Should Somerville Adopt the Community Preservation Act?
On Nov. 6, Somerville voters will consider Question 4 and decide whether or not to adopt the Community Preservation Act. Here's a look at the issue.
Photos
This November, in addition to casting important votes in the presidential and senatorial races, Somerville voters will decide whether or not to adopt the Community Preservation Act, known as the CPA.
The CPA is a surcharge on property taxes that puts aside money for open space, recreational space, historic preservation and affordable housing projects in cities and towns. Communities that adopt the CPA receive partial matching funds from the state.
In Somerville, the CPA decision will be Question 4 on the ballot, and here's a look the matter.
What will you be voting about?
When you vote on Question 4, a "yes" vote means you want Somerville to adopt the Community Preservation Act. A "no" vote means you don't want Somerville to adopt the Community Preservation Act.
When you vote "yes," saying Somerville should accept the CPA, you're agreeing that Somerville should establish a 1.5 percent surcharge on property taxes to fund CPA projects in the city. In return, Somerville will receive partial matching funds from the state (more on that below).
What is the CPA? Why now?
The CPA was signed into law in 2000, and it allows communities to form Community Preservation Funds to pay for projects in three broad categories: open space, historic preservation and affordable housing. Somerville's local fund would get its revenue from the 1.5 percent property tax surcharge and from partial matching funds from the state.
Some 148 Massachusetts communities have already adopted the CPA, and 12 communities, including Somerville, will be voting on the matter in November.
As originally written, the CPA was not of interest to a dense city like Somerville because, when it came to open space projects, CPA funds could only be used to acquire open space, something Somerville doesn't really have, explained Katherine Roth of the Community Preservation Coalition, a statewide organization that advocates on behalf of the CPA.
This summer legislators made some changes to the CPA law. Now, communities can use funds to rehabilitate existing recreational facilities, Roth said. As a result, the CPA made more sense for Somerville, according to advocates, who include Somerville Mayor Joseph Curtatone and the Board of Aldermen.
How much would it cost Somerville taxpayers?
The CPA would add a 1.5 percent surcharge on property taxes.
It would also establish exemptions for lower-income residents, according to Erica Schwarz of The Committee for a Stronger Somerville, which supports the CPA.
"The point about the exemptions is really important to know," she said. The first $100,000 of residents' property value would also be exempt.
So, what does that mean?
According to a chart prepared by the city assessor's office, here are the average surcharges property owners would pay:
- Condo (average value $323,500): $16.89 surcharge
- Single-family home (average value $405,000): $32.89 surcharge
- Two-family home (average value $487,000): $48.99 surcharge
- Three-family home (average value $550,300): $61.42 surcharge
- Building with four to eight apartments (average value $727,100): $123.13 surcharge
- Building with nine or more apartments (average value $2.4 million): $453.91 surcharge
- Commercial and industrial (average value $1.4 million): $439.12 surcharge
How much money would the CPA raise in Somerville?
First, the short answer:
It would raise roughly $1.2 million from the property tax surcharge in Somerville in the first year. On top of that, according to Roth, the state would provide matching funds worth about 22 cents on the dollar, based on conservative estimates. So, with $1.2 million raised, Somerville could receive $264,000 in matching funds from the state.
Now, the slightly longer answer:
The estimate of $1.2 million is based on fiscal-year 2012 property tax rates and current assessed values. The fiscal-year 2014 tax rate hasn't been established yet, and assessed values are always changing, so the CPA would raise different amounts every year.
As for state matching funds, "To do an estimate is somewhat of a moving target," said Roth. She thinks the 22 percent matching funds currently projected are a low estimate. A $25 million infusion of cash is coming into the state's CPA fund in 2013, she said. Also, revenue for the CPA comes from fees tied to registry of deeds transactions, she and Schwarz explained. During the recent housing downturn, those funds dried up, but with the housing market experiencing more activity so far in 2012, the state's CPA fund could grow. In other words, Roth and Schwarz—advocates of the CPA—think matching funds will rise in upcoming years.
What projects would it fund in Somerville?
Schwarz, a Union square resident, pointed to two possible projects that CPA funds could help with in Somerville.
