The Boston Globe is reporting that the bill passed in the House, Thursday, February 28 by a wide margin. To my knowledge there has been no mention in the local press of the bill, until today. Why this wasn’t news BEFORE the House vote is beyond me as the bill has been percolating in the House since last year.
The full text of both bills is included below and can be found at: http://www.mass.gov/legis/hbillsrch.htm. Signing onto the bill are local area representatives Peter Kocot and Ellen Story.
As Northampton Mayor Mary Clare Higgins is apparently preparing the community for a Proposition 2 1/2 override, next spring perhaps, something last defeated by a mere eight votes in 2004, the combination of a new Senior Center and this proposed tax exemption for some seniors might be enough to tip the vote in her favor this time. Clearly our politicians are working in tandem to raise revenues, even if the public is not fully aware of it.
The Eagle Tribune article was originally published February 7, 2008. Here is the link that was posted: http://www.eagletribune.com:80/puopinion/local_story_038063539.html.
An excerpt:
By Taylor Armerding
Staff writer
State Rep. Ruth Balser, D-Newton, sponsor of a bill that would let local communities exempt senior citizens from the impact of Proposition 2 1/2 overrides, says it is "a way to help elderly homeowners."
Don’t believe it. The bill, which may go before the House today, is just using senior citizens as cover. It is not about helping elderly homeowners. It is about making it easier for cities and towns to raise property taxes — coincidentally the very thing that Gov. Deval Patrick claimed would decrease if he was elected.
Of course some elderly homeowners need property tax relief. But the reality that Balser and others want to hide is that relief is already available — there are multiple ways for seniors to cut their property tax bills or to get help paying them.
Seniors with low incomes can qualify for abatements. Seniors who have suffered the "misfortune" of a vast increase in their property value can take out home equity loans or reverse mortgages to help them pay their property taxes without being forced out of their homes. While that would decrease the value of an asset to their heirs, it is not the responsibility of taxpayers to subsidize the inheritances of others.
Another reality that the so-called "advocates" of senior citizens try to hide is that while there are obviously poor seniors, they are, as an age group, better off financially than younger people. They have more discretionary income. Why is it that elders are the ones who buy the bulk of state Lottery tickets, and are the majority of those on the buses to Foxwoods and other casinos?
If anybody needs a tax break, it is younger homeowners — those working two jobs, with three or four kids and college costs looming, who are taking effective pay cuts every year because their health insurance and energy costs are spiking and who are struggling to put aside a few bucks for their own retirement.
HOUSE……. No. 4534
AN ACT TO CREATE AN EXEMPTION FOR LOW-INCOME SENIORS FROM PROPOSITION TWO AND ONE HALF OVERRIDES.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:
SECTION 1. Section 5 of chapter 59 of the General Laws, as appearing in the 2008 Official Edition, is hereby amended by adding the following clause: —
Fifty-second A, (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, any homeowner who meets the criteria described in subsection (b) shall receive an abatement of an amount equal to any increase in property taxes attributable to the provisions of paragraphs (g),(i ),(j) and (k) of section 21C.
(b) The criteria for eligibility for this abatement shall be as follows: The property for which the abatement is sought must be owned by a person 65 years of age or over and occupied by him as his domicile, or owned jointly with his spouse, either of whom is 65 years of age or over, and occupied as their domicile, or by a person who owns the same jointly or as a tenant in common with a person not his spouse and occupied by him as his domicile. No abatement shall be granted unless: (1) said owner had, in the preceding year, gross receipts from all sources not in excess of $60,000; provided, however, that in computing the gross receipts of an applicant under this clause, ordinary business expenses and losses may be deducted, but not personal or family expenses; and (2) the real estate tax payment exceeds 10% of the taxpayer’s gross receipts. Notwithstanding any provision of this section, or any other general or special law to the contrary, this abatement shall be available in addition to any other abatement which a homeowner may receive.
This clause shall take effect in any city or town upon its acceptance by such city or town for fiscal years commencing on or after July first, 2008, or for fiscal years commencing on or after such later July first as the city or town may elect; provided,
however, that, notwithstanding any provision of this section or any other general or special law to the contrary, this section may be revoked or suspended for the following fiscal year by the same manner by which it was originally adopted.
ORIGINAL HOUSE……. No. 2840
By Ms. Balser of Newton, petition of Ruth B. Balser and others for legislation to exempt certain elderly persons from real estate tax increases resulting from proposition two and one-half overrides. Revenue.
