More than two months after submitting a freedom of information request for “all data and values on my personal residence” associated with the city’s two-year delay on the revaluation of city taxable property, former Mayor John Fabrizi has his answer from the city: Forget about it. The city doesn’t have the documents, according to a letter to Fabrizi from City Attorney Mark Anastasi, and if we did we wouldn’t give them to you anyway. As a result, Fabrizi has filed a complaint with the state Freedom of Information Commission.
Anastasi writes “the City does not possess any documents responsive to such request. Furthermore, kindly be advised that even if the City were to have had possession or preliminary records concerning your Doreen Drive property in draft form, the release of preliminary drafts or notes is expressly exempt from disclosure under the FOIA provided that the public agency has determined the public interest in withholding such documents clearly outweighs the public interest in disclosure …
In closing Anastasi argues, “The real estate market is dependent upon official municipal real property valuation assessments, mill rates and tax assessments. Selective release of preliminary draft valuation reports never finalized and adopted by the appropriate City officials and agencies, and otherwise unused and outdated, would generate substantial levels of confusion, unfairness and inequity within the real estate market, and threaten real and significant potential for unjustly skewing the real estate market and negatively impacting sellers and purchasers alike to their financial detriment.”
Fabrizi, who has formed an exploratory committee to seek his old job, was curious about the assessment on his house had reval been implemented. The city had paid Vision Associates roughly $300,000 as part of the reval assessment process that was delayed.
At the urging of Mayor Bill Finch, Governor Dan Malloy and the state legislature approved this year the city’s request to delay state-mandated revaluation of city property extending into the 2015 reelection year for the mayor.
City officials requested the delay for several reasons including anticipation of tax revenue for development projects such as the Steel Point redevelopment area coming on line. Some of the higher-taxed neighborhoods such as Black Rock and North End would have absorbed the reval blow. Implementing reval also would have juiced motor vehicles taxes, scared away businesses fearing a higher mil rate as well as put some fragile businesses over the edge, according to city officials. Without a delay in reval, the city was heading for the highest mil rate in the state.
Connecticut law requires all real estate to be revalued for assessment purposes every five years to bring about uniformity in property values and ensuring everyone pays their fair share. Your property tax bill is a function of your assessment based on 70 percent of value. In this economy property values have sunk so as a general rule the mil rate approved by the City Council will spike to make up for the reduced assessments in order to fund the budget proposed by the mayor.
Critics to delaying reval argue the city is kicking the can down the road. Some also argue because the city shelled out money to Vision Associates they have a right to know the assessment information. Also, would the reval review information on Fabrizi’s home been implemented without the delay? Or is it now deemed “draft” by Anastasi fiat? How do you know it’s in the public’s interest to withhold information unless the public can compare the numbers?
Fabrizi has asked the state commission to overrule Anastasi. From his letter to the FOI commission:
He (Anastasi) first informs me that the City of Bridgeport has no documents responsive to my requests. He ignores the portion of my letter of May 6, 2014, in which I asked for material “from you or your agent, Vision Associates.” Since the taxpayers of Bridgeport paid Vision Associates to compile the data, I believe that it should be, and is, public information. Attorney Anastasi then goes on to explain, that even if the material is in the possession of the City of Bridgeport, it is exempt from disclosure …
The City Attorney cannot reasonably argue that any real estate appraisals are exempt, pursuant to Section 1-210(5) (7) of the General Statutes, since the information was not obtained “relative to the acquisition of property.”
Instead, he cites Section 1-210(b) (1), which exempts “preliminary drafts or notes provided the public agency has determined that the public interest in withholding such documents clearly outweighs the public interest in disclosure.”
I would question whether this material constitutes “preliminary drafts or notes.” However, assuming, arguendo, that Attorney Anastasi’s characterization is accurate, his conclusion that “withholding such documents clearly outweighs the public interest in disclosure” is simply wrong; both as a matter of law and as a matter of public policy.
Nothing new here but John Fabrizi will push on and continue his fight.
There are over 300 property owners receiving tax breaks in Black Rock, from the Finch 2009 revaluation. All politically connected!
Attorney Anastasi, Mayor Fabrizi only requested the information for his specific property. The “real estate market” is not going to surge or collapse based on the reevaluation of a single home. Clearly, it’s not the “public interest” that is paramount, it is Mayor Finch’s interest that is paramount. Looking forward to 2015.
Why would the information about Fabrizi’s single property cause the local real estate market to surge or collapse? Answer: one property is easily compared to others. Clearly, Maria Pereira has limited knowledge of “public interest,” making her alliance with Fabrizi easily understood.
(wink)
Local Eyes, I just want to be absolutely clear, I do not have an “alliance” with Mayor Fabrizi. (no wink)
As long as Maria Pereira uses the term “Mayor” incorrectly, I will consider her a close ally of Mr. Fabrizi.
Paul, she is using it correctly. Any past office holder can use the title of their previous office. So all past presidents are called “Mr. President” and all past mayors can be called “Mr. Mayor” and so forth.
Fabs: run against Finch on the basis of a clean sweep of all city jobs!!!
