Sections

Neighborhoods

Features

Follow Us

NHI Newsletter

Some Favorite Sites

Government/ Community Links

Tax Appeals Chief Quits; New Charges Emerge

by Thomas MacMillan | Sep 15, 2010 6:28 am

(42) Comments | Commenting has been closed | E-mail the Author

Posted to: City Hall

Thomas MacMillan Photo New allegations of misbehavior—including nepotism and possible no-show work—surfaced at a stormy public hearing as a mayoral appointee defied a subpoena to give a public accounting of scandalous goings-on at the Board of Assessment Appeals. An alleged Facebook posting emerged as a possible smoking gun. And the board’s chair defended a tax appeal he filed himself on a property he bought to flip.

Missing in action at Tuesday night’s hearing was Jacqueline Harris. She resigned from the Board of Assessment Appeals on Aug. 19 amid charges that the body—legally charged to give taxpayers a second chance if the city has wronged them—has failed to meet in public, meet some of the most basic thresholds of competence, or otherwise carry out its duties according to law.

The Board of Aldermen’s Tax Abatement Committee, which held the hearing in City Hall’s aldermanic chambers, had issued a subpoena for Harris to appear and offer testimony. The group has held a series of hearings into a broader swath of charges of misconduct by city tax officials, drawing crowds of angry taxpayers. Tuesday night’s hearing lasted four and a half hours.

The committee also subpoenaed Harris’ fellow board member, committee Chair Michael Newton (pictured). Newton did show up Tuesday night and provided responses, testily at times, to cross-examination from aldermen. After his grilling, Newton announced he, too, has resigned from the board.

The mayor appoints the members of the appeals board.

Newton began his testimony on a combative note, lashing out at an alderman for allegedly not paying taxes. He was then subjected to extensive questioning about the Board of Assessment Appeals’ procedures.

Of particular interest to aldermen was new revelations of alleged conflicts of interest or compromised relationships: Harris turns out to be a rent-paying tenant of Newton. Harris’ son works as a paid clerical staffer to the Board of Assessment Appeals, with a questionable work record. And Newton filed a tax appeal himself last year, which his tenant/ fellow board member Harris voted on.

Those relationships raise ethical questions in light of a tax appeal filed this year by Newton himself.

Wooster Square Alderman Michael Smart, chair of the committee, said he will confer with committee counsel Michael Jefferson to determine how to handle the new allegations of impropriety and Harris’s defiance of the subpoena, despite a City Hall assurance that she would show up. Jefferson said Harris could be compelled by a judge to appear before the board, if necessary.

Tuesday’s meeting was the latest in a series of public hearings in which the Board of Assessment of Appeals and the tax assessor’s office have come under fire. The appeals board has failed to hold meetings in public or produce minutes of meetings or decisions, as required by law. This year, artists and small business people have filed complaints after receiving huge spikes in their tax bills, including across-the-board $5,000 assessments on personal property; those hikes were levied by the tax assessor based not on inspections, but alleged industry “standards.” Complaining taxpayers reported sometimes bizarre encounters with the appeals board, and in some cases said they were told their appeals were granted, only to receive subsequent letters from the tax office saying the opposite. In one case, the owner of a for-profit downtown coffee shop appealed being charged for failing to submit paperwork required of not-for-profit organizations—and was denied. (Click here to read Betsy Yagla’s New Haven Advocate story first reporting the appeals board shenanigans.)

“James, Yeah”

Tuesday night’s four-and-a-half-hour meeting included extensive testimony from taxpayers who continue to complain that they’ve been unfairly or mistakenly sent large tax bills. The committee then moved into the “workshop” section of the meeting, calling Harris and Newton to testify.

City Corporation Counsel Victor Bolden informed the board that Harris’ attorney had communicated to him that Harris would not be appearing. Bolden had previously criticized the issuance of a subpoena for Harris to appear and declared she was planning to attend anyway.

Michael Newton did show. Immediately upon sitting down, Newton announced that he pays $32,000 a year in taxes— unlike, he said, some people on the committee. He later revealed that he was referring to West Rock Alderman Darnell Goldson, who he said doesn’t own any property in New Haven. Goldson said his house is under his wife’s name and he pays taxes with the mortgage every month.

