From: Susan Kniep, President
The Federation of Connecticut Taxpayer Organizations, Inc.
Website: http://ctact.org/
email: fctopresident@ctact.org
860-524-6501
June 22, 2005
Review
Previous Tax Talk Issues on our Website at http://ctact.org/
WELCOME TO THE 52nd EDITION OF
TAX TALK
Reserve Your Tickets for the
Saturday,
June 25, 2005
FCTO Annual Meeting
8:30
AM – 12 Noon
Chatfield, 1 Chatfield Drive, West
Hartford, CT
(across from West Farms Mall)
Shall we add you to the Agenda?
Please contact Susan Kniep
at 860-524-6501 to reserve your ticket ($10 each), or email Susan at fctopresident@aol.com,
or send your check directly to Bernie Roy, Treasurer, 162 Putting Green Rd,
Trumbull, CT 06611
*******
NEWS LINKS WORTH READING AND SAVING
Rell Should Not Back Off: Gov. M.
Jodi Rell made campaign reform the issue of the
season, just as the legislative session ended. By Journal
Inquirer Editorial, June 15, 2005
****************
House defies Bush, votes to change Patriot Act
****************
Democrats Also Got Tribal
Donations
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/02/AR2005060202158_2.html
****************
Bush Aides Report Millions in
Assets
By Michael A. Fletcher, Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, June 16, 2005; Page A12
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/15/AR2005061502531.html?nav%3Dhcmodule&sub=new
****************
Lucrative Drug, Danger Signals
and the FDA
By GARDINER HARRIS and ERIC KOLI, The New York Times
http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/business/article.adp?id=20050610073709990002
****************
Donna McCalla, CTJodi146@aol.com
Hebron Dollars and Sense
Updated CT Tax
Increase Comparison Spreadsheet
June 19, 2005
Hi, all. Budget season is winding down; there are now only
21 municipalities with unapproved budgets.
All regional school district budgets have passed. While East Haven’s 11.32% tax
increase is currently the highest approved tax increase in the state, the town
had a 5.44% spending increase. It would
not be inappropriate to assume that after 5 years of zero percentage tax/mill
increase, the East Haven tax increase approved by Council on April 29
was highly predictable.
Region 8’s 9.8% approved spending increase is the highest
approved spending increase in the entire State of Connecticut. No other approved or unapproved budget has a
higher spending increase; therefore, Region 8 has the dubious distinction of
being the biggest spenders in Connecticut for FY
2005-06. This is consistent with their
past history of double-digit or near double-digit increases for a number of
years. They have learned to use the “we’ll cut football” threat very well. It is going to take the crisis of
revaluations to force change in Region 8 spending, and, we suspect, in a couple
of other towns that are threatening to cut sports if budgets aren't passed
(Ellington played the sports card just this week.)
The data today is consistent with the predictions I sent to
you on May 4 (the start of “Sweeps Week”), in which we said: “Of the 28 passed budgets, the average tax
increase is 4.35%, but the vast majority of those passed budgets is correlated
directly to the “method of voting”, which at this point is being strongly influenced
by towns in which the funding authority is a Town Council, a BET, a BAT, or an
RTM. Of the 15 failed budgets, the
average failed budget is 6.37% increase.
The failed budgets are likewise primarily in those towns which have
referendums as the charter-designated method of voting.”
As of today, the average approved tax increase stands at
4.31%. With 5% regression, the number is
slightly lower at 4.17%; with 10% regression, it stands at 4.16%. This average is almost identical to numbers
reported in the last several weeks.
Likewise, the average defeated proposed increase is now 6.72%. With 5% regression, the number falls to
6.42%; with 10% regression, the average defeated proposed increase is 6.27%.
The Municipal Budget Adoptions 1998-2005 spreadsheet was
handed out at this week’s CCM meeting; the numbers have changed slightly
because of several votes held since Tuesday.
In the spreadsheet (up to date as of today), I have also included the
names of the towns facing the various votes.
This serves as a summary of the CT Tax Increase Comparisons_V9
spreadsheet.
Finally, a question was posed today regarding statistics on
those towns voting by referendum: of
those towns voting by the method of referendum, how many passed on the first
try? The response was as follows:
The following includes only the 169 Connecticut municipalities,
and not the 17 regional school districts.
Of the 169 Connecticut municipalities,
71 went to referendum this year. I use these words because in some cases,
the charter calls for Town Meeting, with a caveat that BOS can voluntarily call
for a referendum (which a couple did this year), and in some cases the charter
calls for a Town Meeting, but allows residents to petition for referendum
(which a couple did this year).
