Recently Westfield homeowners were informed that a real estate tax increase of 3.75 percent awaits them when the tax rate is set for Fiscal Year 2016 (July 2015–June 2016).
I can assure the homeowners that I will be recommending a tax shift factor that will result in a tax rate increase that will be considerably less than 3.75 percent.
In Fiscal Years 2010-2013 the average Westfield homeowner saw a real estate tax increase of 19.4 percent, while the average commercial/industrial bill increased 12.6 percent.
I campaigned in 2013 against a further shift of the tax burden onto the homeowner. At the December 18, 2014 Council meeting I made a motion for a 1.71 tax shift factor which was seconded by Councilor Figy. If adopted by the Council majority, it would have resulted in a homeowner tax increase of one cent–18.18 to 18.19– an average increase of $2 per year, 17 cents per month. My motion was rejected in favor of 1.63 tax shift factor resulting in the average homeowners real estate tax bill increasing 36 times as much as I had recommended.($200,000 as the average homeowner assessment).
I intend to stand in opposition to the lobbyists from the Commercial/Industrial sector who have supported a shift of the real estate tax burden onto Westfield homeowners and tenants– and I urge the current Councilors to stand with me.
I will not support a homeowners tax increase of any figure close to 3.75 percent. The Council can do much better than that.
TAX BREAKS
If the average Westfield homeowner spends $100,000 to build a garage and family room, that homeowner will probably see the tax assessment go from $200,000 to $300,000 and the real estate tax bill go from $3708.00 to $5562.00.
If a Commercial/Industrial Owner (some worth billions) expands it can get a TIF (Tax Incentive Financing Tax Break) or a STA (Special Tax Assessment, a reduction of future real estate taxes)—Another shift of the Real Estate Tax Burden onto the homeowner.
Over the last 18 months I have voted against every proposed real estate TIF and STA, matters involving approximately $670,000 in tax breaks for Commercial/Industrial properties. I was outvoted and the companies did get the tax breaks.
I am in favor of establishing, if legally possible, a third class of real estate taxation for very small Westfield Commercial/ Industrial properties so that they (and there are very few of them) can be assessed at the residential rate, the same rate that apartment complexes are assessed at even though they are commercial enterprises.
DUPLICATION OF SERVICES
I have opposed funding SIEMENS AG (Siemens) at the rate of approx. $30,000 per month for the last nine months. Siemens monitors our municipal buildings.
In June, 2014 I made a motion to delete $326,000 from Fiscal Year 2015 earmarked for Siemens. That motion passed , but a few months later Siemens was brought back in through the back door( to restore the $326,000). I voted against it, but it was voted in.
We now have a Facilities Director(salary of $58,000) in addition to a Municipal Custodial budget of approx. 2.5 million dollars-for our hard working custodians—-and Siemens.
On June 29, 2015 I made a motion to eliminate any further payments to Siemens beyond September when their contract ends. My motion was not supported by the Council majority. The cut was only $100,000 and not my recommended cut of $172,000.
On June 30,2015 the administration attempted to slide the $100,00 back in during the final budget vote. It did not work. However, expect another request to keep Siemens on, which I will vocally oppose.
The Council has been told that Siemens and the Facilities Director are working on a “Plan”. In the private sector “Plans” of this type take days or weeks–NOT months or years!
Cindy C. Harris
Councilor At Large
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this column are those of the author and not the staff, editor, or publisher of this publication.