Newton’s opening comments drew a sharp rebuke from Hill Alderwoman Andrea Jackson-Brooks, prompting an apology.

“We’re not here to attack you,” Smart said. “This is not a witch hunt.”

Goldson confirmed with Newton that he gets paid a $50 stipend per “session.” Newton last year earned $1,850 in 37 sessions, Goldson said. Meanwhile, Harris earned $7,000 last year for her work on the Board of Assessment Appeals. “That’s a huge discrepancy. Why was there such a difference?” Goldson asked.

“I don’t know why there was such a large discrepancy,” Newton said. Harris did come in during the day often to do paperwork and filing, Newton said.

Goldson then zeroed in on questions about support staff to the appeals board. Newton said the board has two part-time clerical workers. He said he couldn’t remember their names. No problem, Goldson had their names ready. One of them, he reminded Newton, is “James H. Harris, the Third.”

“James, yeah,” Newton said.

“Is Mr. Harris related in any way to Ms. Jackie Harris?” Goldson asked.

“I believe—I believe so, yes,” Newton said. “I think—I think he’s a stepson?”

“A son?” Goldson said.

“A son, I mean, her son,” Newton said.

Goldson asked if Newton was trained on ethics when he began serving on the board. Newton said he was.

“So is it permissible for the board to hire a relative—a direct relative—as an employee?” Goldson asked.

“You know, I understand where you’re going with this but it’s ... it was really a matter of we needed—we needed people to really [do] data entry,” Newton said. The person who had been doing it wasn’t able to this year, he said. “We just really needed to get him in there to do that entry.”

Moments later, Goldson drew Newton’s attention to an address listed on a spreadsheet of appeals board actions. “There’s a notation here for a property that you own at 84 Fountain St. that you asked for an appeals on.”

“Right,” Newton said. (Newton said he owns five properties in New Haven.)

“Now, there’s nothing wrong with that. You’re a citizen you have a right to ask for an appeal,” Goldson said. But certainly you didn’t rule on the request, he said to Newton.

“Right, and that property was sold way before the process,” Newton said.

“Right, but you asked for the appeal, is that correct?”

“Absolutely,” Newton said. The appeal was heard but it was presented by the new owner, he said, stammering a little. “That property closed in, I believe, March.”

“And the hearing was in April,” Goldson said. “So you filed an appeal for the new owners?”

“We didn’t know who the new owners were going to be,” Newton said.

“Is it also true that Ms. Harris is a tenant of yours?” Goldson asked.

“Yes, she is,” Newton said. She moved into one of his houses two years ago, he said.

“But she was also, in partner with you, hiring staff that’s related to her,” Goldson said. “That’s not appropriate, is it?”

“It wasn’t ... it wasn’t like it was,  it was hidden. It’s not really like we hire anyone, it ... it ... I understand where you’re going, but-”

“This gentleman made over $8,000 last year as a staff member,” Goldson interrupted. He was supposed to be doing data entry, but aldermen can’t seem to get the data they need, he said.

Newton later said he and Harris signed off on her son’s time cards. The son no longer works for the board and has moved to North Carolina, Newton said. To which Goldson announced that he had internet evidence that James Harris moved south in the middle of the time in which he was supposedly working for the appeals board. He said the man’s Facebook status updates from early spring indicated that he had moved to a town in the south. Newton said that wasn’t the case.

Goldson later returned to the matter of the house Newton sold after filing a tax appeal on it. “Did you have some sort of deal with the buyers on whether or not the price would change based on the assessment?”

“No,” Newton said

“Amusing” Appeals

Aldermen continued cross-examining Newton about board procedures and the board’s relationship with city tax Assessor Bill O’Brien.

Newton answered all questions, launching at times into a defense of his work as chair of the board and a defense of the assessor’s office. “There’s a lot of different issues that it’s easy to attack people on with these assessments, and it’s not an easy job,” he said.

At one point, Newton called it “amusing” how incomplete and inaccurate taxpayers applications to the board can be. That drew another sharp rebuke, this time from Fair Haven Alderwoman Migdalia Castro: “I find that very disrespectful to everyone who’s come in front of this committee to testify.”