She often runs up Prospect Hill, and "the tower could use some work," she said, referring to the Prospect Hill monument and park, which mark the spot where George Washignton first flew the American flag in 1776. CPA funds could help renovate the monument and park as historic preservation and open space projects, she said.
Another project could be the Somerville Museum, which is "facing some expenses" right now, she said.
CPA funds could also be used to "create really high quality affordable housing" or renovate and maintain existing affordable housing, she said.
The Community Preservation Coalition lists examples of projects conducted in other communities.
Cambridge, for instance, has used CPA funds to support the acquisition of buildings for affordable housing units. It's also funded capital improvements to existing affordable housing buildings and allowed owners of affordable housing complexes to refinance and maintain affordable designation.
Cambridge has also used CPA funds to conduct multiple projects at Fresh Pond and make repairs to Cambridge City Hall and other historic buildings in the city.
What about Somerville's Lincoln Park?
Some have asked if CPA funds could be used to renovate Lincoln Park near Union Square, where neighbors and city planners have been in sometimes heated discussions about rehabilitation plans. Plans called for installing an artificial turf field, among other rehabilitation features.
Based on new legislation passed over the summer, CPA funds cannot be used for the installation of artificial turf, Roth explained. However, other aspects of renovating an athletic field, such as improving drainage and leveling the field—both things that may need to happen at Lincoln Park—could potentially use CPA funds, she said.
Because the artificial turf rules are new, communities are still waiting for legal guidelines on this issue, Roth said.
How would CPA work in Somerville?
Somerville would establish a local Community Preservation Fund that would be managed by a local committee.
The committee would have at least five members from the city's housing, planning, historic, conservation and recreation commissions, explained Schwarz.
But Somerville would likely have nine members on the committee, the maximum allowed by law.
Government or non-profit groups with worthy projects would apply to Somerville's community preservation committee for funds. The committee would make recommendations, and the Somerville Board of Aldermen would have the final say on approving those projects.
Every year, Somerville would need to spend at least 10 percent of the local Community Preservation Fund on each of the three project categories. In other words, it would spend 10 percent on historic preservation, 10 percent on affordable housing and 10 percent on open space. The remaining 70 percent could be used however the committee sees fit.
Funds not used in a given year could roll over into subsequent years.
Arguments against CPA
Those who oppose the CPA argue against more taxation.
On Somerville Patch, one commenter wrote, "No way would I ever vote for something like this. We are already paying way too much now and I am sure we are going to be hit some more with all this so called progress going on in this city."
Another asked, "Can we get the open space and maybe the historic preservation without the affordable housing?"
A Kennedy School of Government paper written in 2007 suggested that CPA funds benefited wealthy communities at the expense of poorer, urban communities, and that wealthy communities used the funds mostly to protect open space. (It seems this summer's changes to the law addressed some of those issues).
Arguments for the CPA
Schwarz said that with an average surcharge of $32 for a single-family home in Somerville, the CPA represents a "modest investment" that would not only attract matching funds from the state but also leverage state, federal and private grants.
Even with state matching funds at 22 percent, a number she said would likely grow, "It's still hundreds of thousands of dollars" that Somerville would get in return for joining the CPA, Schwarz said. When matching funds increase, "We might as well be poised to take advantage," she said.
On Somerville Patch, one commenter wrote, "It's basically free money for the city, to improve our parks (or other uses, if we see fit). Personally, I think this might be one of the best sources of money available to actually finish the Community Path."
Roth said, "CPA is very flexible" and communities like Somerville can tailor projects to fit its needs. She said Somerville is a "dynamic, growing, thriving" community and "CPA would be a terrific choice for Somerville."
In This article
-
-
Prospect Hill Park
Munroe St & Prospect Hill Ave, Somerville, MA -
Somerville Museum
1 Westwood Rd, Somerville, MA -
Lincoln Park
Lincoln Pkwy & Perry St, Somerville, MA -
Somerville Home Owner
10:53 am on Friday, September 28, 2012
I agree with the commenter that said "Can we get the open space and maybe the historic preservation without the affordable housing?"
