Left In Lowell

The Property Tax Discussion

by Mimi at 11:21 pm.

Given all of the activities and discussion during the past two City Council meetings (LTC streaming video 1/8/08 and 1/15/08) floor as well as some of the press coverage regarding Lowell property taxes, one would think there is some kind of revolt. But if you read Mike Lafleur’s front page article in yesterday’s Sun (disregard the pictures and graphics) you will get a clear picture of what the facts are.

More than 40 percent of the nearly 23,000 residential properties in the Mill City will see their property-tax bills decrease this year. Roughly 24 percent of the city’s residential taxpayers can expect to see their bills go up by less than $100. But about 7,800 properties in the city saw tax bills increase by $100 or more. Hundreds were hit with increases of $300 or more.

According to the Lafleur article, the large increases were mainly due to “the state Department of Revenue pushing all communities to update and streamline how they assess properties… the state requires communities to reassess properties every year, to ensure they are taxed at ‘full and fair value’.” So in effect, those individuals who receive those hundreds of dollar increases in their taxes in previous years may not have been paying their fair share and now the scales have been balanced.

In CM Bernie Lynch’s blog reporting on the City-organized public meeting at the Senior Center “to explain the assessment process and in particular to address recent changes in appraisal methods,” the CM indicates that there were about 50 people there.

If you add the 76 people who have already filed for abatement (asking for a reduction on their property tax), that is about 126 property owners who are interested, compared to the 435 challenges filed in 2005. I do not remember the CC being so vocal and demonstrative back then when the reaction of the taxpayers was three times what is was this year.

If you believe that you are paying more than your fair share, here is the link to the Secretary of State page, “Abatement Tax Tip Facts.” It will guide you on how to file for property tax reconsideration with the City’s Assessor’s Office.

But please remember, if you want your property taxes not to rise, you need to have the CC control spending and look for new revenue. I know that this CC is looking into endorsing the Governor’s Casino Plan but I wish they would reconsider endorsing the Governor’s plan to allow municipalities to implement a local meal tax.

[Filed under Local politics, City Council] [link]

33 Responses to “The Property Tax Discussion”

joe Says:
January 22nd, 2008 at 11:37 am
Ever see a property tax bill from Westford, or even Chelmsford or Tewksbury? Yikes!

Lowell is a deal. If my property tax bill goes up $500, it would STILL be a deal.
Eleanor Rigby Says:
January 22nd, 2008 at 2:44 pm
Yes Joe, but the reason it’s a deal is because property values in Chelmsford and Tewksbury are substantially higher than in Lowell.

Mimi is right, the CC has to look for better ways to raise money and attracting industry, not just the box stores, is the best way to do that. Also keeping properties on the tax roles is important. I read an article in the Globe yesterday in which it says the Archdiocese of Boston is moving its HQ into a building in Braintree assessed at $14 Million! That means the tax revenue on $14-Million suddenly went to zero.

The Spindle City (not Mill City as the Sun has renamed us) needs to be careful because while it might be prestigious to be the seat of power for some state or non-profit agency, it hurts the tax base.
joe Says:
January 22nd, 2008 at 6:21 pm
E.R.,

My house is just as good as a comparable house in Chelmsford, and I get to live in Lowell instead of some suburb, AND my taxes are lower.

I am one happy guy.

Still, fair points.
joe Says:
January 22nd, 2008 at 6:51 pm
FWIW

Residential Property Tax Rates:

Tewksbury: 10.45
Dracut: 10.55
Lowell: 10.60
Tyngsboro: 11.71
Westford: 13.40
Chelmsford: 13.50
Groton: 13.87
Eleanor Rigby Says:
January 22nd, 2008 at 7:33 pm
Joe
Not knowing where you live or the size or style of your house I can only make a general observation. That observation is that if you take a home in Lowell, and could magically transport it to Westford, Chelmsford, Tewksbury even Dracut, it would be worth more money.

That said, the way to offset residential property taxes is to attract industry, not create more condos, multi family or single family homes.
joe Says:
January 22nd, 2008 at 9:26 pm
Sure, but then I’d have to live in Westford.

