WESTFIELD – The City Council conducted its annual property tax levy public hearing last night where the city’s business community asked for a more equitable tax class shift factor, one which will substantially lower commercial, industrial and personal property tax rates.
All of the speakers at the hearing represented the city’s commercial, industrial and personal property (CIP) taxpayers.
Attorney Calvin Annino, a member of the Greater Westfield Chamber of Commerce, said that the city needs a robust reserve fund, currently between $12 and $13 million in its rainy day fund.
“The Chamber agrees with the mayor that the city needs adequate reserve to fund an unforeseen contingency, for future needs,” Annino said. “But there has to be balance, tax relief is a today need.”
Annino said that the total value of residential property far outweighs the value of commercial, industrial and personal (CIP) property. He estimated it is 85 percent of the total property value, so small changes to the residential tax rate translate into large changes in the CIP tax rate, either increasing or decreasing the CIP tax burden.
Annino also said that CIP taxpayers do not require the same level of municipal taxes as residents do, services such as trash collection and supporting the city’s school system.
“The Chamber believes commercial taxpayers consume much less in terms of municipal services than residential taxpayers,” Annino said. “I think we have to refocus the conversation (beyond the residential versus CIP tax rate discussions). What we are talking about is fairness.”
Annino asked the City Council members to take the time to get all the information and deliberate because it “needs to set a fair shift.”
Chamber Executive Director Kate Phelon said “commercial property owners are paying 55 percent more than residential taxpayers under the current 1.6 levy shift and that the Chamber is recommending a shift of 1.55 to “send a message to the business community.”
The City Council adopted the 1.63 levy shift for the past four years, which, in 2014, resulted in a residential rate of $18.18 per $1,000 of value for residential property and a rate of $33.84 per $1,000 of value for CIP taxpayers.
“A $33.84 per $1,000 is not sending the right message,” Phelon said.
The most radical discussion occurred among City Council members before the hearing was open for comment by members of the public. A number of councilors suggested that the city did not need to increase the tax rate by any amount. State law under Proposition 2 ½ allows communities to increase the tax levy by up to 2 ½ percent.
“For the first time in a long time we have the opportunity not to raise property taxes,” Ward 1 Councilor Christopher Keefe said. “We’re costing the city’s taxpayers another $2 million and I want to know why.”
At-large Councilor David A. Flaherty agreed with Keefe’s assessment.
“We’re in a very good position to do something,” Flaherty said.
The councilors voted to keep the public hearing open until its Dec. 4th meeting to allow members to get more information before voting to approve a shift factor or approving any increase in the tax rate.