Newton didn’t back down. He said that a taxpayer who testified earlier made flippant remarks about the appeals board. “There’s a two-way street here. I just want you to know that we spent many, many hours working on this and weekends on this,” he said. Sometimes taxpayers don’t make it to multiple proposed meeting times, he said.

Newton also lashed out at the press, saying that phone calls from reporters have made Harris “very uncomfortable” and that may be why she didn’t show to Tuesday’s meeting.

Newton was asked why he didn’t respond to repeated requests from the committee to appear and testify, until he was subpoenaed. He said he has been away all summer.

“They Don’t Get It”

After over an hour of testimony, Newton was dismissed. He hurried out of the aldermanic chamber. At the top of the steps in the City Hall atrium, he paused with an unlit cigarette cupped in his hand.

“I really have done a lot for these people,” he said aggrievedly. He paced back and forth. “They don’t get it.”

He said he hadn’t done anything wrong in filing an appeal for the house he had owned at 84 Fountain St. He bought it at the end of last summer, “as a flip.” It was “way overvaluated,” he said. He sold it before the hearing process and recused himself, Newton said.

As for hiring Harris’ son, that was a matter of necessity, Newton said, unbuttoning his top button and loosening his tie. “We try to get as much done as we can. We had to find people to do filing. We didn’t have anybody.”

“I’m tired of really getting a hard time,” Newton said. “I’ve already handed in my resignation. I have no need or desire to deal with this.”

After the meeting, Goldson said the relationships—both familial and financial—between appeals board members and staff raise a number of ethical questions. In addition to the ethics of hiring one’s son, can a tenant objectively rule on a tax appeal on a property recently owned by her landlord, someone to whom she has a financial obligation?

Alderman Smart said the committee will be conferring with attorney Jefferson on those questions and determining a course of action, which might involve the city Ethics Commission.

The committee needs to conduct a thorough investigation of the appeals board and determine if any laws have been violated, Jefferson (pictured) said.

Aldermanic Attorney?

After grilling Newton, aldermen turned their attention to city attorney Bolden. They wanted to know why it had taken so long to subpoena Newton and Harris.

“It seemed like there was feet-dragging,” Smart said. “It’s been a whole shell game.”

After raised-voice accusations and denials of obstructionism between Bolden and Smart, Bolden stormed out of the meeting. He returned at the end of the meeting to laugh and shake hands with Smart.

Hill Alderwoman Jackson-Brooks took the opportunity to bring up the idea of the Board of Aldermen having its own lawyer, so that it’s not looking for counsel from a mayoral staffer.  “I think that we ought to have some autonomy, particularly when it gets to this kind of situation,” she said. “We’ve got to have someone that can give us a straight answer. I don’t know that anyone’s looking out for our interest.”

Goldson seconded the idea.

Tags:

Share this story with others.

Share |

Post a Comment

Comments

posted by: Exiled Italian Shill on September 15, 2010  7:35am

Can somebody clearly tell me what all this is really about?

posted by: Corruption on September 15, 2010  8:06am

@Exiled Shill:

For starters, it is about corruption. A landlord hires a tenant, who then hires a son, who then rules on the landlords appeal, who then pays the son..and on and on.

Second, it is about accountability, taxpayers need to know that the system works fairly for everyone, or they will lose trust in the system, and stop paying taxes altogether.

Third, it is about reforming a broken system.

Fourth, it is about the BOA exercising and exerting its authority, and the administration attempts to quash that authority.

Now do you get it?

posted by: Funky Chicken on September 15, 2010  8:31am

My take is that the Administration’s goal is to collect as much tax revenue as possible. Any tax appeal will reduce the amount of revenue collected thereby forcing them to raise money in other ways (higher fees or raise property taxes) or (horrors) cut spending.

Therefore, in my not so humble opinion, the Assessor and the Board of Tax Appeals have a vested interest in rejecting as many appeals as they can. I do not know if this was a direct “command” from the top (the Mayor or Mark Pietrosimone) or just an understanding that this is the job.

It now seems apparent that there is at worst corruption in the Board of Tax Appeals or a best gross incompetence. Neither is good and with both members stepping down I hope the Mayor will take the opportunity to do the right thing and put in competent, honest people.

posted by: streever on September 15, 2010  8:47am

Exiled:
The Tax Assessment Appeal Chair and his tenant were the only two members of a 3 person board.
The tenant made 7k for her work on the board.
She heard a case filed by the chair—her landlord—and found in his favor and was paid for that determination.

