Vote 'yes' on small increase in CPA tax

By PETER JESSOP

Published on October 27, 2006

Most Amherst voters are aware of the various state and national offices and issues they will be voting for on Nov. 7. What many Amherst voters do not yet know is that there is a binding local ballot issue, Question No. 4, which asks voters if they will approve a modest half-percent increase in funding for the town's contribution to Community Preservation Act projects.

The CPA Committee supports voter approval of Question No. 4 because: 1) The CPAC has been receiving many more good proposals than we can possibly fund at the current 1 percent funding level; 2) CPA projects have been well dispersed geographically and generally well-received; 3) The town is likely to continue to receive 100 percent matching funds from the state for the foreseeable future; 4) State matching funds come from Registry of Deeds fees on property transfers, funds generated by Amherst property sales which will go elsewhere if we do not claim them.

If approved, Question No. 4 will raise about $100,000 in town tax revenue, which would likely be matched dollar for dollar by state funds, for a total of $200,000. The owner of a $200,000 condo would pay an additional $7.85 in tax this year; the owner of a $330,000 home would pay an added $18.06; and the owners of a 56-unit apartment complex valued at $2.057 million would be assessed a 23-cent per month per unit property tax increase fee.

A special Registry of Deeds fee increase funds the state's matching contributions. The monies collected are required to be placed in a special fund, not under legislative control, to be disbursed by the state treasurer in accordance with the Act.

One of the roles of the committee is to explain what the CPA is, and why Amherst is being asked to raise our CPA funding level from 1 percent to only 1.5 percent when some surrounding towns have adopted 3 percent CPA funding. Amherst accepted the CPA at the 1 percent level in 2001 by a vote of 2,276 to 979.

The 1 percent level was proposed to the voters because Amherst's property taxes are higher than its neighbors', the Amherst CPA vote was one of the first in the state, our 2001 budget outlook seemed difficult, and supporters felt it was important to establish a positive CPA track record of identifying needs and achieving results.

The following CPA exemptions were also approved by Amherst voters: 1) The first $100,00 of every parcel of residential property, whether owner-occupied or not; 2) All property tax reductions or exemptions already in place for non-profits, veterans, the blind, and elderly, etc., would apply to the CPA; 3) Any property occupied by an owner whose annual income, based on family size, would qualify them for low or moderate senior or low-income family housing.

Each year, 10 percent of a town's annual CPA fund must be set aside or spent for 1) affordable housing, 2) historic preservation, 3) open space, including farmland preservation. The remaining 70 percent is allocated for the three primary purposes plus certain recreation projects, according to recommendations by a nine-member committee appointed by the Select Board. Each proposed CPA expenditure requires approval by Town Meeting.

In total, we have been able to fund over $1.7 million in projects since the Act was passed by Amherst voters. Expenditures recommended by the committee have covered the spectrum of authorized activities. Some examples are: land purchases and development costs for affordable housing on Tamarack Drive and Main Street, study for housing trust fund feasibility, repair of the Strong House chimney, restoration of West Cemetery, interpretive publications for the Historic District, preservation and restoration of Town documents, purchase of APRs for farmland preservation, and development of athletic fields, among others. Amounts well below the allowed 5 percent were spent for administration.

Amherst's CPA process has worked well, been administered frugally, and funded important, geographically dispersed projects in a public, cooperative, and transparent manner, receiving 100 percent state matching funds. Voter approval of Ballot Question No. 4 will allow the town to access additional state matching funds for projects identified by the committee but not presently able to be funded.

Peter Jessop is chairman of the Community Preservation Act Committee.