Claremont
“In my opinion, it was overvalued,” Lessard told the handful of residents who had to wait about 2½ hours and until after the adjournment of the City Council meeting before Lessard and City Manager Ryan McNutt spoke directly to them.
The assessed value of the Topstone Mill building has been reduced to $175,000 from $670,000.
During a break in the meeting, Lessard said that wiping out the tax bill for the owners given the rationale contained in the abatement application was the right move.
“I felt it what was needed to be done and I did it,” he said.
About 20 residents were in attendance when the meeting began. Based on the council’s decision last week to convene a special meeting to discuss the Topstone building, the residents were under the assumption they would get answers from Lessard on taxes that were abated last month.
But at the meeting, the city’s legal counsel Shawn Tanguay said that councilors or meeting attendees who asked questions directed to the assessor would be violating the city charter’s non-interference clause, which says the city manager has full responsibility of any employees.
In response to one resident who asked how it could be construed as interference when the public is asking the questions, Tanguay said that because the public is asking questions the council wants to ask at a venue created by the council, it could be considered indirect interference.
Tanguay’s comments came as a surprise and a disappointment to audience members, who listened to a general review of the abatement process and the role of the assessor under state law and the city charter.
Tanguay cited state statute and the city’s code, which give the city’s assessor the sole authority to act on abatements and can do so with “just cause.”
“The City Council plays no role in consideration of a tax appeal,” Tanguay said.
Councilor Andrew O’Hearne pressed the issue, asking why the council could not inquire about the Topstone abatement if the documents are public and the decision was made.
“How are we interfering if it is a done deal?” O’Hearne asked.
“You are looking at possibly influencing future assessing decisions,” Tanguay replied.
After the council returned from its break and some audience members left, Mayor Charlene Lovett announced that in order to avoid violating the charter, the council would adjourn the meeting and allow Lessard and McNutt to answer questions directly from the public.
The first question was from state Rep. John O’Connor, R-Claremont.
“(Lessard) has the authority to wipe $220,000 off the books without your approval?” O’Connor asked.
“Yes,” McNutt replied, adding that he was informed of the decision.
McNutt also said he agreed with the decision and said that if he hadn’t, the abatement application would have gone to the state Board of Land and Tax Appeals.
Lessard explained that the rationale on the application for a reduced assessment included some contamination in the ground from abutting properties, the lack of heat on the upper floors of the five-story brick mill building constructed in the early 1900s, and a comparison of assessed value of other mill buildings in the city.
“All of those things I considered in processing the abatement request,” Lessard said.
McNutt also told residents that the city had zero expectations of ever seeing any of the $220,000 and that the building had a high assessment that could not be substantiated.
Still, the decision did not sit well with many residents.
“This is an economic giveaway,” Cynthia Howard said. “You take money from citizens and give it to special interests.”
Another resident, Marie Lozito, said the council should be reviewing decisions such as these.
“To let one person decide on that much money, that is a little insane,” Lozito said.
Councilor Nick Koloski, who has a business in the Topstone building, recused himself from the discussion.
Before the council adjourned, Lovett said the council’s policy committee would begin meeting to discuss the possibility of creating a public board of assessors.
Patrick O’Grady can be reached at poglcmt@gmail.com.
