Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Disabled vet claims gay bias in tax bill
NorthJerseyNewspapers ^ | 01.22.05

Posted on 01/22/2005 10:08:17 PM PST by Coleus

Disabled vet claims gay bias in tax bill

NEWARK - A gay, disabled veteran of two wars claims he is being denied a property tax break afforded straight veterans because he owns his home with his longtime partner, not a wife.

Louis Paul Hennefeld and his companion contend they are being treated unfairly by their hometown of Montclair because they received half the tax break that would be granted to a similarly disabled straight man and his wife.

The case, which appears to be the first of its kind in New Jersey, is an example of marriage-based discrimination, according to one gay-rights advocate.

On Friday, state Tax Court Judge Vito L. Bianco questioned lawyers for the couple and for Montclair. Bianco made no immediate ruling and said he would issue a written opinion "as soon as I can."

"It's a complicated issue," he said.

New Jersey law allows disabled veterans to seek exemptions from local property taxes. Hennefeld, who is considered 100 percent disabled, owns a house jointly with Blair William O'Dell. After living together since 1975, they formed a Vermont civil union in 2000 and married on Oct. 22, 2003 in Niagara Falls, Canada. That nation recognizes gay marriage.

The men sought a full tax exemption last January, but received 50 percent off their annual levy of $17,600.

"I thought it was patently unfair," O'Dell, 60, said in a telephone interview. When the Essex County Board of Taxation denied their appeal, they sued.

Hennefeld, 72, was recuperating after a recent hospital stay and unable to comment Friday, O'Dell said He declined to describe his partner's disability, but said it stemmed from his military service. Hennefeld served in the Air Force during the Korean and Vietnam wars and was a staff sergeant when he left the service in the late 1960s, O'Dell said.

Their lawyer, Fernando M. Pinguelo, urged the judge to consider the "plain language" of the tax exemption law, which states that the disabled veteran must own and occupy the house.

"It would be unfair to treat a veteran who served 15 years, in two wars, differently than another veteran in a different domestic partnership," Pinguelo argued.

Since a wedding that took place in Britain would be recognized by Montclair, so should the Canadian marriage of Hennefeld and O'Dell, he contended.

Under questioning from the judge, Montclair Township Attorney Richard Seltzer conceded, "The custom is, when a disabled veteran is married under traditional marriage, they get 100 percent exemption."

That disparity is one of many created because same-sex couples are denied the legal protections and benefits of marriage, said David Buckel, an attorney with Lambda Legal, a group that seeks civil rights for gays.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; US: Connecticut; US: New Jersey; US: New York
KEYWORDS: gaymarriage; homosexualagenda; homosexuallist; homosexualmarriage; montclair; newjersey; nj; veteran; veterans; veteransbenefits
Montclair, a liberal bastion in New Jersey where property taxes are sky high.  It's an upscale community where many in the NYC,  TV and Finance industry reside.  Home of Olympia Dukakis and Yogi Bera. Buzz Aldrin grew up there. 

Montclair

Looks like the homosexual activists are at it again. They'll probably win as did the Dale case against the Boy Scouts. Right now, there's a case going on in the courts where they will decide if homosexual marriages will be legal or not.

Case: Lewis et. al. v. Harris et. al.

Same-sex marriage in New Jersey

Montclair State University - Discusses Gay Marriage

1 posted on 01/22/2005 10:08:18 PM PST by Coleus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Coleus

This is wrong, he is NOT married!! the Test for Marriage is the ability for the MARRIED COUPLE to concieve to perpetuate the species. These two cannot meet the requirements of the test.


2 posted on 01/22/2005 10:15:20 PM PST by 26lemoncharlie (Sit nomen Dómini benedíctum,Ex hoc nunc, et usque in sæculum! per ómnia saecula saeculórum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
"It's a complicated issue," he said.

NO it's not. If they don't like it, let them move to canada where they're really 'married'.

3 posted on 01/22/2005 10:22:24 PM PST by America's Resolve (awarforeurabia.blogspot.com - Watching the war for Europe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

This is more "gay" gobbledygook. Are single vets being discriminated against? Are divorced vets being discriminated against? Are widowed vets being discriminated against?


4 posted on 01/22/2005 10:46:36 PM PST by Jaysun (If you disagree with me it's a clear indication that you're wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jaysun

You should also include unmarried heterosexual couples. A number of companies offer "same sex partner" benefits yet deny them to unmarried heterosexual couples.


5 posted on 01/22/2005 11:21:36 PM PST by weegee (WE FOUGHT ZOGBYISM November 2, 2004 - 60 Million Voters versus 60 Minutes - BUSH WINS!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: weegee

I wonder if he antied up additional federal income taxes when the marriage penalty was punishing married heterosexual couples?

