Chairman Bill Hayner, Treasurer Steve Gilligan and I now ask your support for No CPA Tax under Ballot Question #5 in November, because we support the education of Arlington’s children.
The CPA tax is a massive slush fund, with no identified line-item purpose, serving third parties — not Arlington’s Community Safety, Education, Public Works and Social Services. Its alleged reimbursement is an under-funded, doomed Ponzi scheme that has woefully missed its targets for the past six years.
The minimum CPA tax cost to taxpayers is $8 million diverted to the slush fund. Over the 30-year bonding period for a new Arlington high school, this diversion is $88 million. $88 million taken from voters that could be used for living expenses, college education or 401(k) plans. This tax is fiscal irresponsibility on a scale unknown in the history of Arlington. It may well cause the AHS project to fail!
Supporting this reckless referendum jeopardizes the rebuilding of the High School and the operating override that you and I know the School and Town will require within 5 years!
Taxpayers defeated two AHS referenda in 1975, overrides in 1987 and 1989, and again in 1997, the first $50 million debt exclusion for our elementary schools was defeated. The 2004 override was defeated. My message: Arlington voters will not be happy with an $88 million slush fund diversion that threatens their core services and the education of their children.
I ask each of you to vote No on the CPA Tax and to take a Committee vote recommending the same to Arlington taxpayers.
Your charge, the education of our children, is now at risk. If the $88 million slush fund passes, what will you tell the parents of our students when an override fails and you have to cut services? What will you say when a voter asks you why you supported this travesty? What will you say to an eighth grader looking at an aged high school that has lost its accreditation? What will you tell her? Thank you.
This viewpoint was published Sunday, Oct. 12, 2014.
Vote No CPA Tax (Question #5)
The following letter to the editor was submitted Oct. 16 by Dean Carman of Kilsythe Road, and Arlington Finance Committee member from Precinct 20:
This Nov. 4 Arlington residents have an opportunity to help set the financial course of Arlington for the next five years by voting NO on the optional and unnecessary Community Preservation Act Tax (Question #5).
Arlington property taxes have increased 61% over the last decade, driven by two operating overrides and the elementary school rebuilds. This has caused significant stress on property owners because nobody’s personal income increases 4.6% per year, but we’re all feeling cost pressure from not only property tax increases but also rising healthcare costs, gas prices and water bills that have doubled over the last decade, just to name a few.
As we look forward five years, town leaders are telling us we have three big ticket items that will require large tax increases: rebuilding Arlington High, rebuilding Minuteman Tech and an override for the operating budget when we run out of money to provide level services. If approved by voters, these tax increases will continue the 5% annual growth of Arlington property taxes.
This rate of growth is simply not sustainable.
Sadly, instead of circling the wagons and focusing on cost controls, town leaders have chosen to put before us a fourth tax increase, the optional and unnecessary CPA tax, a special interest legislation that puts three spending categories (open space, historic preservation and affordable housing) above all other priorities in town — police, fire, public safety, teachers, school buildings, etc.
This is outrageous and not in line with Arlington community values. Town leaders need to be respectful of our ability to pay property taxes that are growing at twice the rate of inflation by managing our tax dollars as responsible as possible, not asking us to approve unnecessary spending. Please join me in voting NO on the CPA Tax this Nov. 4.
This letter was published Thursday, Oct. 16, 2014.
Don’t ignore the costlier half of the story
Dean Carman, a member of the Arlington Finance Committee and a Precinct 20 Town Meeting member, tells why he thinks Arlington should oppose the Community Preservation Act. His comments were published at his blog, votenocpatax.blogspot.com, under the title “The Quest to Increase Your Property Taxes by 50%!” They are republished with the author’s permission.
As I look back on the 2014 Town Meeting debate over the CPA tax and the speeches that were given, there’s one that continues to stand out it my mind, the speech by former Selectman Clarissa Rowe, one of the main proponents of adopting the CPA tax. The reason this speech stands out is because it was the ultimate half-truth politician speech. Masterful and effective because it highlighted points that Town Meeting would rally around, but omitting the half that would have doomed her presentation.
Clarissa spoke about how she went to a Finance Committee meeting during the 2012 override campaign, hearing there was concern about the override from certain Finance Committee members, and she lectured the entire Finance Committee about how they were not policy makers and that they (we) should not stand in front of the override. It was a very powerful speech on the floor of Town Meeting.
The problem with Clarissa’s recounting of events is that she told half the story, curiously omitting the costlier half. When Ms. Rowe visited the Finance Committee in 2012, members were voicing concern for what town leadership was projecting as a never ending cycle of 8 to 10% operating overrides every 3 to 5 years (on top of the annual 2.5%), and concern over the ability or willingness of voters to fund this never ending cycle, plus any capital overrides we would need.
When this was explained to Ms. Rowe, her immediate response was to say that Arlington could afford property tax rates in line with Belmont and Lexington, 50% higher than Arlington at the time, so our concerns were without merit. She then started her grand lecture about the Finance Committee not being a policy board and that she and her fellow Board of Selectman were the elected authority on implementing a path to much higher taxes.
Funny that part got omitted from her speech.
After you’re done calculating what a 50% increase in your property taxes would be, you’re probably shaking your head thinking this type of extreme view is not widespread in Arlington. Sitting through many Finance Committee meetings over the years, I can assure you that there’s a vocal group of elected officials, residents and volunteers who believe that, “Arlington taxes have significant room to increase, and we should be moving down the path to bring taxes in line with Belmont, Lexington and Winchester, who are all 50% higher” (there words, note mine) or as they will say, “we need to take this opportunity to start getting taxes up, Arlington can afford it.” Of course when I say vocal, I mean in a Finance Committee meeting with limited scrutiny from the public or in casual conversation among insiders (or those they think are insiders J).
Other costs the town faces
So now that I’ve aired out a dirty little secret, I’m sure some CPA tax supporters will deny this and claim it’s not true.
But here’s the problem – since early 2014, many members of the Finance Committee and Town Meeting have been asking for a long-term spending plan from the Selectman over what the increase on the tax rate will be for the annual 2.5% increase they’re planning, PLUS four voter referendums in five years (1.5% for CPA, $150 million Arlington High, $60 million+ Minuteman Tech, 10% minimum operating override).
The response of the four selectman who support the CPA tax is that they will work on something or respond back with vague one liners with buzzwords like cost neutral, sharpening our pencils working on a plan, we have the best interest of the community in mind, blah, blah, blah. What they don’t ever come back with is a plan or costs.
Why is that?
I think the answer’s obvious. While it’s a low risk venture to stand in front of the Finance Committee and scoff at a 50% increase in property taxes like former Selectman Rowe does, putting a plan on paper that shows property taxes increasing 30-50% over the next five years would be a tough argument and not help with re-election. Instead, it’s a better strategy to ignore the long-term, focus on the short-term and hope nobody has a calculator as you pass one tax increase after another. Pass each override in isolation, starting with clearly frivolous and wasteful CPA tax, so by the time we get to the necessary overrides like Arlington High School, the damage will be done.
This is a sad way to do business and not in line with Arlington values.
This viewpoint was republished Thursday, Sept. 25, 2014.
