message from Kay about MBTA meeting on the 3 train stations
Susan Albright
Councilor-at-Large Ward 2
didi_614
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 13, 2019, at 9:04 PM, didi_614 (didi...@yahoo.com) via Mailing List <newto...@lists.neighborhood.net> wrote:
For Example a 2 family in Watertown on a postage stamp lot taxes are now around 12,000 per year. A few years ago they were almost half that amount.
On Jul 13, 2019, at 8:29 PM, didi_614 (didi...@yahoo.com) via Mailing List <newto...@lists.neighborhood.net> wrote:
Peter, I know you're making a joke but... I'm not sure why anyone wouldn't want housing for baby boomers and young families, new commercial space, bike lanes, walkable sidewalks and restaurants with outdoor seating. That sounds great to me. In fact, I know a lot of people in our community want those things. I know this because I am constantly asking them what they're looking for in our village centers. We all have different ways of evaluating what will benefit our village centers most, and trying to put together a vision that satisfies most people is the best way to plan for our future.
- Bryan BarashCandidate for City Council, Ward 2
PS - I can't imagine why anyone would be against Rep. Khan's impressive advocacy for better commuter rail service. Upgraded, accessible service is a necessity for our community.
On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 10:29 AM PETER HARRINGTON (p...@aol.com) via Mailing List <newto...@lists.neighborhood.net> wrote:
Good news, or not. History says that this is the first step in revitalizing Newton Center to make it a vibrant village with 6+ story mixed use buildings in a transit oriented project with, maybe, 1,000 new apartments for aging baby boomers and young families, new commercial space, limited parking, bike lanes and walkable sidewalks with outdoor restaurant seating. Perhaps we could find a developer to create an eco-economic friendly urban enclave.
We won't need to waste money on a vision plan since we can predict the results by interpreting vision plans for other villages where citizen input was discounted to make room for the vision. We could use a traffic study to assure that increased density and reduced availability of parking will reduce traffic congestion and a financial impact report that shows the increase in tax revenue will offset and increase in municipal expenses.
Peter F. Harrington
-------------
access list archives, shared file area, your settings at
http://lists.neighborhood.net/index.html/info/newtonville
list services provided by the Newton Neighborhood Network
-------------
access list archives, shared file area, your settings at
http://lists.neighborhood.net/index.html/info/newtonville
list services provided by the Newton Neighborhood Network
--
-------------
access list archives, shared file area, your settings at
http://lists.neighborhood.net/index.html/info/newtonville
list services provided by the Newton Neighborhood Network
-------------
access list archives, shared file area, your settings at
http://lists.neighborhood.net/index.html/info/newtonville
list services provided by the Newton Neighborhood Network
-------------
access list archives, shared file area, your settings at
http://lists.neighborhood.net/index.html/info/newtonville
list services provided by the Newton Neighborhood Network
When responding, please be aware that the Massachusetts Secretary of State has determined that most email is public record and therefore cannot be kept confidential.
-------------
access list archives, shared file area, your settings at
http://lists.neighborhood.net/index.html/info/newtonville
list services provided by the Newton Neighborhood Network
-------------
access list archives, shared file area, your settings at
http://lists.neighborhood.net/index.html/info/newtonville
list services provided by the Newton Neighborhood Network
When responding, please be aware that the Massachusetts Secretary of State has determined that most email is public record and therefore cannot be kept confidential.
