Williamstown Property Tax Rate Jumps 9 Percent / Williamstown.com

Your Comments

Williamstown.com welcomes critical, respectful dialogue. Name-calling, personal attacks, libel, slander or foul language is not allowed. All comments are reviewed before posting and will be deleted or edited as necessary.

19 Comments

Add Comment

Perhaps it is time to consider a split tax rate. Not everyone who lives in Williamstown is rich, as some people think, and an increase in real estate taxes will be burdensome, especially to those who are trying to survive on fixed incomes.
from: not rich	on: 09-27-2011 04:30PM I Agree (15) - I Disagree (4)

As I understand, the residential and commercial tax rates will all increase by 9%. Yet it is stated in the article that Folhlin offered an option to keep the percentage of the tax the same. Is that not what is happening?
from: confused	on: 09-28-2011 03:52PM I Agree (0) - I Disagree (0)
Editor: The option to keep the percentage the same refers to the ratio between residential and commercial/industrial properties of the total tax revenue. The board opted to raise the rate on all tax classifications the same (9 percent) and therefore, residential properties will pay more of that ratio. Had they chosen to keep the ratio the same, residential rates would rise less than 9 percent but commercial/industrial would rise more than 9 percent. - Andy McKeever
I Agree (0) - I Disagree (1)

Would this be due to the property tax loss due to the tragic devastation that occurred at The Spruces? You, Mr Frohlin classified the good people of The Spruces as "trailer trash", now they won't be able to pay your bills, now will they?
from: Sue	on: 09-28-2011 08:42PM I Agree (9) - I Disagree (8)
Editor: Morgan Management pays the property tax and the re-evaluation was done long before Irene. And when did Mr. Fohlin claim anyone there was "trailer trash?" Not at any time that I know of. Your comment is ridiculous and off-topic.
I Agree (16) - I Disagree (8)

The Williamstown Selectmen appear to be overly influenced by local businesses. The reality is Williamstown is a desireable place to do business. There is no question that Williamstown should have tax classification with a higher tax rate for businesses. The Community Preservation act should also be repealed as the committee running it has made some poor, it not illegal, decisions in using these tax dollars. The options offered at this annual farcical tax classification hearing were deliberately confusing to the typical observer. (Since all tax rates are going up, the discussion should be held in terms of: 1. if all property values stayed proportionately the same, how much would your property tax increase as a result of the Town increasing taxes by 2 and 1/2? 2. How much would your taxes be if several classification scenarios take place. 3. What is the effect of lowering appraisals unilaterally on business properties on residential property. 4. What it the median assessed value of residential properties rather than the average value, which includes these million dollar palaces? First: Should everyone expect to believe that business property has lost value more than residential property. This seems like an insider campaign by developers like Mr. Paresky who knocked down the lower rent buildings so his expensive to rent buildings would become the only game in town. Were Mr. Paresky's new properties devalued? Second: Does Clark Art pay ANY taxes? If so, how much? They are not on the list. Also the List leads us to feel sorry for these big taxpayers? How much in taxes do Colonial Village homeowners collectively pay? South Williamstown? Longview Terrace? Third: Would Williams College pay more or less in taxes if there were classification? Obviously they do not pay taxes for their properties designated for education usage (though that definition may be debatable). Not knowing this answer makes it difficult for the general public to form an opinion on this matter. Does this factor (secretly) into the Town manager and Selectmen's decisions? Can we see a list of the properties that Williams DOES pay taxes for? What are they used for? If property classification would increase Williams' tax burden, then this would, sadly, explain why the Town has long been opposed to classification. North Adams and even Adams (I believe) have tax classification. What is the effect of Williamstown having an extremely high percentage of non-profits and non taxable educational institutions on the tax base? Williams College and the Clark Art wouldn't move in the next year or two if there is tax classification. However, many good hard working citizens, may be forced to move. Part of the American dream is being able to own a home that is 100% paid for. The other part of that dream is being able to afford your property taxes. When the tax bill exceeds $5000 for an average home it's no longer a dream, it is a nightmare!
from: The Taxman	on: 09-29-2011 08:47AM I Agree (21) - I Disagree (2)
Editor: All the questions you have asked are available at Town Hall.
I Agree (2) - I Disagree (8)

I agree with not rich. Not everyone in Williamstown has "money". What about the people on Arnold St. that have owned their house for years? Most of them are retired and live on a fixed income. How can they pay a tax increase? Lets keep the Village Beatiful, affordable
from: Also not rich	on: 09-29-2011 06:25PM I Agree (16) - I Disagree (1)