They hired her son to do clerical work for the board. His work is a mess, the files are all out of order and a total jumble.

Assessment Appeals, Tax Assessment office, attorneys who work for City Plan and advise BZA/City Plan on developments they were hired to work on, a BZA made entirely up of people who work for the mayor/volunteer for the DTC and his campaign and then vote in favor of anything that he supports…

A state marshal the City keeps hiring who was found to have shaken down businesses, lied, and intimidated them into paying protection money. Surprise, he’s also a big fund-raiser for the Mayor.

is this it? Is the DeStefano House of Cards going to fall at last?

posted by: Cedarhillresident on September 15, 2010  9:11am

“Corruption” is right “EIS” and as someone stated this was not to go after people it was to review how things are being done and how to make the better. And I personally think alot of issues came to light last night that need to be fixed that can make things easier for everyone including the people that work with in the dept’s that over see all of this.

I will say that I learned somethings last night to. That the whole system seems to be broken for sometime now. (not that I did not know this already but some new facts I found to be interesting)

Good job to all that put their time and energy into this.

posted by: Cedarhillresident on September 15, 2010  9:30am

Came across this have to post it :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hYpAYWqiwo&feature=player_embedded

posted by: robn on September 15, 2010  9:39am

WTF is going on in city hall?!?!

Are we a banana republic or what?

posted by: 8th ward resident on September 15, 2010  9:43am

To the Independent: Please refer to Alderman Smart as the Alderman (or Alderperson) for Ward 8. He represents much more than Wooster Square- and incidentally- does a very good job of uniting a diverse Ward.

posted by: Tax payer on September 15, 2010  10:08am

Every year all city committee members etc. are asked to disclose any conflicts and sign an ethics agreement. Who read these and what is their purpose if clear conflicts are brushed aside?

posted by: Threefifths on September 15, 2010  10:22am

Crying again.How you like your crooked Two party system you voted for.Remember this is what the two party system is about.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66KphHHVLOw&feature=related

posted by: Paul M. on September 15, 2010  10:39am

Does anyone else think it’s odd that Darnell Goldson keeps property out of his own name?

For a guy who loves to get in print for opposing Zipcars, sidewalks, tax abatements for new businesses, Science Park - anything not in his district - and being pro-drinking in city parks ...

posted by: real estate on September 15, 2010  10:40am

a reduced tax assessment in april would result in a credit to the seller of the property in march. that is because the seller would have paid for 9 months of taxes on the higher rate, and would then receive a credit after the sale for the 9 months paid by the seller at the reduced rate.

looks like a duck, swims like a duck, quacks like a duck.

posted by: Razoul on September 15, 2010  10:53am

Perhaps these systems and processes need improving. Good! But you get what you pay for…and if the BAA Chair is paid $1,500 annual and the other member paid $8,000 annual for the time, work and aggravation they put in, well I’m not at all surprised at these results. If you want better results from all these volunteer boards, you better be ready to increase the size of our already bloated city bureaucracy ($$).
By the way, I find it the height of irony that Goldson and Smart are leading the charge on their “holier than thou” crusade after their debacle with the former poster child of corruption and dysfunction - Community Action Agency. That agency was rife with scandal after scandal, involving mind-boggling tales of misappropriation of funds, nepotism, cronyism, theft, Board mismanagement, employee harrassment. Take your pick. Oh well, I guess they learned their lessons on governance from so much hands on experience. (Go figure!)

posted by: Beansie's Mom on September 15, 2010  10:56am

Ceder Hill resident:

Thanks for posting the utube link to the Beatles cartoon.  Made my day.

posted by: Tim Holahan on September 15, 2010  11:45am

What a mess. This is embarrassing.

Congratulations to the Aldermen of this committee who are providing us a rare and heartening example of legislative oversight. Alderman Goldson in particular seems to have done serious homework investigating the questionable practices of the BAA.

If our city’s charter has any legal effect, Ms. Harris should be held in contempt (I believe under the jurisdiction of the Superior Court). She was paid to serve on a city board, and she has now refused to respond to a subpoena from the Board of Aldermen. Open and shut.

