NO SURPRISE...Taxes as Usual in Hamilton

The group Enough Is Enough (EiE) recently presented the Hamilton Board of Selectmen (BoS)with an article the group sought to have placed on the warrant for the fall Special Town Meeting. Calling it a "Local Stimulus Package", EiE was seeking a non-binding advisory question be placed on the ballot for the next election which read:

"Shall the town of Hamilton place a cap of 0% increase on the total taxes assessed for residential property in the town for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2010?"

The question applied only to residential property taxes, not commercial (which only represents about 3% of Hamilton's tax base) and was intended to apply to only the one year. It was to be non-binding, so in essence it would serve simply as a poll for how the voters felt about paying the same taxes next year as they paid this year...with no increase. Naturally, a 0% property tax increase could possibly require cuts in services or adjustment for service personnel (pay cuts). EiE's stated intent was to use this non-binding question as a springboard to discussions, both pro and con, that such an initiative would undoubtedly create.

This week, the BoS voted to deny placement of the article on the fall Special Town Meeting warrant.

It comes as no surprise that the BoS chose to deny EiE's request of a question asking if the taxpayers in our town would like some relief from the burden they currently bare for living in the town with the highest property tax rate on the North Shore.

I say "no surprise" because the Hamilton BoS has consistently supported every single override for at least the past 12 years. Collectively, the overrides since 1998 have cost the taxpayers of Hamilton more than $39 million.

With such a record of endorsement for higher taxes, why should we be surprised that they would choose not to allow an opposing viewpoint to be openly discussed and voted upon by the residents of our town.

As I said, I am not surprised. But I am disappointed...disappointed because they have chosen NOT, as is so often espoused by override proponents, to LET THE VOTERS DECIDE.

The BoS has stated that they are aware of how tough times are in our current economy. But I am not certain they are quite as aware as they could be about how this economy is affecting the residents of Hamilton. Most of our citizens have slid down the economic ladder. Those that used to go out to eat are now serving meatloaf at home. Lawn maintenance contracts have not been renewed and homeowners are weeding their own gardens and mowing their own yards. Needed repairs to homes are being put off. Vacations, if taken at all, are spent at home or at nearby campgrounds. Pay freezes, pay cuts and job losses are much more common in our town than I believe the BoS realize. And foreclosures and short sales are becoming a way of life...even here in cherished Hamilton. And yet when a chance presents itself for voters to inform them of their plight, the BoS chose to deny them that opportunity.

The BoS stated that among their reasons not to support the request to let the voters decide is that the issue is too complicated and that the voters will not understand what they may need to give up in terms of services. It was suggested that capping the residential tax levy would mean cutting up to $500k from our budget.

But that's simply not correct. It's "fuzzy math".

You see, EiE was not suggesting cutting the taxes collected by 2.5% - they were recommending "level funding" based on the previous tax year's budget. The BoS was wrong to suggest that not raising taxes by 2.5% = cutting the budget by 2.5% (which is where they came up with the $500k). It does not. And EiE was remiss in not pointing that fact out. In fact, the only cuts that consistently are made every single year when the 2.5% formula is applied is a cut to the taxpayers' paychecks. Every tax is a cut in pay.

Most importantly, however, the BoS chose to ignore a rare opportunity to be innovative leaders during this dramatic economic decline...an opportunity to embrace a concept that is far removed from the "business as usual" budgets that rely on 2.5% MORE in taxes every year, year in and year out, regardless of the economy, and overrides to make up any anticipated shortfalls. They may have lost an opportunity for town-wide dialogue and discussion of an issue of critical importance to those they represent. And by the way, no one asked them to ENDORSE or RECOMMEND the question...just simply allow it to be placed on the warrant so that they can actually HEAR what residents are saying and thinking and FEEL what they are going through.

For so many residents, things are far worse than the BoS realizes. But unlike their willingness to support proposals that INCREASE our tax burden, they now are showing an unwillingness to support a question designed to suggest a LESSENING of our tax burden.

No surprise...

************************
On a positve note...At the same meeting the BoS voted to place an article on the warrant that would allow for secret (or private) balloting at Town Meetings when 25% of the registered voters present seek such a motion. The article also calls for private balloting for override motions requiring the appropriation of more than $250,000

Below are some other Massachusetts towns that have made similar changes to their bylaws regarding Town Meetings.

Any percentage is the number of registered voters needed to allow for a secret ballot at Town Meeting. Some towns just use a number of voters and some towns require automatic Secret Balloting on motions requiring large expenditures.

Essex = 20%

Andover = 25%

North Andover = 25%

Middleton = 25%

Wakefield = 25%

North Reading = 25 voters

Easton = 29 voters

Mendon = 10 voters

Stoneham = 25 voters

Wrentham = Automatic Secret Ballot on all issues of capital projects over $2 million

Berkley = Automatic Secret Ballot on all issues over $500k

Manchester = Automatic Secret Ballot on all issues over $250k



*****************

Reminder...Town Meeting in Hamilton is Saturday, October 17th

******************