Matt C
10:53 am on Friday, September 28, 2012
This is an vote where everyone needs to weigh the issues. I think the biggest challenge against it is that it brings together three distinctly different issues
- open & recreational space
- historic preservation
- affordable housing projects
I see only one, open and rec. space of the issues to be truly be within the purview of local government.
Affordable housing is pretty well covered for new development by existing city statutes and state mandates (40b)
Historic Preservation can really go either way in my book - managed by private citizens like a historic trust or public.
The City would be compelled to spend at least 144k on each of the categories. I think i would be a lot more comfortable if the city would commit to more detailed allocation plans that cover at least 80% of fund
The other concern i have is that this appears to be open ended. If there were a term on it 3 or 5 years we could see if it was worth the surcharge that we will be paying if it passes.
For these reasons I don't think i can vote for the tax.
Steve
1:13 pm on Saturday, October 27, 2012
I'm in agreement here. I'm in favor of three categories and could support this, but the problem I have in doing so is that; "70% can be spent as the committee sees fit". I see too big an opportunity for mismanagement of these funds, against the spirit of the program and wishes of those voting for it.
AHM
2:07 pm on Friday, September 28, 2012
They don't need this at all. They have enough for what they need to do if they would just get their act together and run this like a city. Supposingly we are supposed to have all this increased revenue from these developments that that should take care of this and have some left over to reduce the taxes. I am looking into what will happen if I stop paying my real estate taxes now so I can afford to get by as it is. Plent more of us here in that position and just amatter of time before they can't either. Enough already, make better use of what we have. Plus we are getting this so called money from a country that is deep in debt. How sane is that..
Liz B
2:24 pm on Friday, September 28, 2012
Looking at the costs, it seems I'd have to pay an extra $200.00 a year, or less than $17.00 a month. Given that we would have some measure of control over the areas of spending, I'm for it. And the improvements to the city--affordable housing which encourages diversity, more open space (would love to see the bike path/community path finished!), and renovations to monuments such as The Prospect Hill Tower--all make our city more desirable, which means the value of your home will also go up. I do like the idea of putting a time limit on it so that the work actually gets done in my lifetime, but I'm for this progressive choice for the Ville. (I've lived here 16 years.)
Alex
3:55 pm on Friday, September 28, 2012
I'm pleased your behind it l, Liz. You'll like it even more when you realize that the costs per year are much less. I own a 2-family, and so it would be less thean $49 / year or $4 month. A condo owner would pay $16 /year. over-65 would pay nothing, low-income owners pay nothing. I like the idea that this money will make permanent improvements in a city I love. We all benefit from better parks, and our community path stands out in the country for how many people walk and bike on it. If we don't pass this, we'll be leaving state money on the table that is going to 148 neighboring cities and towns that HAVE ALREADY PASSED this measure.
Alan
4:09 pm on Friday, September 28, 2012
Matt C and others: good questions.
1. I believe that the surcharge can be "cancelled" or changed after 5 years if Somerville feels it hasn't been useful, etc.
2. RE: which programs to spend the $ on - everyone will have different opinions so isn't this a fair mix?
3. Of course we call want and should insist that the City spend our taxes efficiently. But very very little of the City's budget goes to the types of projects that the CPA will benefit. Such projects are mostly funded by federal grants, which are decreasing because of the debt issues that AHM has pointed to.
4. If people think that more should be done at the local level rather than from Washington, then this is the perfect case to make that happen.
5. In any case, I support this (i.e., passing the CPA) small tax (10 cents per family per day).
Carol
12:50 pm on Sunday, September 30, 2012
Tell me something....Why should it be up to the Somerville "voters," most of whom are not property owners, to vote on an issue that would raise property taxes? This is not a fair way to put forth this question and puts the burden, if passed, right smack on the backs of only property owners.
