While some may be tempted to chug a pint or two (or three) of Guinness upon reviewing a tax hike, OIB friend Pete Spain’s frustration level with his soaring bill and “the human toll on seniors and long-time residents whose taxes have increased nearly 400% in 20 years” prompted him to make application with the Guinness World Records for the “highest one-year increase in property tax rate in the world.” Alas, says the Black Rock resident, his request was rejected but “The Guinness World Book is a zany thing that you scare your babysitter with, by flipping to the page with the longest mustache. It’s kooky and outrageous, and I feel like that sums up the situation here.”
A number of Black Rockers were clobbered by the revaluation of city property accompanied by a spike in the mil rate.
New York Times scribe Kristin Hussey has more on this:
… Exasperated by what he had heard from neighbors, and wanting to do something that would garner attention, Mr. Spain landed upon an idea to officially declare Bridgeport guilty of municipal lunacy. He registered with the Guinness website, paid the $5 fee and applied on behalf of the taxpayers of Bridgeport for the world record.
Guinness receives nearly 1,000 new applications every week, a spokeswoman said. It typically takes about three months to review requests before rendering a decision.
Mr. Spain’s application was denied. Guinness said it could not fairly compare local tax rates, given the variations in jurisdictions and tax formulas around the world.
Mr. Spain said he was not too disappointed by the ruling. His Guinness bid was designed to bring attention to the city’s plight.
“It reminded me of the underlying criticism of Bridgeport,” Mr. Spain said. “It’s the phantom circus element that never really left town.”
Full story here.
In the OIB comment section Spain clarifies his motivation:
It’s a very troubling situation–least of which is our own. It was NOT my frustration level with my soaring bill that got me to do this.
What got me to do this was the human toll on seniors and long-time residents whose taxes have increased nearly 400% in 20 years. That’s unfair.
The New York Times journalists did excellent research on just a few of these stories in our city.
Please encourage fellow citizens to e-mail their stories to info@betterbridgeport.com.
We hope the Mayor and City Council will meaningfully and publicly address the real, day-in day-out plight of people like the Botelers and Ms. Longo and also take immediate action–e.g., creating a financial task force–to come up with a pragmatic plan to stop Bridgeport city government from further distressing property owners, reducing property values and the tax base, and effectively pushing out long-time residents from their homes–homes which for many are a big portion of their life savings.
Great strategy, Pete. I can tell you residents in Thomas Hooker and at least Success Village are upset about it as well.
It’s a very troubling situation–least of which is our own. It was NOT my frustration level with my soaring bill that got me to do this.
What got me to do this was the human toll on seniors and long-time residents whose taxes have increase nearly 400% in 20 years. That’s unfair.
The New York Times journalists did excellent research on just a few of these stories in our city.
Please encourage fellow citizens to e-mail their stories to info@betterbridgeport.com.
We hope the Mayor and City Council will meaningfully and publicly address the real, day-in-day-out plight of people like the Botelers and Ms. Longo and also take immediate action–e.g., creating a financial task force–to come up with a pragmatic plan to stop Bridgeport city government from further distressing property owners, reducing property values and the tax base, and effectively pushing out long-time residents from their homes–homes which for many are a big portion of their life savings.
BRIDGEPORT TAXGATE REVOLT! Kudos for getting the NYT article into a national newspaper, but yikes! Now everyone’s going to know our dirty laundry. Too bad about the Guinness rejection. Here comes that sinking feeling again.
The path to recovery is being blocked by the basket of deplorables at City Hall. Hopefully Ganim is still and/or soon will be back on the Fed’s radar.
CT State Statutes need to be changed so the aggregate of Fairfield County Property Taxes are placed into a single fund and distributed across the county evenly for all the Municipalities. And the Mil Rate could conceivably become a Flat Rate much like the concept of a Flat Income Tax Rate.
But this is probably just a pipe dream because the majority of our County residents are not receiving anything close to the financial flogging we here in Bridgeport are getting.
Taxation without Representation was one of the “Founding Fathers*” impetus to rebel. (*The Mothers and Daughters never got the credit they deserved.) “You say you want a Revolution? Well you know” how about a real TAX REVOLT!!!