-------------
access list archives, shared file area, your settings at
http://lists.neighborhood.net/index.html/info/newtonville
list services provided by the Newton Neighborhood Network
-------------
access list archives, shared file area, your settings at
http://lists.neighborhood.net/index.html/info/newtonville
list services provided by the Newton Neighborhood Network
Susan Albright
Sent from my iPhone
--
If you'd like to be added to this discussion group, visit this group at the link below, or simply send email to gswi...@alum.mit.edu with your name and affiliation with West Newton.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "West Newton Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to westnewtonneighbo...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to westnewtonn...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/westnewtonneighborhood.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/westnewtonneighborhood/2076189685.1512101.1563068764868%40mail.yahoo.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
didi_614
SusanSo in other words permitting giant developments that are revenue negative probably won’t provide much help with our budget problemsSnarkPeter Yaffe, MBASent from Peter's iPad"So when property values go up the tax rate should go down proportionately minus inflation unless new revenue is needed to fund more children in the schools, increased traffic patrolling, more police etc all of the things that increase with more people. "The other workshop we need is an explanation of all the things we can't do in Newton because there iis insufficient revenue. We can't fund park maintenance at an appropriate level, we can't buy as many trees as we need, we can't add staff to inspectional services to help monitor conditions on special permits, and on and on and on. Taking the conversation away from staff needs we can't fund upgrades to your buildings at the rate we would like to. Although capital costs are bonded we have to have the funds in our operating budget to pay down more debt than we are already covering.We do ok in Newton but there is a lot we need to be doing that we can't. Residential taxes are simply not enough to cover the things we would like to do. Our commercial taxes are simply not very substantial.If you follow the budget every year you will find 10-15 resolutions that the Council sends to the Mayor of priority areas the Council would like to fund. Year after year most of these are rejected for lack of funds. I'd be happy to get a bunch of us together to talk this over.On Sat, Jul 13, 2019 at 11:05 PM <sarle...@gmail.com> wrote:Susan it is understood that the tax rate does not go up but the tax revenue does. So when property values go up the tax rate should go down proportionately minus inflation unless new revenue is needed to fund more children in the schools, increased traffic patrolling, more police etc all of the things that increase with more people.
So a “workshop” would be a wonderful idea so that we can sort out the conflicting opinions over whether developments like these are revenue positive, neutral, or negative. Since varying people in the city all seem to have different opinions it appears not to be clearcut. You say it will add revenue. Others say it will do the opposite. I don’t think it is therefore as clear cut as you are saying.
These are the kinds of questions many of us are asking and it only adds confusion and distrust when councilors don’t admit that we don’t know for sure what the answer is.
Sue
Sent from my iPhone
Susan Albright
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/westnewtonneighborhood/1607112445.1644512.1563109842851%40mail.yahoo.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
didi_614
Although in Newton alot of Parents want the NPS so most likely they will rent the apts but it will then increase enrollment in the NPS even though we have been told that NPS Enrollment is going to decrease.
I guess that raises the question if the apartments will sit empty if the owners cannot find enough people who can pay $4000/month. Will they lower prices, or just keep them empty? There are empty apartments now because of a mismatch between price and value.
From: newtonvil...@lists.neighborhood.net [mailto:newtonvil...@lists.neighborhood.net] On Behalf Of Susan Albright
Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2019 8:42 AM
To: <newto...@lists.neighborhood.net> <newto...@lists.neighborhood.net>
Subject: Re: [Newtonville] [WNewton] Re: message from Kay about MBTA meeting on the 3 train stations
Since 2015 there have been 2 projects approved that are larger than the typical. One of these is 68 units and the other is 140 units. Both projects were analyzed by city peer reviewers to determine if the projects were revenue positive for the city. Both projects were deemed revenue positive. The city council has no interest in passing projects such as these unless they are revenue positive. The one exception from this I think would be a project that is 100% affordable. We have not had one of these presented so this notion needs further study.
If every project before the Council now were to be approved as presented we would add 1400 units of housing - hardly 10s of thousands.
You are raising very important subjects to be taken seriously but we should keep the conversation real.
On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 8:06 AM Peter Yaffe <ply...@gmail.com> wrote:
Susan
So in other words permitting giant developments that are revenue negative probably won’t provide much help with our budget problems
Snark
Peter Yaffe, MBA
Sent from Peter's iPad
On Jul 14, 2019, at 7:43 AM, Susan Albright <susansophi...@gmail.com> wrote:
"So when property values go up the tax rate should go down proportionately minus inflation unless new revenue is needed to fund more children in the schools, increased traffic patrolling, more police etc all of the things that increase with more people. "
The other workshop we need is an explanation of all the things we can't do in Newton because there iis insufficient revenue. We can't fund park maintenance at an appropriate level, we can't buy as many trees as we need, we can't add staff to inspectional services to help monitor conditions on special permits, and on and on and on. Taking the conversation away from staff needs we can't fund upgrades to your buildings at the rate we would like to. Although capital costs are bonded we have to have the funds in our operating budget to pay down more debt than we are already covering.
We do ok in Newton but there is a lot we need to be doing that we can't. Residential taxes are simply not enough to cover the things we would like to do. Our commercial taxes are simply not very substantial.
If you follow the budget every year you will find 10-15 resolutions that the Council sends to the Mayor of priority areas the Council would like to fund. Year after year most of these are rejected for lack of funds. I'd be happy to get a bunch of us together to talk this over.
