Lacking a quorum to conduct an official meeting February 9, the Legislative Council's Ordinance Committee decided to conduct a working group session with Town Finance Director Robert Tait as the panel began an in-depth review of two local tax relief programs.The Bee that he believes that exemption formula is not utilized in current practice. Mr Knapp then asked how the assessor can determine the reductions before the tax rate is set, and how the town can set a tax rate with variations in the grand list.

The committee has been charged with reviewing a popular senior tax relief program, as well as a separate benefit that reduces property taxes for qualified emergency service volunteers who serve with five local fire companies, the ambulance corps, and the underwater search and rescue team.

Ordinance Chairman Ryan Knapp, and committee members Dan Honan and Judit DeStefano began with the consideration of questions Mr Knapp had submitted to Mr Tait in advance of the meeting.

In reviewing the emergency services program, Mr Knapp had noted that the ordinance reads like an abatement, and is listed as an abatement in the title but is described as an assessment exemption program.

In his response, Mr Tait stated that according to state statute, the maximum allowable benefit that can be extended to qualified volunteers under local programs like the one in Newtown, is $1,000. But the finance director said that the $1,000 is really a tax credit which equates to an assessment amount.

Mr Knapp pointed out that as worded in Code Book 208-22 the maximum "exemption against assessed values" would be $1,000. That means a $300,000 home would be taxed as a $299,000 home, which when multiplied by the mill rate equates to about a $33 tax benefit.

But after talking with volunteers who are friends and family members from town, Mr Knapp told

Mr Tait said he thought the tax office might use the previous year's numbers but that could be problematic in some circumstances such as in a revaluation year.

Mr Honan asked if the amount of the credit is sufficient given the service provided. Which prompted Mr Knapp to review the charge, which asked the committee to look at the emergency volunteer program because it has not been adjusted for years.

He said the town may consider some sort of inflation or cost of living increase, reminding his colleagues that the enabling statute limits any credit a town may give to $1,000. An alternative might be eventually recommending a reduction to the time served before volunteers could become eligible.

Ms DeStefano wondered if the assessment benefit incentivizes people to volunteer, and Mr Tait said the program may be interpreted as the town showing its appreciation, and that it also provides a stipend.

Mr Knapp then asked Mr Tait to address the pros and cons of having it as an abatement program versus an exemption program. The finance director replied that that there are other state exemption programs seen in the revenue section of the budget, but settling on providing a fixed credit might be easier for accounting purposes and transparency.

Mr Tait said adding a line item to capture these funds would not impact the budget because the net tax accounting for the grand list would go up accordingly, so crafting language to label the benefit an abatement might be simpler.

Mr Knapp agreed that including the total impact of the abatement in the budget would make it simpler and more transparent. On a side note, Mr Knapp said the number of volunteers receiving current tax benefits is lower than he expected it to be.

Before moving on, Mr Knapp suggested that perhaps the program might be administered like the senior tax program. The ordinance committee did receive written correspondence from both the chief and president of the Newtown Volunteer Ambulance Corps, reinforcing that a limited number of volunteers were responding to an unprecedented level of emergency calls in town, and requested that the benefit be kept either the same or increased.

Turning to the senior tax program, Mr Knapp also posed advance questions, several of which the committee members learned might require further research and response from both the finance and tax offices.

Mr Knapp asked how many qualifying individuals for the abatement fall under median assessed value of real estate listed at $468,830 in the current ordinance, and how many qualifying individuals fall between 100 percent and 200 percent?

Mr Tait replied that Newtown does not have a sophisticated data collection system. At the same time he noted that the senior population is growing, citing a registrar of voters report putting the number of senior voters at 4,058 - an increase of just over 300 in the last year.

At the same time, Mr Tait reiterated that Newtown offers the second most generous senior tax abatement program in Connecticut based on the amount the town funds in its budget. He added that, ironically, the highest town in terms of dollars allocated to senior tax abatement is smaller than Newtown.

Mr Knapp commented that he would like to see Newtown use the full budgeted amount, but considering the senior relief program seems poised to grow, he and his committee members do not have a lot of information to make informed changes without risking going too far and creating a situation where the maximum benefit for all qualified applicants exceeds the total amount budgeted.

This could result in pro rating benefits at a lesser amount across the board to all applicants in each of the four benefit tiers of the program, potentially negatively affecting those who need it most.

Ms DeStefano asked about the effectiveness of the home value test. And Mr Knapp replied that at least one person was excluded from the senior benefit this year because their home value exceeded the benefit cap.

But he noted that without turnover data from former applicants and beneficiaries, there is no way of knowing how many residents failed to reapply because they believed or assumed their home value would disqualify them once that asset test was initiated this year.