Why I voted to lower Clinton’s property tax shift

On Wednesday, the Board of Selectmen held its annual tax classification hearing. At it, I voted to lower the town’s tax shift two points, from 160 to 158 percent. In the broadest of terms, it means we’re going to continue to close the gap between residential and commercial/industrial property tax rates in an effort to make the town more appealing to businesses. The new residential rate is $16.98, the new CIP rate is $30.73.

As a result, business owners will pay a little less next year and residential taxpayers will be paying a little more — about $20 over the normal increase for an average home — to make up the difference.

It wasn’t an easy decision, but I sincerely think it’s best for the town, and I wanted to explain why I voted the way I did.

First, some background: Every year, the Board of Selectmen is responsible for setting the town’s property tax rate. In Clinton, where we have a split rate — one for residential property and another for commercial, industrial and personal property (CIP) — that involves deciding how much more the CIP rate will be. The total amount of property taxes raised remains the same. It’s simply a matter of how big a share each group pays.

Here’s more, from the state Department of Revenue:

An amendment to the Massachusetts Constitution endorsed by the electorate in 1978 resulted in the Classification Act. This Act requires municipalities to classify real property into one of four classes, according to use: residential, open space, commercial and industrial.

Cities and towns that are certified as assessing property at full and fair cash value may elect to shift the tax burden among the major property classes within certain limits established by law. The adoption of different rates does not change the total property tax levy; rather it determines the share of the total levy to be borne by each class.

After many years at the maximum shift, the board began to chip away at the business rate in 2013. Since 2015, it’s moved from 165 percent to 162 to 160. It’s small but steady progress, a sign to the business community that we understand their part in making Clinton what it is.

When I ran for selectman, I said I’d consider any reasonable way to attract new business to town, and to support the businesses already here. Clinton isn’t like many of our neighbors: We were born from the mills, and industry has been part of our fabric for more than 150 years. I firmly believe that, if we are to reach our full potential as a town, we need to embrace that history and get Clinton back in business.

We’ve got a long way to go. The town’s three priority development targets all have challenges, and High Street is currently facing a vacancy rate of more than 30 percent. Still, I’m hopeful. Our downtown is the kind of walkable, diverse and resilient district many towns only dream of. We’ve got streetlight, facade improvement, and wayfinding projects in the works, and people are starting to notice.

I think that continuing the progress we’ve made will keep this positive momentum going. Our FY2017 commercial/industrial rate of $31.95 is the 22nd highest in the Commonwealth, higher than Berlin, Bolton, Fitchburg, Lancaster, Leominster, Marlboro, Maynard, Northboro, West Boylston, and a host of other neighboring communities. If we are to compete, we need fewer liabilities and more advantages. I believe that lowering the shift represents one such potential advantage.

I don’t like raising taxes. But I firmly believe that strengthening our long-term economic foundation is worth sacrificing some short-term relief. If we can attract more businesses, if we can fill some of those empty storefronts and warehouses, we’ll not only broaden and our diversify our tax base, eventually giving all of us some relief. We’ll also be improving the quality of life for everyone who lives here. More places to eat, shop and work at. A better Clinton we all can be proud of.

Still, I know some of you think this is a bad idea. Good news: I’ve been named to a special board subcommittee to recommend future changes to the tax shift, and I need your help. If you have an opinion, if you agree or disagree, please let me know. As I said on Wednesday, we were elected to make tough decisions like this. I’m happy to explain more to anyone why I voted the way I did.

Furthermore, I promise to work with the Assessor’s Office to find assistance for those hardship cases who need it. Here’s a link to available exemptions, including those for the elderly, disabled and veterans.