The college owns a lot of the buisiness property in town. The college pays nothing on most of the prime real estate it owns. While it is true that tax hikes on local buisiness properties would translate into rent, which the college keeps fairly low, something has to be done to get more revenue from Williams. The rate was .114 only several years ago. You would have to do an analysis of the assessments in comparison to the rate to really understand how much indivduals are going to be burdened at the expense of buisiness/ college properties. One thing for sure, it is time for Williams college to pay more in property taxes, and has been for some time now. The school operates like a buisiness, and left its primary mission of education long ago. Taxes were raised last year on home owners as well... at least mine were. Something has to happen to collect more revenue from the prime real estate owner in the town. You cannot have Williams college sitting on billions of dollars in prime real estate value and only paying about half a million a year in property taxes and keep the place affordable. The college is not paying it's fair share. An imbalanced increase on local land owners that protects a school that dominates the landscape and growth of the town- and has a billion dollar endowment, does not make any sense at all.
from: Williams already pays too little	on: 10-01-2011 06:30AM I Agree (14) - I Disagree (2)

Taxman- Williams pays next to nothing in comparison to the value of the properties it owns in town. Very true. The school dominates the town. That includes the development of the town, even the region. Very true. The school has a large amount of influence and control over the polity. Very true.
from: answers	on: 10-01-2011 06:49AM I Agree (17) - I Disagree (1)

I love living in Williamstown, but this truly bothers me. Someone else asked what are the taxes of the Clark...I'd like to know what they are for the public library and the youth center. My family donates money to these worthy organizations, but I am certainly going to have less money for these community organizations. Especially considering if these businesses were spared of the tax burden and it was levied on the resident by the Select Board.
from: Gouged in the Eye	on: 10-01-2011 09:11AM I Agree (8) - I Disagree (2)

The tax rate has increased 10% not 9%. Check your math. The increase from 12.70 to 13.98 is a difference of 1.28. When computing the increase, you divide 1.28 by the original amount, 12.70 (not 13.98 as someone apparently did). If we need the money fine, but let's not understate the increase. iBerkshires, please correct your headline to reflect the double digit increase.
from: Concerned Citizen Kane	on: 10-01-2011 11:21AM I Agree (11) - I Disagree (2)

Gouged- The Clark, the library, the local youth center have not changed their primary mission into one of a substantial economic player in the region- and should be taxed. Williams College now controls a vast majority of the prime real estate in Williamstown. It has grown over time into an economic powerhouse that curbs growth and stifles the tax base. The school needs to pay more taxes. Local home owners can no longer afford to subsidize a school that sits on tens of billions of dollars of untaxed prime real estate while taking in tens of millions of dollars a year in revenue, curbing development and sheltering its wealth in non taxable land- while using the town resources. The school and the town have always co existed... key word "CO". No one is asking the school to pay the real value of it's land- that would be tens of millions of dollars- but the school should pay in lieu like so many other similar institutions do (like Amherst, for example). The school is only paying about half of what it should. Good local schools also increase recruiting for profs... police add security to the town, etc. Williams is not paying its fair share to the community. Sure, it gives as a charity from time to time- but that is not what is needed. A larger tax base is needed or the town will continue to raise rates until no one but profs and alumni can afford to live in it.
from: Williams must pay more!	on: 10-01-2011 07:37PM I Agree (1) - I Disagree (1)

Editor: "All the questions you have asked are available at Town Hall." Editor- You are completely missing the point of what "taxman" is saying. The point is that an individual should not have to go to town hall for a simple explanation. The selectmen presented the options in a complex ans confusing manner rather than talking about the real issues of taxation in the town. A person should not have to have a PHD in economics to try to figure out what these new rate hikes will mean to the average voter and other wealthy institutions in the town. I too, would like to know how Spring Street can drastically increase square footage through large development business property projects over the last decade and the town can lose property value in taxable business land ownership? Knowing what has been built recently- that makes no sense at all. Once again, we see iberkshire writers acting as excuse makers for our local politicians throughout this thread. How about some active reporting that looks at the numbers and the issues instead?
from: Editor does not get it	on: 10-02-2011 07:19AM I Agree (6) - I Disagree (2)

