[Editor’s Note: We updated this story with some more Homestead Exemption information. Please see paragraph five.]
FARMINGTON – The Board of Selectmen set the tax rate at .01928 Monday evening, with increases in the Homestead Exemption program cited as the chief cause of the approximately 48 cent increase per $1,000 of property value.
The .01928 rate represents a .00048 increase over the 2015 tax rate, or $48 on a $100,000 piece of property. That rate includes capturing $125,000 for the Downtown Tax Increment Financing reserve account and raising $25,000 for the overlay.
Appropriations and offsetting revenue both increased, with county, school and municipal expenditures increasing a total of $223,602 and the town collecting an additional $92,000 through revenue sharing and other sources for a net increase of $131,602.
The greatest impact upon the town was through an expansion of the Homestead Exemption program, according to John E. O’Donnell of John E. O’Donnell & Associates, Inc., the town’s assessor. This year, the maximum amount of property tax relief through that program was increased from $10,000 to $15,000. That resulted in an increase in total exempted funds from $15.3 million in 2015 to $22.3 million this year. Fifty percent of that nearly $7 million increase in exempted valuation is reimbursed by the state.
Due to the expansion of the Homestead Exemption program, participating homeowners would see a decrease in their taxes, as compared to the previous fiscal year. The $15,000 exemption, applied against the new .01928 rate for a $100,000 piece of property would result in a tax bill of $1,638.80, a decrease of $53.20.
While there was new construction, O’Donnell said, much of it replaced existing taxable properties, such as the new McDonald’s and the Tire Warehouse on the Wilton Road. As a result, the new construction had a limited impact on the town’s valuation.
Approximately 10 properties began participating in the state’s Tree Growth program and a couple others began participating in the farmland program. Two lots were also added to the list of tax-exempt properties, a church in Fairbanks and the town’s new parking lot at the Corner of Church and Cony Street.
In total, the town’s taxable valuation decreased from last year’s $460 million to $453 million.
With appropriations, revenue and valuations already set, the board effectively had two decisions to make Monday evening: setting the amount of money to be captured for the Downtown TIF Reserve Account and the overlay.
The TIF currently contains approximately $90,000, but the parking lot project is expected to cost a total of $165,000, reducing that account to negative $72,000 when all bills come due. In the past, the board has targeted a $100,000 level for the account, which funds a list of projects developed by the TIF Advisory Committee.
Selectman Matthew Smith noted that he’d be “hesitant” to raise much more than $100,000 for the TIF account this year, given the inherent tax rate increase. Chair Joshua Bell noted that the overlay, recommended at $50,000 by O’Donnell, could be reduced to $25,000, allowing for an extra $25,000 to be added to the TIF account. The overlay, O’Donnell noted, was used to cover the town in the case of late of absent tax payments, or to cover abatements.
The board voted unanimously, 4 to 0, to set the tax rate at 0.01928, raising $125,000 for the TIF account and $25,000 for the overlay. Tax bills are expected to go out later this week.
Why not take more buildings down and put more the tax on the people that have lived here their entire lives. It is sad more homes going up for sale and folks leaving the beautiful town or state.
And other news, the sun came up.
What is even sadder is knowing that there are many folks who are facing imminent foreclosure because they cannot afford to pay more, and they have nowhere else to go.
Yes, Taxpayer, and a few more parks that don’t pay property taxes.
Please spend my tax dollars wisely,I don’t feel as if I have.
Did anyone else notice that the article in the sun journal listed the RSU 9 school budget added $112,000 to
The increase. I seem to remember that Dr.Ward and the school board repeatedly stated that 8 of the 10 towns
Will see a decrease in their tax. Farmington was listed as one of those 8 towns. But the newspapers reported
An increase of $112,855. Hmmmmmmm, imagine that.
NO MORE TAXES!
Imagine if the many churches paid tax on what their properties are worth!
Just think, remember its for our children and our future, that’s what the majority of people here said. Now everyone wants to get upset because the taxes are going up, Don’t argue about it, the people voted this in.
Hahaha, do we get to hear ” in the long run this will save us money? ” or, ” this increase will actually lower your taxes? “
Captain Planet, I’m with you. There is no logical reason for churches to be exempt from taxes.
UMF takes up half the town.
Okay…there were 12 responses. 12 out of 12 are upset because taxes are going up AGAIN!!!
Now whose fault is that, do you suppose? Who is responsible?
YOU! All of you who don’t go to Town Meeting and cut the budget. YOU!!! All of you who don’t go to
the school budget meetings and vote the budget down.
I predicted this. I’ve been fighting this for years. Now all of a sudden, people are upset.
How upset? If you’re really upset, plan to come to the Town Meeting. CUT budgets.
Come to the school budget meeting and CUT budgets.
One thing the article DIDN’T say is how many taxable properties are now off the tax base.
And that’s in the past year.
One thing the article didn’t say is how much money we’re spending on “projects” and how much money
is an over-run.
Yes, Mike, Tom Ward has repeatedly told us Farmington was going to save money. M-m-m-m-m-m…
Just thinking…yes, UMF takes up a ton of space in downtown. If they paid taxes, their contribution would be in the $1MIL range. They’re repeatedly asked to make donations in lieu of taxes. Last year, it was in the $30,000 range. So now they’re down $970,000. Happens every year. Every year they cost the town more money.
I believe, you might find that taxing a church would be ruled out by the 1st amendment . It is also worth noting that Churches do pay property tax on any buildings they hold which they use for any purpose other than worship, such as a parsonage or rental hall
Admin’s note: We’ve added some additional information regarding the Homestead Exemption to the story.
In regards to the school assessment’s impact on the budget, keep in mind that the school budget runs as a June-July fiscal year, while the town’s property tax is assessed on the calendar year. Farmington residents see half of the impact of the 2016-17 school budget as part of this assessment, and the other half as part of next year’s assessment.
Maybe Bulldog could explain a little more on how RSU 9 is requesting $90,503 less for the upcoming school year, and the Town of Farmington approved increasing their tax revenue amount targeted for schools. If RSU 9 budgets for lower taxes from Farmington, why does the select board not budget for lower taxes from the school district? Is it because of the TIF’s ?
Please be clear in your explanation, because right now I do not understand why there is an increase for school taxes when RSU 9 asked for $90, 503 less???
Is it so Farmington can have more carry over next year to award to TIF’S ??
Are the select men budgeting for a large increase in taxes for 2017/2018 school year?
It doesn’t have anything to do with anticipating future expenses or TIFs. It’s just an issue of timing.
Farmington is on a calendar fiscal year, and therefore (in 2016) must fund the school assessment in halves: one half from the 2015-16 budget (i.e. the school budget approved last year) and one half from the 2016-17 budget (the one approved earlier this month). The town sees the increase or decrease reflected in its education assessments, just as the other towns do, it just takes two municipal fiscal years (or, more accurately, two halves from two municipal fiscal years), rather than one.
The town’s figures therefore indicate the following:
There was an increase of $158,152.50 in the educational assessment from January 1, 2016 to June 30, 2016, followed by a decrease of $45,297.17 from July 1, 2016 to December 31, 2016. The net effect is an increase of $112,855.33.
The second half of the decrease in the educational assessment will be seen in the 2017 tax bill (along with the first half of the 2017-18 assessment’s change, whatever that may be).
Thank you for the clarification Admin….
Wow, here is my prediction. Taxes will continue to rise.
One thing not mentioned and one thing not mentioned equals 2 things not mentioned.
” all of a sudden ” lol
More confused then ever
all the town can see is PLUS..INCREASE….try this for one yr plz…subtracked…..decrease…0ops…