Spoiler alert: I really like New Canaan’s prospects.
Here are five observations taken from the revaluation, the Town budget, the State election, and the first quarter real estate sales. There is a happy ending.
1. The uncertainty coming from Hartford is probably worse than anything Hartford will actually do to us. We accept a certain amount of pain is coming and we adjust. But when house-hunters from New York say, “I heard the New Canaan train is going away” or “What’s going on with your schools?” we know the headlines are worse than the reality will ever be.
2. New Canaan government is working leaner and smarter. Our budget went down .43%, the greatest cut in a decade, while improving services. We built new playgrounds, turf fields and gas lines while putting solar on town roofs. Our roads will be new, and our schools will remain No. 1. Town Hall will sell antique buildings and find a way to co-invest in the world-class library our residents want. Progress is being made on parking, senior and affordable housing and improved cell service. It’s a great time to live right here.
3. The Waveny Conservancy, Land Trust, Library and Athletic Foundation are examples of the high-energy volunteer organizations we have in New Canaan restoring treasures like Waveny Pond with donations, paying it forward.
4. New Canaan real estate is stable. First quarter house sales are up 20 percent with average prices in the $1.3 millions, (same as 2012-13 and same as Darien). New Canaan is drawing buyers out of Westchester and New York City. (If we speed up the trains, wow, the landscape shifts more dramatically in our favor.) Why is the market recovering from the bottom-up? Because 75 million Baby Boomers are trying to sell their houses to 66 million GenXers (like me, late 30s to early 50s), and there are just not enough of us. Be patient. There are 83 million Millennials (23 to 38 years old) who are starting to discover that Texas and San Francisco are expensive. They have to live somewhere. Why not here? We are downright cheap.
5. New Canaan’s downtown is healthy with less than a 5 perent vacancy rate. A few years ago vacancies were lower and rents unaffordable. Rents are attractive again. P&Z and the new Tourism & Economic Development Committee are responding to changes in the market, giving us the flexibility New Canaan needs to compete in a changing retail environment. Developers respond with exciting new projects all over town. The Grand List is growing again. Consider the new developments built or planned for downtown: Pine Street Concessions, Oxygen, The Merritt Village, a new Post Office, a new Merrill Lynch, new mixed-use on Forest, Locust, Cross and Vitti streets. Soon look to the corner of South and Elm and for more development on Pine Street to keep the next station to heaven vibrant.
Change is hard. For a town of steady habits that fears change New Canaan is adapting well, improving in so many ways, poised to compete for the next decade and beyond.
John Engel is chairman of the Town Council. Chairman’s View represents the views of the chairman and not necessarily any other council members.
Town income is dependent on real estate values and the taxes they generate. Our revenues currently grow at 1% per year.
I propose that we cap spending at 1.50% per year for three years, beginning now. We must limit our spending growth more closely to our revenue growth. The town budget is growing 1.43% while the school budget grew 1.85% ($1.4 million). My proposal means cutting $340,000 from a $91 million Board of Education budget. This is not a criticism of the school budget or their priorities. It is simply the recognition that 2.8% average annual growth we’ve seen for the last 10 years is unsustainable.
The reputation of top-performing schools causes school-age families to move in. The No. 1 reason people move out is affordability. That is particularly true of our empty-nesters and seniors whose taxes developed the school system that we all currently enjoy. It’s the responsibility of the Town Council to make sure we maintain that balance between excellent schools and long-term affordability. We cannot ignore the effects SALT deductibility, revaluation, and pressures from Hartford have had on property values. We must cut spending growth in all budgeted areas to a level New Canaan can sustain.
New Canaan currently plans capital spending of $17 million, $18 million and $18 million in the next three years while retiring only $11.5 million to $12.4 million of debt per year. Those figures don’t meet the needs of our Police Department or library, but they do include a $500,000 fire rescue truck, $210,000 ambulance, $550,000 school planetarium, $6 million Waveny restoration, $200,000 Irwin House restoration, $250,000 Nature Center restoration and $3.2 million in the selectmen’s budget to buy land for new parking lots. We must get serious about re-prioritizing our capital needs within the $13 million cap. Doing so will result in debt service savings of $282,529, $426,047 and $842,239 in the next three years and is necessary if we are to decrease debt service toward the 10% guideline set by the Board of Finance in the fall of 2018. If we don’t limit new capital spending below $13 million, then we will never reach the 10% target.
