Letter: Vote No on Oct. 8 Proposition 2 1/2 Exclusion
 |
To the Editor:
North Adams voters have an important decision to make on Oct. 8. Will we approve a Proposition 2 1/2 exclusion authorizing a 30-year increase above real estate tax limits to fund the city's share of the cost to build a new elementary school? Or will voters decide there are other, more fiscally responsible options available?
While a new school would be nice, it's not that simple. Many North Adams residents live paycheck-to-paycheck. Others are limited to the amount of their monthly Social Security check to try to make ends meet. For homeowners, the additional tax will be a hardship. For renters, landlords will pass along the increase, raising rents when we already lack affordable apartments.
Even for those who could absorb the additional tax, approving the Proposition 2 1/2 exclusion would be a mistake. North Adams has other major expenses looming on the horizon.
North Adams needs a new fire/police station. NAPD now rents space. Our Fire Department remains in a building suffering from far too many ills to fix. They deserve better. The time is rapidly approaching when North Adams will no longer be able to put off building a new public safety facility. Another Proposition 2 1/2 vote.
Then there's the failing flood control chutes that have served North Adams since the 1950s. Currently, the Army Corps of Engineers is studying how best to remedy the situation. Once that decision is made, North Adams will be responsible for paying part of the $200 million cost of replacing those chutes. North Adams needs to consider now how it's going to pay its portion of that cost. Another Proposition 2 1/2 exclusion?
The most urgent of all major expenses North Adams faces is our failing infrastructure: water mains, sewer lines, fire hydrants, roads. Recently, fire destroyed a home because our water system couldn't supply the water needed. That wasn't the first time firefighters had to contend with a lack of resources which should have been available. How many homes have a fire hydrant nearby that doesn't function? Fixing these problems will cost taxpayers — a lot.
Approving a 30-year Proposition 2 1/2 exclusion to build a new school that won't be needed in 10 years due to declining student population is fiscally irresponsible, especially considering the other high-cost expenditures the city faces. Please join me in voting no on Oct. 8.
Deborah Benoit
North Adams, Mass.
