CPA | Bellicose Bumpkin

CPA in Martha’s Vineyard

By bumpkin, September 4, 2008 8:06 am

Here’s a good article about CPA in the Vineyard. It discusses why the state contribution will drop this year, an overview of how it works and how the monies have been used in the past.

The incentive for towns to join the Massachusetts Community Preservation Act (CPA) is that the state matches funds derived from a three-percent surtax on the property taxes collected by the towns. Until this year, the state has matched town funds 100 percent, but that level of match was never guaranteed. Bob Bliss, spokesman for the state Department of Revenue, told The Times this week that the match will probably drop to 65 percent this year. The final figure will be announced in October. Mr. Bliss explained that the number of towns adopting the CPA has increased, and the slow housing market has reduced the income from the Registry of Deeds, which is where the state matching funds come from.

The CPA is designed to help towns in three areas: affordable housing, open space, and historic preservation. At least 10 percent of each town’s CPA appropriations must go to each of the three categories. Once at least 10 percent has been voted for open space, money may also be spent on recreation facilities.

CPA list

By bumpkin, September 2, 2008 8:08 am

Here is the list of towns that have adopted the Community Preservation Act. It is current to June 2008 and includes the percentage contributed by each town. Many towns are contributing the maximum of 3% and I’d guestimate the average to be over 2%.

CPA list

CPA projects in Concord

By bumpkin, August 27, 2008 8:30 am

This quick blurb on WickedLocal gives a short overview of some of the projects being considered for CPA money. Like many of the projects that are being done in other towns, they mostly seem like worthy projects – many of which would be done anyway. These sort of quality-of-life projects can really add to a town’s character.

Bruce Freeman Rail Trail design plans, Monument Street retaining wall repairs and a facelift for the West Concord Fire station were among the suggested town-sponsored Community Preservation projects selectmen saw on Monday.

Some potential projects for the 2009 funding round of the Community Preservation Act are structural repairs to the Scout House, restoration of the Thoreau Book Collection and renovations to the Peter Bulkeley Building.

An estimated $1.2 million will be available for the 2009 funding round, which has a state reimbursement rate of 70 percent and will be voted at the annual Town Meeting on April 27, 2009.

The selectmen will put together a priority list of projects next month, after the town manager, or assistant town manager, get back to them about what each project will cost.

CPA misuse in Wareham

Comments (2)

By bumpkin, August 14, 2008 9:04 am

The Globe is reporting about a group in Wareham that tried to stop the use of CPA funds to pay for beachfront acreage the town purchased in 2003.

Political watchdogs in Wareham won a court order to block what they say is the town’s misuse of $1.1 million in Community Preservation Act funds. But it came a bit too late.

By the time a Brockton Superior Court judge issued a restraining order last Friday, the town had wired the money to its intended recipient, resident Barbara Deighton Haupt. The town owed her the $1.1 million for the beachfront acreage it took from her, but did not fully compensate her for, in 2003.

The citizens group, Taxpayers for Full Disclosure, had argued that it was improper to use funds from the Community Preservation Act to pay Haupt, and the state Department of Revenue agreed. CPA money is earmarked for three uses – open land or historic preservation, and affordable housing – and towns are expected to voluntarily heed those guidelines.

As I said in the previous post, whenever you have money, you need to keep an eye on things.

Several things I’m curious about in this case. It seems the Selectman have authority to spend CPA funds. It also seems that they rushed the payment on this before a Nov. 16 deadline. From my experience, when people try to rush things through, there’s probably something shaky going on.

So how do other towns authorize expenditure of CPA funds? Stay tuned.

And what is this citizens group – Taxpayers for Full Disclosure? I’d like to hear more about them.

CPA controversy in Peabody

By bumpkin, August 14, 2008 7:05 am

I’ve been researching the Community Preservation Act. There is a wealth of information about the program – which I’ve read. In recent months, I’ve been more interested in how CPA works in practice – what are towns doing with it, how are they managing it, do they like it. This portion of the investigation largely consists of reading news articles that I find from Google alerts. I’ve written a number of posts highlighting the way CPA is being used in real life in real towns.

So far what I’m seeing is that the towns that have it … love it. They are doing all sorts of interesting projects – most of which wouldn’t get done without the money CPA provides. Recently I came across a negative editorial from the Salem News. The gist of the objection seems to be that CPA is a tool for NIMBY’s and that special interests can hijack the money.

