Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-05-11-REPSC-min Residential Exemption Policy Study Committee (Ad Hoc) Draft Minutes Friday, May 11, 2018 Hudson Room, Cary Memorial Building Attendance Mark Andersen, Chair;John Zhao; Howard Cloth; Katie Cutler;Thomas Whelan, Sara Bothwell Allen,Joe Pato, Selectman Liaison. Absent Vicki Blier. Guests: Bob Pressman. Carolyn Kosroff, Lexington Financial Director, Rob Lent, Lexington Assessor and Michael Golden,Assistant Assessor. Mr. Andersen called the meeting to order at 8:39 a.m. Ms. Cutler agreed to be the acting secretary for the meeting. Mr. Andersen asked if the meeting could be recorded and Mr. Lent agreed Approval of Minutes The minutes of the March 30, 2018 meeting were reviewed and approved. Questions and Discussions from the Committee to the Town Officials Mr. Andersen asked Mr. Lent to review the questions sent to him from Committee Chair Mark Andersen in April. Mr. Lent reviewed with committee what the Assessor's office is invested in and their mission. He also commented on what the assessor's office avoids in their role. He continued to say that the questions do not align with their office's perspective. Mr. Andersen stated that the role of the committee is to create a recommendation for the Board of Selectman (BOS), and to understand the implementation challenges. He added that we are looking for guidance on how this would affect your office (resources,work load, administration). Mr. Lent stated that his office takes directions from Finance Director, Ms. Carolyn Kosroff and the BOS. Mr. Andersen asked if we should meet with Ms. Kosroff regarding these questions, using the example of"Verification of Residency' and Mr. Lent commented that his office does not perform this task. Mr. Andersen asked if we can continue discussing some of the questions that may pertain to the Assessors office. Mr. Lent stated that he can respond to questions regarding "how the assessors office works."At this point Ms. Kosroff added that the town has not researched this topic nor have they reached out to other towns. She feels more research would be needed. Mr. Andersen asked how to proceed in an effective manner. His concerns dealt with the financial aspect of implementing a program and how it would affect the assessors' office. Ms. Kosroff stated that the office has had some changes from administrative staff to field staff. She thinks the initiative would be two part- 1) Implementation (more administrative) and 2) on-going. Staffing should be considered but not be a factor. Mr. Pato agreed that the cost is not part of the recommendations task of this committee. We reviewed the prepared questions allowing Mr. Lent and others to only comment on items that were deemed appropriate. SEE ATTACHED -Questions for Lexington Assessor(Rob Lent)from Residential Exemption Policy Committee (April 2018) ITEMS THAT WERE NOT REVIEWED IN DETAIL 1.Verification of Residency—Mr. Golden commented that in other towns verification is the burden of the resident 2. Condominiums and Condominium Conversion 3. Personal Property Tax- comment was that Lexington is not geared to this issue based on lack of manpower and few rentals. This tax happens mostly in a summer rental situation. Assessor office effort-covered Mr. Cloth wondered if they had ever had high school volunteers in the assessor's office and Mr. Lent stated they had seniors only and it was not very successful. Classes of Residential Property Regardless of size or buildable property tax is not affected New Growth Report Any building permit given that constitutes new growth, meaning if it is perceived by the market to increase property value it's considered new growth. The question is: "If the market perceives an increase,it is considered new growth. Any changes in square footage is considered new growth. Other questions and comments Guest Pressman questioned the assessment of apartment complexes vs their sale price. This question was asked relating to the fairness issue regarding assessing apartments vs single family homes. Mr. Lent explained how the assessor's office works and they do a pretty good job and do not miss much. All valuations are systematic but have a baseline. Mr. Golden offered to pass any questions about how Waltham implemented RE. Mr. Andersen commented that the committee would consolidate potential questions and submit. At approx. 9:20—Mr. Lent and Mr.Golden left the meeting Mr. Whalen presented the Massachusetts Mean Tested Exemption Laws for Senior Citizens (Sudbury) (MMTE) See attached Mr. Whelan reviewed his findings regarding the MMTE report emphasizing the following- 1. Program was for seniors 65 or older who have lived in Sudbury for 10 years 2. Owner occupied 3. Prove with circuit breaker calculation that you are in need There was a discussion if seniors benefited from increases in market values vs seniors' with high value homes and less equity. Mr. Whalen commented he did not get a sense of this issue. It was agreed that Mr. Whalen would research other towns to make the information more comprehensive, as there could be different criteria in different towns. Mr. Zhao wondered if RE in itself can be means tested (overlay) It was stated that RE is a state law and means testing and or the combination had not been explored. We can ask but it would be unlikely and time consuming. Sudbury's history with means testing took years at town and state level to approve There was a conversation regarding assets and equity, questioning how the home rule petition was written in Sudbury. There was a comment made that the 10 year requirement demonstrates residents' commitment to the community. This criteria may show a fairness issue based on the residents' investment in their town.. In addition, it was mentioned that the state's circuit breaker method and assets play a part in REs. Guest Pressman - Questioned what the cost was to resident who had to pay more. This was discussed in length. We ended the meeting making changes to the public hearing announcements and public hearing timeline. We agreed that Mr. Andersen will do the presentation, and he will submit to the committee for review during next meeting. Also, he wants to remove the FAQ session (which is reflected in the updated timeline). Both the announcements and timeline are attached. The meeting was adjourned by Mr. Andersen on behalf of the Committee at 10:10 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Katie Cutler,Acting Secretary