Milford aldermen reject measure to adopt higher motor-vehicle assessment under House Bill 7067

The Milford Board of Aldermen voted 9-4 on March 26, 2025, to reject a resolution asking the board to adopt a higher local depreciation schedule for motor-vehicle assessments under House Bill 7067.

The measure would have applied a state-authorized local option that increases vehicle assessment percentages by five percentage points under the schedule created by Public Act 22-118. Supporters, including Mayor (title given in meeting as "Mayor"), said the change would recoup part of a recent drop in the motor-vehicle portion of the city—s grand list, generate about $1.5 million in additional revenue and reduce the mill rate by roughly 0.20 to 0.22 mills.

Finance Director Peter Iredici described the fiscal effect: "This change, if we if this board adopts it, will recoup approximately 50,000,000 of that $67,000,000 loss to the grand list. And so if you would look at that and say the grand list is going up 50,000,000, that will lower the mill rate by approximately 0.2 or 0.22 mills." The finance director said the underlying change to state law first took effect Oct. 1, 2024, and that House Bill 7067 (adopted earlier in March) offers municipalities the local option to raise the statutory depreciation percentages by five points.

Supporters framed the motion as property-tax relief. Mayor said, "I feel this is a great opportunity for the citizens of Milford to provide property tax relief," and noted that roughly 70 other Connecticut municipalities had adopted the option.

Opponents said the change would be regressive and shift more of the tax burden onto residents who own and register vehicles in Milford. Alderman Smith said, "This option will bring in $1,500,000 in new taxes," and added bluntly, "This is a tax increase." Alderman Federico argued the change would not yield savings for many households, saying, "So there is no savings to the taxpayer that fits that scenario," after offering a numeric example showing small net differences for a homeowner with a $100,000 house and a $20,000 car.

Other aldermen questioned the clarity of the data packet provided for the special meeting and asked for more time to review motor-vehicle grand-list and tax-collection details. The city—s tax collector had supplied actual tax-paid figures by email, and finance staff and the assessor explained the difference between assessed vehicle values (the grand-list component) and taxes paid.

The roll-call vote was: Aldermen Bevin, Casey, Jenkins and Marlowe — yes; Aldermen Beatty, Federico, Fowler, Healy, Morenett, Pacelli, Smith, Vitro and Willis — no. The chair announced, "9 no, 4 yes. The motion fails." The board then adjourned.

The failed resolution leaves the motor-vehicle assessment schedule at the level set under Public Act 22-118 (effective Oct. 1, 2024). The board will consider the full fiscal year 2026 budget adopted by the Board of Finance in coming meetings; finance staff warned the certified 10/01/2024 grand list figures affect that budget.