The situation in Plainville regarding cuts in services and the recent electoral decision not to raise taxes in order to fund those services is a fine example of the real power and impact of a law many people abide by today do not even remember and that they understand even less – sentence 2 1/2.
This particular tax cut bill was passed in the early 1980s when property taxes got out of hand in local communities across Massachusetts. Before proposal 2 1/2, the mayor / city council or the city assembly in a municipality voted on a budget every year. The only limit they could spend was what the legislature would approve. If the city assembly voted to fund projects or departments through a large tax increase, it was done.
Although it was the people themselves who voted through the town council on these increases, it was declared that something had to be done to protect them from themselves.
Led by a group called Citizens for Limited Taxes, a proposal has been made to limit the total amount a city can collect through taxes (called a tax levy) by 2 1/2 percent per year plus any new builds or increases the previous year .
Some believe the 2 1/2 percent figure was the result of detailed study and research. But it was only a number that the petitioners believed was correct. Nowhere in their proposal was there a mechanism for adjusting the percentage over time in response to inflationary factors.
Today the people of Massachusetts seem to believe that the 2 1/2 percent figure was in the original constitution, and not just an arbitrary choice.
The question was answered and the legislature added an “override provision” that allowed municipalities to make exceptions to the limit for certain things. Hence the concept of “overwrite” was born that has hung over this area like a shroud of doom for 40 years.
Any attempt to raise the tax limit by more than 2 1/2 percent is viewed as an attack on the natural order of the universe. Overrides are not seen as inevitable adjustments, but as a means of covering up the supposedly gross excesses of communities.
The truth is, 2 1/2 percent for most years doesn’t cover the baseline increase in annual costs for cities and towns. As a result, municipalities have resorted to generating revenue from other sources such as new and increased fees and shifting the burden to usage fees and similar mechanisms.
And overwrites. Which leads to failure in most people’s minds. You might as well have called them “taxes of shame”. In this state, an attempt to overwrite is almost universally viewed as an admission of mismanagement or misconduct rather than a necessary correction.
Proposition 2 1/2 was not aimed at wasteful politicians who put off local property taxpayers. The law was aimed directly at citizens and taxpayers. Their power to decide on their own budgets at local legislative level has been abolished. It was a single solution to 351 separate and unique problems. But it has slowed the growth of property taxes.
Cities like Plainville are now too often focused on staying within artificial boundaries rather than responding to real needs.
And now you know why overrides aren’t called “growth adjustments.”
Bill Gouveia is a columnist and longtime Norton local official. Reach him at billinsinsidelook@gmail.com and follow him @Billinsidelook.