Industry and commercial property is certainly a net-positive for our fiscal situation, but you might be surprised by the effect of residential property development. Because of how the state’s local aid and educational funding programs work, it turns out that for Lowell, condos, multifamily residential, townhouses and lofts are also a net boon to our fiscal situation. This is because they tend not to attract buyers who have a lot of children, while adding to our overall population. Only large-lot single family homes - the kind you might see in Westford - turn out to be a fiscal hit for the city. This isn’t true of other communities, because their higher median incomes mean they get less state aid per capita.

There’s a good analysis of this in the Comprehensive Master Plan.
Anonymous Says:
January 22nd, 2008 at 10:17 pm
i assume joe has no children (in the lowell public schools)
Eleanor Rigby Says:
January 22nd, 2008 at 11:18 pm
Joe I might go along with you that generally condo owners tend not to put a strain on the system (schools etc) but Multifamily homes? (renters) Single family homes in low income areas (most of Lowell)?

I grew up in Belvidere and now live in a more congested area of the city.

There are many more families and children in my neighborhood now (putting a strain on city resources) than when I was growing up in a large-lot single family home!
sd Says:
January 23rd, 2008 at 12:09 am
i think when he talks about mulit family, joe is refering to the stuff downtown.

look at it this way. the commercial rate is almost twice the residential rate. but if you have a one acre lot, a luxury condo building with 100 units may be worth 30 million, while a one floor industrial plant building on the same site may be worth 8 mil. while the city may collect 20 dollars per 1000 on the building worth 8 mil, and 10 dollars per thousand on the building worth 30, the luxury condos are worth much more to the tax base than the industry. in this case, the industry brings in 160k per year in taxes while the condos bring in 300k. the idea that on any lot in the city industry is better than condo is just not true.

and, it is not a good idea to compare tax rates from surrounding communities without understanding the base that that rate is applied to. a better comparison would be the average tax on a three bedroom home on a half acre lot in lowell vs. another community. i’m sure the tax paid on such a house in lowell will be much less than dracut or westford, etc.
joe Says:
January 23rd, 2008 at 12:28 am
Ooooohhhh, do we really want to get into the goings-on in the Westford public schools, Anonymous?

I told my sister, after the heroin and pedophile stories broke, “You should send your kids to school in Lowell. Where they’ll be safe.” I wa actually just kidding, but it did feel good, for all the white-flight, hysteria-driven badmouthing our schools have to put up with.

My kid’s gong to the exam school at LHS when she’s old enough. You just don’t find programs like that in the ‘burbs.
joe Says:
January 23rd, 2008 at 12:36 am
Eleanor,

I found it.

In Chapter 2 of the Comprehensive Master Plan, Community Profile, there is a fiscal analysis of different types of development, using metholdologies developed by the state.

Here, it’s Section 2.11, towards the end of the chapter.

http://www.lowellma.gov/depts/dpd/master_plan/complete_masterplan/MP-Ch02.pdf
waittilnextyr Says:
January 23rd, 2008 at 10:20 am
Tax revenue is only one-half of the story, we must also consider expenses and private income. Land use with good jobs creates private wealth, and generally does not add much to the public expense, unless infrastructure development is required. Condos may be better than other housing, but I suspect it is not as good as a good commercial enterprise.
Lynne Says:
January 23rd, 2008 at 10:33 am
I attended a big city high school (my town was too small to have one and so sent its kids to the city) and I can tell you, I wished I’d been in a big school district for my entire schooling, as I wasn’t afforded opportunities in jr high that I was in high school. I wouldn’t have traded the level of schooling found in a larger school for the world…the class offerings are bigger and more varied, there was so much more available to learn. Not to mention, the extra activities that were available - we had a really great band/music/chorus program, for example.

I have to say, I’d take city schools over ‘burb schools any day. And not to mention the rural schools. Blegh. It wasn’t their fault, but talk about limiting your choices…
waittilnextyr Says:
January 23rd, 2008 at 3:33 pm
At first blush, FY 2009 looks like it will be a difficult year for the City. Net increase in State aid is proposed at about $750K.

http://www.mass.gov/Ador/docs/dls/cherry/09/cs09160.doc
joe Says:
January 23rd, 2008 at 3:48 pm
waittilnextyear, you are, of course, correct. Commercial and industrial uses are much, much better for our fiscal situation than any residential.