It seems to me, that whenever there is a pool of available money in town, there will be a pool of people that want it. some will have noble aims, and some less so. I’ll take this negative editorial as warning that if Middleboro ever adopts CPA, we will want to look carefully at how other towns dole out the funds to prevent misuse by special interests.

I’ll note that a cursory search for Peabody and CPA doesn’t yield anything that looks too alarming. While I have become a proponent of CPA – I’d also be completely in favor of the town – possibly a citizens committee – doing a full investigation of CPA. In fact I think it’s essential. I would also say that I probably shouldn’t be part of any such committee since I am biased in favor of CPA – that and the fact that the town hates my guts.

CPA artilcles 7/24/2008

By bumpkin, July 24, 2008 7:33 am

Here are some recent articles on CPA. They give a glimpse into towns that have opted in to CPA and how they use the money:

Templeton

The first year of the Community Preservation Act surcharge on tax bills has gathered $118,073, to be matched to some degree by state funds, for preserving Templeton’s history and open space and enhancing local housing options.

Hadley

Board Chairman Gerald T. Devine told the board that in an 8-0 vote, the Community Preservation Act Committee agreed on Monday to recommend to the Town Meeting that $84,000 in community preservation fund money be used to pay for the documentation, permitting and other initial costs.

“It releases the pressure on the townspeople” to use that money, he said.vv

And the committee has the money available.

Hanover

Town residents may soon have the opportunity to vote on whether Hanover will add to its stock of open space.

The Community Preservation Committee intends to have residents vote at the upcoming Sept. 8 Special Town Meeting on whether the town should use community preservation funds to purchase the Nava property at 553 Center St., CPC Chairwoman Diane Campbell said.

Scituate

Scituate Arts Association President Janet Cornacchio has begun meeting informally with town officials, including representatives from the historic commission and selectmen Chairman Rick Murray, to discuss the possibility of getting Community Preservation Act funding for the up to $500,000 in repairs needed for the building. Those repairs, she said, would probably take up to eight years.

“(The repair) is something our organization couldn’t do alone in any number of years,” she said.

Under the Community Preservation Act, residents pay a 3 percent tax surcharge to fund projects in the areas of affordable housing, open space and historical preservation and public recreation. Ten percent of the committee’s funds must be allocated in each of these three areas.

These are four great examples of improving the quality of life in town using CPA money – monies that would otherwise not be available.

CPA in Hanson

By bumpkin, July 10, 2008 10:35 am

One of the comments on my last post alerted me to this article about the Community Preservation Act(CPA).

At this point I’ve seen enough. Middleboro is losing out by not adopting CPA. Every so often – and probably not as often as we all would like – we spend general revenue to buy open space and do other things that CPA would allow us to do. We have to scramble at town meeting to authorize the money, and then have to borrow and pay interest that is fairly high due to our bond rating.

CPA would allow us to set money aside that we would spend anyway. If money is so tight that we can’t justify paying extra, then we should reduce general taxes by an amount that is equal to the CPA monies. This money would be matched by some percentage by the state(currently 65%). Even if state matching vanished completely, we are still better off because we our yearly costs become more planned and predictable.

Here are some quotes from the Hanson article:

With the appointment of four residents to the newly-created Community Preservation Committee, Hanson joins more than 130 Massachusetts towns to move forward with the Community Preservation Act.

The Community Preservation Act allows the town to acquire and preserve open space, create and preserve affordable housing, and preserve historic buildings and landscapes. Hanson residents voted to adopt the act May 17.

Hanson voters approved a 1.5 percent surcharge on property taxes to go toward funding the program. Other towns have allocated between 1 and 3 percent.

Previously, the state had matched town funding at a rate of 100 percent, but according to a March announcement the Web site of the Massachusetts Municipal Association, beginning this month, that rate was decreased to 65 percent.

“Whatever we get from the state is over and above,” said Town Administrator Mike Finglas. “I think they will do the best they can to fund it 100 percent but as the economy goes, so does the money.

“As they have to tighten their belts, we’ll have to tighten ours too.”

The guidelines of the act determine that a minimum of 10 percent of the annual revenues of the fund be used toward the three core requirements of the act: open space, historic preservation and affordable housing.

