Hey, there! Log in / Register

Bostonians who think their next property-tax bills seem ludicrous can thank Nick Collins; but some city councilors want to hold Wu administration to account

Boston was hoping to send out property-tax bills this month with a bit of a break for homeowners. Only problem: state Sen. Nick Collins, who represents South Boston and Dorchester, managed to get any discussion of a bill to let the city temporarily set a higher rate on commercial property until at least Thursday.

At least five councilors - Ed Flynn, Erin Murphy, John FitzGerald, Liz Breadon and Julia Mejia - are signalling they are ready to give up and start assigning blame, through a request on tomorrow's agenda that a Council committee start an audit of how City Hall screwed up with "the failed property-tax reclassification home rule petition," an event they say the Wu administration failed to prepare for. They say they also want answers on what the administration will do now.

The council is also slated to vote tomorrow on a measure to re-apply a 35% break on whatever residential tax rate the city sets, for people who live in their own homes, for which the city does not need state approval.

Collins held up any Senate action on the proposal yesterday because he has suddenly become deeply concerned about Boston municipal finances, in a way he didn't seem to be during the several months that Boston city officials and local business groups were hashing out a deal on the issue. Maybe he was too busy fuming about people from East Boston daring to open bars in Andrew Square.

The reason it matters: State law lets cities set different tax rates for residential and commercial properties - up to a particular limit. The city has proposed a three-year plan that would let it set commercial rates a bit higher than it normally could because otherwise, homeowners will have to make up an anticipated drop in tax revenue from downtown office towers as they get lower assessments because their worth has dropped due to people continuing to work at home even as the pandemic has waned.

Under the proposal, the city would be allowed to set a commercial tax rate at 181.5% of the residential tax rate next year starting with bills going out this month, compared to the normal 175%. The rate would then decrease back to 175% over the following two years - with $15 million set aside in each three years to help small businesses, with less than 50 employees and $5 million in revenue, along with an increase in their exemptions for "personal property" - such as tables and chairs.

City officials say the decrease in downtown property values has been steep enough that owners of office towers could still see decreases in their tax bills, just not as much as they will if Collins succeeds in killing the bill. At the same time, the measure would mean the city's residential property owners could still see increases in their taxes, but not as much as if Collins gets his way.

When the City Council formally approved the request to the legislature for the change last month, only Collins's fellow South Boston resident, Ed Flynn, voted against it.

At the time, Flynn also raised concerns about municipal finances, saying city officials knew the collapse of downtown property values was happening months ago and should have started cutting expenses back then - except for police, which he feels should get more money to hire more officers.

Also tomorrow, the council will consider a request for a hearing on how to diversify city revenue, which has become increasingly reliant on property taxes over the past two decades. However, any proposals would not come in time to ease tax bills going out this month.


Ad:


Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

Gee, I wonder what kind of effect a residential tax hike during Wu's term would have on Ed's upcoming campaign for mayor.

up
61

Naked policial scheming.

up
28

And Nick Collins as his accomplice. It is so clear and yet they did it anyway. Not that it will matter. Wu will still win, but they have to give us some pain in the meantime - thanks you jerks.

up
46

You mean some taxpayers didn't want to foot the bill for somethings you think you want but they don't?

Sorry that democracy smacked you around there.

Go have a Go Fund Me for a bike lane or one to pay for the giveaway for some millionaires to make even more money off of White Stadium while screwing over school kids.

up
27

If you are worried about the cost of bike lanes wait until you find out how much we spend on car infrastructure. To blow your mind even further look up the throughput of each kind of infrastructure.

Bike lanes cost less and move more people. They are a way to deal with budget crunches in part driven by autocentric infrastructure investments coming due. I thought you were concerned about cutting budgets? Bike lanes allow just that. Something tells me this is about something else for you.

up
26

And how about the tens of millions in welfare Boston drivers get in the form of free parking? The city would never have to worry about raising taxes if they stopped giving millions in handouts to that one group.

up
22

Blah blah blah blah.

