All numbers reported at the financial town meeting were accurate.”

Barrington Town Manager Jim Cunha

If you’re going to make changes… it’s best to make sure your supervisors know these things were going to happen.”

Barrington Town Manager Jim Cunha

Assumptions, exemptions, and an unexpected tax levy increase.

Town officials released a statement last week in advance of a new state report that will identify a “discrepancy between the data Barrington provided the state and the data used during the financial town meeting.”

The discrepancy is the difference between the tax levy increase residents approved at the July 2020 financial town meeting and the budget data town officials submitted to the state for final certification.

Barrington Town Manager Jim Cunha said that while residents at the July 18 FTM approved a 3.36 percent tax levy increase, town officials submitted data to the Rhode Island Department of Municipal Finance that reflected a 4.11 percent tax levy increase. (The state mandates that municipalities may only increase their tax levy by 4 percent annually.)

Mr. Cunha downplayed the situation, stating that budget information, such as property assessments, normally shift throughout the year. He also said residents’ tax bills will not be impacted by the change, that the tax rate remains the same, and that there will be no penalty to the town.

“There are no repercussions,” he said.

Mr. Cunha placed blame for the unexpected tax levy increase at the feet of recently-resigned tax assessor Michael Minardi.

Mr. Cunha said Mr. Minardi made significant changes to the tax assessment data shortly after the July 18 financial town meeting. Those changes — increasing personal property and real estate assessments and decreasing real estate exemptions — resulted in the increased tax levy, Mr. Cunha said.

“All numbers reported at the financial town meeting were accurate,” Mr. Cunha said. “The discrepancy was based on a misjudgment by the tax assessor’s office that we have rectified and will continue to monitor going forward. Tax bills received by Barrington residents are accurate.”   

Mr. Cunha said that the town’s tax rate has not been impacted — it remains at $20.90 per $1,000 of assessed property value — thus the tax bills sent to residents are unchanged. The difference, he said, will be with the exemptions assumed by the assessor’s office.

Exemptions

Mr. Cunha said that following the July financial town meeting, Mr. Minardi continued to change assessed values for some properties in town. He said that is a normal practice, but, he added, the changes Mr. Minardi made were larger than in prior years and created some of the discrepancy in data submitted to state officials.

Mr. Cunha said Mr. Minardi added $15 million in anticipated tax exemptions for Covid-related reasons. The tax assessor typically includes between $5 million and $10 million in exemptions, partly in anticipation of businesses and residents who fail to pay their taxes.

This year, because of the economic impact of the pandemic, Mr. Minardi expected the town would experience a larger than normal number of exemptions.

But it appears that the larger exemption, in addition to the other changes Mr. Minardi made, were not anticipated by other town officials, including the town’s business and finance director Kathy Raposa, and therefore not included in the July financial town meeting discussions. Meanwhile, Ms. Raposa also reportedly uses 100 percent tax collection assumption while figuring the budget.

Without figuring in those changes, the town presented — and taxpayers later approved — a budget that appeared to have a 3.36 percent increase over the prior year’s budget. The 3.36 percent increase included money for two additional department of public works employees, and annual pay raises ranging from 2 percent to more than 8 percent for other municipal workers.

The 176 people who attended the financial town meeting at Victory Field in July voted to increase the budget by 3.36 percent, to $63,508,937. However, when the budget was certified and submitted to the state, it reflected a 4.11 percent increase, to $63,972,719. That is a difference of $463,782.

“It looks like a huge increase, but a half-million is not a huge increase” in a $63 million budget, Mr. Cunha said.

Mr. Cunha reassured taxpayers that there was no “false reporting” at the financial town meeting, and that the changes made were done so following the July FTM.

Mr. Cunha said he and Ms. Raposa spoke with officials at the department of municipal finance about the situation. They also had prior discussions with Mr. Minardi while he was still employed with the town. (Ms. Raposa oversees both the finance department and tax assessor’s department.)

Mr. Cunha said he was concerned about Mr. Minardi’s actions and “lack of communication.” He said the changes Mr. Minardi made to the budget illustrated a lack of transparency.

“If you’re going to make changes… it’s best to make sure your supervisors know these things were going to happen,” Mr. Cunha said. “Bad news doesn’t get better with age.”

Asked if this situation played a factor in Mr. Minardi’s decision to resign, Mr. Cunha said could not speak for the former tax assessor.

“The performance of the tax assessor based on this year and last year’s issue (the altered tax assessment policy) were of great concern,” Mr. Cunha said. “I don’t know if he was reading the writing on the wall when he resigned.”

Reached by phone, Mr. Minardi would not comment on the situation.