HOLYOKE – The Charter and Rules Committee met on Jan. 9 to discuss a proposed ballot question to lower Holyoke’s Community Preservation Act (CPA)surcharge, which prompted much discussion among the committee.

Filed by Ward 5 Councilor Linda Vacon, the first related item looked to have the city solicitor draft a ballot question for the next eligible election for voters to decide if the CPA tax should be reduced from 1.5 percent to .5 percent in light of current financial hardships on taxpayers.

Vacon cited home values and property tax increases as an example of current financial hardships taxpayers face. An example cited from the item was that homeowners with properties valued at $236,000 or more can expect to pay $200 more in 2023. According to one of the filed orders, the increase will be “due to repeated inability to achieve seven votes of the City Council for lower taxes for homeowners.”

The item continues and states, “This increase is taking place along with significant increases in sewer, gas, electricity, food and heating prices. Voters should have the right to decide the rate. City Council initiated the CPA tax here originally, so it needs to vote to place it on the ballot again for voters to decide.”

The third and final order related to the topic and discussion from the meeting looked to have the city solicitor draft a ballot question to revoke the CPA tax and that it be placed on the next eligible election ballot for the voters to decide if they want to keep the CPA tax after five years.

Back in 2016, 55 percent of voters adopted the tax during that year’s election, including the surcharge stipulation. A local committee reviews all CPA proposals and forward funding requests to the City Council for final approval.

CPA funds are utilized in supporting historic preservation, low-income housing and open space projects. Current CPA funded city projects include the restoration of Anniversary Hill Park and Scott Tower, as well as the Victory Theatre rehab.

City Clerk Brenna Murphy-McGee informed the committee that a voter-led petition requires 10 signatures of registered voters is required for a nonbinding ballot question to be included on the ballot. At-Large Councilor Jose Maldonado Velez added the city has 90 days to approve the petition.
If the petition were to fail, another must be filed with the signatures of 10 percent of registered voters and submitted 42 days before the September primary.

Assistant City Solicitor Michael Bissonnette said a citizen-initiated nonbinding question falls within the City Council’s purview and the state’s CPA regulations outline how to reduce, revoke or amend the act locally.

The Law Department was able to draft the ballot question language following Vacon’s initial order on the topic being tabled by the Finance Committee. The City Council placed the original question on the 2016 ballot.

Vacon added the council must initiate a follow-up question. She also requested the council approve her ballot questions for the fall municipal elections.

“It needs a majority of the council to approve going on the ballot, giving voters the right to vote on it,” Vacon said. “The voters can weigh in. I’m hearing a lot of feedback around taxes, the increased water, sewer, food, gas, everything. They’re looking for some relief, so that is the largest reason why I have filed this particular order.”

Vacon then permitted the council to “leave to withdraw” her order to revoke the surcharge. She felt a second ballot question would confuse voters.

At-Large Councilor Tessa Murphy-Romboletti noted Holyoke’s 1.5 percent surcharge was lower than most communities. According to the Community Preservation Coalition, the 194 participating municipalities may impose up to a 3 percent surcharge.

“I want to make sure the facts are clearly laid out to residents. I don’t think everyone understands that it’s after the first $100,000. Not everyone is getting taxed CPA until a certain point,” Murphy-Romboletti said.

Vacon responded that she was “speaking loudly on behalf of taxpayers,” who hold fundamental rights to “weigh in” on taxes they pay to support the CPA fund and other programs. While 1.5 percent is the standard surcharge, taxes and property rates rose in 2022.

“We have to look at the context we’re in, which is also the context where we have the lowest income along with the highest property rates as far as taxes go,” Vacon added.

CPA Committee Chair Meagan Magrath-Smith joined the discussion and added that two of the 194 CPA participants have a .5 percent surcharge. A lower surcharge could cause funding difficulties in specific categories, such as housing, historic preservation and recreation and open spaces that require 10 percent outlays.

“You can only spend up to 5 percent for your administrative costs,” said Magrath-Smith. “If you did move forward with a .5 percent surcharge, there would be some real difficulties in terms of being able to fund projects from year-to-year because if a project came to us and was $300,000, we wouldn’t necessarily be able to afford that kind of project in a single year. It would take us a few years to get enough in any one category, to be able to fund anything in that category.”

Magrath-Smith added that “offsets, either directly or indirectly,” could entail reduction of hours for the CPA Committee’s administrative assistant, shifting the workload onto city departments.

At-Large Councilor Israel Rivera spoke in favor of the CPA funds and their use in helping the community move in a direction “we’ve been working toward over the last several years.” He noted that either projects completed or in the pipeline, this funding was beneficial in getting projects that do not fall under the “CDBG [Community Development Block Grant] zone” of project funding completed.

“I just feel like it would be a travesty to even lower the rate of where the CPA is right now. Right now we are actually dealing with not as much money as we used to when it first started. I think it would hurt us more than help us to bring it down to .5 [percent], but I totally hear councilor Vacon’s concerns with regards to rising prices, with gas and sewage, our homeowners, but ultimately its just a situation where I feel like you’re getting more bang for your buck with the CPA when you’re investing in that.”

Vacon’s order to revoke the tax was given leave to withdraw by committee members. The City Council will vote on the withdrawal at an upcoming meeting. The Finance Committee will take up the ballot questions.