Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-03-30-REPSC-min Residential Exemption Policy Study Committee (Ad Hoc) Minutes Friday, March 30, 2018 Hudson Room, Cary Memorial Building Attendance Mark Andersen, Chair;Vicki Blier; Howard Cloth; Katie Cutler;Thomas Whelan,Joe Pato, Selectman Liaison. Absent John Zhao. Guest: Bob Pressman. Mr. Andersen called the meeting to order at 8:30 a.m. Mr. Whelan agreed to be the acting secretary for the meeting. Approval of Minutes The minutes of the March 16, 2018 meeting were reviewed and approved. Guiding Principles As suggested in the minutes of the March 16, 2018 meeting,the 'fairness' aspect will be discussed as part of the presentation on Social Impact. Glossary of Terms Ms. Blier distributed an update of the 'Glossary of Terms'. Break-Even Point Mr. Andersen stated that this calculation can be confusing and noted that in other communities the effort is assessor led. Ms. Blier indicated how homeowners receive information on their tax bills and some fail to pay attention to critical data and time deadlines. Initial Outline for the Residential Exemption Report Ms. Blier distributed the subject report dated March 29, 2018. It was agreed that Committee members would review this report at home. Reference Materials for Other Communities with Residential Exemption Document • Spreadsheet"Mr. Andersen identifies that for many towns he was unable to find information in the time allotted, and so the benchmarking spreadsheet showing breakdown, median, and other values has mostly empty cells." • Mr. Andersen stated "that all municipalities should remain on the list." • Evidence required—most concentrated on tax returns • How do we deal with residents who spend their winters in Florida. Mr. Cloth indicated that some are 'non-resident'taxpayers on their Massachusetts returns. • Some elderly residents don't pay taxes! • Mr. Andersen—evidence will be re-submitted yearly. 1 • Mr. Whelan referenced the article distributed by Mr. Andersen re: Boston's problem with taxpayer's who received the exemption which they were not eligible for. Societal Impact Mr. Cloth provided members with a handout on the topic'Societal Impact'. He commented that he had no idea how deep the pool was until he dove in. He referenced the website "MyLocalTaxes.com." as a good source. • Our final report—what we produce must be helpful to the Board and residents. • Transparency factor vs. sales tax. Mr. Cloth cited economists who referenced transactional taxes vs regressive taxes. • Ms. Blier expressed that some who study taxation feel that property tax is important • on the local level because it is not as volatile as income-based taxation. Other academics • have stated that property taxation is not regressive because it is a tax on capital. • The question of fairness was discussed. o Do we impose a shift in the first place? o Timing. Political vs economic impact of new federal tax laws. o Implementation mechanism. Is it equitable? Reference:" My local taxes.com website." o What would Board or Town Meeting consider fair? o It would seem that town would want to do it especially for groups such as senior and veterans. Why Now? Mr. Cloth commented that since 2000 that there has been a threefold increase in the taxes on the average house (ex. Used $4,600-$13,800). Ms. Blier stated that the average house cited each year is not the same house that was the average house the previous year because less expensive houses are torn down and replaced by very expensive houses. Mr. Pato indicated that this example could easily be misunderstood. • It was felt that the example would have to be a house that had not been improved when calculating taxes paid by the homeowner. • Mr. Pato indicated that this should be worked on off-line. • Mr. Andersen told Mr. Cloth that this document was very helpful and Mr. Cloth indicated that fairness is critical and made it clear that this was a first draft. • Mr. Andersen raised the issue of apartments. How do we approach this topic? Burden on landlords. • Affordable housing—will it be impacted? Ms. Blier suggested two sections in our report • Effect on apartment buildings and other rental properties • Possible indirect consequences. Ms. Blier suggested that the report have sections dealing with: • Apartment buildings and other rentals • Possible indirect consequences Mr. Whelan noted that Lexington's ranking as a sought after location had improved from#20 to#8 and this hasn't had any effect on rising property values. Ms. Andersen agreed to take on the impact on apartment buildings. Ms. Cutler stated that there are more houses rented than apartments. Mr. Cloth stated that the over 60 group represented 25%of the demographic; he also indicated that seniors are 'taken for granted'. 2 It was also noted that there is the question of Lexington High School—Remodel, Rebuild? Objective: How do we define our assumptions to provide residents with adequate notice? What do we present get the best feedback? We need to support the work the Assessor's Department will need to do if an exemption program is adopted. The program, if adopted, must be reviewed every year which provides an opportunity to make necessary adjustments. Public Hearings Mr. Andersen—early to get information; Later to present proposals. We are required to have at least one hearing to explain process; maybe a second meeting to present how we arrived at a recommendation. Ms. Blier—likely most who want it will attend. Should be have a targeted hearing? Mr. Pato—public hearings must be unfiltered. A meeting can solicit specific groups. Mr. Whelan will report on the mechanics that will be required by the Assessor's Department for an exemption program and the alternative tax mitigation systems currently in place. The meeting was adjourned by Mr. Andersen on behalf of the Committee at 10:00 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Thomas Whelan,Acting Secretary 3