We wanted to share with you the Concerned Watertown Homeowners Association position statement on the Community Preservation Act (CPA) initiative. Let’s all try and remember-this is a TAX. We have heard from many about door knocking campaigns to obtain the required signatures to put the question on the ballot in November. Please find our reasons for opposing the CPA Tax.
Reasons to Reject the Community Preservation Act (CPA):
1 – The School Committee reported that we are out of classroom space in our schools, and that means we have a high probability of having to raise taxes to meet that NEED. A new high school and sufficient space in our elementary schools is a much higher priority than the CPA TAX.
2 – It is irresponsible to tax for WANTS, when we do not have enough money to fund our NEEDS. Many of us are already challenged to pay for our family’s needs. WE DO NOT NEED ANOTHER TAX!
3 – In 2005 Watertown Residents and Taxpayers were told the CPA tax would be matched at 100% by the State of Massachusetts which is no longer true. Now they are guessing available matching funds to be only 25%. However, with state tax revenues below forecasted collection amounts even that guess is questionable, at best.
4 – In 2005 we were told tenants would not be affected. That statement was untrue then, and is still untrue today. Tax escalation clauses are included in many leases, meaning those with leases get an automatic increase in their rents.
5 – The CPA tax commitment to Watertown Taxpayers is for a minimum of 5 years, and will be extended if loans are taken out. Therefore, the 5 year commitment is misleading. Once we sign up for the CPA TAX we are committed whether it works in or best interests or not. Consider how much matching funds have dropped in the last ten years. There are no guarantees of what the matching funds will be in the future.
6 – The Residents of Watertown said “NO” TO THE CPA TAX 10 years ago, but CPA proponents are back again trying to take your hard earned dollars for their WANTS
7 – The cost to live in Watertown is high enough, we do not need to increase it for homeowners and/or tenants.
8 – Open space, parks, and recreation areas should (and are) funded by our real estate taxes. It also begs the question, “What open space?”
9 – Raising property taxes makes housing even more unaffordable for many. Doesn’t this fly in the face of all the efforts we have made to improve affordable housing in Watertown? And how do our politicians who are proponents of affordable housing explain how raising taxes makes Watertown more affordable?
Stay tuned and thank you for your support!