This commentary is by Windham citizens, who are listed below the text.
Earlier this year, the Town of Windham underwent a full property reappraisal which has left a significant number of our residents struggling. The Board of Abatement reconvened on Monday, February 10, for the second time to hear and decide on more desperate cases.
According to the law (32 V.S.A. § 6066), residents with an annual household income not exceeding $47,000 should not have to pay more than 5% (3% for municipal and 2% for educational taxes) of their household income for their house and 2 acres, as long as their reassessed property value is under $400,000. In all of the abatement cases the Board of Abatement heard, this applied to each of the appellants who should not have had to pay more than roughly $600 and yet were charged more than four times that amount. The one-year lag in the income sensitivity calculation is also a very unfair challenge in a reappraisal year for probably every town in Vermont.
In one instance, a person received a tax bill that amounted to 16% of their household income. They own less than 2 acres, 1.09 acres to be exact. Their household income was similar for 2022 ($14,230) and 2023 ($14,871), less than $15,000 in both instances, which qualifies them for a 4.5% cap. Their homestead value rose from $180,000 to $345,000 after reappraisal, which is still less than the $400,000 limit. How does this comport with 32 VSA, Chapter 154, Sec. 6066(a)(3-4), which indicates that they should not be paying more than 4.5% of their household income for their total tax bill? And how are they to handle the increase in their mortgage payments if and when their taxes are in escrow?
Windham is a small rural community with just over 550 permanent residents and about 55% second-home owners. Our town has no grocery store, no post office, no school nor any other amenities — hardly even a street light — and yet it ranks at the top of the tax rates in the state. We are being penalized for the fact that wealthy buyers from out of state have been buying properties for more than twice their value, often sight unseen.
We fear that if income sensitivity is not effectively applied to the income tax equation, Vermonters will not be able to stay in their homes. We hope that a solution will be found to address the apparent anomaly that occurs as a result of a pandemic and reappraisal.
In our deliberations that Monday, the Board of Abatement decided to calculate the appellants’ appeals based on the 4.5% value that 32 VSA, Chapter 154, Sec. 6066(a)(3-4) indicates.
The remaining balance will have to be divided among the town’s residents in order to fulfill our tax obligations, but this cannot be the norm, nor can we continue to see tax rates rising beyond affordability. Oddly enough, all attempts to get confirmation and advice on how to proceed based on 32 V.S.A. § 6066 led nowhere. It seemed like relevant officials were unaware of the income sensitivity 5% cap or did not know how to answer our questions. We wonder how many other communities in Vermont have had a similar experience.
Antje Ruppert
Mary McCoy
Michael Simonds
Marcia Clinton
Michael Pelton
John & Anne Finley
Lewis & Barbara Lettenberger
Kord & Kathy Scott
Karen Osborne
Dave Osborne
John Boynton
Catherine Stover
Rachel Spengler
John J & Sally R Hoover
Alden Wicker
Paul & Gail Wyman
Steve & Imme Maurath
Bill Casey
Frank Seawright
Betsy Riley
Susan Persa
Alison Schantz
Rory Rosselot & Keith Gustafsson
Bill & Chris Dunkel
Pete & Diane Newton
Dave & Ginny Crittenden
Pete & Beth McDonald
Vance & Maureen Bell
Alan Partridge
John Pozzi
Susan Brown
Thomas Lynch
Michael France
Lydia Pope France
Nathan Boynton
Gary Cheney
Catherine Edgerly Fales
John Hunting Fales
Howard Ires
Chris Hopkins
Ariel Cheney
Alison Trowbridge
