City Council

Approved by the City Council & WPCA MINUTES Vol. 27, Page 519 May 19, 2025 CITY COUNCIL Vote: Unanimous BOARD OF FINANCE SPECIAL MEETING City Hall Auditorium / Zoom May 12, 2025 A SPECIAL JOINT MEETING of the City Council and the Board of Finance of the City of Torrington was held at the City Hall Auditorium on Monday, May 12, 2025. Present at City Hall were Mayor Elinor Carbone, Corporation Counsel Michael Magistrali, Comptroller Olivia DeRosa, Deputy Comptroller and Manager of Budgets and Planning Erika Johnson, Assessor Stacie Maldonado, Treasurer Dan Farley, Councilors Drake Waldron, Stephen Ivain, Molly Spino, Anne Ruwet, and Paul Cavagnero, and Board of Finance Members Laurene Pesce, James Wright, Wendy Traub, Chris Beyus, and Deborah Iannacito. Deputy Police Chief Bart Barown joined via Zoom. Councilor David Oliver and Board of Finance Member Christopher Anderson were absent. Mayor Carbone called the meeting to order at 4:04 p.m., beginning with the Pledge of Allegiance. Discuss Phasing in the 2024 Grand List On a motion by Councilor Spino, seconded by Councilor Ivain, the Boards voted unanimously to discuss the potential impacts of implementing a phased approach to the 2024 Grand List. Mayor Carbone explained that the Office of Policy and Management (OPM) offers three ways to phase in property assessment increases after a revaluation: by the dollar amount of the increase, by a percentage ratio, or by using different ratios for separate classes of property. However, Torrington can only use the method based on the dollar increase. Mrs. Maldonado gave the Boards examples of how a two through five-year phase-in would affect both a median- priced home and a higher-value home. In both cases, residential properties would see a modest increase, while commercial and business properties would face larger increases. She warned that using a phase-in would disrupt the equalized distribution of the tax burden, shifting more responsibility onto businesses. She noted there are about 1,700 businesses with personal property and 1,000 commercial properties in the city. Councilor Ruwet pointed out that all phase-in examples assume no growth in the budget or grand list over the next five years, which Mrs. Maldonado confirmed. Mayor Carbone added that one-time revenues supporting the first year would disappear in the second year, leading to a likely increase. She emphasized that all figures discussed assumed that no changes to the city’s spending or revenue plans would be made. Councilor Ivain asked whether motor vehicle revenues would continue. Ms. Johnson said they would, via the state’s motor vehicle transition grant. Mrs. Maldonado added that although the legislature has discussed eliminating the motor vehicle tax, it would not happen until 2030 at the earliest. Mayor Carbone reminded the group that the motor vehicle grant amount depends on the city’s mill rate. Mr. Beyus said he would accept a two-year phase-in but preferred implementing the full increase immediately. Mayor Carbone explained that the proposal under consideration is to use 50% of the new assessments in the first year and the remaining 50% in the second. Mrs. Maldonado noted that this approach would shift tax burdens back and forth between residential and commercial properties. Mr. Beyus questioned how they could justify placing most of the burden on businesses and doubted the ability to maintain a flat budget. Mrs. Pesce clarified that a phase-in isn’t a tax break; taxes will still rise, just less sharply at first. Mrs. Traub said she’s not inclined to support a phase-in but would consider two years if necessary. She also cautioned that if anything changes in future years, the current estimates will become irrelevant. Mr. Beyus emphasized the need for greater transparency with taxpayers and said he would not support a phase-in for longer than two years. Mayor Carbone stated that if no phase-in is chosen, taxes would rise by 26.7%; with a two-year phase-in, the increase would be 17.75%. Councilor Cavagnero favored the two-year option, warning that implementing the full increase immediately would be too harsh. He added that although taxes would still increase, it’s important to prepare taxpayers through effective communication. Mrs. Pesce remarked that many people had expected the revaluation to reduce the mill rate and weren’t financially prepared for increases. Mr. Beyus requested updated financial sheets to better understand the impact. Mayor Carbone agreed to send them, noting that the main decision now is whether to implement tax relief through a phase-in or not. She said Mrs. Maldonado must notify OPM of the city’s choice. Mrs. Pesce said a phase-in would require the assessor’s office to redo the entire process. Mrs. Maldonado confirmed that if the deadline of June 1, 2025, is missed, the city will face a penalty, and her previous work would have to be redone. Councilor Ivain suggested adopting a five-year plan now and canceling it later, but Mayor Carbone warned that this would reflect poorly on the city’s integrity if reviewed by OPM. Councilor Spino noted that any projections are based on assumptions, and properties can appeal valuations during each year of a phase-in. Mrs. Maldonado confirmed that all appraisals are tied to the 2024 values. Mr. Beyus asked whether the city could use its fund balance for relief while skipping a formal phase-in. Mayor Carbone said that the approach wouldn’t work. Councilor Ruwet said this is a no-win scenario and argued against a phase-in, favoring a lower mill rate to draw in new businesses. Councilor Spino supported a gradual increase, saying it would give residents time to adjust, and help market the City with a 32-mill rate and development-ready sites. Councilor Cavagnero also supported growth through new business and preparing taxpayers. Councilor Ivain said the city must be cautious about increasing the burden on an already struggling community. Councilor Waldron said seniors can’t afford major increases and suggested a 4–5-year phase-in. Mrs. Traub disagreed, saying a budget increase each year is inevitable and anything longer than two years would be too burdensome. Mr. Beyus argued that flat funding a budget for 4–5 years is unrealistic and said he wouldn’t support more than two years of phasing in. He also pointed out that most residents have taxes escrowed with their mortgage payments, which would spread out the cost. Mr. Wright reiterated that the city should “rip off the band-aid.” MINUTES Vol. 27, Page 520 CITY COUNCIL BOARD OF FINANCE SPECIAL MEETING City Hall Auditorium / Zoom May 12, 2025 MOTION FAILED: 2024 Grand List Adoption On a motion by Councilor Spino, seconded by Councilor Cavagnero, the Council voted 2 in favor, 3 opposed (Councilors Ruwet, Ivain, and Waldron), to adopt a 2-year phase-in approach for the 2024 Grand List revaluation. The motion failed. MOTION FAILED: 2024 Grand List Adoption On a motion by Councilor Waldron, seconded by Councilor Cavagnero, the Council voted 2 in favor, 3 opposed (Councilors Ruwet, Spino, and Ivain), to adopt a 3-year phase-in approach for the 2024 Grant List revaluation. The motion failed. MOTION FAILED: 2024 Grand List Adoption On a motion by Councilor Ruwet, seconded by Councilor Cavagnero, the Council voted 1 in favor, 4 opposed (Councilors Cavagnero, Spino, Ivain, and Waldron), to adopt a no phase-in approach to the 2024 Grand List revaluation. The motion failed. 2024 Grand List Adoption On a motion by Councilor Cavagnero, seconded by Councilor Spino, the Council voted unanimously to adopt a 2-year phase-in approach for the 2024 Grand List revaluation. Adjournment On a motion by Councilor Ruwet, seconded by Councilor Spino, the Boards voted unanimously to adjourn at 5:10 p.m. Respectfully submitted by ATTEST: Heather Abraham, Asst. City Clerk CAROL L. ANDERSON, CITY CLERK