Two years ago, New Canaan and Darien both claimed mill rates in the 16s. This year, Darien has a mill rate of 16.08 while New Canaan’s will grow from 16.96 to 18.11 and possibly exceed 19 in two years. We need the mill rate to return to levels near that of Darien and Westport, our closest rivals. I am confident that with proper planning we can do this while maintaining school excellence and the current level of services. And, as a Realtor, I am confident that real estate prices will recover and when they do we will be able ease the caps.
John Engel is chairman of the Town Council. The views expressed in this column are those of the chairman, not necessarily the entire council.
“I do have to pick my priorities. Nobody can do everything.” — Ray Kurzweil
We held the first joint offsite meeting among the four funding bodies (Board of Selectmen, Town Council, Board of Education, Board of Finance) in over 10 years, an important step toward approaching our town and school budgets with a spirit of cooperation.
Critical takeaways: 10 of us think that the budget is driven by the Board of Finance, 10 believe we all share it, and nine votes were scattered among Town Council, Board of Education and Board of Selectmen. It’s a shared responsibility but clearly, the BOF is driving the bus. Most of us believe that the budget should come in at an increase of between 0% and 1% this year, a big change since last year’s debates between 2% and 3.5%. We agreed a joint meeting should bookend the budget process every year: November and May. And, support was nearly unanimous for conducting a professional town-wide survey.
We had our last forum on town buildings in April. It is time to listen again. The Town Council is scheduling a public hearing for Wednesday, Jan. 9, to solicit input from the public and discuss our buildings within the context of the 5-year Capital Plan. Why is it necessary and why now? In April the focus was on preservation of important buildings and the need to decrease building expenses. There have been several articles over the last six months floating different possibilities for the Library, the repurposing or demolishing of Irwin House, purchasing the Covia Building, renovating the old Police Station (or repurposing it as housing), selling the Vine Cottage and renting the Outback. These options are interrelated and now we know the costs. Some of these initiatives should be put in the Capital Plan and others removed. We need to get serious and specific about our priorities and make sure they are accurately reflected in the Capital Plan and this year’s budget, reflecting the towns people’s appetite.
The Library was put in the 5-Year Capital Plan for $5 million by First Selectman Robert Mallozzi. It would help the Library board secure additional private funding and allow them to “think big” if we put the Library in the plan for $10 million. That is incredibly hard to do during the revaluation, but if we were to plan for a matching gift, 2-1 behind private donations, and stretch that commitment from three years to potentially five years it works within current Board of Finance guidance. I believe a $10 million earmark has the support from the majority of the selectmen and Town Council. If the Library cannot raise $20 million then Town Hall is not committed. But, by signaling a cap of $5 million in the capital plan, the Board of Finance is essentially killing the project. If you feel strongly that a new library will be transformational to the health of our downtown, let the Town Council and Board of Finance know.
New Canaan’s real estate grand list fell by $570 million (7.15%) compared to 2017.In the recent revaluation:
4,861 parcels saw average decreases of 11%.
2,308 saw average increases of 13%.
For homes worth more than $3 million, the average decrease was 14%.
For $2 million to $3 million homes, the average decrease was 10%.
For $1 million to $2 million homes, the average decrease was 7%.
Homes less than $1 million saw an average increase of 1%. Multifamily homes decreased 4%. Commercial properties increased an average of 13%. Condominiums increased 9%.
We will not know what the new mill rate is and the new taxes are until the MuniVal consultation period is complete (this week and first week of January), then the Board of Assessment appeals process is complete (February) and then the (town and school) budget process ends with the Town Council vote April 4, 2019.
If your revaluation is factually wrong then schedule a meeting this week for early January with MuniVal, the revaluation company and correct the facts (203-292-5500 or newcanaanreval@munival.com). If unsuccessful, then you must appeal in person to the Board of Assessment Appeals with facts about your house and comparable sales that occurred between Oct 1, 2017 and Oct 1, 2018. Appointments are given February 1 to 20 and the appeals take place in March. Sales that fall outside of that 1-year window are considered but carry less weight.
After the 2013 revaluation the Board of Assessment Appeals increased two assessments and reduced 187 of the 285 appeals filed. Some homeowners appeal alone, others take a Realtor or an attorney. Some attorneys charge by the hour. Others work on contingency, taking a percentage of a successful appeal. If an appeal process is unsuccessful, the recourse is a lawsuit. Five years ago, 13 homeowners filed lawsuits against the town. Two were subsequently withdrawn. It takes three or four years to resolve a lawsuit.