On a Federal, State and Municipal Level, as a “Tax Resister” who objects to how the “Government” spends one’s tax funds (Weapons, War, Etc.), you, me, everyone can legally pay your taxes into an escrow account that the “Govt.” cannot have released until it meets the requirements set forth in the Escrow Account.
In our case it could be to Until the resignation of Felonious Joe and his Deadwood Puppet City Council and/or until “Implementation of an Independent Financial Review Board.”
Recently members of the Bpt Housing Authority were forced to resign because of a HUD audit finding them unqualified to hold those positions.
What if the proposed escrow account also states the “City Charter be amended to require City Council Members to have certain qualifications to run for election?” As in understand and grasp the gravity of voting for a tax hike up to the peak of Mount Bankruptcy? That would clear the deadwood out of the rotten wood pile! Here is a link to Historical and Recent Tax Resistance methods via Escrow Accounts. Samoa, occupied and taxed by Germany (who knew?) to NY State residents’ option to create an Escrow Account, to protest Commuter Taxes in 2011.
sniggle.net/TPL/index5.php?entry=25Dec12
And here’s another one folks, click on the button for CT. There is currently an attempted Mayoral recall happening in Stratford. The site has step-by-step procedures used by other citizens in efforts to get their Mayors and City Council Members removed from office who betray their oaths of Office and betray the principles they are required to practice as elected Officials.
ballotpedia.org/Mayoral_recalls
The Ganim administration is claiming half the properties in Bridgeport saw a reduction in taxes. The Times article cited a reduction in the assessed value of condominiums and that Ganim purchased two condos for less than the sellers paid.
Has the Ganim administration actually identified the pattern of which properties saw an increase in taxes and which saw a decrease? Did the city council demand to see a summary or graphic representation? Not likely.
My home had a 20% decrease in assessment but my taxes increased. Black Rock residents experienced increases that will harm some homeowners and impact the stability of the neighborhood.
The Times article was well-written.
Remember when the message was 65% of homes had tax decreases, and now it’s 50%? So what is the real number?
Ganim is claiming half the properties in Bridgeport saw a reduction in taxes. We do not have less taxes; our property values plummeted. This means the higher tax rates have the effect of being less but the rate is the rate. Paying less in taxes is nice; but so is having equity in my home. Based on the new evaluation my home is underwater; while in the surrounding towns values are increasing. This is a direct failure of Bridgeport and while it wasn’t caused by Ganim, he has proposed nothing to change the situation. Great article to highlight the challenges the citizens of Bridgeport face!
On a standalone point I would like to thank the Spains, Kate and Pete, for their leadership efforts. I hope more people join the effort to make a Better Bridgeport.
Pete Spain is a treasure that Bridgeport should embrace, engage with him, he’s a reasonable, decent gentleman who has so much to offer, and does so generously. I have attended a few meetings in Black Rock, and I’m committed to broaden this base so others may be informed, that’s all we’re asking for, share information and possible solutions.
How can anyone afford to rent a house or apartment in Bridgeport?
Peter Spain, this white guy who is well-to-do and resides in Black Rock, well just let me say this about this guy, he needs to run for public office and I’m not talking about running for the City Council, he needs to run for mayor or the State House. Pete Spain is that good, he needs to come out from being in the background and get out front so the voters can see and hear for themselves. I’m publicly asking for Pete to step up and let us know what he wants to do to lead Bridgeport, never mind about time will tell, Pete let’s do this.
Ron, this is why I love and admire you. You watch, listen and then always come to a concluded opinion of common sense. I agree with you 100%, the problem I see is Pete Spain is such a decent man of integrity I doubt he has the stomach for the dirty politics of Bridgeport. I hope the reasonable, open-minded people, like you, encourage him to hang in because eventually that door will open for him. I’m with him, I’m even giving up my Young Dems event tomorrow to join Pete at a meeting.
Tonight, while others may attend to the activity of the public schools, I shall be attending the City Council Committee that deals with Budgets and Appropriations. While others on OIB fondly dream about how fiscal matters are handled in other Fairfield County municipalities, this is where elected public representatives, seven of them are scheduled to meet each month, and if there is a quorum of four, they do. Tonight they will likely approve the minutes of the September Regular Meeting and two Special Meetings also called in September. They will then move on to a General Discussion of the Monthly Financial Report.
