Fiction |
Fact |
| The CPA is an unnecessary burden on taxpayers already struggling with taxes, water/sewer bills and other fees. |
While every tax or fee has an impact on taxpayers, the CPA has safeguards to insure that it will not be a burden. First, the proposed CPA surcharge for Natick is only 1%, or an average of $35 per household per year (less than $3 per month). Second, the first $100,000 of a home’s valuation is exempt from the surcharge. Third, low-income homeowners and low and moderate-income senior homeowners don’t have to pay the surcharge. |
| There are other projects on Natick’s capital plan that are higher priority. Now just isn’t the right time for the CPA. |
Reasonable citizens will always disagree about which projects are more important than others. But open space, historic preservation and affordable housing have taken a back-seat for much of Natick’s history. Natick has not increased its stock of affordable housing in decades, and currently only 5% of Natick’s housing qualifies as affordable under state guidelines, allowing developers to ignore our local zoning bylaws and build projects like South Natick Hills under the state 40B law. In addition, there are numerous historic structures and cemeteries throughout town that are deteriorating without a regular source of preservation funds. Now is absolutely the right time to preserve our history and provide more housing options, while at the same time taking back our zoning bylaws from 40B developers. |
| The $30-$35 per resident fee is an underestimate, because the CPA tax also applies to any overrides (current and future). |
It is true that the CPA surcharge is calculated after any overrides. However, the CPA surcharge is only 1%, so that (as an example) if an override for a new Senior/Community Center were to add $50 to the average tax bill, then the average CPA surcharge would increase by less than 50 cents, after accounting for the exclusion of the first $100,000 of property value. |
| Not all Natick residents have contributed to the Commonwealth’s CPA trust fund, and if they have, they’ve only contributed about $20. |
Many Natick homeowners have refinanced their mortgages at least once in the last six years, and many of us have done it a few times, to take advantage of falling interest rates, or to lock in low rates before they increase. Each time a home loan is refinanced, another $20 surcharge is paid to the state. In addition, those who paid off their mortgage and recorded the discharge paid another $20. The $20 surcharge is paid for virtually every document that is recorded with the Registry of Deeds or filed with Land Court, and Natick residents collectively have paid hundreds of thousands of dollars into the CPA trust fund since it was created in December, 2000. The state will give it all back and more if Natick residents adopt the CPA. |
| Land is so expensive in Natick that the money raised by the CPA wouldn’t be enough to pay (current rates of $250,000 to $300,000 per acre). |
In Natick we are fortunate to have an Open Space Fund, with mitigation money paid into it by large developers in return for the right to build with higher density than is permitted under current zoning
regulations. This fund currently has about $1.5 million, and net of any purchases is expected to rise to about $6 million after the expansion of the Natick Mall. This money, along with CPA funds, could
go a long way toward purchasing some key parcels in town. Moreover, In the past, the Open Space Fund has been used to leverage other funds for open space purchases. For example, a state grant of $250,000 supplemented Town funds of $500,000 toward the purchase of Winter Woods. More recently, $10,000 of Open Space Funds helped Mass.