I was just making the point that not all residential is created equal, from that standpoint, and some of it is actually a net gain.
waittilnextyr Says:
January 23rd, 2008 at 4:05 pm
I agree, joe. And thanks for that link. But the City has put up a lot of money, and is carrying additional financial risk, for the JAM/Hamilton Canal area, so it would be wise to maximize the payback.
joe Says:
January 23rd, 2008 at 4:49 pm
I can’t argue with that, but they/we should take the long view. An unattractive industrial or business use on a parcel in that area might pay more taxes than a residential use, but what effect would it have on the values, and thus tax payments, of the other properties around it?

Or what if such a use holds back the redevelopment of the rest of the JAM area? The existing condition of the area is probably lowering property values throughout the center city area.

It’s all connected.
Kim Says:
January 23rd, 2008 at 10:58 pm
The biggest joke going here is the “theres a lot to love about Lowell” campaign. They really need to hire someone that knows how to get commercial developers to come here.(not a bunch of postcards to the retailers directly) I think they should hire someone that understands the way that development really happens. They also should invite some of the developers to come in and speak with them on what attracts the to a city/twn and the importance of going green to attract bio and tech to the city. The catch word is “green” now to get people to come to Lowell. Companies such as Guitierrez are developing Green Space up and down 128 and 495 and skipping Lowell. We need to ask companies why.
Kim Says:
January 23rd, 2008 at 11:15 pm
I am glad to hear some of you try to explain why Lowell schools are better (Oh bigger is better blah, blah, blah). Here is what those that actually have children are faces with

Ranks

Lowell High
10th English 274 of 341
10th Math 254 of 341

Westford Academy
10th English 19 of 341
10th Math 20 of 341

Also does anyone out there not have to pay taxes due to a propety being exempt?
Michael in NH and Pawtucket Says:
January 24th, 2008 at 1:51 pm
One of my nieces attended Westford Public Schools and she had a perfect MCAS score and took an unbelievable number of AP course. Our families had dinner a few days ago and some of the topics were neuropsychology, neural nets, chemical engineering and computer science. It struck me that these aren’t the typical topics that teenagers discuss with parents.

Smaller school districts can make use of technology and distance learning to provide more courses where it doesn’t make economic sense to run a class with only a few students. The Hollis, NH district (arguably one of the best districts in NH) makes Stanford University’s distance learning program available for classes that they can’t run due to low demand.

We chose to homeschool and it’s worked out well so far.
joe Says:
January 24th, 2008 at 2:10 pm
Imagine that, rich white kids whose first language is English and who stay in one school system their whole do better on standardized tests than kids that come from poor homes, move a lot, and have to learn English as a second language.

Knock me over with a feather.
Michael in NH and Pawtucket Says:
January 24th, 2008 at 3:24 pm
> Imagine that, rich white kids whose first language is English and who stay in one
> school system their whole do better on standardized tests than kids that come from poor
> homes, move a lot, and have to learn English as a second language.

I grew up in a poor single-parent minority household and attended a suburban school district and did reasonably well. My father wasn’t a native-english speaker. The school environment can make a difference as the peer group can affect the individual for better or for worse. All schools have their problems. But as a parent, I try to think about the odds and expected outcomes to make educational decisions given our resources.

We raised our kids in a then-blue collar town (maybe it still is, I’m not sure) and homeschooling seemed like the best way to go as the private options weren’t really options.
Kim Says:
January 25th, 2008 at 12:04 am
Joe,
Does anyone have any sympathy for the poor or middleclass non minority children that are being left behind in this system? If you know any public school teachers they will tell you that it is not at all fair to the kids in the class that are english speaking and are not on an ed plan. Also, it is great Michael that you are able to homeschool. (I can not afford to stay home or i surely would). Lowell is a great city and they have cleaned up this city. The schools however just plain stink. I am not saying I dont understand why they do, but that holds back a large population to do better in their lives. Yes, I wish my kids could go to Westford (I will try they have school choice)
Michael in NH and Pawtucket Says:
January 25th, 2008 at 2:03 pm
> Yes, I wish my kids could go to Westford (I will try they have school choice)

My niece went to Westford on school choice but the number that they accepted that year was very small. The thing about school choice is that you have to provide your own transportation which can be a burden for parents (amongst all of the others).
joe Says:
January 26th, 2008 at 2:08 pm
Kim,

I don’t believe middle class kids are being left behind in this system, Kim. I think Lowell Public Schools do a fine job teaching kids from more mainstream backgrounds, too.