That may prove special because of the nature of the errors in this report. The revenue items in the budget two months into the fiscal year indicate actual plus projected revenues have increased by $7.5 Million. (Now, however one specific revenue line item came to be estimated in the budget at $6.8 Million less than can now be projected after two months of experience and receipt of more than $5 Million more than the estimate, may be a good question to pursue. But if we leave that for later, there is a real variance that might offer a solution to other budget issues.)
Let’s look at the expense figures for the Police Department. This report is not paginated. Some are, but did anyone proof this one? When you get to the Police Department expense lines, look to the column that should say “FY 2017 Budget.” You say you cannot find it? You are right. But there is a column with the heading “FY 2016 Budget.” It is present. It is in ERROR. Did anyone proof this report?
Now, look at the numbers: $35.3 Million of full-time salaries have been decreased to a projected $34.3 Million (and the sign in the variance column is wrong). The second line shows $13 Million of projected overtime and other types of payroll expense that has been projected to increase by $8 Million but you can see both the math calculation and the sign are in error. Fringes went up also. Police Department budget TOTAL = $109,561,133 an increase of $7.5 Million (not a decrease of $3.5 Million as reported).
Shucks, what’s a few million among friends, you ask? Ken Flatto is the man who sends this report to the Council every month. If columns, lines, headings, pagination, etc. can change and do change, what’s a poor Council member to do? Ignore it, you say. Right on, I agree. And that is a huge problem for citizens, who wish their kids get more funds for school operations, or taxpayers who wish less money spent.
The final order of business is a demonstration of “Open Bridgeport,” an internet fiscal tracking device for SOME of the City spending and revenue (?) by Thomas Gaudett of the Mayor’s Office. The monthly financial report has never been shared with citizens and taxpayers through the internet, though Council members have received it that way for years. Perhaps you ask why that is? So have I for several years. It is not answered. If they can put on OPEN BRIDGEPORT, why don’t they put on the monthly reports?
People know I have been reading, reporting, addressing the Council, connecting money flows and department activities for five or more years. More attention is required by more people. And then, sure of yourself, you need to come to meetings and raise your hands requesting an opportunity to speak to folks who may know less or comprehend less than you would ever wish to think. But they got more votes than other citizens, more competent, who stayed quiet (S.Q.) and that is how we come to the Status Quo. Time will tell.
JML, THANK YOU for the information. As you forecasted, I, along with others (hopefully), will be going to the BOE meeting (hopefully). And hopefully, the BOE situation will somehow be “fixed” soon. My disappointment with the CC subcommittees not listening to public comments (correct me if I am wrong), I would agree citizen presence at as many meetings as possible would hopefully give CC members the impression the public is listening and watching what they do. But as of yet, it seems from what I have heard CC members don’t listen, don’t know and don’t care.
The message and focus of this New York Times article is the last thing Bridgeport needs. It’s another spotlight on the all-too-obvious problems shaping the perceptions and behavior of people looking to buy, invest or devote time and energy to revitalizing Bridgeport.
Granted, the reality of the city’s challenges and shortfalls can’t be denied. But an article like this, and the inspiration that gave it birth, solves none of these issues. The fact it “brings attention to the city’s plight” does nothing to enhance property values, reduce the tax burden or give investors confidence Bridgeport is poised for sustainable growth.
Unfortunately, the real risk is the article will do more harm than good. It creates more uncertainty and negativity around an already languishing housing market, and it offers no short-term suggestions or solutions to ease the city’s onerous, residential tax burden.
“Stop Bridgeport city government from further distressing property owners, reducing property values and the tax base and effectively pushing out long term residents from their homes …” is a call to action mentioned in the article. Unfortunately, the more immediate impact of the Times reporting might be just the opposite of what some residents had hoped for.
Frank, the City Council has not changed its rules. Each Committee chair has the right to encourage or eliminate public comment.
Last night I was permitted to have a copy of the revised monthly financial report that eliminated some errors on the Revenue side but no changes on the Expense side regarding the Police Department.
After all Council questions were answered, Scott Burns allowed me to raise the issue of the Police Department errors and Ken Flatto searched for an answer, but essentially found none, before the meeting moved to the Gaudett demonstration of OpenBridgeport. Will questions be allowed in the future facing the fact some CC members do not like their private work area to be trespassed upon? Thanks to Scott Burns for recognizing a member of the public. Time will tell.
Thank you Scott Burns for setting an example!