Mr. Conroy called the meeting to order at 7:15 p.m.

Mr. Conroy read the Senior Tax Relief Ordinance to the assembly and explained the purpose of the special meeting of the two Committees. He then asked the Members if they had any comment to this Ordinance.

Mr. Kimmel suggested since the Committee would not be making changes to the Ordinance on a yearly basis, they look at the numbers a little closer. He said that he felt they could raise them due to the fact that at their present status the total would equal $558,000, which was well under the cap. He felt that the $600 maximum could be raised to $800 and the $550 could be raised between $650-$700 and still be under the cap considerably. Mr. Nolin cautioned that the Members should be mindful of what had been budgeted and he pointed out that before the budget had even been set down they were breaking it. He commented that he felt they should stay with the figures they had proposed and noted that if it were implemented they would be a little bit above budget but he felt it was a margin that that would be acceptable to Finance. Mr. Torrano commented that at the Public Hearing there had been a discussion and it was agreed by all the Members that they could finance the extra as proposed, but now if the amounts were going to be increased it would create a problem for Finance.

Mr. Kimmel stated that even if both amounts were increased to $800 it would have an impact of $230,000 on the Fund, which he felt would not have an affect on the Fund balance. Mr. Wrenn stated that he agreed with Mr. Kimmel as many citizens had an increase in their taxes in one year. He added that he was confident that the Finance Department could handle the situation, which would give relief to many seniors. He noted that if the car taxes were raised a couple of mills it would provide over $200,000 in revenue. Mr. Conroy stated that he wanted to address the issue raised to the Finance Committee regarding qualified properties.

Mr. Bowers stated that he was not disposed to increasing the amount to $800 but added that he questioned if going to $800 would deplete the Fund balance. He went on to state that he felt this was the wrong direction to be going and while they had the seniors at heart they had to be mindful of the needs of all citizens. He commented that he questioned the politics of this. Mr. Torrano stated that he would like to hear what Mr. Miller had to say on this issue due to the fact that he had already said that any increase would have to be funded by the taxpayers. Mr. Miller addressed the Members and stated that $525,000 had been set aside to fund the program. He noted that an additional $300,000 would be needed to fund the increase that was being discussed. He explained that the additional funding would have to come from the personal property taxes being raised. Mr. Torrano asked if seniors would be affected by an increase to the auto taxes and Mr. Miller replied that they would. Mr. Miller noted that in his opinion he did not expect that the Board of Estimates would change the auto tax. Mr. Nolin asked Mr. Miller if the Board of Estimates needed to concur to a tax increase on vehicles and Mr. Miller replied that they did.

Mr. Kimmel stated that he was not looking to Mr. Miller to find a means to fund the increase; he was stating that the increase should come out of the Fund balance. He started to question the Members on voting on what he was proposing but Mr. Nolin interjected that he objected as this request was out of order since they did not have the power to state from where the funding should be taken. Mr. Miller stated that as the CFO of the City he would recommend that they do not touch the Fund balance, especially with what might happen concerning snow removal.

Mr. Conroy noted that there was strong support to keep the numbers as originally proposed and as such he wanted to move on to the other topic. Mr. Miller stated that he would like to take all wage earners in the household over age 24 and count their income towards the full household income. Mr. Ken Whitman, City Tax Assessor, stated that if they were to count all incomes of full time residents over 22 in the same household that would help overcome the difficulties that were previously raised. He noted to the Members that his office had received numerous complaints about families where there were permanent residents living with senior property owners who receive the tax credit. A discussion then ensued about seniors who stated that they did not charge family rent but others had come forward and stated that they did. He commented that his Department would have to put in overtime hours to investigate this situation if that were the decision of the Council. Mr. Miller stated that they were trying to bring fairness and equity to this situation and his recommendation was that something be implemented.

Mr. Kimmel questioned Mr. Whitman as to how he had received his information and Mr. Whitman replied that people either in the program or applying for it had supplied this information. Mr. Kimmel pointed out that if Mr. Whitman’s Department were investing this situation they would have to investigate each of the 1,100 households. Mr. Whitman stated that they had not conducted any investigations at this point, as they preferred to trust people. He noted that the language of the Ordinance allowed this situation to occur. Mr. Bowers stated that he was not in favor of going that route as they were setting up the Finance Department for being judge and jury and there was no appeals process. He noted that this being brought up at the 11^th hour was not fair to either the Council or the seniors. He went on to state that there might be someone living with a senior citizen to assist them and this would basically set up Norwalk to become a police state to find out if that senior was lying or not. He commented that if they could come up with a fair system with an appeals process that took each one case by case he would be in favor.

Mr. Torrano stated that they were relying on the honesty and integrity of the people to be truthful and he felt it was unfortunate for a Member of the Body to feel this way. He noted that if someone were earning an income and could help to support the taxes they should do so. He commented that they had discussed raising the cap and this would be a way to help raise extra money.

Mr. Bowers stated that he respected Mr. Torrano’s right to disagree in this situation but he felt it was turning into what he had described earlier. He went on to state that unless this process was done case by case he felt it was not worth the aggravation to the seniors. He added that he felt this would not generate that much money anyway and it did not lend itself to the compassion that a city should be giving to its most elderly residents. Mr. Nolin stated that he concurred with Mr. Torrano. He said that this was the same as any other Regulation and in other cases people were made to comply. He noted that they were talking about people with sizeable incomes getting a free ride. He commented that if someone were living with a senior and making an income over the guidelines they could contribute $600 to that senior’s taxes. He noted that was only $30 a month. He pointed out that many members of the Norwalk public had asked at the Public Hearing why the law was written as such. He said that this would bring fairness and would not affect fairness and added that this would possibly allow for more money to be allocated to senior tax relief next year.

Mr. Kimmel stated that he agreed with Mr. Bowers that this would be an enforcement headache and without an appeals process it would be a virtual can of worms. He noted that from what Mr. Whitman had to say they were dealing with a small amount of violators and he was against making the change. Mr. Conroy stated that he would report their discussion to the Council group.

The meeting was adjourned at 7:50 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,
nn Marie DeLuca
Telesco Secretarial Services