Oxford officials are taking hundreds of names and millions of dollars off a controversial list of delinquent taxpayers distributed in February.
Tax Collector Cayenne Spremullo made the announcement during a press conference at Town Hall Tuesday, called to discuss a lawsuit the town filed against the state to resolve issues stemming from the alleged theft of hundreds of thousands of dollars by Spremullo’s predecessor, Karen Guillet.
It says records kept by Guillet — now facing felony embezzlement charges and a civil lawsuit — were shoddy, and erroneously named certain taxpayers as delinquent in their payments.
Officials held a press conference in February to distribute a 41-page list of more than 2,000 seemingly delinquent property tax accounts totaling more than $10 million and dating back to 1997.
The next morning, several residents showed up to Town Hall to complain that their names were put on the list erroneously, some very angry. Police were even called to ensure order.
On Tuesday Spremullo thanked those residents for showing up, saying the proof they brought to Town Hall helped her and Sharon Scinto, the assistant tax collector, begin to sort out the list.
If others see their names on the list and have proof that they paid their property taxes, Spremullo said they should let her know.
“This is really just a huge joint effort because we can’t rely on our own records,” Spremullo said.
Spremullo said that so far, 383 of the more than 2,300 people on the list have given officials proof they paid their taxes — like old refinance documents or tax records or mortgage statements, for example.
As a result, she said, properties totaling more than $2 million will be removed from the list if a judge at Superior Court in Milford OKs the town’s plan of action.
“What I hope to have happen is the Board of Selectmen be empowered to address the list and to take these people off who obviously have proof,” First Selectman George Temple said. “Right now if we did it without checking with the judge or without doing this declaratory judgment, we are open to any taxpayer’s lawsuit.”
In the video below, Town Attorney Kevin Condon discusses why the town had to file the lawsuit. Article continues after the video.
But what about those whose names are on the list but don’t have proof they paid their taxes years ago?
Temple’s advice: wait until a judge weighs in on the town’s plan.
“I’m asking everyone to have patience and sit tight,” Temple said.
Lorraine Tirella, a town resident the list says owes nearly $6,000 in back taxes and interest, is in just that position.
She attended Tuesday’s press conference and said she contacted her bank to get the records she needs to prove she paid her taxes years ago, but was told that would cost hundreds of dollars.
She said being on the list added insult to injury and said there were ways the town could have made taxpayers aware of the problem — by mail, for example.
“If you don’t have a list, if you don’t have anything to work with, what do you tell the court?” Temple responded. “If we don’t have anything to identify, we can’t go to court.”
“It’s at least a starting point,” Spremullo said.
The first selectman went on to apologize to Tirella for any embarrassment caused but said it was something the town had to do.
“It’s over and done with. Hindsight’s 20/20,” Tirella said. “I think that you should have done some something different from publishing it. Now let’s make up for it and let’s not make the taxpayers go crazy.”
“We are here to take the burden off the taxpayer,” Temple replied.
“If we could actually rely on the records we had, we would never ask people to come in and do this,” Spremullo added. “We know what happened. We know looking at these accounts that they’re wrong. It is a joint effort on behalf of the town, taxpayers, and employees. We can’t just delete it.”
Tirella said after the press conference she felt somewhat reassured officials were trying to fix the problem. “I do feel better,” she said.
Condon said there will likely be a hearing in the lawsuit scheduled in the coming months at which he and officials from the attorney general’s office, who would represent the listed defendant in the case, the state’s Office of Policy and Management, would discuss how to resolve the problem with a judge.
The status of the lawsuit can be viewed anytime on the Judicial Branch’s website by clicking here.
