Why Wu Tax Plan Misses the Mark: Spending Discipline Is the Clear Way To Affordability

As small property owners, we know that when you ignore the real source of a leak, you get mold, rot, and a bigger bill later. Boston’s tax shift proposal takes the same short-sighted approach, catching the drips of a broken fiscal system while leaving the real structural issues untouched. Instead of repairing the underlying problems of overspending, vacancies, and inefficiencies, the City is asking commercial property owners to absorb the runoff. In today’s fragile market, that approach will only make the damage worse.

Boston is facing a genuine affordability challenge, and homeowners across the city are feeling the pressure of rising property taxes. SPOA supports meaningful relief for these residents. But Mayor Michelle Wu’s proposed tax-shift plan, which transfers a large share of the tax burden onto commercial properties, is not a real solution. The core drivers of Boston’s fiscal instability are clear: unchecked municipal spending growth, long-term office vacancies from the pandemic, chronic cost overruns on city projects, and regulatory bottlenecks that slow new development. Taxing struggling commercial properties in the weakest market in decades will only lead to property devaluation, rising loan defaults, and further erosion of the city’s tax base.

Small and mid-sized commercial property owners, many of them first generation and family-run businesses, are already operating at the edge. Long-term vacancies, insurance premiums up more than 40%, steep increases in utilities, rising labor and compliance costs: these are not temporary inconveniences. They are structural pressures that threaten the sustainability of many properties. A tax shift that ignores these realities will accelerate vacancies, discourage investment, and ultimately raise costs for workers, residents, and small business tenants. Shifting pain from one taxpayer group to another is not a strategy; it is a warning sign of deeper problems.

That is why the narrative must move away from “commercial vs. residential” or “landlord vs. tenant.” Boston’s real challenge is a fiscal system that costs too much and produces too little. The conversation should focus on systemic cost control, targeted relief, and economic growth, not redistribution.

Before the City considers shifting taxes onto already-struggling owners, it must demonstrate fiscal discipline. Concrete steps include:

1. Slowing City Payroll Growth

• Payroll has grown faster than inflation for years

• Overtime and pension liabilities continue to accelerate

• Reforms should include hiring freezes outside public safety, reasonable overtime caps, and pension renegotiations

2. Cutting Reliance on Outside Consultants

Boston spends millions annually on:

• IT consulting

• Transportation planning

• Legal and development advisory

The City should conduct contract audits, competitively rebid major contracts, and build more in-house capacity.

3. Eliminating Underperforming Programs

Boston continues to fund redundant, duplicative, or low-impact initiatives. These programs should be reviewed and, where necessary, retired.

Economic Growth, Not Tax Redistribution, is the Sustainable Solution
Boston cannot tax its way out of a vacancy crisis.The only sustainable solution is expanding the tax base through economic growth and redevelopment by creating new taxpayers, not squeezing existing ones.

Key strategies include:

• Removing zoning barriers for adaptive reuse and historic rehabilitation

• Speeding up permitting, inspections, and change of use approvals

• Incentivizing small business tenancy and ground-floor activation

• Supporting upper floor modernization and reinvestment

These actions stabilize neighborhoods, create jobs, attract investment, and generate new revenue without raising tax rates.

State-Level Relief Without Harmful Local Redistribution

Instead of shifting taxes locally, Massachusetts should expand statewide homeowner relief programs, including:

• Increased circuit breaker credits

• Energy cost offset programs

• Incentives for landlords providing rents at or below market

• Housing stabilization funds supported through state surpluses

These options relieve pressure without destabilizing Boston’s struggling commercial sector. Boston deserves thoughtful, long-term solutions, not short-term patch jobs. Let’s fix the roof, not place more buckets under the leaks.

by Amir Shahsavari