Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Select Board authorizes chair to oppose state bill that would remove license/registration holds for unpaid excise taxes
Summary
The finance director warned the Road to Opportunity Act would remove the town's key tool for collecting overdue vehicle excise — registration/license holds — potentially increasing property tax burdens; the board unanimously authorized the chair to submit testimony requesting municipalities retain debt‑based driving restrictions for excise collection.
Get email alerts on the Municipal Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Finance Director John Steinberg briefed the Select Board on the Road to Opportunity Act and the likely local impact if the state removes municipalities' ability to place holds on vehicle registrations or licenses for unpaid motor vehicle excise. Steinberg said the town collects most excise by notification and holds, with a typical collectible rate just under 92%. He estimated the town could lose roughly $350,000 in collectible excise if the registration‑hold mechanism is eliminated and warned that the town would need to increase overlays or shift costs to property taxpayers.
"This is a tax local tax that is paid for by everyone in town who owns a car," Steinberg said, outlining collection practices and the statutory remedies currently available to municipal collectors. He described multiple prior notices and administrative steps used before a hold is placed and said the town's assessor and treasurer use the hold as an effective collection lever in practice.
After discussion, a board member moved "to authorize the chair to submit testimony requesting that debt‑based driving restrictions remain available to municipalities in collection of motor vehicle excise taxes." The motion was seconded and approved by roll call; the chair was authorized to transmit the testimony to state lawmakers and join with other municipal officials expressing concern about shifting local revenue shortfalls onto property taxpayers.
The board did not seek other policy changes at the meeting; members said they support the governor's affordability objective but prefer alternative state actions that do not eliminate a major municipal collection tool.

