WOONSOCKET – Mayor Lisa Baldelli-Hunt has announced that property tax bills for the city of Woonsocket’s Fiscal Year 2023 were mailed by Tuesday, Aug. 30, and the due date for the first quarter’s payment has been extended to Monday, Sept. 12, with a 10-day payment grace period.

Due dates for the subsequent quarters will be Oct.15, Jan. 15, 2023, and April 15, 2023.

(18) comments

James Peters

LPettytush:

You must be Cournoyer.... with another account. Or another City Councilor feeling pity for poor Mr. Cournoyer.

LPettytush

I am not, but your reaction does not surprise me. As I said, no solutions, just name calling and finger pointing. The hard working tax payers appreciate this council, and the fact that our property values have risen, as well as most of the country, mean’s that people want to come to our city. You have a choice, and the city council is not lazy…much the opposite, in my opinion. I wish you well in your endeavor, but I do not want to pay more taxes, because you don’t want to pay what your property has been assessed. And, I like what is happening in Woonsocket, it’s better than most of the 50+ years that I can remember..look around.

James Peters

Cournoyer et al, back in the building.

LPettytush

Mr. Cournoyer is one of the most professional people that has been on the council. It is not personal, so those that attack his character, rather than suggesting any type of solution, add nothing to the conversation. Please do not waste your time Mr. Cournoyer, these folks thrive on divisiveness and distractions. You get things done. As a tax payer in this city, I appreciate what you and the council are doing. Please ignore this vitriol, and continue with the strong leadership that is improving this city!

James Peters

I did suggest solutions, he doesn't want to hear it. Says it's out of his control. You must be one of the people that didn't get the massive tax increase.

LPettytush

Sorry, I don’t see anything positive in your comments, just a lot of self pity. I did see a slight reduction, but attribute that to an equilibrium in the tax base, maybe I have been overpaying, and the reevaluation has now leveled the field. Either way, I don’t think demeaning Mr. Cournoyer, or the council/administration will help. These folks also work full time jobs, and are also faced with the same increases we all are. The city has to run, and to think that they can make an exception for individuals, outside of the channels that exist, is rather short-sighted. It is in your best interest to work with the reevaluation folks to understand the change in your property value. We all received new property values, and all pay on the same base rate. Pretty clear to me.

James Peters

Great post Dee.

I abhor violence. They just did violence to my finances and yours.

Pretty soon Mr. Cournoyer's 1% will cost you $1000.00

Dee1978

Again, I can totally understand the frustration, although we got higher appraisals, they mentioned at the council meetings that they were lowering the tax rate, with less than 1% increase & we were Not going to see a significant increase. I believe they mentioned $30 bucks more as a way to illustrate. However, that’s clearly not the case & I am positive they will tell us it’s to late to appeal, how could we know to appeal? The appraisal meant nothing without understanding the property tax bill, the only thing that matters to us. Again, I understand the money is used for services but it is a real kick in the teeth to be told one thing with a promise of a low bill in one of the worst inflation periods in history & be slammed with a 30% increase.

James Peters

I did some research Dee. Cournoyer, Ward, Gendron, Soucy all recieved tax decreases. Jallette got a small increase that's barely worth mentioning. Sierra and Gonzales aren't listed as the owners at their addresses.

So you see, basically, the Woonsocket City Council is asking me, you and neighbors all around me to "plug budget holes" while they walk away untouched.

Under these circumstances the American "Rescue" Plan is nothing of the sort.

Cournoyer will come in here and spin this up and say there's nothing he can do. I say there's nothing he wants to do and is not worthy of anyone's votes.

Cheers to you and your vigilance!

Jim Cournoyer

Mr. Peters: not sure what "violence" has to do with any of this.

Dee1978: I completely understand Mr. Peters' frustration. The point, however, is that his problem (and certainly others like yourself who experienced a large increase) is out of the Council's control.

What we do control is the Tax Levy - and we kept the total increase to just about 1% despite the significant inflation that even Mr. Peters acknowledges. It seems from his comments that he has not been successful himself in keeping his personal operating expenses in check, as he explicitly stated that "everything is going up".

Unfortunately, in a revaluation year, some properties end up with disproportionate increases based on what happened to the property values.

Overall, values went up signficantly - not just in the City, but accross the state. As a result of the significant increase in values, the overall tax rate came down significantly - it dropped from $23.75 per thousand last year to $13.98 per thousand this year ... a 41% decrease.

