No new surcharges in Danvers

On Nov. 8 in Danvers, Question 5 will ask for your vote on the Community Preservation Act (CPA) with a so-called “surcharge,” a tax increase for special interests, on the property values of homeowners and businesses in town.

The CPA tax increase was crafted by the state Legislature, initially as a means of town governments to override Proposition 2 1/2’s restriction on real estate taxation. The legislation was sweetened with an annual distribution from the “CPA Trust Fund,” equal to 100 percent of local revenue raised by the communities adopting this measure. The 1 to 3 percent tax imposed by the adoption of the CPA was then matched by an increase in Registry recording fees (another tax on real estate transactions). By 2008 the matching funds were dropped to 67 percent and then fell (by its own projections) to 25 percent in 2011.

Today, communities are down to 20 percent matching funds, with pie-in-the-sky promises of state funding infusion of $10 million. The state is already in a deficit position and there are 11 cities and towns voting to jump on the bandwagon.

The proposed CPA tax increase is funded by the surcharge you are being asked to place on your property. If accepted, by approval of Question No. 5, you are being asked to increase your own real estate taxes to support the special interests.

We all dream of bigger and better things. Some cost too much for what they are. Our town managers, Wayne Marquis and now Steve Bartha, have been responsible in spending our taxpayers’ money, and we cannot abandon this practice. Wayne Marquis during his tenure rejected the CPA after consulting the selectmen. He, with the help of past selectmen, managed to fund all valid and worthwhile proposals and acquisitions within the available budget.

May I remind those who see a big windfall on this cash cow that this is no bargain? Here comes another local big-government idea based on another surcharge and the creation of another bureaucracy. The CPA surcharge is a tax, and this one’s sure to metastasize as government coffers grow smaller and community “expenses” grow larger. It’s also a clever way of circumventing Proposition 2 ½. Much like the heavy local real estate taxes we already pay, the CPA proposal is another tax at a time when most of us can least afford it. We already are taxed enough and we need to vote no on Question 5.

Current business and real estate market conditions are very fragile. There are foreclosures and short sales of existing real estate advertised daily. Our young families cannot afford the high prices and the elderly cannot afford the taxes to stay in their homes. Our current taxes are adding to their woes, and now we are asking for more taxes disguised as a surcharge.

We currently live within our means and the voters in Danvers defeated two 2 ½ overrides in 2000 and 2003. Our high taxes fund the necessary services that government provides and the Danvers High School building project has been funded and completed within our financial plan. We acquired open space, supported historic preservation and have the best playing fields and an extensive archival center and library on the North Shore.

The CPA has been endorsed by the Board of Selectmen (for extra money to spend), Finance Committee and Town Meeting, but now the taxpayers/voters will be heard on Nov. 8. The business community has been silent on this matter, but they will carry the bulk of the load for the surcharge planned.

The proposed CPA tax collections are slated for affordable housing, preserving historical buildings, open space and other special interests. Recently at the Town Meeting residents inquired if these tax receipts could be used for rehabilitation of private residences. When will the town government be able to live within its budget? We all have a limited ability to endure all the fee increases and proposed taxes.

Over the last 30 years, in government, I have not seen projects that deserve funding be rejected by Town Meeting. Proposed projects may have been scrutinized and then approved and funded if appropriate for the entire population. Special interest groups have special interests, but the objective is to serve the entire town and not a few special interest organizations who may have noble causes to enrich the community! These organizations are volunteers and have alternate funding sources that sometimes go begging.

We all would like to have unlimited funding to spend on special proposals. It is the duty and responsibility of the selectmen to determine whether a proposal is affordable and appropriate for our town. We do not need another bureaucracy established to spend this tax increase. We need a tax reduction and a more efficient government.

Mark Zuberek is the current co-host of “The Topics of the Town” on DCAT, a Town Meeting member for Precinct 7, and former chairman of the Danvers Board of Selectmen and the Finance Committee.