Mayor Bill Finch has issued the 2010 grand list of taxable property. The mayor was hoping to squeeze as much as possible for his election year budget that he will submit to the City Council next month. Prediction: irrespective of a tough budget year the mayor will submit a spending plan with a big hole, no tax increase and declare victory. He might not tell you there’s a big hole to fill. Hey, it’s an election year.
In his statement below the mayor doesn’t over hype the modest increase in the grand list that he describes as “respectable.” He laments “Connecticut’s dysfunctional tax system,” something he failed to change during his seven years in the State Senate. The mayor includes in his news release a list of the top 10 taxpayers. Alas, what happened to those industrial powerhouses? Watermark 3030 Park and Success Village Apartments in the top 10? From the mayor:
Mayor Finch Announces 2010 Grand List
Mayor Bill Finch today announced the completion of the 2010 Grand List, which shows an increase in net taxable property of $2.9 million from the 2009 Net Grand List. The total 2010 Net Grand List is $7,022,705,240 billion.
By category, the increases are as follows: $11.2 million in net personal property, and $20.6 million in motor vehicles; net real property went down $29 million, due to an increase in real property exemptions. The overall Gross Grand List (prior to deductions of all Exemptions and Exempt Property) grew by nearly $112.5 million. Exempt real estate now composes $3 billion in assessed value, or approximately 33.63% of the Total Real Property component of $8.95 billion.
“Despite this respectable news, Connecticut continues to be held back by its over-reliance on property taxes to fund local government and schools,” said Mayor Bill Finch. “Though Bridgeport continues to hold its own in a very difficult economy, the Park City suffers from Connecticut’s dysfunctional tax system. Three of the United States’ smallest cities, Bridgeport, New Haven and Hartford, all with modest amounts of taxable property, suffer the loss of at least one-third of all real property value because they are not taxable.”
Acting Tax Assessor Elaine Carvalho, CCMA, said she was pleased with the modest growth in the 2010 Grand List noting that, “The City’s real estate economy continues to hold its own; however, we have a greater number of exemptions than our neighboring towns.”
In accordance with Connecticut General Statutes, the 2010 Grand List reflects a 70% assessment ratio.
The Top Ten Taxpayers – Real Estate / Personal Property Combined for 2010 are as follows:
Rank | Owner | Assessment
1 | CRRA/US Bank National Association/James Mogavera* | $ 320,948,352
2 | United Illuminating | $ 211,997,036
3 | PSEG Power Connecticut LLC | $ 152,689,120
4 | People’s United Bank | $ 58,727,604
5 | Connecticut Light & Power | $ 55,423,829
6 | Bridgeport Energy LLC | $ 36,166,277
7 | Southern Connecticut Gas | $ 34,364,683
8 | AT&T Mobility | $ 30,809,473
9 | Watermark 3030 Park | $ 29,736,500
10 | Success Village Apartments | $ 24,269,140
Total
$ 955,132,014
*dba Wheelabrator
When Mr. Grimaldi laments Bill Finch’s inability to change Connecticut’s entire tax structure, I wonder how many of those years he was Bill Finch’s political guru.
I know this will make a lot of people angry but here goes.
Based on what I read above, 33% of all property in Bridgeport is tax exempt. Why is that?
Why are the hospitals tax exempt? Has anyone seen these two Bridgeport-based hospitals and how they have grown? Has anyone reviewed a hospital bill lately? Making them tax exempt is wrong.
How many more storefront churches are we going to have in Bridgeport? Based on the number of churches we have this should be a crime-free city and everyone should be singing hymns.
Many of these storefront churches are scams that the “pastor” gets the storefront tax exempt his home and his cars tax exempt in the mean time he works a regular job and turns the collar around on Saturday and Sunday. It’s time to truly separate church and state and let them all pay taxes.
Define legitimate religion. My cousin is a fully ordained Catholic priest in a remote town 75 miles from another remote town in New Mexico. He works at the local gas station and convenience store 6 days a week to earn money to cover the weekend donation shortfall. He’s been doing this for 30 years. La Iglesia de Jesuses all over the place serve a purpose if even to 1 or 2 families who like to hear that particular iteration of the golden rule. Surely there are many fraudulent mail-order buffoons sporting the roman collar but there are many who do good even if the flock they serve is tiny. Not worth the effort. The good ones deserve the tax break. Besides, like my cousin, the church couldn’t exist if property tax were added to the operating costs.
Just so happens the newly elected State Representative, Rev. Charlie Stallworth, lives in a lakefront home on Lake Forest tax free. Why is this? He is pastor of East End Baptist Church on Central Avenue, and the church parsonage is located in the Lake Forest neighborhood–in the North End. How hard will the Rev work to reign in and reduce the number of tax-exempt properties in Bridgeport? If you don’t walk the walk, you cannot talk the talk. No disrespect to religious, nonprofit organizations. I’m just sayin’ …
yahooy, tell your cousin I have a nice property available on Pembroke St.