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Ruth B. Balser, John H. Rogers, Ellen Story, John P. Fresolo, Pamela P. Resor, Cynthia S. Creem, Jennifer L. Flanagan, Brian A. Joyce, Christine E. Canavan, Susan C. Fargo, Robert K. Coughlin
PETITION OF:
James B. Eldridge, Mark C. Montigny, Bruce J. Ayers, James M. Murphy, Barbara A. L’Italien, Louis L. Kafka, William Smitty Pignatelli, Peter V. Kocot, Steven J. D’Amico, Kay Khan, Jennifer M. Callahan
In the Year Two Thousand and Seven.
AN ACT TO CREATE AN EXEMPTION FOR LOW INCOME SENIORS FROM PROPOSITION TWO AND ONE-HALF OVERRIDES.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:
SECTION 1. Subsection (g) of Section 21C of Chapter 59, as appearing in the 2004 Official Edition, is hereby amended by inserting at the end thereof the following paragraph: The local appropriating authority may vote to adopt the following exemption to the question: For residential property whose owner is 65 years of age or older and who occupies said property as his principal residence and whose real estate tax payment exceeds ten per cent of the taxpayers total income, provided however, that the taxpayer’s total income together with the total income of taxpayer’s spouse shall not exceed $60,000. For the purposes of this paragraph “residence” and “taxpayer’s total income” shall have the same meaning as used in paragraph (k) of Section six of Chapter 62. Any person qualifying for the exemption shall apply for the same on or before July 1st of the fiscal year in question on a form provided by the assessors. In determining eligibility for an exemption the assessors shall review the income tax forms for the preceding year.
SECTION 2. Subsection (h) of said section, as so appearing, is hereby amended by adding the following paragraph: The local appropriating authority may vote to adopt the following exemption to the question: For residential property whose owner is 65 years of age or older and who occupies said property as his principal residence and whose real estate tax payment exceeds ten per cent of the taxpayers total income, provided however, that the taxpayer’s total income together with the total income of taxpayer’s spouse shall not exceed $60,000. For the purposes of this paragraph “residence” and “taxpayer’s total income” shall have the same meaning as used in paragraph (k) of Section six of Chapter 62. Any person qualifying for the exemption shall apply for the same on or before July 1st of the fiscal year in question on a form provided by the assessors. In determining eligibility for an exemption the assessors shall review the income tax forms for the preceding year.
SECTION 3. Subsection (i ) of said section, as so appearing, is hereby amended by adding the following paragraph:— The local appropriating authority may vote to adopt the following exemption to the question:— For residential property whose owner is 65 years of age or older and who occupies said property as his principal residence and whose real estate tax payment exceeds ten per cent of the taxpayers total income, provided however, that the taxpayer’s total income together with the total income of taxpayer’s spouse shall not exceed $60,000. For the purposes of this paragraph “residence” and “taxpayer’s total income” shall have the same meaning as used in paragraph (k) of Section six of Chapter 62. Any person qualifying for the exemption shall apply for the same on or before July 1st of the fiscal year in question on a form provided by the assessors. In determining eligibility for an exemption the assessors shall review the income tax forms for the preceding year.
SECTION 4. Subsection (j) of said section, as so appearing, is hereby amended by adding the following paragraph: The local appropriating authority may vote to adopt the following exemption to the question: For residential property whose owner is 65 years of age or older and who occupies said property as his principal residence and whose real estate tax payment exceeds ten per cent of the taxpayers total income, provided however, that the taxpayer’s total income together with the total income of taxpayer’s spouse shall not exceed $60,000.
For the purposes of this paragraph “residence” and “taxpayer’s total income” shall have the same meaning as used in paragraph (k) of Section six of Chapter 62. Any person qualifying for the exemption shall apply for the same on or before July 1st of the fiscal year in question on a form provided by the assessors. In determining eligibility for an exemption the assessors shall review the income tax forms for the preceding year.
SECTION 5. Subsection (k) of said section, as so appearing, is hereby amended by adding the following paragraph:— The local appropriating authority may vote to adopt the following exemption to the question:—
For residential property whose owner is 65 years of age or older and who occupies said property as his principal residence and whose real estate tax payment exceeds ten per cent of the taxpayers total income, provided however, that the taxpayer’s total income together with the total income of taxpayer’s spouse shall not exceed $60,000. For the purposes of this paragraph “residence” and “taxpayer’s total income” shall have the same meaning as used in paragraph (k) of Section six of Chapter 62.
Any person qualifying for the exemption shall apply for the same on or before July 1st of the fiscal year in question on a form provided by the assessors. In determining eligibility for an exemption the assessors shall review the income tax forms for the preceding year.
