A CALL FOR TAX REVIEW

The Senate has stated that it will not pass its version of the Health Care Reform Bill before adjournment and thus the urgency to opine on what is proposed or omitted has passed. Since I can take more time for reflection there are other matters; namely our civic finances for one that are more important to each of us, and of this moment as evidenced by resolution sand ordinances that have been before the Council in July..

In response to readers' unanswered questions at Council meetings; on 7/23/09 Plainfield Plaintalker printed a list of the types of tax exempt properties in Plainfield All these properties have a total listed assessed value of $254,134,000. which would at present rates bring in approximately $15,194,671.86 in taxes if my math is ok. $16 million off the top that we other tax payers have to provide. This does not include all the properties that have reduced payments through tax abatement or Pilot Programing. That is not chicken feed.

Let us review the classes of tax exempt properties, Some we can not change as a result of existing laws. Others we can challenge and perhaps get a clarification of the law. Still others probably do not meet a strict interpretation of existing indications. These must be taxed. Yes it will mean litigation, but we need every dollar that is due us.

The categories:

• Homes of disabled veterans; those that served are country deserve such consideration. Would it not be nice if the city could receive some federal grant to help defray the costs. Where are a legislatures?
• Schools; The municipal schools run by the Plainfield Board of Education are part of the civic operation. The school buildings and all properties needed for operation of the programs must be exempt. However is this extended to private schools and/or colleges? If so, why? Is there federal or state legislation mandating this gift to profit making enterprises mandatory? Is the property being used for municipal needs and are freely available to the public?
• City owned properties and municipal buildings: It goes without saying that if the property is being used for municipal needs it would be ridiculous for the city to tax itself. There could be a case to tax property owned by the city but being used by a profitable enterprise
• Cemeteries: If any of the residents are on the city voting rolls, their plot should be taxed
• Houses of worship and parsonages; this is traditional not to be touched. BUT the exemption can be granted for only that building or portion that is used for the purpose designated. Buildings owned by a religious body and rented to others should be taxed appropriately.
• Public housing; Clarification should be made as to whether the terminology is generic or specific. A profit making entity running a supposedly public housing project should not be exempt.
  
• State and Federal owned buildings, we have no choice.
• Railroad properties; an archaic curse that should not be valid in this age. The exemption was granted to encourage the building of the railroad for the community's benefit. This same `error c an be compounded in tax abatements for construction of new condos "to bring people onto the community"
• Hospitals; Again only that part of the property that is for the use of Health Care needs. not rental or other income ares.
• Social Agencies: A strict definition as to their role. If solely for profit, should be taxed.
• PMUA properties; This is an autonomous body over which the citizens have no control. It can b e argued that it should pay property taxes.
• Lodges and Fraternal organizations: Only those that offer unrestricted membership to all can merit such a benefit. If any part of the building is used for a profit oriented enterprise it can not be tax exempt. If there are any qualifying ethnic, religious, or financial limitations for membership it should not have the tax benefit. I question if any such organization merits such taxpayer support.
  
• Union County College; are all institutions of higher education offered tax exemption by State law? If so OK but if the non state private on es are subject to taxation so should this organization.

As to other exemptions , abatements, and Pilot Programs, we need a complete listing of each one and the terms. Do the original designators for Pilot programs still own the property. I do not believe that the Presbyterian Homes still own either the high rise apartments or the nursing home. If there are new owners have they been granted a new pilot program benefit or has the old one been continued without review of legality.

If administration,the Common Council, or a special empowered civic committee does not review the entire situation this Fiscal Year then the citizen's interests are not being protected. Either Administration with the approval of the council or the Council on its own can create such a "commission" and act on its findings. This is as important as a review of all the city's ordinances and charter provision.

The Challenge is to the Council for they represent all the people in the community. If the Council can not stand its own two feet, then as its members come up for reelection they should be replaced by others who are not looking over their shoulder in fear of offending the boss.