Key Points:
- Selectmen again postponed tax sale action as questions remained about collection methods and how much time taxpayers would have to pay.
- Members sought further discussion with town counsel about the proposed contract’s scope and terms.
- A separate 3-2 vote acknowledged the tax collector’s recommendation without approving the contract.
Why It Matters: The decision could affect how Wilton pursues overdue revenue and what opportunities taxpayers have to resolve unpaid balances before further collection action.
Despite urging from First Selectman Toni Boucher to move ahead, the Board of Selectmen again postponed action on a proposed tax sale, at least until they could get some questions answered by town counsel about the collection method, the time taxpayers would have to pay and the vendor’s contract.
Hollie Rapp, Wilton’s manager of assessing and tax collection, once again went before the BOS at a special meeting on Tuesday, Nov. 10, to request that the town finally move forward with a tax sale, as she has recommended for more than a year.
While the idea has been under discussion for at least a couple of years, the BOS has given it more detailed consideration in recent months. That has included meeting with a lawyer from Pullman & Comley, the firm Rapp has identified to handle the sale, and an informational session about foreclosures as an alternative with an attorney from Berchem Moses, the Town’s of counsel law firm on retainer.
“My concern with this contract is it’s very broad based,” Selectman Matt Raimondi said, noting that more clarity was needed on the scope of work and Pullman & Comley’s hourly rate, which was significantly higher than Berchem Moses.
Boucher said that town counsel had reviewed the agreement.
“They’ve pronounced that it’s solid,” she said.
Previous Discussions and Vendor Review
Adam Cohen, the Pullman & Comley attorney who specializes in tax sales and works with numerous municipalities throughout the state, first appeared before the BOS on Sept. 2, 2025, at Rapp’s request.
He returned on April 20 to discuss the proposal with the newly constituted board. At that time, BOS members expressed some misgivings, in part because former Selectman Joshua Cole was employed at the same law firm. At that time, BOS members approved a motion directing Rapp to interview other vendors without giving preference to Pullman & Comley.
On Sept. 22 town counsel Mario Coppola appeared before the BOS to explain the differences between individual foreclosures and a tax sale. He spoke highly of Cohen, calling him “a consummate professional” who was “well-respected and well-known throughout the state.”
“I think she’s done her due diligence,” outgoing Chief Financial Officer Dawn Savo told the board on Nov. 10, noting that choosing how to collect delinquent taxes was Rapp’s responsibility and described the board’s role as only approving the contract.
“We’ve had robust public comment during prior meetings and so I think, in my opinion, it’s time to make a decision,” Savo said.
Selectman Rich McCarty asked whether Rapp had sought bids on the contract through a request for proposals, or RFP.
“We did not do an RFP,” Rapp said. “We reached out to other counsel and only one responded to us and was not interested.”
McCarty, too, then suggested that the contract was too broad for what he believed the town wanted to do.
Questions about Collection Method and Timing
Questions remained about whether to pursue a tax sale or individual foreclosures, as well as how much time taxpayers would have to pay overdue balances.
Board members expressed concern that the parameters for collection in a tax sale might be too rigid for people who with valid reasons for falling behind in paying their taxes.
“It is different when it’s your friends and neighbors that this is going to happen to,” Raimondi said. “And again, they need to pay their taxes, but I think what I’m trying to solve for is a way in doing it that is … just as compassionate as possible.”
Toward that end, he said he wanted to revisit the contract in an in-person discussion with Coppola.
As Rapp had earlier pointed out, Boucher emphasized the importance of treating taxpayers equitably and avoiding situations of preference or favoritism.
“This is the danger of moving into that conversation, that we’re moving into the territory of picking favorites,” Boucher said, “those that pull at your heartstrings more than, say, others. The process is set up so it doesn’t allow that to happen. That’s why it’s done this way.”
Boucher said state statute, in essence, removes the BOS from the collection process itself, putting the responsibility on Rapp as the tax collector in order to keep personal considerations out of those decisions.
Board Acknowledges Recommendation, Holds Off on Contract
In acknowledgement of Rapp’s statutory power to decide how to handle the collection itself, McCarty made a general motion for the BOS to accept receipt of her recommendation to conduct a tax sale.
In a memo dated Nov. 9, Rapp had identified the potential for recovery through a tax sale was $1,319,949.94 in outstanding taxes, sewer usage charges, interest and lien fees.
Raimondi and Selectman David Tatkow, however, expressed hesitation about the motion, which passed 3-2 with Second Selectman Ross Tartell joining Boucher and McCarty and voting in favor.
The vote acknowledged Rapp’s recommendation but did not approve Pullman & Comley’s engagement letter.
McCarty agreed that the engagement letter needed further thought and that board members should confer with town counsel before approving it.
