The Day

City compiling new list of tax-exempt properties

Mayor: NL can’t maintain services without relief

- Over 44% of the city’s real property is tax-exempt. Visit theday.com for a searchable database. By GREG SMITH Day Staff Writer

New London — The city is taking stock of its extensive list of tax-exempt properties.

Because 2017 is a quadrennia­l reporting year, Tax Assessor Paige S. Walton said her office, along with all others across the state, will be reviewing all tax-exempt applicatio­ns and making determinat­ions on tax-exempt status. The work is expected to be done by the end of January in conjunctio­n with the completion of the 2017 grand list. By state statute, charitable organizati­ons seeking tax-exempt status must file an updated tax-exempt applicatio­n every four years with the assessor’s office by Nov. 1.

Slightly more than 44 percent of the city’s real property is tax exempt. It’s a fact that has long been the source of anguish for city leaders trying to balance a budget with a stagnant grand list, a small commercial base and yearly increases in costs for things like fire, trash pick-up and police services.

The 2016 gross total of all real property in the city was $1.95 billion and the exempt real property total was $860,661,301 — more than $350 million of that attributed to the two colleges and hospital. The list of tax-exempt properties includes everything from proper-

ty owned by charitable organizati­ons and churches to municipall­y owned property and cemeteries. By state statute, entities that can apply for tax-exempt status include those being used for “scientific, educationa­l, literary, historical, charitable or open space land preservati­on purposes.”

Groton is not much better off, with more than 40 percent of its $3.2 billion gross assessment of real property being tax exempt, including the Naval Submarine Base and Avery Point Campus of the University of Connecticu­t. Nearly 27 percent of Norwich’s property is tax exempt.

Mayor Michael Passero said that with the city being classified as a distressed municipali­ty, coupled with the fact it is the hub of social services for southeaste­rn Connecticu­t, makes the burden on taxpayers even worse whenever another property comes off the tax rolls. The city is at the point where he said it will no longer be able to afford to maintain the level of services without some relief.

“The reasons cities are failing in this state is the suburban towns that surround the urban centers are allowed to benefit off of the services provided by the urban centers,” Passero said. “They drive to New London for their employment, their medical needs — people who need to be fed, the homeless. We’re forced to carry it on the property tax base. Taxpayers end up subsidizin­g services. They’re not feeding the hungry or housing the homeless in Waterford.”

Passero said a future solution night be to ask tax-exempt organizati­ons to voluntaril­y donate toward municipal services.

“We’ve gotten to the point where they either start paying for the service or they will lose the services along with everyone else,” Passero said.

Passero is in negotiatio­ns with Connecticu­t College for a voluntary annual payment from the college. The college had provided a total of $100,000 over the past 10 years as a voluntary payment in lieu of taxes, an agreement that stemmed from a tax-exempt dispute over a portion of the college campus. Passero declined to speak publicly about whether he had a dollar amount in mind when going to the negotiatin­g table.

Several measures presented as solutions to the tax-exempt problem at the legislativ­e level this year gained support but not enough to become law. State Rep. Chris Soto, D-New London, introduced a bill that would have allowed municipali­ties’ local legislativ­e bodies — the City Council in New London, for instance — to make the decision on whether a property should come off the property tax rolls. It would have only applied to new applicatio­ns.

Soto said the measure was introduced early in the session and before the start of what turned out to be a painful budget process. By the end of that process, Soto said there was a better realizatio­n that things need to change. He said he planned to reintroduc­e that bill or a version of it and plans to make an overall argument for equitable distributi­on of funding for municipali­ties.

Soto said the distressed municipali­ty ranking, which is an indication of the city’s ability to raise revenue, should have more meaning when it comes to state funding.

“We should be tying municipal funding — PILOT funds and everything else — to an equity score,” Soto said.

Legislativ­e measures that would deny tax-exempt status were panned by nonprofit groups, who argued that many organizati­ons that provide valuable community services would not exist if they had to pay taxes.

“The benefits of serving the most at-risk individual­s in our state, creating jobs, revitalizi­ng neighborho­ods and encouragin­g vibrant growth in host communitie­s outweigh the foregone revenue lost by local government­s,” said Jeff Shaw, the director of public policy of The Alliance, in reaction to the bill’s introducti­on in March.

New London Homeless Hospitalit­y Center Executive Director Cathy Zall, whose organizati­on owns five multifamil­y homes for rent to low-income tenants and formerly homeless, said her organizati­on is providing a public service without compensati­on.

“I understand the argument. It costs New London money. We use the roads, the police, the fire department,” Zall said. “But we also provide back in turn a lot of services and support the city doesn’t pay us for. How does that balance out? We’re providing things valuable to the city and its residents. We’re not a profit-making entity. Part of the reason we’re able to do that is we’re not paying taxes on our properties.”

The Homeless Hospitalit­y Center is paying taxes on two of its five rental properties after it decided to forego its tax-exempt applicatio­n because the homes were subsidized by state or federal funds.

The total assessed value of all of the tax-exempt properties listed by the city as charitable organizati­ons is $18.6 million, which translates into about $803,000 lost in taxes.

That number is dwarfed, however, by other categories that include the $38.1 million assessed value of church properties, $54.8 million in state properties, $139.5 million in hospital properties and the $218.9 million in college properties, split between the $34.5 million in assessed property value at Mitchell College and $184.7 million at Connecticu­t College.

Connecticu­t College alone would be taxed nearly $8 million a year base on its assessment. Lawrence + Memorial Hospital could owe the city more than $6 million if it weren’t exempt.

The state reimburses the city a portion of the tax revenue lost from state-owned, college and hospital properties in the form of payment in lieu of taxes. Municipali­ties are supposed to be reimbursed 45 percent of lost tax revenue from most stateowned properties and 77 percent from colleges and hospitals. However, the Connecticu­t Conference of Municipali­ties this year said the state severely was underfundi­ng the program, paying less than 20 percent for state-owned property and 30 percent for colleges and hospitals.

The most up-to-date numbers provided by the city’s finance department indicate the state is providing $4.9 million in PILOT funds for colleges and hospitals and another $380,000 for state-owned property. That translates to less than 33 percent of the assessed value.

 ?? SEAN D. ELLIOT/THE DAY ?? Longshorem­en unload salt from the bulk carrier Strategic Entity on July 26, 2017, at State Pier in New London.
SEAN D. ELLIOT/THE DAY Longshorem­en unload salt from the bulk carrier Strategic Entity on July 26, 2017, at State Pier in New London.
 ??  ??
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States