Resident raises concern over CCA involvement

In light of an ordinance seeking approval from Amherst City Council for a permanent part-time tax assistant position, a resident voiced concern about an ordinance authorizing an agreement with the city of Cleveland’s Central Collection Agency.

John Mowcomber said he worries the agreement does not reap the benefits at the cost of residents’ privacy.

“I think we’re all worried about our personal information being compromised,” said Mowcomber during a City Council meeting Nov. 26.

The ordinance, passed by Council in 2012, allowed the city treasurer to enter an agreement with the Division of Taxation in an attempt to increase Amherst’s tax revenue “as a way to catch what we call non filers,” said Amherst Treasurer Richard Ramsey.

The city’s agreement with the Central Collection Agency had not been finalized until this year, according to Councilman Brian Dembinski, and requires the city to send basic information of residents, including names and addresses, to the Central Collection Agency.

The Central Collection Agency then confirms who has filed income tax returns on the federal level, but not with the city, Ramsey said.

Mowcomber said the Central Collection Agency’s ability to access federal files without the authorization of residents is concerning.

Letters were sent to residents who have not filed income tax returns sometime between September and October this year.

However, the Central Collection Agency mistakenly sent notices to residents outside the jurisdiction in Amherst Township and South Amherst, Ramsey said.

Mowcomber said a friend of his, an Amherst Township resident, received one of these letters that threatened jail time if the recipient did not pay the full allowance in 10 days.

“The real important part is they don’t owe this tax,” he said. “The point of providing this letter is to prove ... these are heavy-handed tactics, giving someone 10 days to pay a $100,000 penalty.”

Mowcomber cited public records of the Central Collection Agency’s distribution of funds for years 2015 through 2017.

Since Amherst’s numbers were not available, he used Lorain as an example of limited profitability.

Of the three years post, Lorain’s most profitable year as a special member of the Central Collection Agency was in 2016, having earned $23,117.57, Mowcomber said.

The next profitable year was in 2017 at $9,648.29, he said.

“How much money do you have to take in to make this kind of thing justifiable?” Mowcomber said. “The numbers we see from Lorain, it’s not justifiable to me. That’s 33 cents a resident in the best year of those three years.”

Ramsey estimated that so far this year, the city has paid the Central Collection Agency $190 and has received less than $100.

Dembinski said he reached out to the Central Collection Agency earlier this year and said limited earning may actually be a good thing.

“(The Central Collection Agency) said, ‘Good news, we actually aren’t collecting money and that’s good because that means that the treasurer’s office is doing a good job at making sure that they’ve contacted all necessary residents and are collecting all the taxes that they should,’” he said.

However, Councilman Phil Van Treuren said it was concerning that the city may lose money due to the agreement.

“Just for simplicity’s sake, if we’re not collecting any money on this at all, we don’t need to pay anything in order to get a pat on the back and say ‘good job,’” Van Treuren said.

Mowcomber said the price isn’t worth residents’ right to privacy.

The treasurer’s office will compile additional information including the city’s contractual obligations with the Central Collection Agency and how many households have been identified to bring to Council when its next report is due.