Commercial property owners in Tisbury will be getting bigger tax bills, after the select board voted Tuesday to shift 5 per cent of the town’s $40,233,493 tax levy from residential to commercial real estate.
The shift means commercial property owners will pay $8.10 for every $1,000 of assessed value, up from $7.32 in fiscal year 2024. Residential property taxes are going from $7.98 to $8.38 per $1,000.
These rates still need to be certified by the state department of revenue, Tisbury treasurer Jonathan (Jon) Snyder told the Gazette by email Wednesday morning.
"They may be slightly lower," Mr. Snyder wrote.
The commercial tax shift comes after five years of increasing residential property values, which Mr. Snyder said Tuesday are now an average of 77 per cent higher than in 2020 — adding up to more than $4.78 billion for about 2,900 properties this year, out of a total property value of $5.2 billion.
“The median residential property... is now valued at an amazing $1,170,000,” Mr. Snyder said, during the annual public hearing on tax classifications held Tuesday afternoon.
This is the second time Tisbury’s median home value has crossed the $1 million threshold: It reached $1,025,700 in fiscal year 2024. In fiscal year 2020, the median price was $621,400, rising to $744,200 over the next two years and reaching $988,400 in fiscal year 2023, according to figures from Mr. Snyder's office.
As a result of the increased values, he said Tuesday that residential real estate has grown from 89 per cent of the total property value in Tisbury to 91.7 per cent. Correspondingly, the 400 or so commercial properties in town have dropped from 8.6 per cent of the total property value to 6.3 per cent, or just under $328 million this year, Mr. Snyder said.
The remaining 2 per cent of the town’s tax levy, about $1.3 million, represents industrial and personal property taxes.
Josh Goldstein, whose family owns the Mansion House hotel, asked the select board not to shift more taxes onto the town’s commercial businesses.
“We want to be open in the wintertime and in order to do that, every penny counts,” said Mr. Goldstein, who told the board the Island’s lodging industry has suffered in 2024.
“We’ve all seen the increase in traffic this year, but those people have bought houses during the craziness of the pandemic. The market for people coming over by the day and staying has gone down,” he said. “Myself and a lot of the other hoteliers that I’ve spoken to had a drop this past season of anywhere from 12 to 18 per cent. So things are a little tight this winter and the extra money on this tax would hurt.”
“If we could think of a fourth category where we tax businesses that were only open in the summertime, I’d be all about it,” he added.
Elaine Barse, who owns the Green Room department store but not the building that houses it, told the select board that most commercial landlords in the Main Street area use “triple net” leases, allowing them to pass the entire tax increase on to their tenants.
“The valuation of the commercial property may be very high, but the businesses that are renting from some of these [owners] might not be able to absorb that triple net cost,” Ms. Barse said.
Select board member Roy Cutrer spoke strongly in favor of the tax shift.
“The commercial values are low as it is in comparison to the residential values,” Mr. Cutrer said. “We look at this every single year [and] we say ‘No, we’re not going to do it.’ I think this year it needs to be done.”
Select board member Christina Colarusso, who asked to give commercial property owners a year’s notice before imposing the tax shift, voted against it while Mr. Cutrer and chair John Cahill voted in favor.
The board was unanimous in voting to continue the 22 per cent residential tax exemption, which lowers the assessment for owners living year-round in their homes.
“It reduces the tax bill, for any property that qualifies, by 22 percent of the value of the average residential property,” Mr. Snyder said.
This means that most of the 1,103 eligible properties will see a tax reduction of $3,006, he said.
Thirty of the residential properties are only eligible for partial exemptions, Mr. Snyder said.
In other business Tuesday, the select board unanimously voted to allow a pair of street closures during the first weekend of December, when the Vineyard Haven Harbor Cultural District hosts its Tis the Season events.
On Dec. 6, Main street will be closed between Cromwell and Union streets from 5:30 to 9:30 p.m. for a live concert in front of the former Bunch of Grapes location at 35 Main, still widely known as Bowl and Board after a longtime earlier tenant.
“We’re basically trying to create a community cozy music holiday vibe in the street there,” said Taylor Stone, a member of the cultural district’s board of directors.
Union street will be closed Dec. 7 from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. for a holiday art market, which Ms. Stone said will run from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m.
The cultural district has met with the Vineyard Haven Business Association and discussed the weekend plan with Tisbury police, and has permission from the property owner for the Friday night concert, she said.
Also Tuesday, Mr. Cahill reported that there has been a strong response to the job posting for a town administrator to succeed John (Jay) Grande, who is not renewing his contract.
“We have, actually, 21 applicants who will be reviewed in this coming week,” Mr. Cahill said.
A volunteer search committee of Tisbury residents, working with a municipal consultant contracted by the town, is screening the applicants to select finalists for in-person interviews.
The committee is scheduled to present its selections to the select board on Dec. 10, allowing the board seven days to interview the candidates before making an offer Dec. 18.
Updated to include the dollar amounts to be assessed per $1,000 in property value, median residential property values for the past six years and other information provided by Mr. Snyder on Wednesday morning, and to correct an error in the stated amount of the town's tax levy: It is $40,233,493, based on $5,217,395,323 in property values.
Comments
Comment policy »