Wu Refuses to Seek Alternatives on Commercial Tax Shift Bill

After the Massachusetts Senate rejected Boston Mayor Michelle Wu's controversial tax hike proposal on commercial properties this past month, the mayor soon disparaged the senate in the press. Senate President Karen Spilka then responded by saying, "Blaming the senate may be politically convenient for the mayor, but it does nothing to improve a policy proposal that has been widely questioned by fiscal watchdog agencies and could do serious damage to Boston's economy."

Upon learning that the mayor planned to continue lobbying the senate to pass her proposal, rather than seeking alternatives, SPOA issued the following message:

---

August 23, 2024

Dear SPOA Members and Supporters:

Our hope was to let the summer conclude before passing on further bad news, but Mayor Wu refuses to consider cutting her budget, rather than passing off the cost of her excessive spending to Boston taxpayers.

Please contact Senate President Karen Spilka’s office at Karen.Spilka@masenate.gov or call her office at 617-722-1500 to thank her for standing up for struggling small businesses who provide housing, and to oppose Mayor Wu's tax hike proposal. Please copy your state senator using the following link: https://malegislature.gov/Search/FindMyLegislator?Address=191+munsell+st&City=belchertown&ZipCode=01007

Earlier this month, Wu disparaged the Massachusetts Senate on WGBH’s Boston Public Radio. When her tax shift plan did not make it through the session, she said, on air, “Every single resident in the City of Boston will know that their taxes are going up because the senate did not vote through that last step.”

There was little or no mention of the final draft of the legislation requiring a good faith executive order from Wu to shorten the time frame of duress on commercial taxpayers. Nor was there mention of the business sector, facing unprecedented market challenges with high vacancies, diminishing values, exorbitant inflation, and high interest rates, now expecting to bear the burden of an 8% increase in Boston’s budget, having little trust in Mayor Wu.

Wu further threatens a 33% tax increase to residential taxpayers which would not be possible under Massachusetts’ Proposition 2 1/2. Economic experts have weighed in voicing their concern for the commercial taxpaying sector of the city (currently paying $25.27 per $1,000 value v. the residential rate of $10.90 per $1,000.)

Senator Nick Collins answered a State House News poll of elected officials by saying, “We’re still hearing a lot of concerns that the legislation hasn’t changed, that has had so much opposition from the retail community, business community, and folks in general, about taxes [going] up while the rainy-day funds in Boston are double what they need to be, according to Moody’s.”

How much taxpayer money was spent in Wu’s unsuccessful pursuit of rent control? What is the budget for the department at City Hall educating disruptive, non-paying tenants to avoid eviction and remain in small housing providers' units without paying rent?

Housing providers have been cutting costs since the pandemic. We watch interest rates in fear, wondering if conditions will improve when it’s time for us to go back to the bank to renew our loans. We cringe at Home Depot as the prices of supplies escalate, in addition to our tax bills and water bills. Not to mention our insurance premiums skyrocketing with 15% to 40% increases. We don’t want to pass excessive rent increases along to our tenants. But each day, we wonder how long we can continue to run our real estate under these adverse conditions.

It's time for Mayor Wu to realistically explore tightening her belt, like the rest of us have. She presented a budget with an 8% increase this year. No financially literate business is raising budgets in this climate.

Every taxpayer and every voter in Boston should clearly understand that their tax bills will go up, not because of a budget imbalance, but because Mayor Wu refuses to curtail spending. All stakeholders should share in shouldering the burden, not just the commercial sector. For added context, please refer to this article from the State House News Service.

Please contact your senators today and oppose Mayor Wu's tax increase proposal.

Sincerely,

Small Property Owners Association (SPOA)

by Allison Drescher and Amir Shahsavari

SPOA Releases Episode 9 of Housing Policy Series with "Candidate Interview with Mark Tashjian"

We are pleased to release Episode 9 of the SPOA Housing Policy Series, which is called "Candidate Interview with Mark Tashjian."

Mr. Mark Tashjian is an entrepreneur and housing provider running for state representative in the 2nd Essex District of Massachusetts. He shares his views about housing policy, including the proposals that passed and failed this legislative session.

Topics include rent control, tenant right of first refusal (also known as Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act, or TOPA), tenant credit check restrictions, eviction sealing, transfer taxes, Mayor Wu's commercial tax hike proposal, and the approval for accessory dwelling units (ADUs).

SPOA Vice President, Amir Shahsavari, moderates the discussion.

As an organization, the Small Property Owners Association (SPOA) does not endorse political candidates. Therefore, this conversation is not an endorsement of Mr. Tashjian's candidacy by SPOA. However, SPOA extends an open invitation to all candidates to share their views about housing. We bring this information to you for educational purposes, but it is up to you, the voters, to decide the merits of the candidates' positions.

SPOA Housing Policy Series
Episode 9
Candidate Interview with Mark Tashjian

by Amir Shahsavari

The Value of Boston Real Estate Agents: The Work Behind the Commission

Among SPOA's other accomplishments this legislative session was the defeat of an initiative that would have forced all property owners to pay broker fees. The failure of this bill to pass is good news for both owners and renters, as well as the many hard working real estate agents who ensure the smooth functioning of the real estate market – often without immediate compensation. The attached article, which was written before the proposal failed to pass, details why this bill was ill-conceived and why it should be avoided in the future. You can learn more by clicking the link below.

The Value of Boston Real Estate Agents: The Work Behind the Commission

by Demetrios Salpoglou