TC—from your mouth to God’s ear. They should be looked at individually & evaluated. Also you’re right about hospitals. They are Mega-Money dynamos that could easily afford to carry their own weight. Or at least tax their out-of-town clients.
There is a church that recently was built on Huntington Turnpike. They bought two houses that were there and tore down both houses to build their church. The city lost $13,000 in property taxes on these 2 buildings. yahooy, maybe churches that are too small to function should close and combine with other churches.
If what was said here about Stallworth is true then it is another example of what is wrong with the non-profit non-taxpaying properties and ministries.
You can bet your ass these halfway houses are making a ton of money for their owners and yet they are tax free.
How much are the local taxpayers supposed to swallow because of this disgusting loophole in the tax structure?
Except when it comes to Ernest “T,” I am not of single mindedness. Stallworth’s tax-free status for the Lake Forest home would appear to be an abomination. Just consider the rectories around town that are mansion-like that also receive tax-exempt status, given that rectories are generally adjacent to the church. Yet there is a piece of property in either Fairfield or Bridgeport known as the Bishop’s home that is tax exempt and for years the Bishop’s summer place at Seaside was tax exempt but then became the property of UB as a Catholic Newman Center and maintained tax-exempt status. My point? Stallworth is legit. His home deserves tax exempt status like all rectories regardless of whether they are right next door to the church or not.
BUT, I tend to agree that some of these storefront cathedrals should consolidate. I see where abuse can be rampant.
Thank God the values of Used Cars went up! Bill always reminded me of a used-car salesman sans the white belt and shoes. Problem is his honor should be so honorable.
Grin Ripper:
I hope you’re taking advantage of the used car price reversal that’s been so popular in reducing dealerships in Bridgeport and elsewhere in the USA. Lower taxes are a major feature in its ongoing success and a factor rarely mentioned here (it contributes to lower municipal revenues).
Can you believe some people are distracted by white shoes & a belt when a vital political issue comes into focus?
Understand used cars better and maybe you’d stop dissing The Mayor of Bridgeport.
I sure do depreciate your concern! I’m blinded by the white!
Liars Figure but Figures Don’t Lie! Maybe someday the Mayor will Figure this out.
See you at Exit 27A!
CounterPoint:
If there’s nothing of value, there’s nothing to tax.
If you don’t believe me, just ask Sal DiNardo.
“… If there’s nothing of value, there’s nothing to tax …”
Whoa, Local Eyes! Are you saying Churches are “nothing of value?”
Like “Local Eyes” posts … nothing of value.
I think the talk of consolidating churches is a bit much. Small storefront churches are not causing the financial problems of Bridgeport. We are talking about people who want to serve their Lord and Savior in their church and they are not breaking any laws but now they are a problem, and we can now balance the City’s budget by moving on storefront churches.
Not all non-profits are churches. If I’m the director of a non-profit agency that serves food to the poor and I live in a separate house from my food pantry location, should my home and place of residence; my car, or business/non profit equipment be tax exempt?
Ron Mackey // Mar 2, 2011 at 1:47 pm
To your posting
Ron,
A solid observation.
While they are many, small storefronts are certainly vulnerable to a determination by the City that would tax them.
The larger picture might first call for a moratorium on additional non-profits for a specific time to allow a City administration (not the current one by any means) to take the kind of inventory now needed in order to get numbers that will help with long-term planning for Bridgeport. I believe the City’s Master Plan is the best place to start in building this inventory. Such an inventory will certainly be able to provide an accurate picture of the non-profit breakdown of property use in Bridgeport. Then a substantive conversation could begin.
I will tell you I have genuine concerns about those who asked us to “render to God what is God’s and render to Caesar what is Caesar’s” who wear both hats.
I have concern with the balancing act Reverend Stallworth now has. His church members? His constituents?
I left town this morning around 8:10 AM to testify in Hartford at a legislative hearing on certain bills advanced by our Representative Auden Grogins that deal with property taxes as they affect property owners in Bridgeport. There were about nine other Bridgeport residents present to provide testimony and comment on the situation here in Bridgeport.
Mayor Finch testified in the morning along with the Senators, Representatives, Mayors, and various other “officials” who have preferred standing in the speaking pecking order. He told his former colleagues about how difficult it was to be a Mayor of a territory only 16 miles square with our large population of variously needy folks. Panelists shared with him that they are hesitant to send money to the big cities where money seems to disappear without accountability. Interesting dialogue, huh?
The following is the last part of my testimony to those at the hearing. It will echo what others have said, but I have already asked too many learned in the law and/or in public finance who do not know why not for profits are treated so special currently. Funds from this sector might assist the City in the near term anyway. What do you think? Or know? Where do we take this issue?
