blog@abn

Although some municipalities may get relief from increased state aid, Boston's residential property taxes have not been driven up by state aid cuts and won't be reduced by increased aid. Our property tax levy is set by simply increasing the previous year's levy as allowed by Propostion 2 1/2, a maximum of 2.5% annually (plus new growth). We always tax to the max. More state aid, lottery money, local-option taxes -- none of these would have any effect on property taxes; they'd just provide additional money for the City to spend.

Similarly, increasing services cannot further raise our property taxes -- although the Mayor likes to threaten higher taxes to silence citizens' demands -- and slashing services will not decrease our taxes.

Boston's growing residential tax burden is driven by several factors:

1) The assessment method for large commercial properties doesn't capture their full and fair market value as required by law, steadily running at about 50% of market value, while housing assessments have risen from 70-80% to 92%-95% of market value.

2) The tax formula protects commercial owners by putting a ceiling on the their overall tax burden (at most, 70% of the levy), but puts residents at risk by setting only a floor on their tax burden (at least, 30% of the levy).

This system forces residents' tax rates up to pay any shortfall in commercial taxes that result when commercial assessments decrease. But resident don't enjoy the same benefit if housing assessments fall; commercial owners are protected by their ceiling, and once that's reached, residential rates are raised to yield the remaining portion of the levy.

3) Over half the city's land is tax-exempt. The value of exempt institutions' property totals about $12 billion, almost half of that of the taxable commercial property sector, and institutional expansion is escalating, taking taxable land off the tax rolls (but leaving the previous value in the levy). They pay only $10 million a year instead of the $90 million they should pay in PILOT, using the rule-of-thumb of 25% of normal taxes.

4) The City gives huge tax breaks to developers based on false "blight" certifications by the Boston Redevelopment Authority, costing us perhaps $100 million in lost taxes annually. These breaks last for decades, long past any possible justification for assisting development, and are even transferred to new buyers, to no purpose at all.

5) The City doesn't tax the BRA's vast property empire, worth, I estimate, over $2 billion ($60 million in taxes lost).

As to Mayor Thomas Menino's quest for local-options taxes: a meals tax might generate $16 million a year; if he thinks we need more money, he could gain far more by ceasing to give away, at no charge, hundreds of millions of dolllars worth of City property to the BRA (e.g., City Hall Plaza, worth $400 million), and take back what he's given.

We won't be having monthly meetings this month and for the near future. Instead, we will be bringing our Show Me The Money presentation to the neighborhoods, and training community residents in giving the show to their neighbors. As we go along, the Show will add material from community comments.

We will post the SMTM slides on the website after testing with a presentation or two.

The first is tomorrow night 7:00 pm, Tubman House/United South End Settlement, at 566 Columbus Ave (near Mass Ave). Please come if you can.

There are three general issues addressed by the presentation that have to do with where our money comes from and goes, and how our development is de-controlled at our expense. We will focus on the BRA, the property tax structure, and the budget.

We will present some ideas for remedial action on all three, and we want to add suggestions from YOU as we go along.

You can also join the Alliance of Boston Neighborhoods at the presentations.

Mayor Menino's at it again. He's going to "enliven" the far-distant waterfront with a government office building, and leave City Hall Plaza, conveniently located in the center of the transit system, to the good judgment of the BRA and its eager squadrons of office- and luxury-condo-tower developers.

What is this about, really? Well, guess who owns City Hall Plaza? The City, you say? Think again. It's the BRA. Yes, the BRA took it by eminent domain -- AGAIN -- in 1996, this time from YOU. And the Mayor waived compensation, so the BRA got it for free. Now, whatever it's sold or leased for -- the BRA gets all that money.

And -- how convenient! -- the BRA happens to be the development regulatory agency of the city, so they'll make sure that land is made as valuable as possible -- by permitting the biggest possible development.

The BRA happens also to have a Joint-Venture Agreement with the so-called Trust for City Hall Plaza -- a group of developers -- to build a hotel and garage on the Plaza. They always intended to fill it up with buildings, and apparently, now's the time.

Estimates of the land value for what they are likely to build run at $400 million. FOUR HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS! While you have fund-raisers to buy school equipment and maintain your park.

Call the mayor and your city councilors and tell them you won't stand for this! Your services are being cut, your taxes are skyrocketing, and the mayor is giving away hundreds of millions of dollars --plus the profits from an over-sized development -- to the BRA.

The Globe printed a great piece today on our forthcoming campaign to expose and eliminate the BRA!

But before we take the "Show" on the road, we're going to add more about the property tax problem. We'll discuss why homeowners and renters are carrying the weight of sky-high office towers and burgeoning institutions on their backs, and what residents have to do to shift the crushing tax burden back to those who aren't paying their fair share.

Mayor Menino has invented a new tax break, called "I-Cubed". This newly enacted law is supposedly meant to encourage job creation, and so it's structured to encourage commercial development, rather than the housing we desperately need.

I-Cubed would expedite large commercial projects by relieving developers of the costs of building infrastructure for the site; the taxes generated by the project would pay for this infrastructure, which would then become public.