On Sat, Jul 13, 2019 at 11:05 PM <sarle...@gmail.com> wrote:
Susan it is understood that the tax rate does not go up but the tax revenue does. So when property values go up the tax rate should go down proportionately minus inflation unless new revenue is needed to fund more children in the schools, increased traffic patrolling, more police etc all of the things that increase with more people.
So a “workshop” would be a wonderful idea so that we can sort out the conflicting opinions over whether developments like these are revenue positive, neutral, or negative. Since varying people in the city all seem to have different opinions it appears not to be clearcut. You say it will add revenue. Others say it will do the opposite. I don’t think it is therefore as clear cut as you are saying.
These are the kinds of questions many of us are asking and it only adds confusion and distrust when councilors don’t admit that we don’t know for sure what the answer is.
Sue
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 13, 2019, at 10:01 PM, Su Albright <susansophi...@gmail.com> wrote:
didi_614
From: "Marti Boguski (martibow...@yahoo.com) via Mailing List" <newto...@lists.neighborhood.net>
To: newto...@lists.neighborhood.net
Sent: Monday, July 15, 2019 10:56 AM
Subject: Re: [Newtonville] [WNewton] Re: message from Kay about MBTA meeting on the 3 train stations
Howard Rosenof
What assumptions went into the peer review process to predict that the projects would be revenue-positive? More likely than not, the peer reviewers assumed that the projects would be quickly rented at the originally predicted market rates. If that doesn't happen - if some of their storefronts remain empty for a long time, or if the residential units either go empty or have to be offered at lower rates because there isn't enough demand for 2-bedroom apartments at ~$4K/month, then the City's tax revenue will go down. And if the numbers of students go up even slightly from the predicted values (the Newton school system is one thing that differentiates us from several neighboring towns) the City's costs will go up. If either of these happens current Newton taxpayers will be responsible for making up the difference.
As for the number of units that developers are planning to build:
While the numbers are still changing, the proposed number of units
at Northland is approximately 800 and the number at Riverside
around 750. This brings us to slightly more than the 1400 units
you cite. The massive Washington Street projects could dwarf that
number. The older versions of the Washington Street vision plan
gave estimates for the numbers of apartments that could be built
in various parts of the "corridor". The latest version does not,
but building heights have been increased, so the City is now
keeping residents in the dark about what could be built. The
Council has not yet formally looked at any of the Washington
Street projects so your estimate of 1400 units is reasonable, but
we know that a lot more plans are coming. We may not be looking at
tens of thousands of new units, but thousands, yes, and
concentrated in just a few of the less-upscale areas of the City.
Since 2015 there have been 2 projects approved that are larger than the typical. One of these is 68 units and the other is 140 units. Both projects were analyzed by city peer reviewers to determine if the projects were revenue positive for the city. Both projects were deemed revenue positive. The city council has no interest in passing projects such as these unless they are revenue positive. The one exception from this I think would be a project that is 100% affordable. We have not had one of these presented so this notion needs further study.
If every project before the Council now were to be approved as presented we would add 1400 units of housing - hardly 10s of thousands.
You are raising very important subjects to be taken seriously but we should keep the conversation real.
On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 8:06 AM Peter Yaffe <ply...@gmail.com> wrote:
SusanSo in other words permitting giant developments that are revenue negative probably won’t provide much help with our budget problems
Snark
Peter Yaffe, MBA
Sent from Peter's iPad
"So when property values go up the tax rate should go down proportionately minus inflation unless new revenue is needed to fund more children in the schools, increased traffic patrolling, more police etc all of the things that increase with more people. "
The other workshop we need is an explanation of all the things we can't do in Newton because there iis insufficient revenue. We can't fund park maintenance at an appropriate level, we can't buy as many trees as we need, we can't add staff to inspectional services to help monitor conditions on special permits, and on and on and on. Taking the conversation away from staff needs we can't fund upgrades to your buildings at the rate we would like to. Although capital costs are bonded we have to have the funds in our operating budget to pay down more debt than we are already covering.
We do ok in Newton but there is a lot we need to be doing that we can't. Residential taxes are simply not enough to cover the things we would like to do. Our commercial taxes are simply not very substantial.
If you follow the budget every year you will find 10-15 resolutions that the Council sends to the Mayor of priority areas the Council would like to fund. Year after year most of these are rejected for lack of funds. I'd be happy to get a bunch of us together to talk this over.