John
2:08 pm on Sunday, September 30, 2012
This sounds like a terrible idea. When you realize that our tax dollars, which should fund recreation facilities and historic preservation, are instead going to huge payouts to city employees in salary, benefits, pensions, etc. Not to mention the millions of other dollars in wasteful spending. The people on the committee will I assume be non-elected, but appointed. Which begs the question...appointed by whom? More mayoral appointees/puppets? And the groups on the committee each have a vested interest, and an agenda, in these projects. Des anyone think we have enough affordable housing? Of not, what is enough? carol, you make a good point about people voting on something which directly affects only property owners, yet 'low income' residents are exempted, so once again the rest of us end up subsidizing the rest. Will there be transparency? Would the spending of these finds be discussed publicly in budget decisions, or spent only wit the OK of the committee? I say vote no!
Friends of the Community Path
9:48 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
The Friends of the Community Path hope you'll Vote Yes on Question 4! If Ballot Question 4 wins in November, we hope that some of the Community Preservation Act (CPA) Funding will be used to help fund the Community Path extension.
Some 148 Massachusetts communities have already adopted the CPA to take advantage of the State matching funds and raise money for parks/open space, more affordable housing, and preserving historic buildings and sites. (These are the _only_ categories of projects on which the money can be spent.) This is a great opportunity! Somerville should not miss out.
The law was recently amended (hooray!) so that urban communities could access this CPA funding. 12 communities, including Somerville, will be voting on this way to raise funds for their cities and towns November.
Read here about who is on the CPA committee and the role of the Board of Alders in finalizing these projects, and also how the money is allowed to be spent here:
http://www.investinsomerville.com/how-the-cpa-works/
You can read more here: http://www.investinsomerville.com/
Alan
11:40 am on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Carol: The CPA legislation passed by the State requires a vote and I've never heard of any vote NOT by all and any registered voters/residents. Plus it seems fair to me as every Somerville resident will pay any surcharge directly as a homeowner or indirectly as a renter and indirectly as a purchaser of goods and services of Somerville businesses.
elizabeth
4:46 pm on Tuesday, October 2, 2012
What the CPA promoters may fail to appreciate is : Somerville resident real estate taxpayers are out numbered (approx) 30% to 70% by the renters. Now guess how many of this minority group are underwater , unemployed, underemployed, or just house poor enough to make it uncomfortable? What if a condo owner wanted to make a $30.00 donation to their church but could not as they were forced to chip in to the community fund. Vote NO and keep your well intentioned neighbors hands out of your pockets. NO means NO.
Marcus Graly
7:32 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Carol and Elizabeth, Renters are going to pay this cost too, through their rent. Nearly all leases have "tax escalator" clauses, and while some landlords that just own one or two properties, or maybe live in the upstairs of a two family and rent the downstairs, might just take the hit, I imagine the bigger landlords and any private management firms will certainly take advantage of those clauses.
That being said, I support the CPA tax. Most renters can afford another dollar or two per month, which is probably what it would come down to, and we all would benefit from investments in parks and housing. Even if there are other sources of money for these projects, I'd rather let our community decide how we want to spend the money rather than leaving it up to the Bigwigs in Washington or Beacon Hill.
Carol
11:00 am on Wednesday, October 3, 2012
I only hope the renters are aware of what they will be voting on (question 4) come election day. I'll bet most are not familiar about what the CPA is, nor are a lot of property owners. Marcus, even though it seems minimal to you, why should any property owner be exempt from paying this surcharge then, since we "all" benefit from it's supposed investment in the community? Even affordable housing is income based.
Donal Waide
10:50 am on Saturday, October 6, 2012
Why isn't this a vote about allocating some of the taxes we already pay to the city be diverted into a CPA fund. I don't see why a fund with only 30% allocation being fixed should be yet another tax on the homeowners of the city. Sure you can say it's $20 or $50 now, but you know, as it's always been, this will double and triple in times to come. And our taxes haven't gone down either. My home's tax rates has gone up over 60% in the last ten years. The value of the house itself is just over 11% increased in value. The city seems to have the funding already to preserve historic areas (Milk Row Cemetery) and every few months a new park is ready (currently building on Quncy St, just opened the Morse recently). I'll be voting NO on this one.
