Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Collections Tax Revenue topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council tables proposed contract with Municipal Tax Services after questions about fees and process
Summary
Councilors voted to table consideration of a proposed contract with Municipal Tax Services LLC to pursue out‑of‑state or unregistered vehicle taxation, citing concerns about fee structure, process transparency and contract details.
The New London City Council voted on May 5 to table a proposed contract with Municipal Tax Services LLC (MTS) that would identify and pursue taxes and fees on out‑of‑state or unregistered vehicles believed to be within the city.
Why it matters: Proponents said the service could produce additional revenue; opponents and several councilors raised questions about the firm's fee (a percentage plus a $50 per‑vehicle charge discussed in the packet), how notices and collections would be handled, the potential burden on residents and whether the city assessor or in‑house staff should perform the work instead.
Public comment and staff briefing: Resident Jeff Sontop spoke at public comment in support of pursuing revenue from out‑of‑state registered vehicles and unregistered junk vehicles; he told the council such work had been done previously in the city. Staff explained MTS's process: the firm conducts investigations, notifies vehicle owners and prepares a report; they receive payment only if a bill is collected, the staff briefing said.
Council concerns and legal questions: Councilors and the city attorney discussed whether state law permits the $50 per‑vehicle charge and whether the contract would expose the city to collection liability. The city attorney said reasonable fees and costs are authorized by state statute and that similar contracts exist elsewhere in Connecticut; staff also said other municipalities have used MTS with collection results reported in their packets.
Outcome: After discussion and concerns about transparency and contract specifics, a councilor moved to table the item and the council voted to table the proposed contract pending further review. The motion to table carried.
Next steps requested by councilors included providing the council the final proposed contract for New London, confirmation of whether collections are remitted to the city before payment to the vendor, and further legal and procedural detail about notice and appeal rights available to affected vehicle owners.