Seventy percent can be used for any combination of allowed uses or for land for recreation purposes.

So far, 133 Massachusetts towns have adopted the act, more than a third of the 351 communities in the commonwealth.

Selectmen Chairman Jim Egan said there was an outpouring of candidates interested in joining the new committee.

Nine residents applied for the four citizen-at-large slots.

The five members appointed by town departments, as mandated by state statute, are John Kemmett of the Conservation Commission; Allan Clemons from the Historical Commission; Robert Sears of the Hanson Housing Authority; and Philip Lindquist from the Planning Board. A representative of the Parks and Fields Commission is yet be announced.

Egan said no projects have been discussed as of yet.

CPA in Waltham

By bumpkin, July 9, 2008 9:23 pm

From Wicked Local – an article about CPA in Waltham. It deals somewhat with the process of spending CPA money and solicting public input on the best way to spend it.

As I’ve mentioned before, I’m not seeing towns that are sorry about being involved in CPA. Any information is welcome.

Article 1
Article 2
Article 3

Trio of CPA articles

Comments (4)

By bumpkin, July 6, 2008 1:23 pm

Here are a some articles about CPA in Pembroke and W. Bridgewater

What I’m seeing is towns that are happy with CPA and if anything are looking to increase their contributions to take more advantage of the state contribution before it decreases or is eliminated.

What I’m not seeing is towns that have opted in to CPA and have are trying to get out of it. If there are cases like that, please send me some links via comments or email so I can investigate and blog about it.

CPA in action – Pembroke

By bumpkin, July 2, 2008 10:36 pm

Here’s an article that is an interesting snapshot of the sorts of things that come up in a community that has adopted CPA – the Community Preservation Act.

As always, I’ll highlight passages that I find interesting but encourage you to read the entire article:

Eleven projects are up for Community Preservation Act funding this year, including work on historical buildings such as the Friends Meeting House and Bethel Chapel and efforts of the Bay Circuit Trail committee, Pembroke Watershed Association and Affordable Housing Committee.

Clearly there is contention for CPA funds – that could be a source of conflict that we should be ready for and deal with like grownups

CPA funding comes from a 1 percent surcharge Pembroke residents approved in 2006. Massachusetts communities can approve up to a 3 percent surcharge.

The state currently matches that funding by about 67 percent, Ames said, though the final match won’t be known until October, when the state awards funding. The 2008 match will be applied to next year’s CPA funding.

This year, the surcharge was projected to raise about $156,000 when the first collection cycle ended Monday, Ames said.

Folks, this sounds like free money to me.

The committee can use 10 percent of its annual funding in each of three categories and can spend 5 percent for administrative expenses, committee secretary Dottie MacInnes said.

The remainder is placed into a reserve fund and can be used for emergency situations — such as the need to purchase land without waiting for state or federal grants, Ames said. The committee could choose not to fund any projects this year and place all the money into the reserve account for future use.

Projects must meet guidelines set by the CPA Coalition, and, because matching funds come from the state, the Department of Revenue has the final say on whether the town-approved projects will receive state funding, MacInnes said.

I can see people bemoaning that fact that the state has some say in the projects that we can spend CPA money on.

I’m having trouble seeing the downside of CPA.

Rappaport and CPA

By bumpkin, June 29, 2008 10:32 pm

For a while now, I’ve been advocating that Middleboro take a look(or re-look) at the Community Preservation Act or CPA. Conveniently, the Rappaport Institute has just released a 39 page report on CPA.

I’ll be posting in detail on the report after I’ve had the chance to fully digest it. In the meantime, I throw it out there for your perusal.

One thing that jumps out at me from the summary is that communities which are not using CPA are losing somewhat right out of the gate. Communities that have adopted CPA, get some matching funds from the state. The state funds come from a statewide fee on transactions filed with the registry of deeds. In simple terms – any sale of property(and other things) contributes money into the CPA fund – which is distributed to towns participating in CPA.

So simply – a bunch of money is flowing into the statewide CPA fund from properties that are bought and sold in Middleboro, or if someone transfers ownership of a property, or anything that requires a change at the registry of deeds. This money is flowing into towns – mostly affluent towns – that have adopted CPA. We are getting nothing.

I’m still very much in the investigative stage with CPA – feedback is welcome.

