THIS STORY HAS BEEN FORMATTED FOR EASY PRINTING

Voters this year have rejected almost two-thirds of overrides

Reflects dislike for tax hikes amid downturn

By Matt Viser
Globe Staff / November 4, 2008
  • Email|
  • Print|
  • Single Page|
  • |
Text size +

Voters in Massachusetts cities and towns have rejected nearly two-thirds of property tax overrides so far this year, the greatest rate of failure in more than a decade. It is a reflection of residents' dislike for local property tax increases during an economic downturn and foretells potential danger for override requests on today's local election ballots.

"No one has an appetite for an override," said Lisa Pacheco, chairwoman of the Board of Selectmen in Freetown, where eight override efforts failed this year. "It's the economic times."

Of the 102 Proposition 2 1/2 override attempts this year from Otis to Orleans, only 38 have been approved, according to a Globe analysis of data compiled by the Department of Revenue. It is the worst rate of passage since 1996, when 32 percent of overrides were approved.

Proposition 2 1/2, approved in 1980, requires local officials to obtain voter approval when seeking property tax increases larger than 2.5 percent.

Town officials frequently put such questions to voters to pay for town services.

The concerns this year are heightened as communities try to gird themselves for further economic problems.

Governor Deval Patrick announced a plan last month to fill a $1.4 billion midyear budget gap without reducing local aid payments, but he and other state leaders have not ruled out cutting those payments if the economy gets worse. In addition, the budget scenarios are likely to get worse if a recession, which is likely, clamps down on home values, restricts business growth, and reduces corporate tax revenue - which all have an impact on state and local coffers.

Communities have already started cutting back by instituting hiring freezes, cutting library hours, and raising fees.

"There's no more tricks up my sleeve. We'll be cutting to the bone with further cuts," said Mayor James E. Harrington of Brockton, where voters today will signal whether they are willing to increase their property taxes - an initiative some city officials are already predicting will fail.

"I'm optimistic," Harrington said. "Although I know all the signs aren't good because of all that happened to the economy. People are paying more for fuel and heating oil. It's a lot to ask them to do."

If Brockton residents approve three overrides totaling $3.6 million, it would result in a $100 annual increase to the average tax bill. The Police Department would hire 10 patrolmen, the Fire Department would hire six firefighters, and the city's libraries, which are down to eight staffers, would return to full service. The schools would also get $2.25 million.

The city hasn't attempted an override since 1991, when a vote failed.

East Bridgewater, for the second time in a year, is looking for a $1.25 million tax increase to create a fund for capital projects.

A similar proposal failed last year.

"We're reaching a point where it becomes less effective to rely on funding municipal services through overrides," said Geoff Beckwith, executive director of the Massachusetts Municipal Association. "The overall passage rate is down and local cities and towns are facing greater fiscal pressure."

In Freetown, a Southeastern Massachusetts community where eight overrides failed in July, even a request for $5,000 for the Board of Assessors was rejected. It would have added $3.48 to the average tax bill. Because the overrides, totaling $740,300, failed, the town reduced hours at the library and town hall, laid off eight people at the schools and three police officers, and reduced training at the Fire Department.

"Every household is cutting back, and that's what we hear from residents in town: You need to cut back," Pacheco said.

Sudbury, which hadn't rejected an override since 1993, attempted two overrides in May, totaling $4.6 million. Both failed, by a nearly 2-to-1 ratio.

Yarmouth officials tried overrides in May, June, and September. All of them failed.

Property taxes, which vary widely and range from an average of about $700 to $14,500, go toward paying for all types of municipal services, from teacher salaries to trash pickup.

The challenge for the backers of overrides rises during an economic downturn, according to historical data. Not only are residents less willing to approve property tax increases, but real estate values decline and construction of new homes and businesses slows, which means less new revenue. Fewer residents are buying cars, which reduces the amount of money raised through the excise tax.

About 53 percent of local budget revenues comes from the property tax, a historic high, Beckwith said, and that has led some to call for local options to raise taxes on meals, hotels, or telephone companies. The governor filed legislation last year to give municipalities those options, but it failed in the Legislature.

Despite the economic downturn, in several communities voters continue to approve overrides.

Wayland approved a $1.9 million override in April. Canton voters approved a $4.5 million override in May. And in Randolph, where voters for several years had rejected override requests, residents approved $6.1 million in overrides for the school, police, and fire departments.

The average override attempt this year was $495,600, the lowest since 2004, according to the Globe analysis.

The Globe examined figures that are voluntarily submitted each year to the Department of Revenue.

Matt Viser can be reached at maviser@globe.com.

  • Email
  • Email
  • Print
  • Print
  • Single page
  • Single page
  • Reprints
  • Reprints
  • Share
  • Share
  • Comment
  • Comment
 
  • Share on DiggShare on Digg
  • Tag with Del.icio.us Save this article
  • powered by Del.icio.us
Your Name Your e-mail address (for return address purposes) E-mail address of recipients (separate multiple addresses with commas) Name and both e-mail fields are required.
Message (optional)
Disclaimer: Boston.com does not share this information or keep it permanently, as it is for the sole purpose of sending this one time e-mail.