I wonder if Mayor Finch appointed Fabrizi to the job of Adult Education director.
Fabrizi was director of Adult Education prior to becoming mayor in 2003. He took a leave of absence from the position. He resumed it when he left as mayor.
You can get a leave of absence for years? Who assumed the role and what became of them?
Not really sure, but there is plenty of seeming precedent on the City side where “acting Director” almost seems like a formal title at times.
We honor military absences, even when they run longer than expected initially. Sometimes, if the departments are large enough, everyone picks up one or more tasks and the work gets done? Or it gets re-prioritized.
Look at the position of Internal Auditor in City Finance charts for several years beyond the post being vacated and ultimately abandoned while ordinances still address the position. There are important duties in the City Council Ordinance around purchasing the CC has ignored questioning in their lack of fulfillment. And the Finance Department has not regrouped to review what is owed the taxpayers after the Ganim corruption. What else? Time will tell.
Fabrizi isn’t filing a complaint; he’s filing a grievance as befits his long status as a union member. The information he requests would be harmful to Bridgeport and only serves his political purposes. What’s good for Fabrizi is bad for the city he claims to be so passionate about. I hope the FOI Commission denies his request.
The revaluation rules are present to avoid the evils connected with deferral of revaluation. We have experienced these during the Ganim years. Different types of property in various neighborhoods gets out of fair and equal valuation as of a certain moment (date of would-be revaluation) and injustice continues with the property owner frustrated and voiceless.
The “raw data” was complete enough for Finch to wish (or order, perhaps) the destruction, shredding, removal or disappearance of all evidence for the expenditure of taxpayer funds to Vision Appraisal Services in an amount approximating $300,000. Vision, as a vendor, signs an agreement not to provide any info on its dealings with the City with outsiders, that is taxpayers. Interesting way to maintain secrecy? You bet.
Jim Fox, who are the famous 300 from Oct 1, 2008 valuation and what method of calculation is used? I haven’t seen your posting on the Hersh tax abatement, so I wonder whether your list of 300 is a repeat of the Joe McCarthy speech, “I have in my hands the names of 300 card-carrying …” Put the facts in play, please, so we learn the facts and the background on Bridgeport mayhem. Time will tell.
JML,
The facts and background will be out soon.
We live the world created by 50 years of deficit spending and inflation–real-estate revals are a trailing trait of that world.
LE,
I think you are spouting another opinion without backup. As you know, property is taxed, all kinds of property, generally unless the owner is in certain classes (and yet their property continues to be valued on a regular basis).
So property is revalued to keep fairness in the balance to a larger extent than would occur otherwise. Autos as Bridgeport taxable property are revalued each year because “blue book” or suchwise tables are current and available to the taxing authority. (Imagine if new autos took five years or more to find a new fair value for City car owner-taxpayers?)
LE, if we had had 50 years of balanced budget but increased spending; regular, accurate and fair valuations would be required. Since they likely are not invented out of thin air (as some explanations for City activity are), they are based on comparable market values that can be historically verified. If that is your sense of “trailing trait,” so be it, but unless you were to arrive at a better real-world assessment or valuation system, we are stuck with it. Do you have any alternative from your experience in Trumbull? Time will tell.
JML, again you’re barking up the wrong tree! Art Hersh has and will pay more in taxes than Bass Pro! Art Hersh is a great guy!
Art Hersh and his new partner will benefit from a City Council-approved TAX ABATEMENT initiative of the Office of Planning and Development. Last night the abatement was lessened and an opportunity perhaps in five years for an audited review and possible tax step-up are making the deal less disastrous to those who pay 100% taxes on assessed values.
Art Hersh cumulative values are $10 Million to $12 Million. Are you saying Bass Pro will have less investment than that taxable to pay back the bonds? Or are you confused? Please clarify. Time will tell.
Jimfox, I feel you should release the 300 names as soon as possible. Holding them back strikes me as immature.
Maybe he really doesn’t have any names. That’s possible!!!
Maybe you should take the oxygen hose out of your ass for a while. I think your brain needs it!
My list of 300+ are in the the hands of others, once they check the list out I’ll post it.
Black Rockin you can look up anyone on www .zillow.com and see who got a tax break from the Finch team.
Thank you.
Am I hearing any taxpayer requesting information regarding property they own in Bridgeport, and filing a grievance for not receiving this information is doing the City a disservice? I know I’m getting up there in age so maybe my comprehension skills are diminishing. Please someone, clarify!!! As an aside, if anyone who knows me believes for one minute anything about me is diminishing–shame on you! LOL.
Your awesomeness has been understated. Nothing about you is diminished and your prime is awaiting in the distance.
Sorry John, no sympathy from me. For four years Mark Anastasi played this same game on honest taxpaying individual on your administration’s behalf and not a word from the mayor.
But now that you are on the outside looking in, you see a totally different picture.
Totally agree with you, Bob. In fact, I think it was Fabrizi, in retaliation for being essentially forced out of office, who gave that department its power. He’s a whole new guy–just joking.
That said, here’s an idea. How about all of us file an FOI request for valuation information??? Let’s flood Mark’s inbox and create a potential class action suit against these mayoral suck-ups. We paid for the assessments, the information exists, let’s have it.
