Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Roman_Boston t1_it067xk wrote

Another tax scheme. Can’t they just stop with the taxes. I mean we are in a recession and have high inflation. Why raise taxes.

−5

legalpretzel t1_it08jey wrote

We’re talking $50/year on average for most homeowners which then allows the city to access additional state funds to improve our green spaces and provide other community benefits. Many other cities and town in MA have been accessing those funds for 20 years while Worcester has been twiddling its collective thumbs. Worcester redditors are constantly complaining that the city is backwards and small minded (and they’re not wrong bc the elderly voters have long determined the city’s priorities). The CPA is a perfect example of a way to improve Worcester that will likely fail if the elderly voters have their way.

6

Karen1968a t1_it8ddlh wrote

And my completely unscientific view of all the redditors on this page is that they rent and therefore think they can screw someone else with no impact. So I hope every landlord and every impacted commercial property adds a CPA surcharge to help spread the impact. 😀

2

Roman_Boston t1_it09vcw wrote

Does the city publicly publish its expenses and revenues? Do you know where the city spends money? If not why would you want more money to go their way?

Just a question, I’m fine either way you vote.

−2

barry_abides t1_it0xp4a wrote

FY22 Annual Budget has a breakdown of revenues and expenses: https://opendata.worcesterma.gov/documents/be84fb023e6c45c89000c7f6d281c263/explore

This is a state program that is partially funded by fees recorded at county registries of deeds. There is a pot of money used for matching funds that Worcester currently receives none of because we haven't adopted CPA. Other cities have seen a lot of benefits from the additional revenue (worth noting that CPA funds can't be used to pay for other standard city operating expenses, only new projects that fall under one of the specified categories).

2