax bills. But he said he can’t afford the fine. ​“Unless we get a waiver or something, we’ll probably have to close.”

O’Brien refuted the claims of both Berman and Packer. He said Berman was emotional when she came into his office, and perhaps that colored her hearing of what he said. And he claimed that Packer’s paperwork was in fact in the Bru file. But both Berman and Packer stuck to their stories during their testimony and afterwards.

After the meeting, Smart summed up his opinion of the city officials’ testimony. ​“I think the tax collector is trying her best to rectify the situation so I feel like we’re moving in the right direction, but there are still unanswered questions. O’Brien didn’t make sense — the committee was irritated and very concerned.”

He said the committee is going to ​“seek a couple of legal opinions and then make a decision about how to help these folks out. There’s a lot of questions that still need to be answered; we need to get more information. We’re not going to let it die. We’re going to pursue it: the moratorium [on foreclosures]; assessment appeals, tax foreclosure status and refunds. We want folks who qualify for refunds [on appeal] to get their legal costs refunded.”