Lennie–why don’t you print or reprint Fabrizi’s FOI request and we can all adapt it to our personal information. Wouldn’t that be fun???
It will do a disservice. Fabs can use that information to get HIS property revalued. He will be taxed on that information while the rest of BPT is taxed on the higher, old valuation. Fabs will not be paying his fair share. Once people realize this they will do the same thing. Once you have a fair number of people doing this the re-evaluation will have to be enacted and the mil rate increased.
Even though the dollar amount people in BPT pay in taxes will not change, the higher mil rate will further stifle home sales and put an additional strain on local business. Home buyers will be scared off by the higher mil rate because they do not completely understand the implications causing a drop in house values. Local businesses will have yet another reason to leave town. This drop in the grand list will cause an increase in the mil rate. BPT will be stuck in a downward spiral. On the good side, BPT businesses moving to neighboring towns will be a boon to those towns.
Hahah … Fabs, rattling the cages.
If you have never written an FOI request, here is a template. Hope someone can find this helpful.
[DATE]
[NAME]
[DEPARTMENT NAME]
[ADDRESS]
Dear [NAME],
Pursuant to the state open records law, Conn. Gen. Stat. Secs. 1-200 to 1-242, I write to request access to and a copy of the following:
– Minutes corresponding to [include material being requested]
– A copy of all materials including, but not limited to, minutes of meetings, financial statements, e-mail communications, and other relevant communications pertaining to [include material]
If your agency does not maintain these public records, please let me know who does and include the proper custodian’s name and address.
As provided by the open records law, I will expect your response within four (4) business days. See Conn. Gen. Stat. Sec. 1-206.
If you choose to deny this request, please provide a written explanation for the denial including a reference to the specific statutory exemption(s) upon which you rely. Also, please provide all segregable portions of otherwise exempt material.
Please be advised that I am prepared to pursue whatever legal remedy necessary to obtain access to the requested records. I would note that willful violation of the open records law is a Class A misdemeanor. See Conn. Gen. Stat. Sec 1-240.
Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely,
[YOUR NAME]
Andmar, good but you left out “if there is any cost, you are willing to pay that cost.” One of first tricks the City will use is to delay and then send you at letter stating there is a cost.
Baseball and the City Attorney’s office
I reviewed the attorney’s argument and it looks like there is a massive leap in logic.
Placing this situation in context–this is like Derek Jeter asking the Yankees to release his Spring season batting average, and the Yankee franchise saying the release of his batting average is not in the interest of the Yankees because it can adversely impact their performance during the post season.
So here are the problems with the attorney’s logic.
1. Flaw in generalization: Fabrizi is requesting information on one address. The attorney then generalizes this as though Fabrizi is requesting citywide data. Essentially, the attorney argument mainly relies on framing Fabrizi’s request as though it is citywide data, which is not the request. This is like the Yankees trying to imply Jeter is requesting each team member’s information.
2. Flaw in assuming the use of information: The attorney assumes the release of this information will somehow be used by purchasers and sellers. This is the equivalent of MLB baseball teams strategizing around Jeter’s batting average. (Jeter is a great player, but this would be something else).
3. Flaw in assuming the information is outdated: The attorney tries to frame this request as though it is irrelevant and somehow would be outdated. While the values may not be an exact match to what they are currently, they are nevertheless correlated and therefore constitute a good approximation. For example, if you take all baseball averages in the Spring training, they would be correlated with season averages because the better players would correlate with higher averages and likewise with the not so good players (Boston–jk). But in this case he is only requesting one property address so this totally discards even making this point.
And well, I guess in the end, there are commonalities between the city attorney’s office and baseball. Except such simplistic logic should be kept for the preseason and not when the post season elections are nearby.
Flaw in response. The City Attorney failed to make reference to precedent. The City Attorney always does this because he cannot find any relevant precedent.
He simply uses his self-serving interpretation of the law and acts as if it is fact.
It would appear the city attorney has a few other flaws, the city used the data as a final complete report to request the reval waiver, but says the data is preliminary in regard to taxpayer use, how cam it be both? Then there is the issue of using FOI protection written and applicable to be used for a business entity conducting research. Is he saying this administration is a business entity? Did the city council vote to approve his denial of the FOI request because if the city is a business entity, ultimately the city council is the ruling body of the city. He was wrong about the procedure for the city BOE takeover, he was wrong about driveway gate, could he be wrong about this opinion, too? I could also be wrong.
As this request drags on, it will be funny to read the many excuses Anastasi comes up with. As we all know, when things like this come up, he starts making up opinions/laws to delay, delay, delay, hoping it all goes away.
Booty, I’m tough on those who challenge me.
Past office holders cannot use their title once their term has expired. Fabrizi didn’t call himself Mayor, Pereira did! It’s fine when used out of respect but (example) G.W. Bush can’t call himself President anymore nor can Mike Bloomberg refer to himself as Mayor of New York City. Your booty is under suspicion. When you think you know more about politics than I do, use these pages to show to convince the OIB blogosphere.