Audubon complete a $100,000 purchase of land adjacent to Broadmoor
Sanctuary. |
| The state match may not last forever. The CPA fund will be drawn down as more cities and towns sign on, and the state won’t always be able to match at 100%. |
The fund was originally designed to match at a rate of about 30%. Current predictions are that the fund will remain robust enough to continue to match at 100% for a few more years. The match rate may then decline to approximately 50% for a year or two, and then may decline to the originally proposed rate of 30%. The sooner Natick joins in, the more we benefit. |
| The Commonwealth has tried to raid the CPA fund in the past. |
The state legislature has successfully resisted attempts by the Romney administration in the past three budget cycles to raid the CPA fund. In a November 2005 briefing with a joint meeting of the Natick Board of Selectmen and School Committee, all four of Natick’s state legislators pledged to continue to defend the CPA fund against future raids. Representative Alice Peisch stated, “There is strong support in the legislature for retaining the CPA in its current form. … I could not be more confident that the CPA will be protected for the foreseeable future.” |
| If these projects are worthwhile, they should be budgeted through regular town processes and departments. |
What we have seen is that these needs (affordable housing, open space, historic restoration, and parks and rec) always fall by the wayside when operating budgets are tight. If we want these projects to succeed, we need a new way to fund them, and we need the support of Natick voters. Furthermore, CPA projects will be budgeted through a process that is identical to current process, with the addition of a new Community Preservation Committee (CPC). Before any CPA money can be spent, the CPC must make a recommendation to Town Meeting, where it will first be scrutinized by the Finance Committee, just like any other portion of the Town budget. |
| The town doesn’t really want to develop affordable housing, otherwise they wouldn’t have entered into challenges or lawsuits to fight four projects currently proposed. |
The density of the projects that have been proposed (South Natick Hills, Hunters Hill, Grant Street, Cloverleaf Mall) would have substantial negative impacts on Natick’s neighborhoods, physical environment, town infrastructure, and budgets for town services. By challenging these lawsuits, Natick officials have asserted our existing rights to shape how development will impact our schools, roads, water supply, traffic, and town services, and to uphold the zoning bylaws that have been approved by Town Meeting. |
| The town has done enough to encourage developers to build affordable housing, for example, by rezoning downtown into a mixed-use commercial/residential district (the HOOP district) near the Commuter Rail tracks). |
Rezoning doesn’t actually get housing built. It may be a while before significant housing is developed in the HOOP district. We need some solutions today to help Natick families that are struggling with affordability. We need concrete solutions for Natick families currently searching for affordable housing. |
| CPA funds can’t be used for maintenance of facilities, and will increase the town’s overall operating expenses. |
Not necessarily true. In fact, the CPA could alleviate pressures on town’s operating budget by covering some renovations and upgrades that would otherwise be considered maintenance and upkeep. This year, Cohasset spent $80,000 from CPA funds to upgrade town housing with new locks and appliances, and Braintree spent approximately $36,000 from CPA funds for upgrades to bring their housing units in line with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. As described in the most recent Natick Housing Plan, The Natick Housing Authority housing at Cedar Gardens is long overdue for upgrade and renovation, and CPA funds will be useful for this purpose. |
| CPA funds could be used for historic restoration regardless of whether the properties are publicly or privately owned. CPA funds could be used to renovate a private residence. |
The Community Preservation Committee would be responsible for reviewing projects and forwarding recommendations to Town Meeting. Town Meeting members would make final decisions about CPA expenditures. Individual private property owners would not be free to request CPA funds directly from Town Meeting. The law also provides safeguards, including a requirement that the Town receive a preservation restriction on the property, to protect the public’s investment. |
| Isn’t it possible to accomplish historic restoration projects with grants or volunteer labor? |
In a few cases, this is true. As an example, the Henry Wilson shoe shop was rebuilt with some volunteer contractor labor, and a small appropriation from Town Meeting for supplies. But this was a very small project, and this model won’t work for the other needs that Natick faces. In fact, if the CPA had been in effect when the Wilson shoe shop was refurbished, Natick taxpayers would only have had to pay half of the $10,000 appropriated by Town Meeting, thanks to the 100% state match for CPA projects! Further, our historic structures and landmarks are a public benefit to all citizens, and should be preserved through a town-wide effort. Our common heritage should not be dependent on the generosity of a few individuals. |
| Didn’t MathWorks just donate a huge sum of money to create playing fields at the Gravel Pit? |
The MathWorks grant didn’t pay for the total cost of this construction. An additional payment of $250,000 was requested out of the town’s open space fund, but even that will not complete the project. And according to the Recreation and Parks Commission, there are many other pressing needs for new and rehabilitated playing fields throughout town that far outstrip any potential corporate donations. |
| Although low-income families and low- to moderate-income seniors will be exempt from the CPA, these exemptions are not automatic, and taxpayers will have to file for exemptions. Many may not know that exemptions exist. Many are reluctant to disclose financial information because of personal pride. |
Non-participation in exemption programs by qualifying residents is an issue that extends beyond the CPA. However, the CPA allows up to 5% of the funds raised to be used to administer the funds. A portion of these funds could be used to finance public outreach and education efforts, to educate low-income and low- to moderate-income seniors about exemptions that can help them, including others in addition to the CPA. |
