In Boston, no on Question 5

Voters are used to hearing cries of lament from municipal officials about constraints on local budgets (which are largely driven by high personnel costs that are within the municipality’s control, but that’s a discussion for another day).

Given that municipal officials feel so strapped, why wouldn’t they support a new source of revenue? That explains why Question 5 will appear on ballots in Boston on Nov. 8.

Adoption of the Community Preservation Act would create a dedicated fund in Boston for affordable housing, the preservation of open space and rehabilitation of historic properties. It is a tax increase, albeit a small one, that in many communities has become merely a slush fund for pet projects. We urge voters in Boston to vote NO on Question 5.

The average property owner in Boston would pay about $28 more a year. Low-income property owners would be exempt. Supporters note that burden of the 1 percent surcharge on property taxes would fall most heavily on large commercial property owners, as if that doesn’t just add to the already high cost of doing business in Boston.

And while the Walsh administration has emphasized the need to finance affordable housing with revenue from the CPA (which would generate an estimated $16 million a year, more with a state match), we’ve seen other communities tie themselves in knots trying to make a war memorial or a bike path qualify. Meanwhile a new bureaucracy would have to be built for the sole purpose of administering the fund.

Mayor Marty Walsh and his team have done a fine job of building fiscally responsible budgets, managing to get by with the $3 billion the city operates on today. The CPA is a tax increase, and Bostonians should vote no.