Assuming health care rises 5%, town salaries rise 2.8%, school salaries 2.2% and $2.5 million comes from the general fund I expect expenses to increase 1.47% with “level services” and 1.86% if we follow Board of Finance guidance. Therefore, the mill rate announced in May will be between 18.61 and 18.69. That’s up 10% from 16.96. A homeowner’s revaluation would have to decrease 9% in order to see a drop in taxes. To calculate your 2019 taxes multiply .01862 by your new valuation. (The spreadsheet is posted at johnengel.com).
Darien is revaluing now. Their assessor predicted most revaluations within 3% or 4% of their previous valuation. He expects the Darien mill rate to remain close to their current 16.08 rate. Wilton, now at 28.19, will send out revaluation letters in early January. Ridgefield’s grand list rose one half of one percent in their February 2018 revaluation, a 28.78 mill rate. Westport’s mill rate has been flat at 16.86 for 2 years and they won’t revalue until 2020. New Canaan experienced a 3% drop in the 2013 (reval) grand list but gained 1% in most years since (up $84 million, $85 million, $81 million, then $51 million in 2017).
Spoiler alert. I really like New Canaan’s prospects. Here are 5 observations taken from the revaluation, the town budget, the state election, and the first quarter real estate sales. There is a happy ending.
1. The uncertainty coming from Hartford is probably worse than anything Hartford will actually do to us. We accept a certain amount of pain is coming and we adjust. But when house-hunters from New York say, “I heard the New Canaan train is going away” or “What’s going on with your schools?” we know the headlines are worse than the reality will ever be.
2. New Canaan government is working leaner and smarter. Our budget went down .43%, the greatest cut in a decade while improving services. We built new playgrounds, turf fields and gas lines while putting solar on town roofs. Our roads will be new, and our schools will remain #1. Town Hall will sell antique buildings and find a way to co-invest in the world-class library our residents want. Progress is being made on parking, senior & affordable housing and improved cell service. It’s a great time to live right here.
3. The Waveny Conservancy, Land Trust, Library and Athletic Foundation are examples of the high-energy volunteer organizations we have in New Canaan restoring treasures like Waveny Pond with donations, paying it forward.
4. New Canaan real estate is stable. First quarter house sales are up 20% with average prices in the $1.3’s, (same as 2012-2013 & same as Darien). New Canaan is drawing buyers out of Westchester and NYC. (If we speed up the trains, wow, the landscape shifts more dramatically in our favor.) Why is the market recovering from the bottom-up? 75 million Baby Boomers are trying to sell their houses to 66 million GenX’ers (like me, late 30’s to early 50’s) and there are just not enough of us. Be patient. There are 83 million Millennials (23-38 yrs old) who are starting to discover that Texas and San Francisco are expensive. They have to live somewhere. Why not here? We are downright cheap.
5. New Canaan’s downtown is healthy with less than a 5% vacancy rate. A few years ago vacancies were lower and rents unaffordable. Rents are attractive again. P&Z and the new Tourism & Economic Development Commission are responding to changes in the market, giving us the flexibility New Canaan needs to compete in a changing retail environment. Developers respond with exciting new projects all over town. The Grand List is growing again. Consider the new developments built or planned for downtown: Pine Street Concessions, Oxygen, The Merritt Village, a new Post Office, a new Merrill Lynch, new mixed-use on Forest, Locust, Cross and Vitti Streets. Soon look to the corner of South & Elm and for more development on Pine Street to keep the next station to heaven vibrant.
Change is hard. For a town of steady habits that fears change New Canaan is adapting well, improving in so many ways, poised to compete for the next decade and beyond.
The Town Council is considering a proposed townwide ban of supermarket plastic bags. Letters are starting to pour in. Supporters of the ban cite the environmental impact. Opponents of a ban say we are chipping away at freedom and personal choice.
Greenwich, Stamford and Westport banned the bags; Darien will be next. Will New Canaan’s decision rest on the more successful write-in campaign? Fewer than 25 people have weighed in. We all want to get greener but do we need more laws? We want to hear your thoughts.
The Budget. The First Selectman declared victory this week, proposing the lowest budget increase in a decade, up 0.16%, with two highlights: One is the way we look at contingency, consolidating department contingencies into one account at the town level. The second is a hiring freeze. Both seem sensible. If passed the mill rate will increase from 16.96 to 18.32 this year. Unfortunately, next year our debt service is forecast to rise and I fear the mill rate may rise with it, making us less competitive with Darien and Westport.
Our Superintendent of Schools brought in a school budget, up 2.05%, and believes we are done because they met Board of Finance standards published in the fall. We are not. Board of Finance models were based on changing assumptions. The whisper number from the Board of Finance and Town Council is we need another $1.5 million (from a schools budget that only rose a modest $1.4 million). Sound impossible? It may be too hard to turn the ship in one year. We did not get to this point in one year and we may not solve it that quickly.
