LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for MUNINET Archives


MUNINET Archives

MUNINET Archives


MUNINET@LIST.UVM.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

MUNINET Home

MUNINET Home

MUNINET  December 2003

MUNINET December 2003

Subject:

Re: tax due dates-postmarks

From:

Michalina Wasung <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Vermont Municipal Government Discussion Network <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 24 Dec 2003 12:15:49 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (71 lines)

Thanks Bobbi - My Delq Collector and I have followed that policy for some
time now - not in such formal language - because there are indeed times when
it is the post office and we felt that if the clear postmark indicated that
a group of reasonable people would have felt that the taxes had been mailed
in a reasonable amount of time - etc. etc.  Miki - Townshend
----- Original Message -----
From: Bobbi Brimblecombe <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2003 9:30 AM
Subject: Re: tax due dates-postmarks


> Marshfield voted several years ago not to accept postmarks after receiving
> some very late payments that the treasurer believed were from a postage
> machine in a private office, where the postmark date can easily be
> changed.  Then a couple of years ago, a tax payment was mailed from the
> next town using the correct address and perfectly legible handwriting.
The
> payment arrived one week after they mailed it, on the next day that I was
> open after the warrant was turned over to the collector.  The postal
> service wrote a letter stating that the envelope went to Omaha or some
such
> place through no fault of the taxpayer.  They requested an abatement and
> were denied by a close vote.  Those voting against abatement felt that we
> had to honor the vote of the town to stop accepting postmarks.
>
> The taxpayer paid the penalty. They petitioned for an article at town
> meeting, and the article was approved.  This is now our complicated but
> common sense (I hope) policy:
> 1)      Taxes must be in the hands of the Treasurer before the close of
the
> Town Office on the due date;
>
> 2)      However, if a payment arrives after the due date, bearing a
legible
> US Postal Service postmark (but not a "metered postmark") showing that the
> payment was mailed to the correct address on or before the Monday prior to
> the due date, then the Treasurer will accept the payment as current.
>
> This will hopefully allow us to make an exception for those odd postal
> service quirks but still allow me to prepare the warrant for the collector
> on the day after the due date.  If a payment arrives late through no fault
> of the taxpayer, I will issue an amended warrant.
>
> -Bobbi in Marshfield
>
> At 08:39 AM 12/18/2003 -0500, you wrote:
> >Having established a reputation as a big meanie, I have not really had
> >problems with late in the day tax payments.
> >However, POSTMARKS are another thing entirely.  The Town voted about 5
> >years ago to NOT accept postmarks.  (Article itself was worded
> >'positively.') This has been a wonderful thing because technically one
> >would have to wait to do the Delq. Warrant until taxes postmarked the due
> >date arrived from Hawaii or where ever including ones which might have
the
> >wrong or no zip code.  Even then it is truly up to the Delinquent
> >Collector to adjust out the Int and Penalties.
> >This decision had been percolating for a few years and when a very large
> >escrow check which had been indeed sent out on the right day, but through
> >a set of science-fiction  style events, arrived almost 3 weeks late - it
> >was time for the No Postmark article.
> >The Delinquent Collector and I eased first two years with a bit of common
> >sense graciousness (while watching carefully for repeaters).  The bills
> >have "Postmarks Not accepted - taxes due in hand" printed on them plus a
> >new little sentence which also 'graciously' points out that the P.O.
> >This is probably most relevant to once a year collecting towns.
> >Miki - Treasurer, Townshend
> >
>
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LIST.UVM.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager