
The finance committee, which has only been in existence for a few years, is the town council’s oversight body for all things financial. Usually, the committee squares the budget and monthly financial reports or safeguards the Capital Improvement Plan. The committee also monitors all of the town’s investments.
Recently, however, the committee has sought information from the town’s finance department on the existence of property tax relief programs in the state.
Wait, what was that? A property tax relief program? For Brunswick?
It may come as a complete shock to some in town but there is a significant number of our fellow residents who live on a fixed income. Many, mostly elderly, have few means of increasing their yearly income and so subsist paycheck to paycheck. These are the faceless souls who are often forgotten about in the spring of each year as a few decide that we want to increase the budget by just a few percentage points.
Well according to Julia Henze, the town’s finance director, there exist four such relief programs in the state. The four towns and cities are Saco, Gardiner, Cumberland and Harpswell. These four are generally geographic cousins to our fair town and face many of the same issues that our population faces.
In each of the programs there are limitations as to who can take part in the tax relief. There are age restrictions. Some have residency requirements. All have a prescribed cost. What each lack is any real relief.
In the analysis provided by the department, it lists fewer than 250 participants in the relief programs. The cumulative amount of relief that the four have set aside is $190,000. Mind you, these four communities have town budgets that are far in excess of $50 million.
This comes out to approximately $750 per participant.
In the case of Saco, you must also provide 100 hours of community service to the town to be eligible. Oh, thank you benevolent overlords!
For Brunswick, it was reported that a program might have several parameters that a participant must meet. Again, eligibility requirements, age restrictions and length of residency in the home may all be part of the program. The town manager has also suggested that the amount of funding for the program would be capped at $100,000. For a town that just passed a budget that totals more than $62 million, a sum of $100,000 is small indeed.
The underlying issue that is not discussed is the need to watch spending. If the council pursues a tax relief program like those found in the four communities mentioned earlier, the result will be that more taxes will be paid by a smaller group. Whether it is $100,000 or a $1 million in relief there will be a small group who sees the benefit of the program. Those who are not a part of the small group will be saddled with higher taxes.
Instead of taking a hard look at where those monies that are collected are going, the response will be to hand out a small amount and keep the good times rolling. No meaningful reformed will take place to help all of the tax payers and the list of those who need assistance will quietly grow.
This is not to say that I disagree with the plan in its desires. I wish all of the residents of Brunswick could take part in property tax relief. Unfortunately for this to become reality it would take an extraordinary amount of courage by the council, something that is often in short supply in the McLellan Building.
I suspect that the council wants to be able to point to an accomplishment to stem the belief that Brunswick is not a welcoming place for those people of fewer economic means and the elderly. The council may get that accomplishment, but for those who pay attention to such things it will have the same effect that Kevin Bacon’s character in “Animal House” had when he implored the rioters to “Remain calm, all is well.”
That’s my two cents…
Jonathan Crimmins can be reached at j_ [email protected].
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less