FROM STATEMENT TO HEARING 3-2-11: I would speak of a long term issue that needs research and action by the State legislature. This morning the CT Post reported that the Bridgeport Grand List stands at $9 Billion but that $3 Billion is non-taxpaying for a variety of reasons. There is government property: municipal, State and Federal. There are hospitals. Some of these generate payment in lieu of taxes but not at a level that is comparable to property owners. There is property owned by religious institutions. Let us ignore those properties at this time. It would leave us primarily with property that is owned by or that house not for profit organizations serving the public as 501c3 entities. As such they enjoy special status for revenues being non-taxable as income. And most of these have a requirement of annual statements of financial condition and services rendered (Form 990).
However, since these programs benefit from fire, police and other municipal public programs, what public purpose is served by the land and property being removed from municipal property taxation? These organizations do not produce offspring, so perhaps they should not contribute to that portion of local budgets, often around 50% of local budgets for that purpose, but allowing municipalities the right to tax these properties at some level, especially in core cities like Bridgeport where so many not for profits gather to serve local and regional communities would provide assistance to these cities, and again provide a greater sense of reality to the actual programs of the expense of being a City resident.
Facts? Opinions?
Paging Ernie Newton. What does this mean? Can you run or even be allowed on the ballot within the next six months? I don’t understand how you were allowed to register to vote if one has to have paid all fines imposed by the court. What is this $20,000 fine mentioned in this article? Can any of your friends and family help you (contribute) to pay this off and help you move on as far as the fine is concerned?
blog.ctnews.com/connecticutpostings/2011/03/02/ernie-newton-case-somes-to-an-end/
Speedy, this doesn’t impact Newton’s ballot appearance.
So we can expect Ernie to announce soon. It looks to me like he was waiting for this last part of the legal process before making any announcements. I can hear yahooy already.
Beacon; that was a great statement you just made. I agree for the most part. There is no doubt something has to be done when 33% of your grand list is non profits and such. To think that we have $3 Billion in non-profit properties is staggering. Just think if we only got 5% of that in taxes, that amounts to about $150 million dollars that we don’t collect.
We cannot be expected to keep dealing with peoples’ problems especially when many of the people we help are not even from Bridgeport.
With this missing tax money who is getting shortchanged? Our kids for one, think about the educational facilities and such that are offered by our suburban neighbors to their children, things we can’t afford here. One of the reasons is their tax base is not overburdened with non profits. The poor taxpayers here who are just scraping by or in many cases defaulting on their homes would benefit by a lower tax rate. So while we are asked to bite the bullet we are also getting screwed.
It’s red herring season again. Let’s face it, without a comprehensive audit everyone is just blowing smoke. I hope the new mayor calls for a comprehensive audit on the first day she gets elected. Or Sooner!
Jimfox,
We get a financial audit every year, along with an auditor’s letter. It is kept at the City Clerk’s office for public inspection, I believe. When I inquired two years ago, they had trouble locating it because it is asked for so infrequently. That would be a place to start. And you can do it without waiting, except for the days and hours the Clerk’s office is open …
Now you may be looking at something else in terms of a “Comprehensive Audit.” Are you looking for someone to tell you what is being done, how well or fast, etc. and then presumably what isn’t being done? Perhaps encouraging all employees to share information in public forums gets all of us looking for opportunities to become more efficient in doing those activities that are the priority.
My point is we need to stop thinking and acting like victims. Good City employees need to know there is a public who will support effective and efficient governance. And rooting out those who treat their work with disrespect or incompetence need to be identified. Revenue cuts are coming. Hopefully good hard-working employees can be retained and encouraged so our tax dollars will pay for effective services rather than leave us with a bad taste for municipal waste!
“… those who treat their work with disrespect or incompetence need to be identified …”
How do we identify them under the current governing system and protocol–if they have any, then what? The worst ones are those who treat their work and workers with disrespect or incompetence.
Yes BEACON2
Comprehensive audits are concerned with efficiency, effectiveness and economy in the design and operation of programs and services. In other words, these audits are concerned with value-for-money spent and whether intended results were obtained.
Comprehensive audits can be performed at a variety of levels including the organization as a whole, or a specific branch or function such as Human Resources or Financial Management.
Typically, a comprehensive audit would examine the Management Control Framework (MCF) of the entity as well as selected operational practices and controls.
You are scrambling around for nickels by looking for churches et al. to tax. The hospitals, for example, generate hundreds of jobs and spin-off activities. If you have to rezone half of Mill Hill, for example, for medical offices (TAXABLE ONES) you will do fine with the non-profit hospital at the center.
The dollars–in grand list and jobs–are in comprehensive redevelopment. I know the failures. But if the community does not focus on that you are in trouble.
Modern Plastics moving to Shelton should be viewed in the same horror as a dead body being found on State Street.
Bridgeport keeps eating the seed corn.
Lennie, where does the Connecticut Post fall as far as The Top Ten Bridgeport Taxpayers–Real Estate/Personal Property Combined for 2010?
Is the City of Bridgeport tax assessors properly assessing the value of the CT Post? It makes me wonder!