Pittsfield Sets Fiscal 2013 Tax Rates

By Joe DurwinPittsfield Correspondent
Print Story | Email Story

The City Council opted for tax rates that are steeper for residential than Mayor Daniel Bianchi's recommendation.

PITTSFIELD, Mass. — The City Council voted Tuesday for a steeper increase in residential property taxes in order to offset soaring commercial tax increases local business owners say are hampering economic development.

The final tax classification approved represents a residential rate increase from $16.11 to $16.70 per $1,000 of assessed value and commercial increase from $32.85 to $34.48, contrary to a proposal put forth by Mayor Daniel Bianchi calling for $16.48 residential and $35.30 commercial rates.

During a public hearing on the proposed classification, several residents opposed larger increases in commercial taxes, echoing sentiments that the rates have given it a "business unfriendly" reputation.

"You can't promote jobs if you're raising taxes on commercial property to double residential rate," said Dennis Miller, who owns property on Crane Avenue, "If I moved a half mile up the road, I could save thirteen thousand a year."

Attorney Jeffrey Cook, who has represented many industrial clients told the council that a large differential between residential and commercial hurts everyone and Phillip Scalise, who owns commercial property for rent, said high commercial rates are hurting the competitiveness in luring businesses to the city,

"We certainly all know how important it is to promote business growth," said Ashley Sulock, Director of Marketing & Communications for the Berkshire Chamber of Commerce, who added that "raising rates this much [as proposed] may very well have a very serious adverse effect on future growth."

Councilor John Krol motioned to amend the commercial property shift factor from 1.72 to 1.68, altering the distribution of the tax increase to the 16.70/34.48 rates.  



"To me, it's going in the wrong direction," Krol said of the shift factor to commercial business put forth in the mayor's proposal.  "We need to be supporting our businesses, we need to be reflecting our values, that suggest that we are business friendly."

Mayor Bianchi defended the proposed rates he'd put forth, saying this was appropriate to maintain the city's fiscal security without putting too much pressure on residential owners

"I put forth what I thought was a reasonable proposal," said Bianchi, "I think the shift that's being represented [in the council's amendment] is too severe."

Some councilors also felt the change might be too great, suggesting that 1.70 might be a better compromise, but the amendment passed 7 to 4, with the newly agreed upon rates ultimately passing 10-1, with Councilor Kevin Morandi opposed.

"The way to lower people's taxes overall is to build your tax base," said Councilor Barry Clairmont.  "Lower the commercial rate, bring in business, create jobs, and then as they build new buildings you'll bring more on the base, and the tax rates will go down."

The full fiscal report enclosed with FY13's Tax Rate Calculations and Classification Options can be viewed here (pp25-51).

If you would like to contribute information on this article, contact us at info@iberkshires.com.

Letter: Is the Select Board Listening to Dalton Voters?

Letter to the Editor

To the Editor:

A reasonable expectation by the people of a community is that their Select Board rises above personal preference and represents the collective interests of the community. On Tuesday night [Nov. 12], what occurred is reason for concern that might not be true in Dalton.

This all began when a Select Board member submitted his resignation effective Oct. 1 to the Town Clerk. Wishing to fill the vacated Select Board seat, in good faith I followed the state law, prepared a petition, and collected the required 200-plus signatures of which the Town Clerk certified 223. The Town Manager, who already had a copy of the Select Board member's resignation, was notified of the certified petitions the following day. All required steps had been completed.

Or had they? At the Oct. 9 Select Board meeting when Board members discussed the submitted petition, there was no mention about how they were informed of the petition or that they had not seen the resignation letter. Then a month later at the Nov. 12 Select Board meeting we learn that providing the resignation letter and certified petitions to the Town Manager was insufficient. However, by informing the Town Manager back in October the Select Board had been informed. Thus, the contentions raised at the Nov. 12 meeting by John Boyle seem like a thinly veiled attempt to delay a decision until the end of January deadline to have a special election has passed.

If this is happening with the Special Election, can we realistically hope that the present Board will listen to the call by residents to halt the rapid increases in spending and our taxes that have been occurring the last few years and pass a level-funded budget for next year, or to not harness the taxpayers in town with the majority of the cost for a new police station? I am sure these issues are of concern to many in town. However, to make a change many people need to speak up.

Please reach out to a Select Board member and let them know you are concerned and want the Special Election issue addressed and finalized at their Nov. 25 meeting.

Robert E.W. Collins
Dalton, Mass.

 

 

View Full Story

More Pittsfield Stories