Vanessa Alvarado: What Does She Bring to the Table?

The upcoming town election on April 3, 2018, seems to have two issues that will be the focus in choosing who to elect to the Board of Selectmen: The Proposition 2 ½ override and a split tax rate.

The Proposition 2 ½ override has been a hot-button issue in Reading over the last couple of years, whether it should be passed and how much it should amount to. The reason Reading has not had a Proposition 2 ½ override since 2003 is because when on the ballot in 2017, the people of Reading resoundingly voted “no”. Yet again, the efforts to get a Proposition 2 ½ override passed this year are very much alive. On January 30, 2018, the Board of Selectmen voted unanimously to pass a Proposition 2 ½ override, that will now be up to the people of Reading to decide on April 3. My question is, what does Vanessa Alvarado, who is a candidate for the Board of Selectmen, propose to do differently regarding the Proposition 2 ½ override than John Arena, the current Chairman of Board and incumbent for the Board of Selectmen? Chairman Arena openly supports the Proposition 2 ½ override, he goes into far more detail on his website as to what the Proposition 2 ½ override entails and why he supports it than Ms. Alvarado does. In fact, the Proposition 2 ½ override is hardly mentioned on her website, I am only aware of her support due to a Reading Patch article quoting her from the January 30 Board meeting where they passed the Proposition 2 ½ override unanimously, “you have a very special opportunity tonight” Ms. Alvarado said referring to the selectmen voting on an override. Since all five current Selectmen support the Proposition 2 ½ override, I do not understand what she intends to do differently than Chairman Arena in implementing the Proposition 2 ½ override should it pass.

For those who are unaware, a split tax rate in Reading would be a decrease in the residential real estate tax rate, and an increase in the commercial real estate tax rate, this does not increase the total amount of tax revenue, it simply shifts a much larger burden onto businesses while giving minuscule savings to home owners. The current tax rate in Reading is $13.87 for residential property and $13.92 for commercial property. On Ms. Alvarado’s website she states that she, “would pursue a modest split tax rate of $13.87/$15.25”. There is just one issue with her proposal: it is not allowed under State Law. Ms. Alvarado has proposed increasing the commercial rate without decreasing the residential rate-that is not a tax shift. To have a tax shift, no matter how it is allocated, the town will not receive any additional revenue while our local businesses would suffer a staggering tax burden which will cause them to increase prices. To justify her support for a tax shift, Ms. Alvarado states on her website, “commercial property owners would be hard pressed to find a comparable neighboring town with such a low rate. Even with a split rate, Reading would still be lower than many others”. Perhaps Ms. Alvarado can explain to the business community and real estate owners why they would want to suffer increased real estate taxes with no benefit. Will the residents of Reading enjoy paying more for their goods and services to compensate for the increased tax expense? If the tax burden in Reading becomes too high for commercial property, business owners may close their doors instead. How will Reading look with more empty storefronts?

Sure, Ms. Alvarado says some nice things like, “I would be a voice of trust for residents to openly talk about their concerns” and that she, “will continue to emphasize the importance of community outreach and transparency”, but when it comes down to the nuts and bolts, what does she bring to the table? It seems that she would support the Proposition 2 ½ override, which already has unanimous support from the Board of Selectmen, which includes the incumbent John Arena, and she supports a change in real estate tax assessment that cannot be done, which would squeeze Reading’s already small commercial base.

By,

Alec D. Giacalone, voting Reading resident