Carol
12:37 pm on Saturday, October 6, 2012
I agree Donal. Not only is the funding used to preserve historic areas in Somerville, but this money can also be used by private citizens to restore and preserve their OWN homes if labeled historic. This tax should be completely voluntary and not put only on the taxpayers! Actually, some homeowners may be exempt from paying this tax at all. Who will be completely honest when it comes to reporting income of all household members to qualify for this exemption? It may be proposed to start at 1.5 percent now but it can go to 3 percent. Do you really think this tax won't go up in years to come? This should be voluntary on every individual, so I am voting NO on question 4.
J M Bossi
9:25 am on Sunday, October 7, 2012
Wikipedia gives a pretty detailed, unbiased, facts only of the CPA. Definitely worth the time to read it. My concerns are that we would be paying a 1.5% surcharge now but what about down the road. It has the potential to double and you know this tax will never go away. Also do we reap the full benefit or just half since we only pay half the maximum rate. Wikipedia is a little gray on this. Also aren't we a little late to the party; in 2007 113 cities split 68.1 million, in 2010 143 cities split 25.9 million. Revenues are down from slow home sales. The fund is being infused with 25 million from some other state fund this year to build it up. Mass. has an extra 25 mil just kicking around? Also do we have to hire four more people to manage this fund?Four salaries to benefit a possible 150K? There are a lot of questions here.
Donal Waide
10:56 am on Monday, October 8, 2012
I spoke to someone this past weekend about the CPA in their city and I was told, that now there's a surplus of funds (CPA was adopted about 9-10 years ago) and this committee is running around looking for projects and things to buy. So it's become, quite quickly, another justification of a hapless political position. It's also a city a far cry from Somerville, where home ownership is at a much higher rate than the 30% listed here. Why don't we hear examples of the 148 cities who already have this implemented and let people know exactly what they are letting themselves in for?
Donal Waide
8:47 pm on Monday, October 8, 2012
http://waidesworld.livejournal.com/94239.html
John Q Taxpayer
1:28 am on Tuesday, October 9, 2012
I agree with the comment above who stated that "our tax dollars, which should fund recreation facilities and historic preservation, are instead going to huge payouts to city employees in salary, benefits, pensions, etc. Not to mention the millions of other dollars in wasteful spending." The recreation superintendent and director right now earn more than $200,000/year, yet they continue to act only on their own self-interests and fail to provide quality programs for the families in the city. This act would allow the Mayor and his buddies even more opportunity to fill their own pockets without any regard for what is best for the people who are paying to fill them.
SomervilleFan
10:04 am on Tuesday, October 16, 2012
OWNERS BEWARE!!!! I strongly oppose this tax. Please look deeply into this issue before voting. I received a pre-screening call asking for my support. I was told for only $35 a year the funds would be used for the west somerville library overhaul, extension of the bike path and a community project in Union Sq, all things that seemed great so I responded "yes". Then at my daughters soccer game the next day, I ran into a woman who was running around person to person asking for support. I took the opportunity (since she was hand selected by govt to campaign) to ask questions. This tax will be a blank check to the city of Somerville, yes there will be limits on the 3 areas where the funds can be directed, but the board isn't in place and there is no specific project or plans, despite the marketing and campaign calls. The entire problem with our government and economy is unaudited spending and now our community is asking for more. NO THANK YOU!
mrbostn
10:22 am on Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Silly people voting for more taxes when NO city/state/town can control spending.
mrbostn
10:26 am on Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Control bloated salaries/pensions first.
mrbostn
11:04 am on Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Many say its only $40-$60/yr, but what about next year,and the next year. Every year something will come up. Folks, once they raise the rate, there's no going back to the lower rate.
Slowly it will climb, 1.5% per year-Don't do it.
BTW how many of you who support this volunteer to pay the HIGHER percentage of Mass State income tax of 5.85% ....
Donal Waide
11:51 am on Wednesday, October 17, 2012
If a private residence is listed as historic, some of the funds are eligible to maintain that residence. In other words you can be paying for your neighbors house to be maintained. I think historic properties are great, but I am not in favor of paying for maintenance on someone else's home.
Somerville is 70% rented. It's the 30% of home owners in the city who are going to be taxed. If tenants think this hike can't be passed along to them....think again before you vote.