Should I Send A Check Our Wait?
Town tells owners to pay up
Greenwich Time - Staff Writer
To pay or not to pay. That is the question being debated by a group of North Mianus property owners who sued the town over their sewer bills and collection officials.
A number of those who received sewer hookups as part of a $23.5 million project in the neighborhood are arguing that they should not have to pay for their share until the lawsuit they recently filed is settled.
Filed earlier this month in state Superior Court in Stamford, the seven-page lawsuit alleges that the bill for the sewers was inflated because of the town's mismanagement of the project and inclusion of unauthorized work....
... "They have to pay," said Louis Caravella, the town's tax collector. "If you don't you're going to start getting charged one-and-a-half percent interest a month. It'll add up quickly."
Recipients of the sewer hookups can either pay for their share of the project in a lump sum, which works out to an average of $30,379 per household, or over 20 years with interest at about 4.2 percent per year.
Caravellla said he has received payments from about 50 property owners, some of whom paid the lump sum.
Romeo contested whether he and his fellow plaintiffs must pay, however, citing Section 259 of the Town Charter.
"Such appeal, during the pendency thereof, shall stay further proceedings for the collection of the particular assessment upon which the appeal is predicated, but shall not stay any other proceedings in relation to such project," according to the charter....
... The group also wants $2.5 million of interest that accrued during the nearly 31/2 years since the project's completion, time that the homeowners said the town spent tabulating the final bill.
Town officials have pointed out that $600,000 was removed from the final bill after an internal audit, to offset unauthorized paving and the cost of rebidding the project when the original contractor walked off the job because of a dispute over safety protocols.
The homeowners contend the town never audited the full project, and that the property owners who agreed to the reductions did not represent the entire neighborhood.
==========================================================
Please send comments to
GreenwichRoundup@gmail.com
Education is a progressive discovery of our own ignorance.
- Will Durant
Town tells owners to pay up
Greenwich Time - Staff Writer
To pay or not to pay. That is the question being debated by a group of North Mianus property owners who sued the town over their sewer bills and collection officials.
A number of those who received sewer hookups as part of a $23.5 million project in the neighborhood are arguing that they should not have to pay for their share until the lawsuit they recently filed is settled.
Filed earlier this month in state Superior Court in Stamford, the seven-page lawsuit alleges that the bill for the sewers was inflated because of the town's mismanagement of the project and inclusion of unauthorized work....
... "They have to pay," said Louis Caravella, the town's tax collector. "If you don't you're going to start getting charged one-and-a-half percent interest a month. It'll add up quickly."
Recipients of the sewer hookups can either pay for their share of the project in a lump sum, which works out to an average of $30,379 per household, or over 20 years with interest at about 4.2 percent per year.
Caravellla said he has received payments from about 50 property owners, some of whom paid the lump sum.
Romeo contested whether he and his fellow plaintiffs must pay, however, citing Section 259 of the Town Charter.
"Such appeal, during the pendency thereof, shall stay further proceedings for the collection of the particular assessment upon which the appeal is predicated, but shall not stay any other proceedings in relation to such project," according to the charter....
... The group also wants $2.5 million of interest that accrued during the nearly 31/2 years since the project's completion, time that the homeowners said the town spent tabulating the final bill.
Town officials have pointed out that $600,000 was removed from the final bill after an internal audit, to offset unauthorized paving and the cost of rebidding the project when the original contractor walked off the job because of a dispute over safety protocols.
The homeowners contend the town never audited the full project, and that the property owners who agreed to the reductions did not represent the entire neighborhood.
==========================================================
Please send comments to
GreenwichRoundup@gmail.com
Education is a progressive discovery of our own ignorance.
- Will Durant
No comments:
Post a Comment
Useful criticism, helpful links and corrections and general comments are always welcome at Greenwich Roundup. Generally only spam ads and posts with very foul language get censored.
Contact me directly at GreenwichRoundup@gmail.com if you have a suggestion or comment you don't want publicized (but tell me so in your email).
I look forward to publishing your opinions.
COMMENTING RULES: We encourage an open exchange of ideas in the Greenwich community, but we ask you to follow our guidelines. Basically, be civil, smart, on-topic and free from profanity. Don't say anything you wouldn't want your mother to read!