Less than 16 percent of Newtown's taxpayers bothered to turn out to cast ballots during the 2018 budget vote, but each residential property owner was looking at a fractional increase in taxation compared to residents in the Borough of Newtown.

On May 8, those who own property within the footprint of this independent 2.3-square-mile government tax district on and around Main Street and Mt Pleasant Road between Diamond Drive to the west and Borough Lane to the South are facing an comparatively astronomical tax increase that would raise the mill rate from 0.85 to 1.49 percent - roughly 75 percent.

A mill represents $1 for every $1,000 in taxable property.

The proposal, according to Borough Warden and resident James Gaston, equates to an average of about a $100 increase on each taxable borough property owner for the fiscal year 2018-19.

The bulk of that increase - as he explained in an interview and a letter in this week's edition of The Newtown Bee - is intended to put funding in place in the event the borough government needs to go to court to block the Inn at Newtown and its surrounding property from being converted into as many as 79 residential apartments.

The borough Board of Burgesses is seeking a $100,000 special assessment to reserve funds for such a contingency.

After consultation with Borough Counsel Monte Frank, Mr Gaston estimated that litigation costs could exceed $300,000.

"Statutory interpretation suggests a Historic District does have an express say in such a project," he writes. "Unfortunately, there is no case law on the matter."

He said the unique historical aspect of a location can play a significant role in proposed developments.

"I ask the fundamental question… how much is it worth to protect historic Main Street?" Mr Gaston writes. "Presently, the owner of the Main Street Inn at Newtown has employed a high-profile Hartford lawyer to push a 79-apartment unit on the historic Mary Hawley property (the historic structure will be razed)."

Uncharted Legal Waters

Action to block a redevelopment in a designated historic zone would involve apparently uncharted legal waters according to Mr Gaston, who is also an attorney and serves as Newtown's Board of Finance chairman.

"The owner claims borough zoning and the Historic District have no say in his development," Mr Gaston writes.

An additional and substantial bump in the legal fee budget line is also contributing to the proposed tax increase, and is also tied to the possible historic zone protection Mr Gaston said the borough would pursue if the owner of the inn moved forward trying to sell the property for multifamily development.

The legal line in the borough budget, if approved by qualified residents on May 8, would increase from $10,000 to $50,000. The increased legal budget would be combined with the special assessment and what Mr Gaston said was a current $300,000 fund balance, to create a nearly half-million-dollar war chest for legal defense.

He said if the borough was unsuccessful in blocking proposed multiunit residential development on the property, significantly more legal funds could be expended on litigation if the borough then decided to try and block said development through zoning restrictions.

The borough has been embroiled in another land use lawsuit going back more than a year involving a proposed condominium development near its western border on Mt Pleasant Road.

Painting as optimistic an outlook as possible, Mr Gaston said if the budget is approved and the funds gathered are not used, they would be applied to reduce taxation against borough property owners in the 2019-20 fiscal cycle.

He also said that the inn property could be utilized for some type of nonprofit venture, in which case any loss that the owners took against the fair market value of the property to turn the property over to such a development could be applied as a tax write-off.

"I'm hoping we can resolve this in a way that avoids legal action," Mr Gaston said, adding that the seller could realize a similar financial gain and not tie themselves up with costly and probable lengthy legal action.

Local land records state the inn property - a fixture on Main Street since 1890 - is owned by DWR Co. III, LLC. It closed in January 2016 and proprietor Rob Ryder said at the time that a combination of family demands and the inability to renovate the property in a way he believes will ensure future profitability pushed him to make the decision to close.

The property, coincidentally located directly across from Mr Gaston's family home, is currently appraised at $1,030,780, and assessed at $721,550.

Defending Budget Details

Turning to the issue of the proposed budget, Mr Gaston said the borough tax has historically ranged between a 0.75 and 1.50 mill rate.

"During my last ten years, as warden, I have worked to keep the mill rate at the historically low 0.75-0.86 levels. Now we are at a one-time unique situation," the borough warden continued. "To the average borough taxpayer, the cost will be an added $100. No doubt, in protecting Main Street we need everyone's help, but it has always been the heightened vigilance of our borough and all boroughs around the state that provide longstanding historic preservation."

Mr Gaston said borough public meetings typically draw few if any taxpayers, including for borough elections. So he was not surprised that the tax increase proposal ratified at an April 10 meeting received little attention until that spending plan appeared in a legal notice in the newspaper last week.

Several other budget lines that may be tied to future action involving the inn property as well as other borough business have increased. Among them is a $5,000 increase for consulting from zero dollars in the current year; a $2,000 bump in the contingency line; a $4,900 increase in the Historic District line, up from $100 this year.

The proposed bottom line increase would, if approved, raise the budget from $199,330 this year to $354,330 on July 1.

Mr Gaston said that at the 7:30 budget meeting on May 8, he will explain every line item in the spending plan before calling for a vote. He said if the budget is defeated, the burgesses will be inclined to retool the proposal and come back before taxpayers at a subsequent special meeting, versus trying to craft an alternate plan that evening.

[mappress mapid="1334"]