WOONSOCKET – City officials contend that a tax agreement signed by former Mayor Lisa Baldelli-Hunt with owners of a residential property at 43 Railroad St. (near Ciro’s) was not valid and binding.
City Solicitor Michael Lepizzera Jr., in an Oct. 5 memo to the City Council, said that Baldelli-Hunt signed an agreement granting an “exorbitantly rich and long-term” tax abatement without the council considering it or passing the appropriate ordinance required by state and local law to authorize the former mayor to sign it.
“In addition, no statutorily required public hearing was advertised or held for the public to weigh in on such an extraordinary tax break,” he wrote.
Representatives from Madison Leigh Properties LLC have sued the city over officials’ attempt to call the agreement void, claiming they have a valid tax stabilization agreement based on a written document allegedly executed by Baldelli-Hunt in May of 2022, during a term shortened by her removal from office a few months later for unrelated reasons (Baldelli-Hunt would later return to office before resigning over an inappropriate land deal. She is now running for City Council).
The lawsuit accuses former interim Tax Assessor John Pagliarini of using his official position to extract personal economic benefits from the plaintiff in an unrelated private landlord-tenant matter. Pagliarini is also accused of using his official position to coerce the plaintiff into abandoning eviction proceedings against his subordinate and close personal friend, conditioning his assistance with the tax stabilization matter on the plaintiff’s compliance with his personal demands.
Councilor Jim Cournoyer said during Monday’s City Council meeting that he spoke up on this matter two years ago, and this is yet another situation where the city is expending time, money, and effort on “nonsense” created by Baldelli-Hunt. No public hearing was held, he said, and Baldelli-Hunt never came to the council.
An ordinance passed by the council a decade ago related to more than 270 properties as potential targets for stabilization agreements, said Cournoyer, and wasn’t meant as a blanket agreement for all properties. It was simply a framework so someone didn’t have to start from scratch.
An agreement, he said, shall not result result in a reduction of the tax levy, yet Baldelli-Hunt approved one to take in $2,925 per year for three years, instead of more than $11,000 per year. That was on a 20-unit residential plus commercial development where rents were $1,250-$1,550, or $2,400-$2,600 for penthouses. The income to the city was essentially one month’s rent for one unit, said Cournoyer, an “absurd” agreement and overly rich one, as stated by Lepizzera.
Woonsocket has much bigger fish to fry on many levels, said Cournoyer, but is instead back wasting time and effort on another unnecessary situation created by Baldelli-Hunt. He said people ask why it’s so hard to move the ball forward on certain items, and this is it.
Cournoyer then listed numerous other situations where Baldelli-Hunt proceeded as desired without permission, all the way up to the “secret friends and family land deal.” She knowingly violated provisions to protect Woonsocket’s citizens, he said. Responding to Cournoyer’s questions on the appropriateness of what she did, Lepizzera said that’s why he provided his strong opinion on the matter, and as everyone knows, it’s often difficult to get an attorney to give their opinion.
Cournoyer noted attorney Aaron Weisman’s findings about the Mendon Road land deal Baldelli-Hunt was involved in where Weisman suggested that she may have had motivations other than those in the best interest of residents. Giving an overly rich tax agreement on her own was part of a pattern of behavior, he said, and Baldelli-Hunt repeatedly told people to keep their mouths shut as she said she would do what she wanted as CEO.
“People need to wake up,” he said of the former mayor.
Council President Dan Gendron confirmed that the intention of the ordinance in 2016 was to offer a framework for future agreements, never approve a “blanket TSA.” It was guidance for the administration to negotiate with input from the finance director and then bring it to the council for individual approvals, he said.
Councilor Michael Dubois said Baldelli-Hunt subjected the city to millions of dollars in liability, and the “hits keep coming.” She was rightly removed from office, he said, and three years later, they’re facing another lawsuit because of what she did. Every time they think they’re moving on, he said, something else comes.
Councilor Denise Sierra, who filed the original complaint to have Baldelli-Hunt removed from office, said this was a pattern of behavior and showed blatant disregard for the city charter. She said it sickens her that taxpayers again have to pay for the former mayor’s actions, wondering how much time and money will be spent defending this case. If $2,900 was charged to the owners, she said, “who gets the rest of the money? Certainly not the taxpayers.”
Councilor Valerie Gonzalez asked about whether the city could recoup the difference in taxes abated. Lepizzera responded that that they are taking the stance that there was no contract and no tax agreement in place, and therefore the city is entitled to the full assessed value. Responding to questions from Gendron on why the company wouldn’t follow normal course and pay its taxes before later seeking an abatement if successful, Lepizzera said the company is “going for the whole enchilada” instead of paying any taxes and following typical statutory process, and the next time there is a tax sale, they will be part of it. Lepizzera said the city is asking for a judgment on full back taxes.
Lepizzera said such agreements are supposed to incentivize developments, but in this case, the project was already developed. Based on the company’s purchase price of $3.8 million, representing likely fair market value, said the solicitor, the developer would be paying $60,000-$80,000 in taxes, which is why he stands by his stance on how outrageously exorbitant the $2,900 agreement was.
