More than $140,000 in past tax is due the town on property that once belonged to Wilton Baptist Church but was sold into private hands in 2021 without changing the tax-exempt status, according to town officials.
The new property owner, however, is pursuing legal action against the town to appeal the retroactive collection, as well as dispute the assessment of the property and historic stone structure that was built in 1864.
On Oct. 23, 2024, a case was filed in Superior Court by 254 Danbury Road EAT, LLC, which purchased the property at that same address on July 29, 2021.
The company is managed by William D. Earls, a local architect and author who lives nearby, and also serves as a trustee for the Wilton Historical Society.
“This building is going to be saved,” Earls said shortly after purchasing the 1.68-acre property for $500,000.
“The building is beautiful, obviously very beautiful, and an important historical landmark. It’s imperative, I think, that it be preserved,” he said, pledging to keep the exterior the same.
Beginning in 2022, Earls has appeared multiple times in front of the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Architectural Review Board with a pre-application proposal to redevelop the site at 254 Danbury Rd. into 10 condo units, ranging from three- to five bedrooms each. The church building, which has already been deconsecrated, would be preserved and reconfigured to house the smaller three-bedroom units, and three additional buildings would be built in a similar design vernacular to the church and house the larger units.
Town Administrator Matt Knickerbocker described the situation as mistake made by the former tax assessor.
“When the property was owned and used as a church, it was exempt from property taxes,” he said.
But after it was sold for the potential use of a commercial enterprise, he said, the religious exemption should have been lifted immediately.
“It apparently was not removed at that time,” Knickerbocker said. “Consequently, the town did not assess property taxes for that time period.”
“This occurred before our current assessor was hired,” Knickerbocker said, crediting her with discovering the mistake last year.
On Sept. 18, 2024, Hollie Rapp, Wilton’s manager of assessing and tax collection, notified the new owner about the issue and requested back taxes totaling $142,708.89.
“It has come to my attention in reviewing our records that you have been receiving exempt status on the above-mentioned property … I regret to inform you that I have had to remove this status from the 2021, 2022 & the 2023 Grand Lists, as this isn’t something that 254 Danbury Road EAT, LLC, has applied for, or likely qualifies for,” Rapp wrote.
While the town did not ask for interest or penalties if the back taxes were settled by Oct. 18, 2024 — one month after the notice was dated — it noted three separate years of unpaid taxes, including $55,816.72 for 2021, $57,857.10 for 2022, and $29,034.97 for the first installment of 2023.
“The assessor discovered that the exemption was still in place during the revaluation process,” Knickerbocker said. “She corrected the exemption and billed for the back taxes, and the owner has appealed the action.”
“This is an active court case,” he said, “so that is all the background I can provide.”
Earls did not reply to a request for comment, but a complaint was filed with Superior Court in Stamford on Oct. 23, 2024, by the LLC through the law firm Wofsey, Rosen, Kweskin & Kuriansky, LLP, of Stamford.
The complaint states, “the Assessor’s retroactive removal of the Property’s exempt status … was improper and unlawful.”
The complaint also says that the valuation “was not its true and actual value, but was manifestly excessive and could not have been arrived at except by disregarding the provisions of the statutes for determining the valuation of the property.”
The complaints says that, while the town assessed the property value at $2,824,700 in both 2021 and 2022, the 2023 assessment was $3,464,700.
“Plaintiff is aggrieved by the doings of the Assessor,” the complaint says, asking for the reversal of the removal of the tax exemption and/or a reduction to the property’s assessment, as well as an award for attorney fees.
In her letter to the property owner, Rapp said that if the property could still potentially qualify for exempt status under one of several state statutes, she encouraged the owner to apply, even providing an application to them for convenience’s sake.
Greedy builders ruining CT
Question: is this the former St. Mathews Episcopal Church “way back”?