In a continuation of Danbury Democrats’ former LONG history of opposing tax giveaways for residential developers, from the HatCityBLOG archives, here’s footage of a 2007 press conference held by Democratic mayoral candidate Helena Abrantes where she and the ENTIRE Democratic caucus and town committee demanded the repeal the seven-year tax abatement given to BRT to build “market rate” housing on Crosby Street.

Several Democrats who opposed the tax giveaways have expressed dismay with the current Democratic leadership's willingness to provide BRT the same tax giveaway the party has historically opposed.

In light of the unprecedented thirty-million dollar education budget request, Democrats who have long-opposed giving tax giveaways to BRT have expressed deep frustration and dismay with the new crop of Democrats who voted to reward BRT with the same lucrative tax break that Democrats historically denounced.

PRESS RELEASE FROM Helena Abratnes campaign for Mayor (2007).

Prominent Danbury Democrats are calling for the repeal of the seven-year tax assessment deferral for the BRT property at 30 Crosby Street.

Helena Abrantes, Democratic Candidate for Mayor, said, "Mark Boughton and the Republican controlled Common Council have ignored the opposition of this tax giveaway and the Ad Hoc committee appointed to consider repeal has been delaying any resolution of this issue." Abrantes stated, "I have the signatures of hundreds of Danbury Taxpayers who demand an answer from their elected officials and want a decision from the Republican controlled Ad Hoc Committee so the entire Council can move forward with the repeal."

"This is the FIRST time in the City's history that a tax deferral was offered for any residential development. There is no benefit to the City or its residents that would justify such a windfall to a single corporate real estate condominium developer, especially recognizing BRT went back on its word regarding the marketing of these apartments on Crosby Street," Abrantes concluded.

Tom Saadi, Democratic Council Leader, who opposed these condo tax abatements from the beginning, said, "We are demanding repeal, especially in light of the developer's 'bait and switch' change in use." BRT originally attempted to justify the tax abatement for its Crosby Street project by claiming it would be bring young professionals to downtown and have an overall positive effect on economic development and revenue for the city.

However, this is an unprecedented use of tax deferrals. In contrast, tax deferrals for the recruitment, retention and/or expansion of Cendant Mobility/Cartus, GE Capital, Belimo and MannKind Pharma provide quality jobs and produce a significant economic benefit for the City of Danbury.

Councilwoman Lynn Taborsak stated, "There are no jobs created, no additional businesses started and no benefit that warrants a multi-million dollar giveaway of both tax dollars and reduced hookup fees for sewer and water. Homeowners in my neighborhood on Jackson Drive, Woodbury Drive and Hawley Road had to pay full-freight for their water and sewer hookups. Why couldn't they get a sweetheart deal like BRT?"

Councilman Ben Chianese said, "The original plan for this project was thrown out the window. Now this project has no resemblance to the plan that was approved by the previous Common Council. As a city, we cannot afford these tax giveaways for residential developers. As Democratic officeholders and candidates, we will demand that the Ad Hoc Committee meet to resolve this issue and we will push for repeal."

Here’s how the Newstimes reported on the situation...

While the Democrats have long complained about the BRT deal, they said their petition proves the public isn't happy, either. "This is the first time in the city's history that a tax deferral was offered for any residential development," Abrantes said in a prepared statement Tuesday.

"There is no benefit to the city or its residents that would justify such a windfall to a single corporate real estate condominium developer, especially recognizing BRT went back on its word regarding the marketing of these apartments."

The city gave BRT -- a Danbury developer -- a seven-year tax incentive to build a five-story apartment building on the site of a former lumber yard. The deal essentially allows BRT to pay taxes as if the property had never been developed, said Dan Bertram, BRT's executive vice president.

The tax break was given with the impression the apartments would go to young urban professionals -- couples and single people a few years out of college, working white-collar jobs and having disposable income.

Instead, Brookview Commons is being rented by students from Western Connecticut State University.

Democrats are calling the change a "bait and switch" and want the tax break repealed. They said the average Danbury resident doesn't get a tax break and questioned why a developer would.

Furthermore, an ad hoc committee formed to explore the possibility of repealing the tax break is being stifled, the Democrats said. "Mark Boughton and the Republican-controlled Common Council have ignored the opposition to this tax giveaway," said Abrantes, who said BRT "went back on its word" by marketing the apartments to college students.

Here are video highlights from the 2007 presser...