On Sat, Jul 13, 2019 at 11:05 PM <sarle...@gmail.com> wrote:
Susan it is understood that the tax rate does not go up but the tax revenue does. So when property values go up the tax rate should go down proportionately minus inflation unless new revenue is needed to fund more children in the schools, increased traffic patrolling, more police etc all of the things that increase with more people.
So a “workshop” would be a wonderful idea so that we can sort out the conflicting opinions over whether developments like these are revenue positive, neutral, or negative. Since varying people in the city all seem to have different opinions it appears not to be clearcut. You say it will add revenue. Others say it will do the opposite. I don’t think it is therefore as clear cut as you are saying.
These are the kinds of questions many of us are asking and it only adds confusion and distrust when councilors don’t admit that we don’t know for sure what the answer is.
Sue
Sent from my iPhone
Howard Rosenof
If the proposed new developments pay for themselves, i.e. if
their tax contributions equal or exceed the costs they impose on
the City then there should be less of an issue. People are
concerned that they won't pay for themselves. Newton depends to an
extraordinary extent (82.39 percent) on residential tax revenues.
Of the 20 cities and towns in Massachusetts with the highest total
tax levies, Brookline is slightly higher (82.52 percent) and only
Wellesley is significantly higher (87.33 percent). Thus if these
new developments fail to pay for themselves, most of the unmet tax
burden will fall on existing Newton residents, including those who
are low-income but don't live in below-market units, and many who
are living on fixed incomes. Many will reasonably view such a
transfer of costs as a subsidy given by residents to developers.
Retail cannabis is already here; however some are concerned with the fact that the Mayor appears to want to concentrate these outlets in the north of the city, with two of Newton's three recreational outlets within walking distance of Newton North and less than a mile away from each other.
I don't hear too many people saying "no" to development. For
example, I don't think there is going to be a lot of nostalgia
over the used-car lots on Washington Street. For the most part,
reasonable development will be welcomed. We can of course differ
on what "reasonable" means, but for many of us it means not
overwhelming the school system, our roads and other transportation
infrastructure, not tearing down irreplaceable historic
structures, not degrading air quality due to traffic congestion,
maintaining Newton's unique configuration as a city of almost
90,000 people with distinct, interconnected villages rather than a
central downtown, not forcing out unique local businesses in favor
of national chains, and not increasing (beyond inflation) the
taxes existing residents pay.
The City had enough money to pay for a $500K Washington Street Vision Plan whose initial versions have now been all but ignored, and buying the Armory from the State for $1.00 for affordable housing is not likely to look like a bargain once there's a professional estimate of the costs of turning it into housing.
Reliance on taxes on residential real estate: http://www.newtonma.gov/civicax/filebank/documents/92676
Page 20
Newton needs to raise more revenue and too many residents on this listserv refuse any means to do so. It's no to overrides, no to retail cannabis, no to development. Then we hear complaints about not having what revenue provides: repairs to roads, infrastructure, public buildings, well cared for parks, etc. Money doesn't grow on trees - all of these services will require increased revenue.
In 2013, we knew that the overrides would help us make progress for 5 years. Here we are 6 years out and we're seeing the impact of the lack of revenue that we should have foreseen. So my question is this: what source of ongoing revenue is acceptable?
didi_614
I’m not sure that the demand will be there in Newton. The $4000/mo rent is for luxury apartments. It will depend on whether enough renters will see value worth the price. Some certainly will. We have seen that at Avalons throughout the area. Is that true for everyone? Probably not for the middle class. As many have cited on this list, the market rate for 2BRs is somewhere between $2100 and $2400 depending on the degree of luxury.
From: newtonvil...@lists.neighborhood.net [mailto:newtonvil...@lists.neighborhood.net] On Behalf Of didi_614 (didi...@yahoo.com) via Mailing List
Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2019 8:13 AM
To: Marti Boguski (martibow...@yahoo.com) via Mailing List <newto...@lists.neighborhood.net>
Subject: Re: [Newtonville] [WNewton] Re: message from Kay about MBTA meeting on the 3 train stations
I dont know why they dont publicize it but - Maybe the same way the Hotels in Waltham do not publicize that they house the Homeless Families for the state? But they do - and the reason I know is that the kids are enrolled while they are living there into the Waltham Public Schools.
Maybe the reason Watertown/the developers do not publicize it is then they might have an issue renting the apts/condos at market value?
Not sure why but this is the reality. Doubt this will happen in Newton because the apts/condos will rent/sell because people will want their kids in the NPS.