Of the 71 municipalities that went to referendum, 36 were
passed on the first vote, or 50.7%. Of the 71 municipalities that went to
referendum, 35 were defeated on the first vote, or 49.3%. I would have to
go back through past years' data to get you apples to apples comparisons, but I
think this is the highest number of referendums (because of petitioning towns
and towns that "voluntarily" went to referendum -- actually, in two
cases, officials were warned petitions would be filed, so they went ahead
and did it "voluntarily"). Secondly, I believe this is the
highest percentage of defeated-on-first-try referendums, but that is an
intuitive reaction. If you need previous years
results for an apples to apples comparison, let me know.
Just for vetting purposes:
Towns that passed on first referendum (not in alphabetical
order): Avon, Berlin, Stafford, Windsor Locks, Southbury, Chaplin,
Litchfield, Ridgefield, Clinton, Old Saybrook,
Brookfield, Winsted, Wilton, Madison, Newtown, Lebanon, Griswold, Guilford,
Orange, Pomfret, Preston, Ledyard, Willington,
Cromwell, Simsbury, Sherman, Redding, Colchester, North Stonington, New
Hartford, Woodstock, Deep River, Hartland, Putnam, Woodbury, Windsor.
Towns that defeated first referendum (not in alphabetical
order): Franklin, Voluntown, Sterling, Andover,
Canterbury, Ellington, Watertown, Westbrook, Killingly, East Windsor, Bolton,
Easton, North Haven, Coventry, Monroe, Windham, Bethel, Ashford, Hebron,
Thomaston, Plainfield, New Fairfield, Tolland, Middlebury, Stonington,
Farmington, East Hampton, Portland, Somers, New Milford, Vernon, Plainville,
Oxford, Canton, Thompson.
Please continue to pose questions, as your questions cause
all of us to view the data in a number of helpful ways. As always, any corrections, updates, or
questions, please let me know. Thanks,
Donna
*************
Gary Greve, gcgreve@msn.com
Subject: Westbrook-looking for a spreadsheet
June 18, 2005
Peter,
I just found your site
You may recall we spoke several years ago about your
visibility reports.
YOu gave me important leads to state websites.
a lot has happened in Westrbrook
since
We've rejected 6 budgets in the past 3 years and are
involved in another budget battle now
We've planned our strategy around the November elections
Our theme has been that for 3 years we have tried to get the
leaders to change
Now it's time to change leaders.
Lee Wilman is no longer the
contact for Westbrook taxpayer issues
Lee actualy moved to S.Carolina nearly 2 years ago.
A new group. Save Westbrook - a registered PAC has been
handling this for 2 years
our contact is savewestbrook@yahoo.com
One immediate issue
I was given a copy of an
excel spreadsheet of statewide referenda-%
increase and results- for all towns up until May 16,2005
I was told FCTO is updating
it regularly.
I can't seem to find it
on your website
Can you point me to a
current version?
gary greve
860-399-6964
Note: I have added the
aforementioned to our group email list, and forwarded spreadsheet. Susan Kniep
*********
Stephen J. Breckley, SteveB@BluewaterManagement.com
Ethical Standards in Government
June 10, 2005
Dear Susan: Fred Standt is a close friend. He distributed your FCTO
meeting flyer to a small group last night. He spoke highly of
you, and encouraged others to attend.
