Idiots! (Failure of Town Prop 2.5 Override)

The BBQ Pit
1

Our town had a vote on a Prop 2 1/2 override so that we could raise desperately-needed money. It was defeated by more than 2 to 1:
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/city_region/overridecentral/2007/04/overwhelming_de.html
We’re appalled. This will mean firing teachers, closing one fire station, and essentially losing the library, in addition to hurting police and fire pay and a host of other services. I would’ve thought that pasing this was a no-brainer. Even senior citizens, usually arrayed against such things (because “I don’t have kids in school”) were in favor of the override because not having it would’ve meant shutting the senior center and curtailing elderly services.

The proximate cause is given as sudden burdens imposed by the town’s health insurance, but there has been a lack of foresight and negflect for years. Things seem to keep popping up that no one knew about that are continuing to add to our bill.

2

My old town, Needham, had its Prop 2.5 override many years ago.

That’s the trouble with these forced supposed fat-cutting measures. They keep cutting after the fat is gone, and soon you’ve lost your bone and muscle and guts.

California will eventually be faced with the same thing regarding its very similar Prop 13, but its a much larger economy and will take a longer time to hit bottom in the way that towns in MA have faced in the wake of 2.5.

3

Cal, maybe I’ve lived in our town too long myself, but it ain’t ever gonna change in that regard. Once in a great while, an override that’s tightly focused enough and small enough can pass the gauntlet of the reflexively anti-government crowd and the seniors on SS who aren’t interested in anything but the Senior Center, but it’s rare. There’s always the attitude that the town can just raise the taxes on all those businesses on Route 1 if there’s a problem, and hell, they’ve always managed to shuffle things around somehow anyway.

But the schools are going to take the brunt, especially if the library grant clause forces it to remain open despite the plan. Please, very seriously consider sending your wonderfully intelligent daughter to school elsewhere. Up until the budget crunch 3 years ago, I was proud of our town’s schools. I’m still proud to know so many fine teachers there, who did such a wonderful job with my own spawn, but the opportunities they had just aren’t going to be there for yours.

If anybody has any hints about better ways to fight selfishness and ignorance, please chime in.

4

Well, I knew before I opened the thread where you live, but even after reading your link and seeing a news blurb last night, I still am unsure what your town was trying to do. The idea was to inflate property taxes in order to pay for the town’s health insurance? Who is “the town” that’s covered under such insurance - town employees? If so, why would they pay for it via property tax? :confused:

5

The town self-insures, as do many in this state. Some buy into the state’s program, but historically that has cost more for most towns. Health coverage, at certain levels, is guaranteed to town employees and retirees under union contracts that can’t be broken without the town going into state receivership (which is a possibility). Paying those contractual obligations while maintaining the required balanced budget means cutting back elsewhere.

It may well be that the town goes to the state’s health insurance system, but that can’t happen overnight or without the unions’ consent. And, if you’re familiar with this town’s teachers’ union, and their president (I know him; he’s an asswipe), you shouldn’t expect that.

Arguments for and against, if you’re interested.

The kind of voter who decides these things. This is what’s wrong with democracy.

6

For those who are questioning the need for a Prop 2 1/2 override - you have to understand the recent economic history of Massachusetts to understand a lot of what’s going on. During the 70s and 80s there was a huge boom in real estate values all through the area. As an example, my parents purchased, in the early 70s, a colonial house on an acre lot, for the tune of about $40K. When it came time for them to move around 1990, they ended up getting over a quarter of a million for it. And that was at a time when the local real estate market was experiencing a temporary down-turn.

In Massachusetts the majority of the operating budget for local jurisdictions comes from property taxes: That is, the schools, the town highway department, the town police and fire services, and other local services are mostly funded by property taxes. There may be state aid to some jurisdictions, but in general, the lion’s share of the operating budget is derived from property taxes.

During the 70s, too, there were the days of the high inflation. Both of these factors ended up leaving municipalities caught between a rock and a hard place - they weren’t changing the appraisal values on property often enough to keep up with the real value of real property, and the money they were getting in from property taxes weren’t high enough to keep meeting operating expenses. So, in a remarkably short-sighted and completely predictable series of decisions they chose to try to raise property tax rates high enough to make up the budget shortfalls. It was easier and cheaper than adjusting appraisals. But it ended up with people starting to face things like a 10% per annum change in property tax bills. (Not a 10% change in the property tax rate - simply in the amount that the individuals were paying.) A lot of people got burned by this when it happened, in a number of places people were honestly worried about being taxed off their property.

So, some people in Boston (IIRC) came up with the bright idea of passing a law limiting the ability of a jurisdiction to change property tax burden. IIRC Prop 2 1/2 limits the change in the tax bill to no more than 2.5% of the previous year’s property tax bill. Which sounded great to a lot of people at the time, who were getting caught up in the works. But capping the annual change in property tax to an amount that’s been less than the annual inflation rates leaves many municipalities losing ground, consistently. And, until/unless Prop 2 1/2 ever gets off the Mass books, it’s not going to change any time soon.

IOW, I believe that Prop 2 1/2 is a legacy of a tax-payer revolt that is going to keep hurting Massachusetts for years, unless more people are willing to try to educate the electorate on the realities of what it does.

Again, it’s not limiting the change in the property tax rates - those don’t need to change all that much. What it does, however, is leaves places with a bubbling property market behind the eight-ball in terms being able to actually keep up with changes in real market value for properties. Which isn’t going to be getting better any time soon, I don’t think.

If one looks at this chart, it seems to support my impression that for the past several years, the inflation rate averages about 3% per annum. Which means if one keeps the change in property tax bills capped a change of 2.5% per annum, these municipalities are going to keep losing ground indefinately. Prop 2 1/2 had been a nightmare waiting to happen, all along. sigh

7

You’re absolutely correct sigh

I know I’ve spoken about my town’s overrides here before – last year we passed 3 of them. There’s another coming up in a couple of months. Our property taxes jumped 40% this year, thanks to bungled school construction costs and misappropriation of funds stemming back to the mid 90s.

We can no longer afford to live here. The only bright spot is that my mother’s house, which I’ve inherited, has no mortgage. If you just add up the property tax plus the water bill (thanks *#$^@%% MWRA), it equals to a good third to half of my annual salary :eek: