NEWS RELEASE
Thursday, June 5, 2003
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Barbara Anderson - 508-384-0100
Overlay exclusion from Proposition 2½
Enough already with the overrides
Though CLT has generally not opposed the creation of overrides that depend upon a referendum vote, we are opposed to this because: enough is enough.
The Overlay issue is so unfamiliar and complicated that it is hard to explain to the media, and I am at least trying – unlike what will happen when supporters try to slip it by local voters.
Aside from the usual scare tactics on existing overrides, there are new trends in attempts to get voters to pass them. Local officials go back to the ballot immediately after losing, spending more scarce money for another election hoping to wear voters down.
In Uxbridge, four of the five selectmen are required to call a special town election for an override. Three of them are illegally calling a June 30 election, planning if it passes to ask the Legislature and the governor to approve the illegal election. People who plot such end-runs cannot be trusted with yet another override option.
As House Minority Leader Brad Jones said during debate on this amendment to the municipal package, cities and towns can seek an override for the amount of money in the overlay account, so this is unnecessary.
The Overlay exemption is different than other overrides for general spending or specific projects. It would exclude the amount set aside for abatements, making the argument that “the money goes back to taxpayers.” Well, yes; only if they are over-assessed, it does. In order to get more money to spend, a town would be tempted to over-assess more people, in order to build up an abatement history on which the exclusion is based. After costing and inconveniencing many taxpayers who have to appeal the over assessment, the town would have its slush fund, raised outside of the Prop 2½ levy limit. Then, according to this amendment, the slush fund could automatically increase by 2.5% every year.
If you do not understand this, call me and I will explain it further. Then imagine yourself a local reporter explaining it to your readers so they can make an informed decision on the new override.
At present, there are overrides for cash (general government expenditures), debt exclusions, equipment, open space and affordable housing. Enough already. We will ask the Senate to ignore this foolishness, or conference committee to drop it, and if necessary Governor Romney to send the package back with the Override language removed.
If all else fails, we will warn local voters: “This is a trick override. Always vote No on an Overlay Exclusion from Prop 2½.”
|