When the controversial tax law Proposition 2 1/2 went into effect almost 10 years ago, many Massachusetts voters celebrated what they hoped would be the demise of the demanding tax structure which has since earned the state the nickname "Taxachusetts."
Since then, the measure, a tax cap designed to give citizens more control over their payments to municipalities and to limit a city's total property taxes to 2.5 percent of the market value of the community, has indeed proven to be a successful and durable law.
But as it approaches its second decade of existence, critics are blasting Proposition 2 1/2 for tying the hands of local governments and rendering them incapable of providing vital community services such as quality public education and police protection.
The recent wave of criticism has led even some of the law's most fervent original advocates to question whether the tax cap in its current form is doing more harm than good.
"We don't want to say we favor changing 2 1/2 because we feel it has been effective," says Lewis C. Howe, spokesperson for Senate minority leader David Locke (R-Sherborn). "But we have to look down the road. Some change may be in order."
Locke, who still describes himself as "a pretty staunch supporter of the tax cap," helped to push the original bill through the state house in 1980.
Advocates of the law point out that a built-in override system allows local voters under Proposition 2 1/2 to choose to raise their property taxes at any time.
"As far as we're concerned, that solves the problem," says Barbara Anderson, chair of Citizens for Limited Taxation (CLT), the lobbying group which originally sponsored Proposition 2 1/2. "If the people in town want [higher taxes] they vote for them, and if they don't, they don't."
But critics point out that high unemployment rates and the overall economic gloom which has descended over Massachusetts are causing voters in recent weeks to reject overrides by overwhelming margins.
Recently, voters in the towns of Norfolk, Weymouth, Needham and Chelsea soundly rejected overrides of the law.
Many opponents focus on the state's troubled public educational system, charging that without the added funds which an repeal of the law would generate, many schools will never be able to overcome the problem of insufficient funding.
Amidst worries that the U.S. educational system cannot compete internationally, Massachusetts is being forced to cut back public library hours and to bus some students outside their local schools because of budgets stretched beyond their limit.
"Declining school enrollments helped [Proposition 2 1/2] to work in the '80s. That has turned around 180 degrees," says Buck Holtz, senior research associate at the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, a research and lobbying organization which opposes the law.
"Proposition 2 1/2 isn't the only reason that communities are in trouble, but it certainly contributes. Education is definitely affected by taht," he says.
City to Ask State For Relief From 2 1/2The Cambridge City Council last night voted to ask the state legislature for permission to enact measures to offset the
Tax Cut Opponents Heat Up CampaignLocal opponents of Proposition 2 1/2 say they will redouble efforts to defeat the referendum, now that its support appears
Voters Divided Over Efficacy of PropositionVoters interviewed yesterday in Cambridge were divided on Proposition 2 1/2. "Anything that cuts the excise tax is worthwhile," Kathleen
City to Consider Municipal LotteryThe City Council last night instructed City Manager James L. Sullivan to draft legislation permitting Cambridge to hold a lottery
CambridgeF or years the Cambridge City Council has been an easygoing sort of place. A lot of important issues come
Proposition 2 1/2To the Editors of the Crimson: Ever since the passage of Proposition 2 1/2 the people of Cambridge have been