The last item on the flyer's FCTO meeting subject list is "Work
collectively to impose ethical standards in government and abolish
corruption". Candidate
Ethical Guidelines - Toward that end, Brookfield First, a non-partisan public interest group, published
standards for ethical behavior in Town government. Candidates would have
to endorse these guidlines as a condition of running
for office. A
copy of the press release is attached. It's thought that
these standards might be useful to FCTO as a starting point. This subject is timely. Governor Rell has urged that standards be drafted and adopted at the
State level. The apparent reluctance of the State reresentatives
to adopt standards affirms pervasive and long standing corruption and
thuggery. The Governor might welcome some
input. Other Taxpayer Issues - The
second attachment was submitted as input to Town Charter revision. It
contains proposed guidelines to govern Town authorizations and spending, among
other things. The goal is to provide better stweardhip
of taxpayer funds. Here again, what's written might be useful on a state
wide level. Feel free to use it. Guidelines
such as these have served me well in the business world. Adhering to them
has facilitated the saving of many troubled companies. The thought is,
that government may well benefit as well or more. That's why I drafted
guidelines for government. I hope this
info is interesting and helpful to FCTO. If you have any questions,
please don't hesitate to contact me. Very
truly yours,
*************
Robert Young,
Wethersfield Taxpayers Association
Subject: A 'Run-Away' Tax
June 13, 2005
Law Tribune Editorial
The Connecticut Law Tribune
Last week, Connecticut's supposedly Republican governor and the
Democrat-controlled General Assembly passed a spending plan (which is a much
better description of the end product than calling it a "budget," as
the state is clearly not on a budget) that includes as part of its funding
mechanism the re-enactment of an estate tax. It's important to realize that, when
the subject is estate taxes, there is really only one operative word in the
debate. And that word is, "Florida." Florida is such a pretty
state. The bougainvillea burst with beautiful color. The golf is good just
about all year round. No one ever dies there of a heart attack while shoveling
snow. The orange juice is tasty, sleeves are short, the
ground is flat. Sure, one has to contend with an occasional hurricane. But what
one doesn't have to worry about is an estate tax, because Florida's is going
bye-bye. There's insurance to cover
one's assets in case of a hurricane. The way assets are protected in the face
of an estate tax is called "moving to Florida." And it's
what we can expect a lot of Connecticut retirees to do in
the face of this foolish act by our elected leaders. In an effort to keep the cash rolling in to
pay for the huge run-up in state employees over the past decade, lawmakers
pushed forward with a plan to generate a few million bucks by taxing all
estates of $2 million or more. State senators and representatives appear to
believe that a $2 million estate is the mark of someone with extreme wealth.
They have not, apparently, been following the Connecticut real estate
market, in which home prices have risen more than 40 percent across the region
over the last five years. Even talk of a housing bubble burst revolves around a
slowing of price growth, not a retreat. And even then, those economists who
have repeatedly asserted that housing prices will start slacking off any time
soon have found themselves repeatedly wrong over the past 18 months.
Between 401(k) savings, regular savings, life insurance proceeds, personal
property and home value appreciation, it's not all that difficult to reach the
$2 million estate threshold. What it is difficult to do is to have any money
left after executor fees, sales commission fees, legal fees, mover fees and
probate fees to actually pass on to the children. That's why the federal
government has been eliminating its estate tax and why countless states have
followed suit. Connecticut, though,
doesn't seem to care: it wants to cut in and take its share of death taxes.
Lawmakers, however, couldn't even bring themselves to make the estate tax
applicable to everyone. Instead, it seems to have directly targeted Fairfield County as the source for
its lucre. The southwest portion of the
state has seen housing prices rise faster and stronger than anywhere else,
making the idea of being able to pass your home down to your kids an important
one, because otherwise the children might not be able to afford to keep living
in the town in which they grew up. Forget Greenwich and Darien -- according to
The Warren Group, which tracks all property transactions in Connecticut, the median price
of a single-family home in the town of Fairfield is now $568,750,
up from just $265,000 in 1999. In Ridgefield, it's worse:
$702,500, up from $385,750 in 1999. Die
while owning a home in one of those two towns, and one will see a large share
of the estate flow to Connecticut's General Fund.
Sell the house and retire to Florida, and it all stays
with the family. This is a no-brainer decision. Unfortunately, that also
appears to be an apt description of the state of Democrat legislators and our
hapless governor when this tax deal was worked out.
****************
Florence Stahl; flostahl@snet.net
Avon Taxpayers Association
Subject:
Susan Kniep, Boston
TV Appearance
June 13, 2005
Dear Susan: Brava! Keep getting our
message out there! As we know, it's still a drop in the bucket compared to the
massive communications network of the proponents of more spending. Susan, in addition to binding arbitration,
the budget cap, runaway school spending, etc., I wonder if you could hammer
home a simple message: WHO going to PAY for all this largesse? HOW much can we
place on the backs of the working middle class, let alone the poor? WHY are we continuing
to shrink the great American middle class? WHEN will rich parents start paying
for the amenities for their children they want entire communities to
underwrite? Best of luck and, yes,
break a leg!
Flo
****************
Jack Walton, jacc45@hotmail.com
Oakville Watertown Taxpayers
Association
Subject:
Response to Flo Stahl
June 14, 2005
Flo....your question of how the middle class
can/will be expected to pay for the worlds mess was a recent story in the
newspaper....The United States is expected with the sanction of all of our
politicians to reduce our wealth by giving it to a myriad of other
Countries....The Helicopter contract was a recent lets support Italy
and the United Kingdom....The underground wiring of our power grid
is to support New Zealand with converters and inverters made in New Zealand
of course....watch closely and you will see Bush and all out politicians give
everything we own away....the New World Order....and I voted for
Bush.........jack
****************