One long-term solution to this should be a charter revision that would clearly define the appointment, staffing, responsibilities, and process of the Board of Appeals. The current charter text is not clear on this subject, and urgently needs amendment.

Three Fifths, if you think this disaster exemplifies the failure of a two-party system ... New Haven has a one-party system, and that’s clearly part of the problem. Even an enthusiastic Democrat like me can see the harm that’s being done to the democratic process in New Haven by the lack of an opposition.

Finally, the buck should stop at the top. Mr. Mayor, when will you act?

posted by: Tina Tucci on September 15, 2010  12:49pm

“Newton’s opening comments drew a sharp rebuke from Hill Alderwoman Andrea Jackson-Brooks, prompting an apology.”

How quickly we forget.  Andrea Jackson Brooks tried to pocket $58,750 of LCI money with the mayor’s blessing in 1998.  This was an interest free “loan”  from a fund intended to assist low income families.  Her annual salary at the time was over $70,000.

http://www.yaleherald.com/archive/xxvi/9.4.98/news/scandals.html

I have a couple of sharp rebukes for Ms Brooks, but I cant’ print them here.

posted by: Chris Gray on September 15, 2010  1:06pm

Having a hard time getting out lately, CTV has given me an eye into the very embarrassing BOA meetings but, when I tuned in last evening about 8pm, I had - what was it? - seven years, which felt more like twenty, both cablecasting and taping BOA meetings back in the ‘80s & ‘90s, rewarded with the best display of the naked corruption underlying the way this city operates and has for several generations that I could have hoped for when I, with Barbara Demeter and others began the project.

Seeing Michael Newton repeatedly attempt to strangle his table microphone, while I watched some radio reporter wrap up her microphone to go home, was a wonderful metaphor for his and Ms. Harris’ careers turning to…toast, before us!

Community organizing with the proper tools can work!

posted by: Exiled Italian Shill on September 15, 2010  2:09pm

OK, but isn’t this an “independent” board? Either DeStefano is going to own boards and commissions and tell them how to vote and what to do or they are going to be independent.  For me it makes sense that they are independent.  If thats the case I don’t see how the administration owns this problem with Harris and her kid or step-kid or whatever.

I do think that new members to the board would go a long way to a fix.

posted by: New Haven Tax Payer on September 15, 2010  2:16pm

Unfortunately, I have encountered O’Brien when he was the ruling assessor of Bridgeport.  He made our business life a living hell for years and our woes were finally settled by a court of law.

I am sad he is our assessor in New Haven after seeing what he did to Bridgeport.  I am also sad that there isn’t an ounce of humility in the process his office goes through because they assume citizens are all current on law.

In the end, these people are there because we put them there.  Maybe not directly but by our vote they got where they are.  What angers me is New Haven’s population loves to get ticked off but no one shows up at the polls to kick ‘em out.

With all of this said, and with my dislike of our assessor out in the open, I will say that the appeals process is a two-way street.  I entirely agree with Newton on this front.  If the taxpayer doesn’t show up with evidence they have been overtaxed there is NOTHING an appeals board can do for that taxpayer.  In a way, we are a totally uneducated group of citizens.  But, the state (THE STATE) needs to be more honest with its citizens and make available the law, how to appeal the law and what to do if your appeal is denied.

It is clear the city is cleaning up years of broken assessments but they need to be more open about the process and, IF YOU ALL DISLIKE THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION SO MUCH VOTE THEM OUT!

Finally, I agree that there is something not right with some of Newton’s actions but they seem to be two separate issues at hand: Newton’s ethics and how the assessment/appeals process works.

posted by: Corruption on September 15, 2010  3:09pm

@ Exiled Shill:

John DeStefano appointed the commissioners, he owns them. That doesn’t mean that he can not be independent when making decisions, but he and his administration are still responsible for managing them so that they adhere to policy, procedures, and ethical codes.

Everyone who testified, including O’Brien, admitted that they knew that she hired, supervised and ultimately paid her son with taxpayer funds, yet no one did anything about it.

posted by: streever on September 15, 2010  3:27pm

Exiled:
It is independent. However, if it is violating ethics rules or operating inappropriately (for instance, having the tenant of the chair hearing his appeals and hiring her son for shoddy work) then it is the Mayor’s job to step up and censure or remove the board member and the chair.