When you look at aggregate numbers, such as average MCAS scores or % not passing this or that level, you’re seeing figures that show there is a cohort that is a at a low level. That does not mean that kids who come from more mainstream backgrounds are failing their MCAS tests.

Which is not to say everything is perfect, or that there can’t be improvements. I”m always willing to pay attention to what teachers - teachers, not political theorists - have to say about making the schools run better.

What would you suggest be done about the issue you mention?
Michael Says:
January 26th, 2008 at 8:34 pm
> I”m always willing to pay attention to what teachers - teachers,
> not political theorists - have to say about making the schools
> run better.

> What would you suggest be done about the issue you mention?

Nashua has seen a big influx of immigrants and the impact on the school system
has been significant over the last five years. I’ve seen families move to good
districts in MA and switch to private schools. The problem is seen in middle-schools
and I hear parents discussing what they will do as they approach those years.

I don’t think that you can really fight a demographic tide without far more in
resources and even there, you have to take care of responsibilities usually
handled by parents.
kpem Says:
January 28th, 2008 at 10:41 pm
Joe,
Thank you for that thought. I guess the poor test results in Lowell are not indicative of my daughters future in the system. You asked me what I feel could change the problem of teaching non english speaking students in Lowell Schools.

1) Speaking with “teachers” not politicians- School integration does not work. When children have “major” behavior problems or “major” language defecits they need to be taught in a seperate setting. They do bring the rest down because a teacher only has so much of themselves to give. We need more $$$ for ESL and Special Ed.

2) This city is spending a crap load of money on busing. We try so hard to be fair that we will bus any child anywhere in the city to make the schools “a minority balance”. Well I am sorry to tell you, but you can go to any school near the projects and any school near Belvediere and see that busing is not making that balance. Few parents whether rich or poor, black or white, want to send their kids cross city. So we spend large amounts of money to bus the small amount of children whose parents choose city wide schools. Put this money back into the Murkland, Stoklosa, etc.. with larger minority populations. Does taking a non english speaking student and busing them cross city make them smarter?

3) Here is something that we should all be fighting to get the money back for the public schools. Massachusetts State law(not all states) require that we pay to bus to private schools. The private schools already get to pick and choose their students and exclude special ed so why should we pay this? The real killer is not only do they get bussed to school but they get to pick any private school in the city (where as public school students can’t just pick a school cross city because it has higher MCAS?) They not only get bussed but get an advantage the public school students do not.

PUT ALL THIS MONEY BACK INTO PUBLIC SCHOOLS!!
K-R-S Says:
January 29th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Kpem #3 doesn’t make a heck of a lot of sense…
Here is what I was able to find out about the bussing to private school issue:
1.) Bussing funding comes from the State and Federal government which in turn is funded down to local communities.
2.) The private schools in the city of Lowell, may opt in or out of the bussing program, depending upon bus availability. Bussing times to private schools are determined around public school needs. Schools may also opt out if the majority of their students live in the vicinity around the school.
3.) Bussing to private school students is not offered to children under the age of 5 and is not offered to children who live within a 1 1/2 mile radius of the school (does not apply to children who have to cross major roadways (Mammoth Rd, VFW Hwy, Pawtucket Blvd., etc..)

Taxes that I pay to the federal and state government more than amply pay for kids bussing.
In addition, families that opt to send their kids to Catholic schools, are paying, in addition to local property taxes, an additional
$3,000 + per child, each year.

As far as your comment here..”The real killer is not only do they get bussed to school but they get to pick any private school in the city”.

Well, according to school choice, parents may pick and choose which school to enroll their child (for a variety of valid reasons). I’d be curious as to the rate of enrollment, based on first choice, second choice, third choice…Percentage wise, how many families are given their first choice and so on?