Consider that over the past 13 years spending increased 42% while enrollment was flat. In the last seven years spending increased 24% while enrollment decreased 3%.
Consider that Darien teaches 4,726 students with 767 teachers and administrators whereas New Canaan teaches 4,113 with 749. If we managed to Darien’s ratio of 6.16 we would have 81 fewer staff across our schools.
This is not a criticism of our schools or a statement that their budget is “fat” It is not. It is simply recognition that to meet Board of Finance debt targets of debt service below 10% in a period of rising interest rates we will have to make long-term systemic changes. If zero growth is too much in one year then perhaps a 3-year plan growing 1% per year is something the Board of Education and Board of Finance can agree on together. Such a plan would bring the mill rate back to a level below 18, reassure a jittery housing market, provide less stress to our schools than year by year cuts, meet Board of Finance long-term debt guidance and would be consistent with “stable but slightly decreasing enrollment” projections from our demographer.
Chairman’s View represents the views of the Town Council chairman and not necessarily those of any other Town Council member.
The brick barn at Richmond Hill Road and Mead Park.— Greg Reilly photo
Even though the Town Council had no authority to take any action, they spent an hour-and-a-half of their four-hour meeting Wednesday night revisiting the pros and cons of the plan to open up the vista to Mead Park by removing the decrepit brick barn on Richmond Hill Road.
“The Town Council cannot rescind money,” Council Chairman John Engel told his colleagues and the audience of about 40 citizens, referring to the budget allocation the Council authorized in May for demolition of the brick barn. “Once we approve money we don’t take it back.”
He said the reason for that is to avoid any appearance or practice of overtaxing people and then holding onto the money.
Furthermore, Engel told the meeting, “We are not a land use authority.”
The Town of New Canaan, which is the owner of the brick barn at the north end of the Town’s Mead Park, has applied to its Building Department for a demolition permit, which may be approved around Oct. 25 at the end of a 90-day waiting period set by the Historical Review Committee. The waiting period allows for parties to come forward with alternative plans to demolition of buildings 50 years old or older.
“Ultimately the decision is for the Board of Selectmen to spend the money allocated” for the demolition, Engel said. “We don’t have a vote.”
First Selectman Kevin Moynihan sat through the Council meeting including a presentation made to the Council by the New Canaan Preservation Alliance that wants to lease the Mead Park barn, finance and conduct restoration, and then sublease it to non-profit organizations. After the meeting Moynihan told reporters, “Nothing is changing.”
In other words, the plan to demolish remains in place, Moynihan confirmed the day after the meeting.
Closure
Engel said he was asked by multiple fellow council members before the meeting, Steve Karl among them, why the brick barn was on the agenda since a decision was made in May and no action may be taken by the Council at this time. Engel told the meeting that is was important to have the group make a presentation and to “get some closure.”
The building has been unused for at least 20 years, and the Town Council in 2010 voted to demolish the building. At that time costs to demolish were reportedly more than $200,000 — more than the Town wanted to spend. Presently the Town has a cost estimate of $65,000, and that is what has been authorized.
New preservation plan
The restoration plan presented by New Canaan Preservation Alliance (NCPA) Co-Founder Robin Beckett and board members Charles Robinson, Carl Rothbart and Rose Scott Long Rothbart calls for the Town to agree to a long-term lease of the barn to NCPA, and NCPA then conducting a four-year restoration plan with estimated hard costs of $350,000. Additional costs for fees and services would be donated by NCPA board member who are professionals.
The NCPA’s proposed source of funds would be $262,500 from a series of $50,000 grants from the Historic Restoration Fund at the State Historic Preservation Fund and a tax credit program. The balance of $87,500 is proposed to be paid by NCPA, and Beckett told the meeting that they have “a little more than half” of that the amount now in hand.
The NCPA proposal calls for a four-year project that would include site cleanup, hazardous material remediation, restoring original materials, replacing missing materials, full restoration of interior and exterior walls, floors and ceilings, and more.
Yet another part of NCPA’s offer, which is conditioned upon their plan being adopted, is to help the Town learn how to get building rehabilitation grants from various sources for Town projects coming up in the future.
Robinson urged the Council to eliminate the dollars for demolition and give an ok for what he called a “reasonable, feasible, prudent alternative to demolition.” He said also that NCPA has a bona fide tenant lined up.
During his pitch to the meeting, Robinson used a rhyming term meant to entice the Council, but the team of presenters later took it back. Robinson said the Town should allow NCPA to turn what is now a “distraction” into an “attraction.”
