massachusetts

The wellbeing of communities across the Commonwealth relies on our capacity to work together through our government to continue building and supporting our public structures that provide quality education, public health, stable legal systems, safe recreation, clean water, and much more. We work through our government to protect these services when we elect our representatives, become civically engaged in our communities, and pay our taxes.

In a Globe article dated February 14th, Jennifer Fenn Lefferts reported how Concord is considering creative ways to reform its revenues to make its tax system more equitable. With an average property tax bill of $10,128, Concord has had trouble retaining lower-income and elderly residents and working farms.

The proposal calls for lowering the property tax and imposing a 2 percent tax on income. This means that each person would contribute a more equitable share of his or her income to the local community, making the overall local tax system more progressive.

Some other cities and states in the country, including New York City, allow the implementation of local income taxes. The Massachusetts Legislature would have to amend the state constitution to allow cities and towns in the state to implement and collect this new source of revenue.

It is interesting to note that Concord is considering a progressive local tax proposal at a time when some elected officials say there is no interest for more taxes. In addition to statewide revenue reforms, like the five previous ballot attempts to build a more progressive tax structure, maybe it is time to help communities like Concord create a tax system that sufficiently funds the needs, programs, and structures we all value and rely on in our own communities. Through these local initiatives we can demonstrate to our elected officials that our state as a whole needs real solutions to address our budget gap and the lack of resources needed to maintain and rebuild our public structures.

It’s a tough time to talk about taxes in Massachusetts.  The House Speaker has asserted his opposition to any tax increases to deal with the state budget shortfall and echoes of the anti-tax rhetoric of the recent Senate campaign still ring in the public mind.

And tax conversations are never easy.  As Charles Pierce lays out in his excellent piece in the Globe Magazine this weekend, Americans have a love-hate relationship with taxes:

“Quite simply, if you love a particular government service -- that your bridges are repaired, for example, or your emergency calls answered -- you ought to love the taxes that pay for it. That, however, is rarely the case.”

And our conflicted relationship with taxes is about more than money:

“Taxes have become the way we define ourselves as a political commonwealth, or a way of determining whether we still see ourselves as such at all.”

But a recent vote in Oregon shows that talking about taxes in a productive way is still possible.  On January 26th Oregon voters approved two tax increases that had been passed by the legislature and were being challenged at the ballot.  Along with painful budget cuts these two tax measures helped to address a severe state budget shortfall.