That the administration has failed to do so is not surprising, but still disappointing.

posted by: Doug Hausladen on September 15, 2010  3:47pm

So Mr. Newtown applied for an assessment appeal in April, the month after selling his property. In traditional real estate deals, the seller is credited by the buyer for all property tax paid, since property tax is paid in advance. The new assessment would then lead to a credit to him as seller. He still has an interest in the assessment after the sale.

posted by: Anon on September 15, 2010  5:34pm

The revelations of conflicts and self dealing were very interesting. I agree with Tom Holahan that it was rare and welcome example of legislative oversight.

But, and I didn’t see the public access TV coverage, I would have liked to learn what else was asked of Newton as to the process. I expected lots of questions about that too and hope it was done, regardless of their both resigning. I wouldn’t mind knowing why he just stopped performing or showing up for appeals meetings, for starters.

Was he under oath too? Should have gotten as much information as possible. I will try to get access to more info. The reporters should have covered it better, at least noting if nothing else came up.

I also am still preoccupied with the role of corp counsel. Are aldermen “officers” of New Haven? Skimming muni code and state stat. I wasn’t sure.

Does anyone know if corp. counsel is obligated to serve and advise the board of aldermen and its committees? Or, only the executive side of city government, mayor, departments etc.

If they are obligated, they demonstrated that they are hopelessly biased and can’t serve two masters, and know who the stronger master is. Nixon fired his AG, right?

If corp counsel is not obligated to serve the legislative arm, the appearance of corp counsel lawyers at committee and aldermen meetings is simply to look after the mayor’s/executive’s interests, not to advise the legislative’s interests at all.

Anyone know?

To Tucci, I hear you and hadn’t forgotten.

posted by: robn on September 15, 2010  5:40pm

Hey but look on the bright side of this….ummm, wait a minute, I guess there is no bright side.

posted by: Can't tell on September 15, 2010  8:41pm

I served on the BOA in the past and we always had a budget for our own attorney. It is unwise to use any city attorney as the serve at the mayor’s pleasure and will pretty much (when it is all said and done) do his bidding. Our attorney if I remember right was retained and pretty much on call when we needed her. She was a great attorney and now a judge! Do this for yourselves as an independent institution and very separate from this g_d-forsaken executive branch!

posted by: steve on September 15, 2010  9:12pm

“New Haven…Look what we’ve got!!”

It all stems from Destefano trying to please everybody.

posted by: WTF on September 15, 2010  10:07pm

Dear President Obama.

Its only Wednesday. To date this week in New Haven on this site we have had 3 stunning stories on how well you Democrats are doing.

Number 1. The New Haven school system has a 27% failure rate. Kids not being educated at all. Your great supporter, Mayor John DeStefano has spent billions in federal money on new schools to achieve this stunning rate of failure. His new school guru promises to improve this to about 12% by 2016. A great achievement no doubt. No statistics have been given on race nor ethnicity of those failing. Would this be another embarrassment??

Number 2. The cities Board of Tax Appeals is in disarray. A polite assessment. If you are not renting or related to a member of the Mayor’s appointed and apparently supervised board you have no chance of fair taxation.

Number 3. The cities zoning Board of Appeals silences anyone who does not agree 100% with the Mayor’s hand picked chairwomen.

Well I’m sorry, but as your biggest campaign contributors were banks who have raped us all, and your supporters like DeStefano have no respect for democracy and the rights of the individual I am beginning to thing Sarah Palin and the Tea Party are the only way out.

God Help America and New Haven

posted by: Chris Gray on September 15, 2010  11:56pm

Had a guest stop over about 8:30, so didn’t see that much of it, but Alder Jackson-Brooks had a great number of questions which she had prepared on a checklist, and to which quite a number where she added, “Oh, you answered that, too,” regarding what seemed frank testimony by Newman.

It was the ethics issues that tripped him up.

It would seem likely that only those empowered to sign contracts on the part of the city are the “officers”.

posted by: Morris Cove Mom on September 16, 2010  8:14am

All of the ties between Harris and Newton seem to constitute nepotism.  There should be no scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours in city politics.  And while I’m sure that this is not the only case, by far, it is a good one to make an example out of.

