Despite several amendment attempts, Wilton residents passed two articles unchanged during a Special Town Meeting on Monday, including a tax relief measure for new commercial and industrial construction, renovations and additions.
The meeting, held at Town Hall, addressed two articles. The first, which took up the bulk of the discussion, established a new tax exemption.
The exemption, allowed under state RSA 72:81, applies only to the town and local school property tax portions, and to increased value attributed to the construction of new structures, additions, renovations or improvements of existing structures. The percentage of the exemption can vary based on the Select Board’s determination of the “public benefit” of the improvements.
Businesses will be judged on criteria including enhancement of economic growth and increase of the town’s tax base, creation of needed services or facilities not currently available in town, redevelopment and revitalization of commercial or industrial areas, prevention or elimination of blight, and retention, diversification or increase of the town’s job base.
The article allows new or renovated businesses to take up to a 50% tax exemption on new value for up to 10 years. The Select Board has discretion to set the exact percentage and number of years. The board clarified that the exemption would apply only to new value added; in the case of a renovation or addition to an existing building, the full value of the building prior to the improvements would still be taxed.
Selectman Kermit Williams spoke to the article and the potential benefits it could have in attracting new business and keeping the town competitive with communities that have adopted similar rules, including neighboring Milford.
“Property taxes are going up. Everybody knows it, and nobody likes it,” Williams said. He said the town has been talking about ways to strengthen its commercial tax base for years, and “that doesn’t happen by accident.”
Williams said the tax exemption gives the town a “tool” to help attract businesses, but told the crowd it was “not a blank check, does not approve any project, and is not written for a single business.”
Asked why the article was brought to a Special Town Meeting rather than placed on the March warrant, Selectman Tom Schultz said the town had been approached by a business interested in the exemption for renovation work after the warrant had already been posted. Williams said there are other potential uses for the exemption, including the likely eventual renovation of the Wilton Falls building.
Several attempts to amend the article led to lengthy discussion, but ultimately did not pass.
Resident Matt Fish said he supported the concept but wanted to see more concrete rules. He proposed an amendment that would limit the exemption to five years, with set discounts of 50% in the first year, 40% in the second, 30% in the third, 20% in the fourth and 10% in the final year. He was seconded by Schultz.
Fish said the five-year sliding scale was similar to those used by other communities in the area, and that set percentages would take ambiguity out of the process. He called it a “fair compromise.”
Williams said the law specifically gives the Select Board the authority to set the exemption percentage at its discretion, and questioned whether Fish’s amendment would be legal as worded.
Schultz, who had seconded Fish’s motion to allow for discussion, said the board had considered a sliding-scale model. He said the sliding scale and the up-to-50%-for-10-years approach were the two most common methods towns in the state had used, and that the Select Board chose the more competitive option but would not be opposed to a sliding scale if that was more palatable to the public.
After discussion, the amendment failed in a voice vote.
Resident Christine Keller then made a similar motion, proposing to cap the exemption at seven years, with up to 50% in the first and second years, 40% in the third and fourth, 30% in the fifth, 20% in the sixth and 10% in the seventh. Keller originally moved to set the percentages as Fish had, but after further discussion about whether that would conflict with the original law, she amended her motion to preserve Select Board discretion. Schultz again seconded for discussion.
Keller said she felt “50% for 10 years is pretty dramatic” and that a sliding scale was more reasonable.
Keller’s motion also failed in a voice vote.
The question was called after nearly an hour and a half of discussion, and the article passed in a voice vote with its original language intact.
In a separate article, voters gave the Select Board authority to expend funds from a capital reserve account for the town’s revaluation. By law, the town must reevaluate its properties every five years and sets aside a portion of funds each year for the process.
Schultz called the article “housekeeping,” saying it had been mistakenly left off the March warrant, leaving the town unable to spend money that had been raised for the revaluation.
Schultz said that if voters did not allow the board to access the fund, the revaluation would still have to happen, by law, and the funds would have to come from the town’s general fund. A warrant article in 2027 would then ask voters to reimburse the general fund from the revaluation capital reserve.
Voters approved the article in a unanimous voice vote.
Ashley Saari can be reached at 603-924-7172 ext. 244 or asaari@ledgertranscript.com. She’s on X @AshleySaariMLT.