Editor: "Morgan Management pays the property tax and the re-evaluation was done long before Irene. And when did Mr. Fohlin claim anyone there was "trailer trash?" Not at any time that I know of. Your comment is ridiculous and off-topic." Uh, no it is not. Perhaps it is poorly stated... he did say the Spruces "should be turned into a water park"- a matter of record. Also, how the loss of 270 properties impacts the tax base is a valid concern. Sue has a point, and is most likley frustrated by the recent events- largely (mis) managed by the town- that put her friends and family on the street- and will most likely force them to move. Good point sue.
from: Editor does not get it	on: 10-02-2011 07:28AM I Agree (1) - I Disagree (4)
Editor: "Trailer trash" and "water park" are not equivalent. Again, the property is owned by Morgan Management. It may be lost down the road and that may well be a concern on how it will affect property taxes overall. What I said was that revaluation was not the effect of Irene. And of course Sue is frustrated. Who wouldn't be in her situation! The residents of the Spruces are having a terrible time.
I Agree (6) - I Disagree (0)

How come the town does not cut some spending as well? You need to take a balanced approach. What is the annual salary of a selectmen in Williamstown? Anyone? Start with a pay cut there to show leadership and move forward.
from: Cut Spending	on: 10-02-2011 07:41AM I Agree (5) - I Disagree (2)

Editor: "Trailer trash" and "water park" are not equivalent." #1- A town manager joking about the flooding of people who he serves homes, is equivalent, or worse. You laughing now? #2- You still have not picked up on Sue's point. The general point is that the more you raise taxes- the more you will drive the working class out of Williamstown. The more property you force people to abandon, the more you are going to have to raise the tax rate. It is all very relevant. Good god- just look at what has happened to the tax rate over the last 3 years. You cannot sustain that kind of growth in taxation on homes without displacing the most vulnerable owners. You drive down North Hoosic Road lately? We should be lowering taxes on property, not raising it. If you care at all about people on fixed income and the health of the rural working class then you do not pass these kinds of tax laws that generally favor the least vulnerable members of the community (Williams College) that have huge amounts of wealth, over the lower income people. The Spruces is just another example, along with this latest tax law, of the town driving out the working class and protecting the wealthy. It's wrong.
from: The Spruces is relevant.	on: 10-02-2011 02:32PM I Agree (6) - I Disagree (4)

Can anyone tell me how each selectman voted on this issue? I'd like the opportunity to vote out any/all selectman who voted for this. Taxpayers get no say in the matter? Why can't Williamstown level-fund itself this year? Where is the money going to exactly? Teachers' cadillac health insurance policies? And you're telling me Mark Paresky's buildings have DECREASED in value? OK sure. The taxes in Williamstown are out of proportion to what residents get in return. Take a look at the MCAS scores at WES(which are down this year BTW)- they do not even come close to those in towns with a similar tax rate. Take a look at absolutely abysmal MGRHS physical plant - ditto. Williamstown thinks it is Wellesley but it ain't. Not even close. Vote out these selectmen. Those in the group who are retired educators are benefiting from the bloated benefits of the union. It is a conflict of interest. They should recuse themselves. They do not have the residents' best interests in mind. Do they not read the national news? Tax increases are out, people. Bloated benefits for unionized is on its way out. But apparently not in ultra-liberal Williamstown where "the rich can carry everybody else."
from: broke in billsville	on: 10-03-2011 09:52AM I Agree (1) - I Disagree (2)
Editor: FYI: If taxes went up but your house decreased in value, your bill isn't likely to change.
I Agree (2) - I Disagree (2)

Editor: it is projected that more than 2,000 properties will have increased taxes; while 500 or so will decrease. Odds are I'm in the first category.
from: broke in billsville	on: 10-03-2011 10:01AM I Agree (2) - I Disagree (0)
Editor: Odds are always against me, too.
I Agree (1) - I Disagree (1)

I just looked on line at the town's website and Mark Paresky's new building on Spring Street did not change in value from last year to this year. I did notice that he still has vacancies. There's also vacancies on the east side of Spring Street...vacancies on Main Street. Great business climate we have here in town.
from: Willy Nilly	on: 10-03-2011 03:49PM I Agree (2) - I Disagree (0)

What a shock to see tax bills up 9% this year. This is really getting outrageous for anyone but the very wealthy. Most people have had 0%-2% raises this year and last. It is time residents organize a level-funding petition for the next 3 years. Freeze the total amount of the budget at this year's level for 3 years. Then tough decisions will need to be made, just like homeowners have to do every year.
from: Ouch	on: 10-05-2011 09:12AM I Agree (3) - I Disagree (0)

Cut some things and re build or re locate the spruces with this increase... and you maintain the tax base with spruces being one of the top taxpayers in the town. But pluuueeese, stop lowering taxes on the college and pareksy and pretending you are doing the working class any favors!
from: All about Wall street!	on: 10-09-2011 07:18PM I Agree (0) - I Disagree (0)