Argued
October 15, 2018
Appeal
from Superior Court, Judicial District of New Britain, Arnold
W. Aronson, Judge Trial Referee, rendered judgment in favor
of the town. Property owners appealed.
Page 654
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Page 655
Matthew T. Wax-Krell, with whom were Marci Silverman and, on
the brief, Denise P. Lucchio, Hartford, for the appellants
(plaintiffs).
Barbara
M. Schellenberg, Orange, with whom were Jonathan S. Bowman,
Bridgeport, and, on the brief, Joseph D. Szerejko, Hartford,
for the appellees (defendants).
DiPentima,
C.J., and Moll and Bishop, Js.
OPINION
MOLL,
J.
[191
Conn.App. 714] The principal issue in this real estate joint
tax appeal is whether the trial court properly rendered
judgments in favor of the defendant, the town of Wilton,
despite having concluded that the defendants tax assessor
(assessor) violated General Statutes § 12-55 (b) when he
added late filing penalties pursuant to General Statutes §
12-63c (d)[1] against the plaintiff property [191
Conn.App. 715] owners[2] three months after taking and
subscribing to the oath on the 2014 grand list. The
plaintiffs appeal from the judgments of the trial court
rendered in favor of the defendant. In their joint appeal,
the plaintiffs claim that the trial court erred by rendering
judgments in favor of the defendant despite having properly
concluded that the assessor acted without statutory authority
when he added the late filing penalties to the 2014 grand
list after taking and subscribing to the
Page 656
oath. We agree. Accordingly, we reverse the judgments of the
trial court.
The
record and the parties stipulations of fact[3] reflect the
following facts and procedural background. On or [191
Conn.App. 716] before April 15, 2014, pursuant to § 12-63c
(a), the assessor requested from the plaintiffs annual income
and expense reports for the year 2013 for their respective
subject properties and provided them with the requisite
forms. At all times from April 15, 2014 through October 26,
2016,[4] including October 1, 2014, the date of
the grand list at issue, the plaintiffs owned their
respective subject properties. Pursuant to § 12-63c (a), the
plaintiffs were required to submit their 2013 income and
expense reports to the assessor on or before June 1, 2014. On
June 2, 2014, the plaintiffs sent, by Federal Express
overnight mail, their 2013 income and expense reports, along
with a cover letter dated May 30, 2014, to the assessor, who
received them on June 3, 2014.
On or
before January 31, 2015, the assessor took the oath on the
2014 grand list,[5] at which time he (1) knew that he had
received the plaintiffs income and expense reports after the
June 1, 2014 deadline, and (2) did not add any late filing
penalties to the 2014 grand list with respect to the subject
properties. The assessors practice has been to assess,
pursuant to General Statutes § 12-60,[6] any late filing
penalties under § 12-63c (d) [191 Conn.App. 717]
retroactively, after signing the grand list for a
given year.[7]
On
April 29, 2015, the assessor issued certificates of change
for the subject properties in connection with the 2014 grand
list and sent them, respectively, to the plaintiffs last
known addresses. The certificates of change each contain the
following prefatory language: "By authority of [§ ]
12-60 of the Connecticut General Statutes,
Page 657
the Assessor hereby adjusts the assessment list of
2014." Each certificate of change identifies, among
other things, the "original" assessment amount, the
"adjustment" amount reflecting the late filing
penalty (i.e., approximately 10 percent of the original
assessment),[8] and the "current" assessment
amount (i.e., the original assessment amount plus the
adjustment amount). The certificates of change reflect no
exemptions.
Pursuant
to General Statutes § 12-119, to the extent that it was
necessary to do so, the plaintiffs timely filed respective
appeals from the assessors actions to the Superior
Court.[9] See Wilton River Park 1688,
LLC v. [191 Conn.App. 718] Wilton, Superior
Court, judicial district of New Britain, Docket No.
CV-15-6030507-S; Wilton Campus 1691, LLC v.
Wilton, Superior Court, judicial district of New
Britain, Docket No. CV-15-6030508-S; Wilton River Park
North, LLC v. Wilton, Superior Court, judicial
district of New Britain, Docket No. CV-15-6030509-S. Pursuant
to General Statutes § 12-111,[10] the plaintiffs also
timely [191 Conn.App. 719] filed
Page 658
appeals to the Wilton Board of Assessment Appeals (board),
which, subsequent to a hearing on April 5, 2016, denied their
appeals, making no changes to the certificates of change.
Pursuant to General Statutes § 12-117a,[11] the plaintiffs
filed timely appeals from the [191 ...