But remember -- developers get to exceed zoning in exchange for providing this infrastructure (streets, lights, landscaping, transit, etc.) as "community benefits." Under I-Cubed they won't actually have to pay for these benefits. Their (that is, OUR) state taxes will be diverted from the general fund to pay for those benefits through state bonds. And if they fail to generate enough state taxes, the City will have to pay off the bonds. We city property tax payers will assume the risk for that infrasturucture debt.

Guidelines are now being written to implement this law, which was rushed through after the legislative session ended, with lots of questions hanging. When the draft guidelines come out, we should demand that such "double subsidy" be disallowed. Either developers pay for their promised benefits privately from the extra profits of the over-sized project, or they give up the extra size. Otherwise, they are technically violating the zoning laws that let the trade height and density for benefits.

We should also protest two other provisions: the exemption of Boston projects from state and city competitive bidding requirements, and from laws requiring the strict screening for engineer qualifications on public works. These are two public protections the Big Dig has reminded us we can't do without.

I'll post an action alert when the draft guidelines are available for comment.

Once again, by the way, our City Councilors just sat by and did nothing while our budget, already running on fumes, was put at risk for what will probably be about $100 million in bonds for speculative development on the none-too-predictable Seaport. They knew about it -- I told Ways and Means Chair Rob Consalvo that it was proposed and suggested a Council hearing -- but no one was listening.

Mayor Menino recently announced that he wants a 1,000 foot tower built on a City-owned property, 115 Federal St., in the Financial District at Winthrop Square.

As usual, there's a little problem with zoning -- it's a 150' height area -- though the Boston Redevelopment Authority (BRA) has tricks to fix that.

But there's a much bigger problem of money. And the BRA' s trick for that will cost us big-time.

The disposition of this City land, currently occupied by a leased garage, should be voted on by the Council and put out for competitive bid by the Public Facilities Commission (now Dept. of Neighborhood Development), per the Boston City Charter:

The public facilities commission of the city of Boston may dispose of any or all of the off-street parking structures, including the real estate related thereto, owned in the city of Boston, as surplus property... only when transferred to the commission by a majority vote of the city council

.
Instead, once again, the City's land will be given away simply by a little deal between Mayor Menino and the BRA. Just like Hayward Place in 2001 (worth $23 million), City Hall Plaza in 1996 (worth well over $200 million), and countless other City properties, this one will be taken from us by the BRA in an abuse of its eminent domain powers, with Mayor Menino acting alone as The City -- and not a dime in payment: Menino not only authorizes the taking, but he waives compensation!

This is one of the ways he funds the BRA off-budget (i.e., without City Council and public review and accountability) and keeps the BRA powerful -- so it can protect his unlawful development deals ( like 1,000 foot towers) from lawsuits by subverting the zoning code with creative exemptions (like PDA, U-District, and 121A). Mayoral tricks and BRA tricks work together to take away our laws and our land.

How much are we going to lose this time? According to a June 20, 2006 Boston Herald story, "Tower Money to BRA?" by Scott Van Voorhis,

"The Winthrop Square garage could be worth anywhere from $100 million to as much as $300 million, depending on the ultimate size of the project, according to informal estimates by city real estate executives. That value, in turn, has been created in part by Menino’s vocal and public support for a massive skyrise complex there, executives said."

When the BRA takes the land, it keeps the sale or lease money. And remember: The BRA is not the same as the City! They have two separate budgets, and the BRA is legally accountable to no one.

The Mayor and the BRA have already begun making soothing promises that the money will go to good uses, as the Herald revealed:

"...a spokesman for Menino insisted that when the money is disbursed, the mayor will see that it goes to worthy civic causes. 'The revenues available will be unencumbered.' ”

They think that if they say certain magic words, like "affordable housing," they can silence criticism and gain allies. Don't be fooled; it's all going to support the BRA's burgeoning bureaucracy.

And in any case, it's not up to the BRA to decide where our money goes, nor to the Mayor's personal whims; we have an elaborate public budget process, and a City Council for which this is the main responsibility. When the Mayor says "unencumbered," he means free from this process.

The BRA has already put out a Request for Proposals (not bids), which are due November 13. The RFP says the BRA will own and convey the land free of City title, and the property will be leased, giving the BRA a hefty permanent income stream. If things go as usual, they'll begin the taking process around Thanksgiving with a 30-day notification to the Council, and finalize it around Christmas.

Why are our City Councilors sitting by and doing nothing? They can't hire a lawyer to fight the taking; they have to mobilize public opinion now before the 30-day clock starts. This means that all of us who hoped we could elect conscientious public servants to protect our welfare and go about our daily lives have to get up and do something.

Think about what you'd want the City to do with $200-$300 million dollars! Write, call, and e-mail the Mayor and all of the City Councilors, visit their offices, and if necessary hold rallies and vigils on City Hall Plaza (if the BRA lets you!) and demand that they do their jobs FOR YOU.

And next election, don't vote for any candidate that stood by and let us be robbed of over $200 million dollars.

Meanwhile, knowing the Mayor and the City Council, I think we'd better start protecting ourselves in other ways too. I believe the BRA exceeds its authority in taking City property, since that land is already available for public purposes; as far as I could find out, the BRA is the only urban renewal authority in America that takes City-owned land by eminent domain. Further, I believe the Mayor exceeds his authority in waiving compensation. I think there may be a few legal violations in this deal.

If there are any lawyers out there interested in looking into this, please contact me.