2011-03-03-AC-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

March 3, 2011 Ms. Manz noted that although the state match has fallen each year, it began with a 100% match, has yielded $6.4m to the Town over the last five -year period, and even at the most recent rate of 29% is not an insignificant amount by which the Town can leverage its tax dollars. She pointed out that reducing the CPA surcharge to 1 % would reduce the average household tax payment by $173 a year in 2013, which is quite modest, compared to the overall benefit to the Town. Ms. Manz also noted that the state legislature is considering a bill to guarantee a minimum state CPA match rate of 75 %. As for the impact of the CPA surcharge on the willingness of residents to support overrides, Ms. Manz noted that there is an exclusion for the first $100,000 of a home's valuation, as well as an exemption for certain seniors, that mitigate the impact of the CPA surcharge on those taxpayers least able to pay. She also pointed out that around $600k of the annual CPA revenue comes from the town's commercial taxpayers. In response to concerns that the CPA may divert funds from low- income towns to higher - income towns, Ms. Manz pointed out that the state match is derived entirely from registry fees, not direct taxes on taxpayers; that it is typically more well -to -do citizens who pay those registry fees; that the CPA was adopted by the state legislature to create an incentive for Towns to undertake projects that were deemed beneficial to the state as a whole; and that any town is free to adopt and get the benefits of the CPA. With respect to the history of debt exclusions and overrides since 2006, Ms. Manz noted that while two of four operating override questions on the same ballot as the original CPA proposal did not pass, no override questions have since been rejected. There was discussion regarding how reducing the surcharge might change the nature and scope of CPA - funded projects, limiting the total size of any debt -based projects and reducing the overall number of projects. Ms. Manz discussed the potential for the CPA to contribute to the funding of future Town capital projects, all of which would be a challenge without such funds, including: renovations of the fire station, police station and White House; the preservation of municipal records; the acquisition of open space; and recreation projects such as the restoration of the center fields. 2. Minutes. Minutes of February 16, 2011, and February 23, 2011, were approved by votes of 7 -0 -2 and 6 -0 -3 respectively. It was agreed that responsibility for reviewing initial draft of the minutes would be rotated. 3. Liaison Reports. Board of Selectmen (John Bartenstein and Susan McLeish): Mr. Bartenstein and Mr. Addelson reported briefly on a presentation made to the Selectmen on Tuesday about the proposed use of retained earnings in the water and sewer enterprise funds. Retained earnings as of July 1, 2010 stood at approximately $1.6m for the water fund and $1.5m for the sewer fund. The Town Manager has advised that it is prudent to maintain reserves of approximately $1 m in each fund. Although not yet reflected in the Brown Book, the motion under Article 5 at the Annual Town Meeting will include a proposed appropriation of the balance of the retained earnings over that amount to a -2-