Clear the board, find all new people to replace these folks.  Unrelated, unacquainted people.  That way, there’s at least more of a chance that it is fair!

posted by: Anon on September 16, 2010  5:20pm

Thanks for the answers re attorneys and what other questions were asked.

Would be interested in hearing from others as to the attorney issue too.

If board hired outside attorney in the past, seems likely corp. counsel is beholden to exec arm/mayor/departments, not legislative. or mostly beholden,

or maybe there is case law on it rather than clear statute? Anyway ...

posted by: Doug Hausladen on September 17, 2010  8:36am

There have been a lot of calls to “clear the board” and “replace the board”. While I agree, there is a very real need for competent people to stand up and get involved and serve on a board for the City. We need more good people to get involved! This one even has a small stipend -

posted by: Alphonse Credenza on September 17, 2010  9:53am

The problem is that the City of New Haven sees itself as a spigot of wealth for “The People.”  Of course, it needs money to provide genuine services, like police and fire and trash removal, etc., but the administration must make substantial cuts and begin to live more like paupers, because it are not going to get the tax revenue it had hoped for.  People will no longer stand for their galling money-grab.

posted by: Tim Holahan on September 17, 2010  10:52am

The board has cleared itself. There will be no one on it if Mr. Newton resigns as he said he plans to.

I just spoke to Jessica Mayorga, who said that the Mayor hasn’t yet received Newton’s resignation. She also said that the Mayor is working on appointing new members to the Board.

On July 26, the Mayor’s office made the following statement:

“Concerns were raised about inadequacies with the work of the board of assessment appeals. While the board is independent as established by the city charter, the controller’s office will begin to provide administrative support for this board and ensure that members of the board receive the proper training and access to the resources necessary to better perform their duties.”

We’ll see.

posted by: Anon on September 19, 2010  1:02pm

LOOK AT THIS PAGE: http://www.cityofnewhaven.com/Government/Boards_Commissions.asp

YOU TELL ME WHERE ON THAT PAGE IT LISTS THE BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS?????

No it’s not under city departments either, like, preposterously, the Civilian Review Board is.

No, there is no link to it on the page for the city assessor’s office either.

I am sure it will miraculously appear when the city’s crooks read this post.

So, under Sec. 12-112. of state statute, I have to present an appeal at the September meeting of this secret board that apparently has no members at the moment.

Where is their calendar? Where and when is their September meeting?

I don’t consider this bumbling oversights, I consider this deliberate abuse of individuals, one person at a time by a city that says that is how government works. Like group mentality, they abuse and harass people and are in denial about it. Like Attila the Hun, they consider might right.
...

posted by: Anon on September 19, 2010  4:17pm

Oh, here it is. Published legal notice as required by law, but good luck ever finding it on the New Haven city web site or any online city calendar:

CITY OF NEW HAVEN, CONNECTICUT BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS MOTOR VEHICLE APPEALS The City of New Haven[’‘]s Board of Assessment appeals will be meeting on September 30, 2010 from 5-7 PM, City Hall 165 Church Street, Meeting Room #3, for any taxpayer wishing to appeal their motor vehicle assessment for grand list year October 1, 2009. For further information, please call the City[’‘]s Taxpayer hotline 203-946-6700. Mark Pietrosimone Controller

     
Appeared in: New Haven Register on Sunday, 09/19/2010


And why do I have to go to this meeting? Because even though the assessor’s office has removed my tax bill because I proved to them I don’t own the car in question, the tax office has since sent me a tax delinquent notice.

I am worried, with this city, if I don’t appeal that notice, I will owe the tax, even though the assessor’s office zeroed out my bill in its system, received the proof and zeroed it out on its public database for all the world to see. And that proof was walked over to the tax collector and updated in their system the very same day, in my presence. Yet, a letter goes out, dated a week after all this, dated mind you, postmarked even later, demanding that I pay my nonexistant overdue taxes.

People should be able to demand cash penalties when the city puts them through this.