You don't see many disabled vets that can afford a home with annual property taxes of 17 grand!


6 posted on 01/23/2005 2:24:01 AM PST by Wristpin ( Varitek says to A-Rod: "We don't throw at .260 hitters.....")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: 26lemoncharlie
the Test for Marriage is the ability for the MARRIED COUPLE

...in MOST states.

7 posted on 01/23/2005 4:02:01 AM PST by Living Free in NH (Where am I and why am I in this handbasket?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 26lemoncharlie

"This is wrong, he is NOT married!!"

From my perspective, it shouldn't matter whether a person is married or not. If you own a home you should get a tax break married or not.


8 posted on 01/23/2005 5:14:02 AM PST by Smartaleck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Coleus

If he believes so strongly in his living arrangement, his partner should sell his 50% stake of the house to the disabled vet. Even after real estate transaction feesd and taxes, they'd save money.

Since they are unwilling to take this route, I don't believe these guys are anything more than two guys who didn't want to get married and bought a house together.

If this guy succeeds, every single disabled vet in NJ can get free room and board from single homeowners by claiming to be a 0% owner of the home in a civil union.

Makes sense?


9 posted on 01/23/2005 7:29:41 AM PST by JerseyHighlander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Smartaleck

I have not problem with him getting a Tax break like anyone elde, but not at the Married rate, because he is not married!


10 posted on 01/23/2005 9:11:36 AM PST by 26lemoncharlie (Sit nomen Dómini benedíctum,Ex hoc nunc, et usque in sæculum! per ómnia saecula saeculórum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Smartaleck

Tax break OK, but not at the Married Rate!!


11 posted on 01/23/2005 9:12:34 AM PST by 26lemoncharlie (Sit nomen Dómini benedíctum,Ex hoc nunc, et usque in sæculum! per ómnia saecula saeculórum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Coleus
So...will he also be complaining about the "Marriage Penalty" tax as well?


12 posted on 01/23/2005 9:13:04 AM PST by unixfox (Close the borders, problems solved!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 26lemoncharlie

"but not at the Married rate, because he is not married!"

That's my point though. I believe that unless the state can demonstrate a clear advantage one way or the other for implementing a law "exclusive to and discriminating against others who are single" the law is in doubt.

It's like the marriage tax penalty in reverse.


13 posted on 01/23/2005 1:00:21 PM PST by Smartaleck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: unixfox

"So...will he also be complaining about the "Marriage Penalty" tax as well?"

Bingo!!!


14 posted on 01/23/2005 1:02:01 PM PST by Smartaleck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: JerseyHighlander

Sure does.


15 posted on 01/23/2005 1:24:30 PM PST by Coleus (God gave us the right to life and self preservation and a right to defend ourselves and families)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: America's Resolve

NO it's not. If they don't like it, let them move to canada where they're really 'married'. >>

Great answer. They can embrace socialism while there too.


16 posted on 01/23/2005 1:25:14 PM PST by Coleus (God gave us the right to life and self preservation and a right to defend ourselves and families)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Smartaleck

No, they can go to Canada and embrace Socialism and have a Happy Sodomy day!


17 posted on 01/23/2005 2:09:20 PM PST by 26lemoncharlie (Sit nomen Dómini benedíctum,Ex hoc nunc, et usque in sæculum! per ómnia saecula saeculórum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: 26lemoncharlie

"No, they can go to Canada"

I started to say "works for me" but on reflection the reality is they're here and we as a society have to learn a way to deal with it.

While some may rant about how Christians try to foist their opinions on others, they seem to give gays who do likewise a free pass.

While I don't necessarily agree with a dangerous lifestyle, I don't agree with discrimination either.


18 posted on 01/23/2005 5:49:03 PM PST by Smartaleck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Smartaleck

While some may rant about how Christians try to foist their opinions on others, they seem to give gays who do likewise a free pass.

While I don't necessarily agree with a dangerous lifestyle, I don't agree with discrimination either.
__________________________________________
The choice is yours:

http://www.catholic.org/phpframedirect/out.php?url=http://www.nccbuscc.com/nab/bible/index.htm


22
You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; such a thing is an abomination.



You, however, whether natives or resident aliens, must keep my statutes and decrees forbidding all such abominations
27
by which the previous inhabitants defiled the land;
28
otherwise the land will vomit you out also for having defiled it, just as it vomited out the nations before you.
29
Everyone who does any of these abominations shall be cut off from among his people.
30
Heed my charge, then, not to defile yourselves by observing the abominable customs that have been observed before you. I, the LORD, am your God."




19 posted on 01/23/2005 7:21:21 PM PST by 26lemoncharlie (Sit nomen Dómini benedíctum,Ex hoc nunc, et usque in sæculum! per ómnia saecula saeculórum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson