"Hi Melissa.
I was wondering if you can offer clarification on items a and c?"
Stacey is referring to Neighbor to Neighbor question #4: "What is your plan to raise revenue for the schools to be able to provide after school and summer programming?"
And my answers: "a. I plan to partner with The City Council and propose that non-owner-occupied, multi-family homes be treated as businesses and be taxed as such," and "c. I plan to partner with The City Council in proposing a rental tax."
Sure Stacey, I'd love to tell you what I'm thinking.
First, I know that the School Committee has no purview over taxation in the city. This is the City Council's jurisdiction.
Second, our schools are in desperate need of funding.
Third, Harrington and Connery were able to make improvements, in part, due to the 1.1 million dollars they received in "turn around" funding. They received this money because they "failed" and were deemed a Level 4 school.
Fourth, our schools shouldn't have to fail in order to receive the money they need in order to be successful.
SO, where will we get this extra cash? Lynn already gets the highest amount of funding from the State possible and the majority of our city tax dollars go to make the city run.
This got me thinking.
The Lynn Public Schools teach to kids that come from all different walks of life. Some kids come from homes that their parents own, some kids live in apartment buildings, we have some kids who are homeless and some kids live in "non-owner occupied multi-family homes" which is a two-family, or greater, home in which the owner or landlord does not also reside.
These properties are income generating for the owner, just like a business would be. I would propose that the School Committee partner with the City Council and urge them to pass ordinances that would tax these properties like businesses with the revenue earmarked for direct services and materials for our students and not administrative salaries.
I grew up in upstate NY, and we had a School Tax. Every residence, whether it contained children or not, whether is was a rental property or a single family home, paid a tax to fund the schools. My answer "c." falls along the same lines. That a tax be created for all rental properties. These rental properties contain multiple families that send their children to the public schools, except the renters themselves are not paying any tax, like the homeowners are, for this service. A tax for all rental properties would create a more fair an equitable base in which to pull funding from. Again I would propose that the School Committee partner with the City Council and urge them to pass ordinances that would tax these rental properties with the revenue earmarked for direct services and materials for our students and not administrative salaries.
These two solutions will create an income base that will be shouldered by the community as a whole. We all share the load.
Keeping the math simple, imagine the rental tax is $100 per rental unit and we had 1000 rental units, this would generate an extra $100,000 for the schools. How many rental units does Lynn have?
We think alike. I wrote this word for word to Mary E. yesterday.
ReplyDelete"That non-owner-occupied, multi-family homes be treated as businesses and be taxed as such"
I would love to work with Melissa on School Committee because we are both educated in architecture and can understand in being resourceful with buildings with including passive design.
We speak same terminology because of our background. :)
DeleteInteresting concept.
ReplyDeleteFive plus unit buildings are taxed as commercial.
The idea of taxing ALL property owners seems a bit more fair.
Targeting rental properties? Why?
Why not impose an excise tax on all cars registered in the city?
Or a meal tax on all restaurants?
Or a tax on all the people without kids, since they have more disposable income? (kidding of course but how is that any different than targeting owners of multis?)
How would you monitor and implement this tax?
Did you know a huge number of people who live in two and even three family units are all family? In many cases they are first generational immigrants who pool their funds to achieve home ownership. Is this tax fair to them?
A huge number of people who own two and three family units are just trying to scrap by? Do they deserve to be taxed at a higher rate???
Granted there are a few larger landlords,(Lynn Housing owns a lot of units...should they be taxed???) who would simply pass this cost directly to their tenants.
It seems everyone seems to think income property owners are rich and have so much of a disposable income. I would encourage you and anyone who thinks that to attend a meeting of the NSRPA,which I am a part of(northshorerpa.com) and have a chat with the actual smaller landlords of the city and I bet you would change your mind!
I am also a single mom of two kids who makes my living off rentals. Times are tough for everyone right now. I as many other smaller landlords do a lot of the work myself. Its our 9 to 5 job. How would you like it if someone told you we are going to tax you since you work in this career?
The goal is to drive more ownership into Lynn not discourage it!
People need to take personal responsibility for their children and their education and until that happen there are no changes.
Hi Stacey,
DeleteThanks for your great comments and questions. I'm preparing for a fundraiser tonight, and tomorrow is my School Committee LynnCam debate so I'll be able to respond on Thursday.
In any case I hope you do make some positive changes, and good luck. I hope by the time my little one is in school and if I am in Lynn the public school may be an option for us.
ReplyDeleteHi Melissa-I was curious to see your answer on this when you had some free time.
ReplyDeleteAlso condo owners who rent out units...how do they police that for this tax.
I will say it looks like this election can offer up a new select of younger blood. I just hope that focus on bringing families into Lynn.