On Tuesday, July 16, 2019, 08:01:43 AM EDT, Marti Boguski (martibow...@yahoo.com) via Mailing List <newto...@lists.neighborhood.net> wrote:
Thanks Joanne,
Of course I know who you are and wasn’t intending to insinuate anything.
For some reason I don’t see the names or email addresses on some of the emails I receive from the listserv. And I’m not denying what you said about Watertown. I just would like to read it from an official source.
I have searched and can’t find anything like that - maybe not the right searches. I would think Watertown or the developers would be publicizing their arrangement with the state to house people or families who are homeless or using Section 8 in their empty apartments - tax breaks or not.
Marti
Julia Anne Malakie
Jessica Polito
Do people say why they prefer Newton North? Are their kids swimmers? I thought with the equalization of sizes when they expanded South, what - 20 years ago? -- that the programs were supposed to be equally broad. Although I guess there are still some unique traditions, like NSHS students doing a big speech, and do they still post their college rejection letters on a big public board? And I recently learned about the "Murder" game at North -- is that just a North thing? (Not that a year-end game is a reason to prefer a school!)Julia
--
If you'd like to be added to this discussion group, visit this group at the link below, or simply send email to gswi...@alum.mit.edu with your name and affiliation with West Newton.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "West Newton Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to westnewtonneighbo...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to westnewtonn...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/westnewtonneighborhood.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/westnewtonneighborhood/CAHuKTxhGNcULh6EF5QhjBgoKQcvecnhkqU6U1XLJ7A9FXjraaw%40mail.gmail.com.
Chuck Tanowitz
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to westnewtonneighborhood+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
Brian Scheff
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to westnewtonneighbo...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to westnewtonn...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/westnewtonneighborhood.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/westnewtonneighborhood/c8718e75-dd98-4c7e-adad-b156c058718a%40googlegroups.com.
Michael Halle
On Jul 17, 2019, at 6:07 PM, Chuck Tanowitz <tano...@gmail.com> wrote:
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to westnewtonneighbo...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to westnewtonn...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/westnewtonneighborhood.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/westnewtonneighborhood/c8718e75-dd98-4c7e-adad-b156c058718a%40googlegroups.com.
Greer Swiston
Proposition 2 ½ limits the City of Newton, and all other Massachusetts communities, the amount of citywide taxes that can be raised. Proposition 2 ½ limits a community to raising citywide taxes by 2.5% from the previous year’s levy limit. Allowing for new growth can then increase this levy limit. New growth consists of property tax increases caused by new construction, renovations or land use changes. Proposition 2 ½ does not limit any individual property tax increase or decrease. For example, in Fiscal Year 2019, the Mayor and the City Council approved a budget that included a tax levy of $346,951,632. The levy limit for Fiscal Year 2018 was $329,940,249 (before debt exclusion payment). So, the maximum amount of taxes that can be budgeted by the Mayor and the City Council for Fiscal Year 2019 is $329,940,249 X 102.5% = $338,188,755 plus certified new growth plus a voter approved debt exclusion payment of $3,000,495. (The 102.5% number is increasing the previous year’s limit by 2.5%). The new growth, which was certified by the Massachusetts Department of Revenue, is $5,762,382. Therefore, the maximum amount of taxes which can be levied for Fiscal Year 2019 is $338,188,755 + $5,762,382 + $3,000,495 = $346,951,632. This figure is the levy limit, which will be used to determine next year’s maximum tax levy. A community may increase the property tax levy less than 2.5%, but that is a determination made by the budgetary requirements of the city as determined by the Mayor and the City Council. A community may not increase the tax levy greater than 2.5% without approval of the voters. The Mayor and the City Council increased the tax levy by $17,011,383 from last year’s tax levy limit of $329,940,249. This is what causes a tax increase, not an increase or decrease in assessed values.
Proposition 2 ½ limits the amount of taxes a community can raise from property tax. The assessment is an estimate of market value. Since the real estate market changes are based upon the buyers’ and sellers’ needs, there is no limit to the amount an assessment can increase or decrease. Assessment changes are always based on the real estate market. For example, if a property sells for $500,000 in calendar year 2017, there is no limit or minimum price it would sell for in calendar year 2018 or beyond. It could sell for $600,000, $700,000, $1,000,000 or $400,000. The sale price would be based on the real estate market at that time. The assessments do not predict market value. The assessments reflect (or report) market value.