The Warwick Finance Committee heard a presentation from Kyler Jones, the city tax collector, who recommended a two-year extension and an increase in spending authority for the city’s tax-sale specialist contract with Rhode Island Tax Titles. Jones said the office requested an $80,000 increase in spending authority to cover the next two years and that the vendor has agreed to a two-year extension.

Jones told the committee that last fiscal year the city charged $193,259.53 to the three account codes that pay for tax-sale services. He said most per-parcel charges associated with the tax-sale process — for example, set-up charges, third‑party notice mailings and advertisement fees — are passed through to the delinquent property owner or to the eventual purchaser of the tax title, and therefore do not represent a city operating expense.

Why it matters: Tax-sale vendors carry out legally required notices, advertisements and sale mechanics when property tax accounts go delinquent. The committee pressed staff for detail on line-item allocations and whether postage and other per-parcel costs are included in the vendor’s bid. Jones said postage is invoiced at the rate in effect on the date the vendor mails notices and that postage is billed as part of the per-parcel pass-through charges.

Committee questions and clarifications: Committee members asked for a breakdown of last year’s spending. Jones provided the $193,259.53 total across the three account codes. Members also queried a line in vendor materials referring to a “RIMV evaluation commission committee” on an account code; Jones explained the 22-series code is the tax collector’s portion of the tax-sale bid, the 323-series code is the tax-sale bid, and series 80/84 are sewer and water shares where applicable.

Committee members pressed whether advertised increments such as “first advertisement” and “third subsequent advertisement” omitted an explicitly enumerated “second” advertisement; staff explained the schedule reflected the publishing cadence in the local newspaper and local advertisement practice (initial, then subsequent shorter notices as required by Rhode Island law).

Outcome: The transcript records the committee-level discussion and clarifications but does not record a formal committee vote on the extension in the excerpt provided. No final council vote on the contract extension appears in the provided transcript segment.

Implementation notes: Jones said the vendor’s per‑parcel charges are intended to be charged back to the taxpayer or purchaser of the tax title. The committee requested additional details and line-item clarifications; staff said they would check invoices and provide itemized information if committee members wanted a comparison to list prices or postage breakdowns.