Laserfiche WebLink
Breadcrumb Navigation:
January 5, 2006 <br />repeal or a reduction in the surcharge, Town Meeting must vote to put it <br />on the ballot for the next regular election and the Town must vote to <br /> <br />approve the repeal/reduction. <br /> <br />d. There are no penalties built into the State statute governing CPA. <br /> <br />e. CPA committees use DOR guidelines in selecting projects. <br /> <br />f. (J. Bartenstein) Ten Lexington taxpayers can bring a court action to <br />challenge any expenditure not in compliance with the law. <br /> <br />g. October 2007 State matching funds can be appropriated in the April 2007 <br />Town Meeting. <br /> <br />h. If it is passed this March, we think CPA billing is expected to appear in <br />the first tax bill of the fiscal year 2007 (due August 1, 2006). M. Young <br />agreed to verify this. <br /> <br />i. Borrowing may only be done against locally collected dollars or dollars <br />previously collected from the State. That is, the Town cannot use State <br />matching funds for service of debt issued previously for a project that <br />hadn’t first been approved by Town Meeting as a CPA project. <br /> <br />j. The 3% surcharge is a surtax, i.e., it is assessed each year as a percentage <br />of the current tax levy after exemptions. <br /> <br />k. This past fall Waltham, Weymouth and Northampton were added to the <br />list of 100 cities and towns that have already approved CPA (see <br />presentation for list). Concord passed it in November, but was able to push <br />it back to be effective in July 2005. <br /> <br />l. The presentation shows percentage match assuming 12 cities/towns are <br />added each year. If there are only 10, the percentages are 62% and 44% <br />respectively after 2 years at 100% in both cases. <br /> <br />m. J. Bartenstein pointed out that the revenue stream that generates the State <br />matching funds could dwindle if the housing market cools off or possibly <br />for other reasons. Such a change is not included in the extrapolations of <br />the presentation. <br /> <br />n. Acton passed a $6.4M capital override and operating overrides for $3M <br />and $3.8M after passing CPA. Wellesley passed a $2.9M operating <br />override, failed a $38M debt exclusion, passed a pared-down $26M debt <br />exclusion, and passed the lower tier of a two-tier operating override for <br />$2.6M. (The upper tier was $3.8M.) <br /> <br /> 2 <br /> <br />