patching...
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!

Tax Freeze Amendment Fizzles Before Council Vote

The amendment proposed by Councilman Ted Jendzejec was not seconded at Monday's meeting.

 

 

At Monday night's meeting, members of the Coventry Town Council discussed a proposal, originally introduced by Councilman Ted Jendzejec last year to amend Article III of Section 217 of the Coventry Code of Ordinances. The amendment would allow senior citizens that currently have their property taxes frozen to come off of the tax freeze and pay taxes on the lower assessed value of their properties until values increase, a point at which they could take the freeze once again. Currently, once a resident drops the tax freeze, they are not given another opportunity to take advantage of it.

After much discussion, no council members would provide a second to move forward with the amendment, allowing nothing to come from the Jendzejec'sproposal.

Jendzejec explained that allowing seniors to come off the tax freeze while assessments are low would allow many of them to keep their homes instead of having to sell. He said that this would control the school population from spiraling out of control, therefore saving taxpayers money that would have to be spent on the school budget if families with children moved into the vacated properties.

"You have to ask, if someone on the tax freeze sells their home and a family with school children comes in, at about $6,000 per child after the state reimbursement, what will that do for the tax rate?" he asked.

"I believe this amendment would pay for itself in the long run," Jendzejec went on to say.

Council President Gary Cote argued that he does not think the amendment would be fair to those taxpayers who continue to pay full property tax that can fluctuate with the housing market.

"I just cannot justify the seniors and people who receive the disability tax freeze getting two bites at the same apple," he said. "I don't think it's fair that everyone else would have to pay for that twice through an increase in their own taxes when we all get the same services. When property values were higher, people on the freeze weren't coming forward offering to pay the higher tax amount."

Related Topics: Coventry Town Council and Coventry Town Ordinance

A Taxpayer

9:03 am on Wednesday, September 26, 2012

Jendzejec's proposal was doomed to fail. Was this a pre-election stunt to gain favor with his constituents, or was it really proposed in earnest? Would love to read Ted's side in more detail.

Unfortunate to see the rest of the Council's attitude. It gives the impression that they have little interest in helping taxpayers because it restricts their ability to spend more money each year. With elections around the corner, is it time for a sweeping change?

Reply
Comment_arrow

coventry voter-Jay

10:52 am on Wednesday, September 26, 2012

You may be correct on the TC's attitude but this would have cost the rest of us more in taxes, and I dont care how little the increase would have been. They all had a choice when to freeze their taxes. The town didnt seek them out, They went to the town asking.
In the days before the freeze, seniors were at every meeting voting down every spending increase. Now the only people who atted the FTM are the unions and special interest. The seniors stay home because spending more in town has no effect on them. Believe me Ted knows this he is a pro politico. Its his job

coventry voter-Jay

10:42 am on Wednesday, September 26, 2012

Teddy tried his magic here and if he had been successful the rest of us would have paid higher taxes to make up for it. The current senior tax freeze is working to keep seniors in their homes, and I disagree that these new lower rate will pay for themselves.
.
The real reason people are not moving to Coventry in droves is all of us who are not frozen pay much higher rates to make up the difference of the generous senior and disability frozen rates.
What is the incentive to move to Coventry?
High Taxes (in most towns this rate includes fire)
add
High fire district taxes.
add
Sewer assessments well above what most cities charge +8% interest because the TC decided to fund it locally instead of the feds doing it.
.
Many of us are stuck here because you have give your house away to sell it.
And oh what a great school system we have High pay/low test scores
Welcome to Coventry!!
My thanks go out to Pres Cote for stopping this amendment.
I agree Teddy Magic was pandering to the seniors on this one
Glad it failed

Reply
Comment_arrow

coventry voter-Jay

10:53 am on Wednesday, September 26, 2012

If you want to increase voter turnout Get rid of all the freezes

really

11:36 am on Wednesday, September 26, 2012

typical Coventry I want service but I dont want to pay for it (WAkE UP PEOPLE !) its not 1918 anymore, this isn't a little mill town .