Distraction
The term “attraction” raised objections by at least two speakers who said it is not a good idea to attract more people to that building, which is separated from Richmond Hill Road by only a sidewalk.
A resident of 71 Richmond Hill who spoke to the meeting said the street already has a lot of traffic with speeding and people passing school buses. More traffic is not desired.
Jack Flinn of 123 Richmond Hill, who happens to be also a Planning and Zoning commissioner, said the Town would never build a building like the barn where it is in a residential neighborhood on one side with a park on the other. Attracting people to the building, for example if used by non-profits, is not what he would like to see. He suggested that people who want to invest in the building can move it to another location in town.
Later in the meeting the presenters said what they meant to convey with their wording is their intent to the building and make it “attractive,” not an attraction.
Embellishing that point, one of the public speakers, a resident name Jennifer Frazier who said she has a degree in architectural history, said that a restored structure could provide “sparkle” and improve the neighborhood.
Speakers split
In total, there were 15 speakers who addressed the Town Council about the Mead Park barn. Eight speakers were opposed to the planned demolition. Four of them were the NCPA presenters, one was another co-founder of the NCPA, Mimi Findlay, and three were general residents.
Seven speakers favored the Town’s plan to demolish the barn. Amy Murphy Carroll, a resident who is also a member of the Board of Finance and a past co-chairman of the Building Evaluation and Use Committee, said she supports “what has been approved — the demolition.”
She said that projects that come to the Town “fully funded, money in hand” might be considered; “I don’t see money in hand.”
The Town has an extensive capital plant, she said, and “another building with another lease” is not what the Town needs.
Even if the building were restored it would still block the vista into the park, Carroll said.
Parks and Recreation Commissioner Francesca Segalas spoke for the commission: “We support demolition,” she said. “We’ve been doing a lot of improvements in Mead Park” and do not want the brick barn in the middle of the view to the pond.
Others in support of the Town’s plan to demolish the barn included Laszlo Papp, who pointed out that he has worked long and hard for historic preservation in New Canaan as a chairman and member of the Planning and Zoning Commission. He said that a building does not have to be very special to be on the state’s Register of Historic Places, and “this building does not rise to the level of the architecture being significant.”
“No responsible Town body can or should approve a presentation like this,” Papp said. “There is nothing on the table. The financing is all promises.”
“Good will was there; help was there,” he said of the NCPA, but he said that in the end maintenance would be done by taxpayers.
The president of the condominium association at 123 Richmond Hill Road, a woman named Kim, said she wants the brick barn to be gone because its presence “is taking away from the park and home values.”
“I appreciate the plan, but it is late,” she said. She agrees with Papp by expecting that at some point in the future the liability to maintain the building will fall back to the Town.
Adding to the voices of those opposed to the demolition were Sarah Robinson and Peter Hanson. Said Sarah: “I don’t understand why the Town would want to spend $65,000 to take down a building when they have a dedicated group to improve and finance it with groups interested in renting.”
“As a taxpayer, I don’t want $65,000 spent to demolish that building,” she said.
Hanson expressed this thanks to fellow citizens in the past who put their energy into restoring Town buildings that fell into disrepair. He named the Powerhouse Theatre and Carriage Barn in Waveny Park and Gores Pavilion in Irwin Park as properties that some wanted to tear down but were eventually restored for the good of the town.
As resigned as Chairman Engel was in being without the power to take action at this time, he said, “We’re still trying to figure out preservation…. The Town benefited today from this presentation.”
In his biweekly column in the Advertiser, Chairman John Engel suggested that nothing is wrong with the condo revaluation, but rather he questions if our zoning laws “adequately address an affordable condominium solution.” Having more than 30 years of involvement with our zoning laws, I can state that the Planning & Zoning Commission did and does exactly that. If I may go back a few years: In the 1970s P&Z noticed that the two-family zone does not satisfy the needs and requirements of the citizens. We introduced a cluster zoning, called “Alternate Development” which than evolved into multifamily, later also to apartment zoning. This was the very first “condo” zoning in the area, later followed by other towns.
Back to Mr. Engel’s argument that “the current revaluation is accurate”. He quotes valid statistics that 2018 condos sold for $417 per foot,versus $420 per foot five years ago. This means that in 5 years average condo prices went down 1% and not up 8% to 10% as the revaluation stated. This is very close to the real estate report that the average condo sales price of $ 807,604 in 2014 went down to $ 778,962 in 2018. This proves that the condo revaluation is anything but “accurate.”
What we need is a “second opinion” for a fair condominium valuation!