Blah blah blah blah.

Blah blah blah blah.

Sorry, I was just trying to communicate with you the way you do here.

If I was Mayor you alone would not be allowed to purchase anything that came into the city on a truck or other vehicle other than a bike. I mean, you have to stay true to your convictions, right?

Did your Mommy and Daddy's monthly Venmo payment so you could play big city boy come in yet?

up
10

IMAGE(https://media1.tenor.com/m/8parvpeqH3EAAAAC/monty-python-im-invincible.gif)

up
16

God forbid!

Local homeowners or small business owners that don't live in Boston?

up
27

Whenever a sentence starts with Flynn and Murphy's names, you know that sentence is going to take you someplace stupid.

up
27

We don't deserve a break with the budget providing us Boston residents so much.

Big news would be finding or discovering Nick Collin’s doing anything remotely productive.

up
41

Anons learning how to punctuate a proper name correctly.

up
11

Destroyed by a punctuation commando!

up
20

Nice one.

The increases cover an entire fiscal year. However, the fiscal year started on July 1. That means that any increase needs to be made up over the final two quarters of the fiscal year. Thus, the amount of the increase for an individual taxpayer is doubled for quarter 3 and quarter 4. People are going to be outraged - and a few people may find the bills unaffordable when these increases hit all at once. Even if the state eventually grants the 181.5% classification, that's not going to be a huge relief for taxpayers.

There will be substantial gnashing of teeth and rending of garments come the first week of January.

Or. This may sound crazy, but hear me out.... Wu actually cut some spending. May sound crazy. But if you spend less, you won't have to tax more.

I know, I know. It sounds crazy, but that's how math works in the realy world.

up
27

which is bloated staffing and inflated payroll

up
27

Where are the cuts in the city budget? Instead of cutting, the mayor is looking to increase city spending by 8%. The mayor has added around 400 employees since she came into office. I wonder why this is happening. If she saw the problem of revenue shortfall coming, why were people added to the city payroll?
We have a school system that has declining enrollment, along with excess capacity. School buses that are often out of schedule and less than full. This is just the school department. I wonder how many assistant deputies to the deputy director sinecures are on the many commissions and other agencies buried in city hall? I know I'll hear from Mayor Wu's acolytes that cuts should be made in police, fire, EMS and other essential services. This is a standard threat we hear anytime a fiscal crisis approaches. Instead, there are no cuts anywhere.
The upcoming tax increases will force me and many others to make choices to do without something in order to pay the city their tribute. There's something wrong with that.
The opinion oligarchy on UHub is fixated on 'Evil' Ed Flynn and now his accomplice "Nefarious' Nick Collins. These gentlemen are pointing out something that is going unaddressed. Nobody is allowed to criticize Mayor Wu and her policies. She's wrong on this, but it doesn't matter. Our taxes are going up and we will all pay up to feed the beast.
Have a splendid day one and all!

up
93

There have been others in legislature with objections, but Nick is from the city he shouldn't being doing to this to us. This is politics as played in most major cities. Wu would do the same thing if the tables were turned. In New York they are planning for or at least trying to be aware potential Federal monies being cut. So stay tuned. If the thing goes through it may turn off businesses and that brings more issues. Maybe Tania Fernandes Anderson could go up the Hill to testify in support of Wu Bill. She needs to get in practice testifying, wonder who got letters from Feds at City Hall....

Budget cuts sound reasonable but they actually cost the city more money in the long run. Running public services well requires steady budgets and continued funding not constantly undermining them. Look at the T the budget cuts under baker have only created a bigger hole we need to dig out of.

up
18

Wu did forsee this and had a solution in the works. She's been working with stakeholders like local business leaders for months. Collins is the one who ignored the problem until the last minute and then threw a spanner in the works, exactly at the best time to be disruptive.

up
36

Where are the cuts?

Wu's answer from the start was to "share the burden".