And lastly, yes when it comes to picking a private school, likely parents do get their pick and they must PAY for it.
There are no tax incentives, no deductions…
Hazel Says:
January 30th, 2008 at 1:36 pm
For a number of years, my BIL was a second grade teacher at PS 41 in New York City. The school’s population is incredibly diverse on many fronts; race, ethnicity, language, class, income and ability. (Hmmm….sort of like Lowell) In fact, his classroom (as well as others in the school) was part of pilot inclusion/immersion program for students with a variety of learning challenges (physical, cognitive and emotional). The school consistently hits over 90% of its 3rd, 4th and 5th grade students meeting or exceeding proficiency in English Language Arts and Math on the NYSED Achievement tests.

My point? It is far too simplistic as well as unfair to blame underachievement on the student mix in any given classroom. Yes, teaching a group of students with mixed ability in terms of language and ability presents challenges, insurmountable? I don’t think so.

What contributes to these great test scores and reviews? One of note is parent involvement. At P.S. 41 over 90% of the parents attend open house night and are consistently present in large numbers at other “family centered” nights. I don’t see that at my children’s elementary school. (and the school is thought to be one better performing in the city) I see the same small core group at every event (and then I see the same group at every other activity, CPC, PTO, soccer, baseball etc). The schools and other parents need to find a way to reach out to a wider range of parents, get them involved and keep them involved. Perhaps they need a volunteer multilingual parent(s) to reach out to parents to make them feel welcomed and involved. (rather than as a detriment to the education of the other children)
kpem Says:
January 30th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
KRS,
Parents in Lowell get one of their three choices but only from within their zone. Where as private schools can choose to be bused to any school in the city.
K-R-S Says:
January 30th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
Kpem, not every private school utilizes bussing, as I had stated previously. I will find out precisely which private schools utilize bussing and post it, tomorrow.
kpem Says:
January 31st, 2008 at 3:00 pm
Krs,
That is all their choice. If they don’t want to do this they can go to public schools. Lots of kids are not so lucky to be given that choice. Your taxes that amply pay for busing could also be used for special ed services that the private schools do not offer.
Regardless of which schools use buses and which ones don’t they should be “zoned” just as the public school students are. If a private school mommy wants their child to go from South Lowell over to Pawtucketville they should hop in their mini van and drive them over. (As I would and may) I can not choose for my child to go to the Bailey school as it is out of zone, but I can put them on a bus to St. Margarets right down the street. The law says that they are to be given the same rights as public school students not better rights. I may even send my child to a private school in city next year and I still would not expect to be able to choose one 20 minutes away and selfishly take money out of public school programs for children that are not as fortunate as my own.
Michael in NH and Pawtucket Says:
January 31st, 2008 at 4:57 pm
One of the reasons to use busses is to reduce fuel consumption and traffic, especially around schools. Having a bunch of minivans trying to do dropoffs on a busy street may result in a traffic mess.

That said, I read about four teens, two of them 15-years-old killing a man for beer and $5 today. And a few more bank robberies. And a student hit by a pickup truck while sitting on a bench on the sidewalk. I didn’t see a way to start new topics and didn’t see a crime topic but have read that there are gang problems in Lowell. One of the comments in the Sun had the comment: where are the parents? One thing that I see is that the crime level in Lowell seems to be far higher than our quiet town in NH.

January 21, 2008

The Property Tax Discussion

33 Responses to “The Property Tax Discussion”

Leave a Reply

Find us on Facebook

LeftinLowell Tweets LIVE

Pages:

Recent Posts

Search

Categories:

Archives:

Other:

Email us!

LiL Fundraising for Elizabeth Warren!

Lowell Area Bloggers/Forums

Lowell Politics

Mass Bloggers

Media in Lowell

Media in MA

Other Daily Reads

Politics Online

Progressive Local Orgs

Snark and politics

The Arts in Lowell

M	T	W	T	F	S	S
« Dec				Feb »
	1	2	3	4	5	6
7	8	9	10	11	12	13
14	15	16	17	18	19	20
21	22	23	24	25	26	27
28	29	30	31