By Bob Katzen
House 25-128, rejected an amendment that would provide a minimum of $100 million annually from the surtax surplus to cities and towns which must use 50 percent of the funds for the repair, maintenance, construction or reconstruction of roads and bridges and 50 percent for public school facilities and equipment. Each city and town would receive a proportional share of the $100 million based on its population as a percentage of the state’s total population as determined by the most recent federal decennial census or the most recent annual municipal census certified by the secretary of state, whichever is more recent.
Amendment supporters said this would average roughly $14 per person based on 7.2 million Massachusetts residents broken up into legislative districts each comprised of some 44,000 residents. They noted this would guarantee each district more than $600,000 per year. Each district would be required to spend $300,000 for roads and bridges and $300,000 for education.
They said that the state currently has allocated the majority of these surplus surtax funds to programs such as $867 million for the MBTA, $419 million for free school meals, $287 million for free community college tuition and $422 million for regional transit. Directing funds toward these priorities has come at the expense of greater local aid. This shift has exacerbated budget shortfalls in many cities and towns, where rising costs like inflation, mandated education expenses outpace the limited 2.5 percent annual growth allowed under Proposition 2½. As a result, local governments have been forced to raise property taxes, cut essential services like teaching positions or public safety, or both, effectively shifting the funding burden for these “free” statewide programs back onto middle-class and working-class homeowners through higher local property taxes.
Amendment sponsor Rep. Justin Thurber (R-Somerset) said the amendment would provide meaningful relief to the 95 percent to 99 percent of Massachusetts cities and towns facing fiscal struggles while fulfilling the original intent of the Fair Share Amendment to support public needs. “Though disheartened it didn’t pass, the proposal highlights important questions about current revenue allocation and whether redirecting more surplus funds could better aid struggling communities and residents amid ongoing local pressures.” continued Thurber. “I hope this sparks broader discussions on ensuring the Fair Share surtax, now generating billions beyond expectations, truly meets voter expectations for funding public schools and road and bridge maintenance.”
Rep. James Arciero (D-Westford) opposed the amendment and said the distribution formula in the amendment does not adequately serve the road and bridge repair needs of rural and less populated areas across the state. Historically, this House has heard from our rural communities how funding distribution formulas that weigh population as a determining factor harms rural communities due to their lower population numbers. Rural municipalities have been clear that road mileage is the most important factor in addressing their repair needs since these towns have extensive local road networks.
He continued that last year, the Legislature authorized $300 million for the Chapter 90 program, a 50 percent increase over historical funding levels. Of this funding, $200 million was distributed to all municipalities based on the standard Chapter 90 program distribution formula of 60 percent road mileage, 20 percent population and 20 percent employment. Then in support of our rural communities, the remaining $100 million of that funding was distributed to all municipalities based on their proportional amount of local road mileage. The passage of this amendment would undermine that progress we’ve made to build regional equity across the state for rural and less populated communities.
(A “Yes” vote is for the amendment. A “No” vote is against it.)
Rep. Christine Barber No Rep. Mike Connolly No Rep. Paul Donato Didn’t Vote Rep. Erika Uyterhoeven No