Again, I fully understand Mr. Peters' frustration, but I believe we were very prudent and fair with regard to the things we have control over - that is the Tax Levy, which we allowed to increase by barely 1% in a high inflation environment.

Unfortunately, for everyone who got whacked like Mr. Peters (and you), there is someone else who saw a reduction in their taxes, because, again, we only increased the total levy by ~1%. So if he had a 30% increase, that means there are others who saw a big decrease.

I wish I could do something about that, but I cannot control the market values to which the tax rate is applied against. I / the Council can only control the Total Levy. Mr. Peters in not interested in how things actually work. Not much I can do about that either.

James Peters

It's financial violence. I'm a 65 year old diabetic taking care of my 91 year old mom who wants to stay in the house we share. The last thing i need is a monkey on my back.

The Council is perfectly capable of lowering the tax rate further or creating a vehicle to help people who can't afford this. The house needs some work, but there's no one i can tax and there are no ARPA funds that i can access.

All you're doing is offering up excuses on your failure to protect vulnerable people.

There's plenty you can do, you're just too lazy to do anything. Also, please provide proof of actual tax decreases. It's hard to believe considering you've already lied. No empathy means a down vote from me and a lot of my neighbors.

CallingOutYourBS

Two things have become glaringly obvious about Mr. Cournoyer in particular, but also apply to other council members and Woonsocket administration.

They never take responsibility for anything. I'm surprised because usually Mr. Cournoyer's go-to low-hanging-fruit response is deflection onto the mayor and Alex Kithes but here he's chosen to go with some good old condescending towards Mr. Peter's very valid concerns.

Just so Mr. Peter's is aware....telling people "they are not interested in how things actually work" is a professional bureaucrat's way of calling you stupid.

Take particular note Mr. Cournoyer is not saying "I'm not OK with this".

Take even more particular notes that Mr. Cournoyer is not saying "I think this is unacceptable and I am going to see what can be done about it"

Instead it's just more of his usual deflection "That's out of the council's control".

That's because Mr. Cournoyer doesn't care about any of you, or Woonsocket. in

Keep voting for useless good old boys and keep reaping what you sow.

CallingOutYourBS

Wow!!

I initially did not notice Mr. Cournoyer even threw this veiled insult at Mr. Peter's intelligence and money handling skills - "seems from his comments that he has not been successful himself in keeping his personal operating expenses in check, as he explicitly stated that "everything is going up"

[ohmy][ohmy][ohmy][ohmy][ohmy]

Dee1978

The operational costs of the services we receive unfortunately went up in price, that falls on us to pay it, yes it’s frustrating but if you think about, they didn’t raise the rates by much and did a pretty good job budgeting considering. Using ARPA funds would have been a one time fix for this year only & most likely those funds will be used for expensive projects, normally those projects would cost us tax payers a lot, so it’s probably best that money is used for such.

James Peters

Inept leadership. Got a nearly $700.00 tax increase with everything else going up and a recession looming. City flush with ARPA cash too. Vote these bums out, i don't care if you have to write someone in!

Jim Cournoyer

Mr. Peters,

If your tax bill went up nearly $700, it is principally because your Assessed value went up so much. I / the Council has no control over that.

The City Council's approved Budget provided just about a 1% Increase in the city's approximate $55 million Tax Levy. We'd prefer not to ever have increases, but as you astutely noted, the cost of everything is going up, including the costs to run and operate the City.

Yes, we have ARPA funds, but those are being used for "one-time" projects that the City has deferred for years due to lack of funding. The City's Public Works Director has said on numerous occassions that he alone could spend every penny of the ARPA funds on City infrastructure needs.

The "bums" you refer to have provided 6 consecutive years of tax Decreases. Unfortunately, costs have skyrocketed, yet we still kept the increase to barely 1%.

We are not going to provide inept leadership by proposing and passing irressponsible "election year" budgets that use ARPA funds to cover normal, recurring operating expenses, which would simply defer the pain until next year, thus creating structural future deficits.

Fortunately, you have lots of choices to chose from if and when you enter the voting booth. Best of luck.

James Peters

House needs a new roof. Can't afford it, got to pay the city. I'm sure you could care less. I will vote and it won't be for you..

Dee1978

I understand everything that your saying but the reason Mr. Peter’s is upset is because that extra $700 for him is a significant increase, where we were being told the whole time it would be a slight increase. So it’s not adding up. It’s true he could have appealed the appraisal but it would not have meant anything to him until now, the reason is we didn’t now because we just got the bills in. For myself, my property tax bill is 30% higher & that what Mr. Peter’s is experiencing. That is a significant increase.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.