CPA in action – Newton

By bumpkin, June 24, 2008 8:02 pm

Here’s an article about a $120K improvement project on a Newton swimming pool using funds collected from CPA – the Community Preservation Act:

The Gath Memorial Pool has undergone some significant changes, thanks to a project spearheaded by the nonprofit organization the Playground Project at Albemarle Inc. and funded by taxpayers.

The project includes a large sunshade, 14 in-pool benches, two drinking fountains, grab bars and non-slip floor surfacing. All improvements were added in two construction sessions prior to the last summer season and this season, with a resilient walkway for slips intended to prevent and reduce the shock of falls still to be installed.

“We’re 98 percent there, and that’s just great,” said Margaret Doris, Playground Project president.

The $120,875 project was first approved in 2003 by the city’s Community Preservation Committee, which oversees funding granted under the Community Preservation Act, a statewide program adopted by Newton after a 2001 referendum. The program raises funds from a 1 percent surcharge on real estate taxes matched by a Massachusetts state fund, and according to a city of Newton Web site, is intended to help “preserve open space and historic sites, and create affordable housing and recreational amenities.”

I’ll repeat that I’m not necessarily shilling for CPA – but it looks more and more to me like a tool that a town could use for “extras” like open space and pool renovations – projects that would either never happen or just come out of general town funds.

Robbing Peter to pay CPA

Comments (3)

By bumpkin, June 5, 2008 8:43 am

In the last Middleboro Annual Town Meeting, voters spent somewhere near $600K to buy land for open space preservation. I’ve heard town officials say on more than one occasion that it is difficult to budget for this because you don’t know when land is going to become available. While you can’t say when a specific pieced of land will become available, you can say with certainty that some land will become available at pretty regular intervals. Hence the title of this post. If the town is doing the right thing, it is doing many of the things that CPA will do for you, but just paying for it in an unplanned haphazard way.

This is where CPA comes in. It gives the town a predictable way to set aside mony for community preservation and get some free money from the state to boot.

I think it’s time for Middleboro to take a fresh look at CPA – the Community Preservation Act.

Some area towns recent adopted CPA including Hanson, Stoughton, West Bridgewater, and Plympton – which is truly a right-thinking town.

Rick Burnet, chairman of the committee that promoted the CPA in Plympton, said the proposed casino in Middleborough has awakened many in Plympton to the need for proactive action to preserve the town’s natural and historic assets. He said the new CPA fund will help by allowing the town to purchase open space that might otherwise be gobbled up by developers and to expand affordable housing on its own terms.

At this point, we are coming up to the one year anniversary of the Middleboro/Mashpee IGA. Are we doing enough to identify potential impacts and taking action to minimize them? I’m thinking of things like zoning and CPA or other open space preservation initiatives.

As I watch the events around me, I often feel that Middleboro is doing a lot help the casino come, but little to prepare itself if it does. Whether the casino comes or not(and it won’t), things like CPA can help a community amass money that it would often spend anyways with the added benefit that the state kicks in a portion. Think of it as a payroll deduction: It’s a little painful at first, but over time becomes easier to live with.

Now after all this – you’d think I’m a hardcore CPA supported – right? Wrong. I’m intrigued by it and think it warrants serious consideration and revisiting.

Here an overview of the act from www.communitypreservation.org

The Community Preservation Act is statewide enabling legislation to allow cities and towns to exercise control over local planning decisions. This legislation strengthens and empowers Massachusetts communities:

All decisions are local.

Local people must vote by ballot to adopt the Act.
Local legislatures must appoint a committee of local people to draw up plans for use of the funds.
These plans are subject to local comment and approval.
If residents don’t feel the CPA is working as they expected, they can repeal it.

The Community Preservation Act provides new funding sources which can be used to address three core community concerns:
Acquisition and preservation of open space
Creation and support of affordable housing
Acquisition and preservation of historic buildings and landscapes

A minimum of 10% of the annual revenues of the fund must be used for each of the three core community concerns. The remaining 70% can be allocated for any combination of the allowed uses, or for land for recreational use. This gives each community the opportunity to determine its priorities, plan for its future, and have the funds to make those plans happen.

Property taxes traditionally fund the day-to-day operating needs of safety, health, schools, roads, maintenance. – and more. But until the CPA, there was no steady funding source for preserving and improving a community’s infrastructure. The Community Preservation Act can give a community the funds needed to control its future.