Between $10 and $20 a year. That's what a family in Amherst with a house assessed at between $150,000 and $200,000 would pay to help conserve those things we value about our town if we pass the Community Preservation Act (CPA) referendum question on April 3. The referendum asks Amherst citizens to vote a "surcharge" of 1% on the property tax, with significant exemptions for people with lower incomes, in order to build up a fund of money that can be used to protect open space, acquire land for recreation, protect historic sites and buildings, and provide affordable housing.
The Community Preservation Act is the result of years of work. Its purpose is to improve Massachusetts' ability to cope with the consequences of rapid development: the destruction of open spaces that are valued as productive land or for their scenic views that help define a community, and the increasing cost of housing that made it impossible for many people to live in the town they grew up in or work in. We have certainly witnessed these related problems throughout the Pioneer Valley, particularly in Amherst.
Without intervention, housing costs will continue to escalate and land will continue to be subdivided and paved over. The CPA is a new tool to help us intervene.
The Act assures local control in several ways. First, each community decides whether to adopt the Act, and how to structure it. Communities can choose a surcharge of 1%, 2% or 3%. In addition, towns can exempt the first $100,000 of the value of a residential property, and any property already subject to other property tax exemptions. The proposal in Amherst adopts all these exemptions, and chooses the lowest surcharge, to keep the costs to taxpayers as low as possible.
Secondly, each city or town that adopts the Act sets up a committee of five to nine citizens to administer it. The committee must have a representative from the Conservation Commission, the Historic Commission, the Planning Board, the Park Commissioners, and the Housing Authority. The committee will study the community's needs, in consultation with the other boards and with at least one public hearing. It will then recommend to Town Meeting how the funds should be expended. The Act does require that at least 10% of the funds be spent on each of the three major purposes of the Act: open space and historic preservation, and affordable housing. Most of the fund - 70% - can be used for any of these purposes, as we think most important.
In addition to the locally-raised money, there is a statewide fund. The CPA established fees at the Registry of Deeds; for example, the fee is $20 when property is sold. Everyone who sells or buys property or has some other reason to record a deed in Massachusetts since the beginning of this year has been paying that fee. The fund created by those fees will be used to reward communities that join the program by passing a CPA referendum.
There is a real incentive to join this program early: the first pot of money will be divided in equal proportions to all cities and towns which are eligible at the time, and will include all the fees paid between December 13, 2001 and June 30, 2002. As the number of participating municipalities increases, that "pie" will have to be divided into more pieces, so each piece will be smaller.
With our proposed exemptions and a 1% surcharge, we in Amherst can raise about $105,000 a year on our own, and we can almost double that with the state's fund. People especially concerned about these issues can also contribute voluntarily.
What can we do with these funds? We can purchase land or development rights, including helping the Town exercise its right of first refusal to purchase land that is being removed from state programs supporting agriculture or forestry. Or we can buy land for recreation, like the soccer fields that we have needed for a long time.
The CPA also provides money for affordable housing. The Act requires that efforts be made, wherever possible, to adapt existing buildings or do new construction on previously- developed sites. This area has a great need for low and moderate priced housing. In the CPA, low income is defined as having an annual income of less than 80% of the median income for the area, while a moderate income family has an annual income of between 80% and 100% of that median.
Finally, it seems likely that the state government, having passed the Community Preservation Act, will funnel most funds for land preservation through the Act, rather than the programs we've used in the past. The same may be true for housing programs. It is to our advantage to use this tool, and to encourage our neighbors to do so as well.
We have a lot of reasons to vote "yes" on April.