All Nick Collins did was remind the mayor that before you ask for more, pare a little off what you have now.

up
44

That if the Mayor thinks spending cuts should be off the table, she should at least make the case why the effective bump in residential taxes is money well spent and important.

up
17

Only after begrudgingly removing her head from the sand! Essentially, she and her administration trashed the messenger (Boston Policy Institute's Greg Maynard) and then did an about face and accepted the facts that they had previously ignored regarding the revenue picture. Jon Keller summed it up pretty succinctly the other day...

'The tortured journey of Wu’s home-rule petition may be a sneak preview of coming attractions. Last winter, an independent analyst issued a report documenting the looming collapse of the commercial tax-revenue base that fed the city’s decades-long boom. The culprit was the pandemic-era exodus of downtown office workers now working from home, and Boston’s disproportionate reliance on commercial over residential revenue was a longstanding habit Wu inherited.

But despite being held blameless by the report, City Hall went on the attack, smearing the study as “disinformation,” as if it were the product of a Russian troll farm. When other analysts backed up the findings, the administration slid into a miasma of spin and reactionary politics, rejecting a range of reasonable solutions (including the kind of budget cuts the late Tom Menino employed before raising commercial rates in the early 2000s) and casting honest efforts to avoid an investment exodus as racially-tinged assaults on frail Boston seniors.'

up
21

There was a very reasonable part of the solution to this looming issue that came and passed about a year ago when the Mayor came up with her BPS captital plan and dialed it back radically - please take a look at how much the city pays for it's schools - this should be getting much more publicity than it does.

Schools are a significant part of the Boston city budget, making up over 40% of the city's budget as a whole:
Boston Public Schools (BPS) budget
The BPS budget is a major part of the city's budget, and the city has made significant investments in the BPS in recent years:
FY23 budget: The FY23 BPS budget was $1.33 billion, which was a record amount and a $40 million increase from the previous year. The budget focused on equitable recovery for students and families.
FY25 budget: The FY25 BPS budget is $1.53 billion, which is another significant increase from previous years. The budget aims to make the district high-performing and inclusive for all students.
Capital Plan: The FY25-29 Capital Plan includes $4.7 billion for school improvements, as well as other public spaces like libraries, parks, and community

BPS enrollment continues to decline and the cost continues to increase, so what do we do? And more families are likely to move out of Boston due to increased taxes, which seems kind of ironic.

We need to close and merge 10-20% of BPS schools.

up
36

Just be ready for the perennial comments about how there should be a school in every neighborhood and no busing.

Currently BPS has 2-3 schools for each level per neighborhood. My neighborhood has 3 or 4....we could and should reduce to 1-2. School Quality would likely improve since parential engagement would improve since parents couldn't simply move their kids to an empty seat at a different school nearby but they would do as parents in the suburbs do and join other parents and advocate for change.

The City needs to cut expenses and services rather than increase taxes. Bike lanes, bus lanes and traffic patterns changes are costing the City millions of dollars. Wu and the Democratic freebies are now proving nothing is free. Free passes to museums, free MBTA bus rides are not free. Housing and policing illegals are costing more millions.

up
22

There’s an old Jewish joke:

The Czar is killed and the local Cossack brings Rabinovich into for questioning. “I assume you know who is responsible!”

Rabinovich responds “I wish I knew, but I do know that, as usual, they’ll blame the Jews and the chimneysweeps.”

The cossack is befuddled and asks “why the chimneysweeps?”

Rabinovich responds “why the Jews?”

So here, whatever the issue is, I blame the bike lanes and the chimneysweeps.

Anons: why the chinneysweeps?

Etc

up
27

Data needed.

Blaming everyone else for her inability to work with others on a reasonable compromise. We pay her for results, not the assignation of fault. This iceberg has been visible for over a year. Yet here we are, close to a head on strike.

up
30

CommonWealth Beacon details Collins's time in the spotlight, ends with a quote from the esteemed senator from Westport:

It’s nice to be an observer of drama, rather than up to my eyeballs in it, as I usually am. We’ll let the Boston folks deal with the Boston issues.