Reporting on Property Tax Reform Forum at the Capitol
September 19th, 2008 categories: Central Connecticut News & Information, Home Buyers
The Connecticut Association of Realtors sponsored a discussion yesterday abouth the State’s property tax system, heard on WNPR’s Where We Live.
Panelists included: State Rep. Brendan Sharkey; State Rep. Larry Cafero; Fred Carstensen, Director of Connecticut Center for Economic Analysis; and, writer/public policy researcher, D. Dowd Muska.
You can hear audio of the show in case you missed it at the WNPR.org Web site.
One thing the panelists seemed to agree on was that property tax reform is desperately needed. The current system, which dates back to colonial days, assessed taxes based on property values because it was once true that owning property equaled wealth. With more and more people owning their own homes, property wealth does not translate to the ability to pay. Furthermore, cities where property values are low have the highest property tax rates.
Fred Carstensen stated that the current property tax system creates “perverse incentives,” driving towns to develop retail over housing (keep the kids out!), discourages affordable housing, and drives residents out of cities in favor of lower tax suburbs and exurbs. The result is concentrated wealth and concentrated poverty. The Two Connecticuts.
All of the above is either causing or exacerbating the single most important issue facing our state - the lack of economic growth.
It’s more expensive to do business in CT.
It costs more to live in CT.
Affordable housing is difficult to find.
18-34 year-old, college educated people are fleeing the state.
Jobs are hard for businesses to fill.
Unemployment is more prevalent (State’s Jobless Rate 6.5%) and any job growth has been in the public sector.
We’re expected to have 80,000 fewer students in K-12 public education while the percentage of seniors is expected to increase significantly.
Clearly, we need a solution. Is it a property tax cap? Is it cutting back on public spending? Is it creating more affordable housing? Is it lowering the corporate tax rate (CT ranks 38th on the Tax Foundation’s list of states according to business tax climate)? Is it regionalization?
Unfortunately, the program spent only a few minutes discussing the actual solutions, where the true debate exists. I wanted to hear more about where we go from here. I don’t think enough elected officials are paying attention to this - but why would they? They’ll be out of office before we really have problems.
There is no real solution. CT west of New Haven and south of Waterbury is really just part of New York and not really part of this equation. The influence there ebbs and flows more with NYC than the rest of CT. And the rest of CT is just, well… boring. Seniors like the boring- the quaint, the quiet, the LL Bean catalog cover look. Seniors vote and local elections hinge on their sway.
Young people see the rest of the world, then compare to here. Why would anyone, especially young people who aren’t held back by kids yet or a mortgage, want to stay here in this terribly unadventurous place? We(the young people) work like slaves all day and might get home by 7PM. When does the Post Office close? 5PM. When does the grocery store close? The one down the street from me closes at 8PM. Everything is CLOSED by dark!!! It’s impossible to actually function here, let alone find any intellectually redeeming or FUN activity after work that doesn’t involve drinking or gambling.
Local property taxes are obscene and increased annually with impunity which pays for kids I don’t have and an army seniors who demand bus trips and new senior centers. I pay thousands more in energy costs than the median American from the 90 degree difference from summer to winter.
The question is, ‘what makes CT attractive to live in?’ . The answer is a decisive, ‘meh’.
Great points - the sun belt states have been attracting the young worker demographic and I think a lot if that has to do with quality of life, access to outdoor activities year round, cost of living (energy a big factor) and availability of jobs and housing.
Pittsburgh conducted a study in the late 1990s to address why younger people were leaving the area in droves and they found some interesting things - some of which applies to CT. http://www.sustainablepittsburgh.org/
NewFrontPage/PublicDocs/Quality_of_Place_Report.htm
Hey, This is a awesome thread. I found you on msn. Keep up the work.