I don't know exactly what I think about the prospect of an override battle in Northampton, but this much is clear: whatever city officials have or have not done to contribute to Northampton's fiscal woes, the need for an override is first and foremost a symptom of a lack of leadership from Boston.
And while there's nothing new about a municipality asking its residents to support an override—since 1980, when Massachusetts voters approved Proposition 2 1/2, limiting property tax increases to no more than 2.5 percent annually, override initiatives have become commonplace across the state—this year is different. This year, cities and towns across the state have every right to feel let down by a governor who once bravely promised to ease the burden on local property tax payers.
As the Daily Hampshire Gazette reported last weekend, it's likely that Northampton voters will be asked to support an override this year—the city's seventh override since 1982, when Prop. 2 1/2 went into effect. The city, facing a staggering $6.1 million budget shortfall, has already been talking about the need for a general override for months. While Mayor Clare Higgins has yet to formally initiate the override process, she has made it abundantly clear that, even with aggressive belt-tightening, Northampton's budget will still be millions out of whack. The Gazette reports that Higgins told city councilors last week that the city will "still have a $2 million to $2.5 million gap" even if it is successful in renegotiating union contracts, cutting healthcare costs and trimming departmental budgets.
A spirited debate has already unfolded in letters to the editor in the daily papers and in local online forums; the debate will likely intensify throughout the summer and into the fall. Proponents will insist that Northampton must pass an override, the increased cost of which will pale, they'll say, beside the long-term cost of not passing it. Opponents will argue that, with better management in City Hall, Northampton's budget wouldn't be in such horrible shape. Proponents will minimize the impact the override will have on individual property tax payers—reminiscent of Gov. Deval Patrick's recent comparison of the average cost of his proposed 19-cents-per-gallon gas tax to a cup of large coffee per week—while opponents will tend to overestimate the amount of money city officials might save if they were more fiscally responsible.
Sadly, the debate over the budget shortfall and a general override—how did Northampton get into this mess and is an override the best solution?—is apt to leave the city deeply divided in the short run and just as vulnerable to budget troubles in the long run. Meanwhile, elected officials in Boston, spared the intensity of the political discord raging in cities and towns, will continue to ignore the causes of the problem.
Proposition 2 1/2 has been a problem for years. Though it may have been necessary back in the late 1970s and early 1980s to put a brake on property taxes, restraining local officials from merely increasing the tax levy every time their spending exceeded the available revenue, Prop. 2 1/2, like many reactionary laws from that era (three-strikes-you're-out legislation, anyone?) is more a gimmick than an effective tool. The percentage itself, 2.5, has long been a problem. Whenever inflation rises above 2.5 percent, as it has in 22 of the 28 years since Prop. 2 1/2 became law, a municipality's income declines in real terms. Under the law, municipalities have seen their incomes drop continually over nearly three decades as costs have increased.
As a consequence of the imbalance inherent in Prop. 2 1/2, municipalities have become increasingly dependent on state "local aid." In recent history, local aid has been cut repeatedly, largely to allow a 16-year run of Republican governors to cut income tax rates. Income tax revenue, meanwhile, grew more slowly than increased spending due to inflation, necessitating even more cuts.
With Prop. 2 1/2 and lower income tax rates in place, government spending has steadily declined in real terms. Patrick's campaign promise of property tax relief inspired hope that gimmicky tax policies might be abandoned for sensible, progressive policies that don't lead, town by town, to divisive, wasteful override battles. His failure to keep his promise is a setback for property tax payers and their communities and makes it unlikely that this year's override battle in Northampton will be the last.