Reply

Rebecca Thomas

12:19 pm on Wednesday, September 26, 2012

Coventry Voter is a coward---sign your name

Reply
Comment_arrow

coventry voter-Jay

9:32 am on Thursday, September 27, 2012

Becky is that You?
It's James Fennor, You can call me Jay

Richard Flint

12:35 pm on Wednesday, September 26, 2012

I find it interesting that Coventry Voter is a constant critic of those that serve yet does not have the decency to use his real name.... Coventry Voter(SD): Do not be such a coward and at least sign your name...better still show up and offer some solutions or put your name on an election ballot and run for office.....

Reply

Richard Flint

12:38 pm on Wednesday, September 26, 2012

and btw : That senior tax exemption needs and Household Income Test Component similar to Burrillville.....

Reply

A Taxpayer

12:48 pm on Wednesday, September 26, 2012

Yeah, after some further thought on this topic, I'm a bit surprised at Jendzejec's proposal. He put the rest of the Council in a tough spot, because now they appear to not care about the needs of Coventry senior citizens. While he selfishly may have gained some brownie points with that demographic in his district, he risks alienating taxpayers who are sick and tired of paying more taxes while both the Council and School Committee failed to tighten their belts during difficult economic times. Did he think this through? It's a no-win scenario for anybody.

Looks like he's commented on his Facebook, but fails to state his opinion on the outcome. http://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=498605580151626&id=177498292262358

Reply

Concerned Senior

2:16 pm on Wednesday, September 26, 2012

Ted Jendzejec is knowledgeable of the hardship placed on seniors fixed income without any increase in social security for years, cost of heating, etc. to be able to stay in our homestead. Council President Cote indicates it wouldn't be fair to taxpayers who continue to pay FULL PROPERTY TAX that can fluctuate with housing market. Taxpayers are NOT paying full property tax as the valuations have decreased tremendously on their 2012 tax bill.

When the freeze amendment was introduced it was with the intent to ease the burden on senior citizens and enable them to live in their homes on a fixed income. It was never anticipated that the valuation of homes would decrease by $50,000 or more. So Mr. Cote the frozen senior taxes for 2012 are MORE than the regular taxpayers share. Mine is $500 more than if I unfreeze and paid the current valuation and current increased rate. Does this seem fair or that we are asking to much from you? If seniors, like myself, unfreeze their taxes than in fact "we are taking two bites of the poisoned apple" by paying current higher tax rate and losing disability or senior credit deduction. The disability tax credit was clumped in the tax freeze ordiance because the Council or Solicitor didn't know wherelse to put it, and that's a fact! Think again Mr. cote, we seniors lose twice when we unfreeze. If tax freeze cannot be refrozen than disability credit should be allowed when unfreezing tax rate and valuation.

Thanks Mr. McGee for seconding!

Reply

A Taxpayer

3:23 pm on Wednesday, September 26, 2012

I'd agree with allowing seniors to unfreeze-freeze their property tax if the measure was accompanied by some sort of spending reduction. Maybe we could go back to one Asst. Superintendent, or the town could re-evaluate if as many as 4 Asst. Principals are really needed at the high school.

Reply

4 Generations

4:23 pm on Wednesday, September 26, 2012

What is so difficult in reducing the tax freeze to seniors with the reduction in property values and then holding in the hopeful future at the highest rate paid in the past.

It seems logical and fair.

I do realize that many of these frozen tax seniors did not pay at the highest level when evaluations where sky rocketing. I see the the Presidents arguement but we all have taken a hit with salary and benefit reductions / increased payment.

Lets take care of the seniors and possibly then they would see in kind to vote for bond referendums that will benefit their grandchildren.

Reply

mad hatter

5:37 pm on Wednesday, September 26, 2012

the tax rate is set to the approved budget. if the budget stays the same, your total bill should be the same regardless if the valuations go up or down. everyone is revalued at the same time so noone is ahead or behind.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Concerned Senior

3:25 pm on Thursday, September 27, 2012

Mathimatically speaking it does make a difference if the valuations go up or down as you simply multiply the tax rate, if it stays the same, by the value and this initself proves that the tax bill will be different.

Leave a comment