And who is even going to be at this meeting from the board? If I were a lawyer with time to burn, I would claim that every appeal that shows up at this September meeting should be granted. I doubt they will have one board member there.

posted by: Anon on September 19, 2010  5:02pm

connecticut statute:

“Sec. 12-170. Penalty for official misconduct. Each assessor, member of the board of assessment appeals, selectman, committee or collector, who does any unlawful act or ****omits to do any necessary act **** connected with the levy, assessment or collection of any tax, shall forfeit fifty dollars to the person aggrieved thereby, to be collected by such person in an action on this statute; and each collector who charges or receives any illegal fees shall, in addition to said sum of fifty dollars, also forfeit double the amount of such illegal fees to the person aggrieved, to be collected as aforesaid.”

posted by: Tim Holahan on September 19, 2010  5:22pm

Anon:

The board in question is called the “Tax Review Board” on the page to which you linked. To thicken the plot, it’s referred to in some places in the charter as the “board of relief”, a title which was replaced with “board of tax review”.

The only place in city documentation I’ve found “Board of Assessment Appeals” is in the FAQ in the Tax Collector’s section of the city website (http://www.cityofnewhaven.com/TaxCollector/FAQEnglish.asp), where it says that the positions are elected. If only.

Again, I see two solutions to this mess, one short-term and one long-term. The short-term solution is prompt action by the Mayor to name new board-members who will act responsibly, and to make sure they are supported as necessary by city staff (as promised in the press release I quoted in my earlier post). The long-term solution is charter revision to clarify the name, responsibilities, and appointment process for the Board.

posted by: Darnell on September 19, 2010  5:24pm

@ Anon,

It is actually called the Tax Review Board, near the bottom of the list.

posted by: roomforaview on September 19, 2010  6:58pm

This whole scandal is more unbelievable at every turn. The Assessor, who gave out assessments based on some “standard” rather than actually looking at the properties, who lives in Southington or at least votes there and pays taxes on his vehicles there, has the full support of the Mayor. The BAA Chairman was the landlord for the other member of the Board, who along with her son, got most of the city funds allocated for the BAA. And perhaps most stunning of all, the esteemed Corp. Counsel obstructed sending out subpoenas at every turn, presumably on the Mayor’s behalf, said they were moot because both Newton and Harris would testify - and Harris still didn’t show!! The Mayor’s generally done a very good job for the city, but he’s been in there too long if he thinks the public doesn’t recognize abuse of power when they see it. This will be remembered next election - count on that. It’s too bad that DeStefano will be remembered this way. Absolute power does corrupt absolutely.

posted by: Chris Gray on September 19, 2010  9:33pm

Come on!  The guy began his “royal” approach to the strong mayor model he follows right from the start and the only thing that trimmed his sails, at all, was Paul’s reporting at the Advocate! 

Then, for a while, he was a good government convert until he decided the power of the press had been diluted enough by shrinking resources and lowering public interest (by the numbers) that it was safe to return to the thug and reward system that’s been in place with entrenched local corrupt Democrats for generations, here!

posted by: Chris Gray on September 19, 2010  9:40pm

Actually, I keep wondering if Bill O’Brien was my 6th grade teacher at Village Street School in No. Haven.  Same name,anyhow.

posted by: Anon on September 20, 2010  2:31am

Thanks guys.

Correction Tom, other place you see the term “board of assessment appeals” is in the city’s own legal notices posting the meeting in the newspaper.

Anyway, don’t know how they are going to put on any kind of show in their sept meeting. Newton is going to show? If not he, who?

Re O’brien’s “industry standard” assessments. I wasted tons of time today reading state tax assessment statutes and from what I read, O’brien’s standard for those arbitrary assessments would never hold up in court.

If there is a way to get office of policy and management to look at it, that would be nice. No way all those poor artists are going to hire lawyers and sue.

get ANDI

Events Calendar

view the full calendar »

SeeClickFix »

Water leak from hydrant?
Feb 22, 2012 2:54 pm
Address: 75 Bishop St New Haven, CT
Rating: 1

On the north side of Bishop, starting from the hydrant at 75, water is slowly flowing east along the...

more »
one of the traffic signals is out
Feb 22, 2012 5:01 pm
Address: Middletown Ave New Haven, CT
Rating: 2

the traffic signal in the right lane of rte 80 is out at this intersection

Flyerboard

Sponsors

N.H.I. Site Design & Development

smartpill design