Class War Resumes: Pay up to prop up absentee owner home values

The April 22th issue of the South County Independent carried a letter by Charlestown Town Council President Tom Gentz and Arthur Ganz, president of the Salt Pond Coalition. Gentz (not Ganz) is also Secretary of the Charlestown Citizens Alliance which is a story in itself.

Gentz and Ganz wrote about the state’s failure to dredge and maintain the Charlestown Breachway so as not to undo the work done by the Corps of Engineers to revitalize Ninigret Pond.

From my perch atop the moraine North of One, the view overlooking Ninigret Pond is precious, so I heartily endorse the importance of the state holding up its end. Unquestionably, the pond is a treasure that must be preserved. I know Rep. Donna Walsh is fighting to prevent budget-cutters from chopping the state's funding for the work.

But in the letter, Gentz (and Ganz) continue, noting that “As a sign of good faith the town of Charlestown has allocated $150,000 for maintenance and is anticipated to add another $150,000 in the 2011-12 budget to help make this project happen. This offer from Charlestown is only available for a limited time - town taxpayers cannot let scarce funds sit in reserve waiting for the state to act.”

Gentz and Ganz say the reason why Charlestown has voluntarily put up $300,000 is that a healthy pond and breachway “are what support seasonal home values; homes south of Route 1, in close proximity to the pond, produce 65 percent of Charlestown tax revenues.”

This is where Gentz and Ganz lose me. The commitment of $300,000 in town revenue translates into 12 cents per thousand in property tax on all of the town’s residents. As Gentz and Ganz admit, the purpose for doing this is to prop up absentee owners’ property values. To that I say: let the absentee owners pay.

According to the Gentz and Ganz letter, these residents “produce 65 percent of Charlestown tax revenues.”  I have seen this claim before and similar ones as high as 70% for the amount of taxes that come from our South of One neighbors, but I sure would like to see some hard data to back that up.

Even if it's true, why isn’t it higher? Why not 75% or 80%? As long as Charlestown is stuck in time – thanks to the Planning Commission, the Town Council and the CCA – as a sleepy little town with only a summer economy, let’s make the most of it. Because the CCA/PC/TC allows no new business development in town, our town’s economy is those summer people.

It's not like these out-of-state fat cats can move their waterfront estates to China or the Dominican Republic. And after all, absentee owners have been complaining for years how they pay taxes to cover costs for things they don't need - like schools. Let's see how they like it for a change.

Face it, while we all love and need Ninigret Pond in particular and all our salt ponds, the town has volunteered to put up tax money to, by Gentz's own words, "support seasonal home values."

As Tom Ferrio and I have covered in detail, our recent town property value reassessment will mean that, starting July 1^st, property tax burdens will shift from the big-ticket, mostly out-of-state South of One property owners to middle-class residents due to uneven changes in assessments. The overall rate is slated to rise from $7.48 per $1,000 to $9.04. Now, we know that 12 cents of that $1.56 hike will subsidize absentee millionaires.  

This is the “class war” that CCA President in absentia Kallie Jurgens warned us all about last January. Except it’s not an uprising of the poor against the rich (though it ought to be) but the rich once again ripping off everybody else.

Author: Will Collette