Tax increase proposal in Boston sparks more fireworks among the city council

An emergency meeting of the Boston City Council, held solely to send a revised petition from the mayor, which would increase commercial tax rates, to a committee for a hearing and possible vote next week, led to unexpected fireworks.

City Council President Ruthzee Louijeune said at the start of Friday morning’s virtual meeting that she had called the emergency hearing to “refer the Mayor’s proposed petition to a committee for further action” to “avoid further delays and address urgent tax matters pending in the city and with the state.”

A unanimous vote was quickly taken to proceed with the emergency meeting, with Louijeune taking immediate action to refer the docket for the mayor’s petition to the Government Operations Committee.

Louijeune then called for a vote to adjourn the meeting about five minutes after it started. Although the vote was unanimous, several council members asked questions when called upon to cast their votes, which later caused some confusion as to why the meeting continued after the adjournment vote was taken.

“I want to make sure I understand the protocols and procedures at this time,” Councilwoman Julia Mejia said before voting “yes” for a postponement. ‘Are we going to postpone if I say yes, or no, we’re not staying’

Louijeune said that while the Council had voted to adjourn, it had not officially called for adjournment – ​​to allow for further discussion that began with Councilor Ed Flynn’s request to speak, and led to further questions from council members about the process and concerns that the body had. could choose to bypass a hearing to expedite the mayor’s petition for a vote next Wednesday without community input.

“The process here seems to me to be rushed,” Flynn said, “and that we’re just doing this meeting as a formality, and then going straight to Tuesday and straight to the vote on Wednesday. It doesn’t seem like we’re actually doing our due diligence in studying this issue, listening to voters, listening to residents.

“It’s almost like we’re a rubber stamp and we’re trying to get this out the door on Wednesday afternoon for whatever reason,” he added.

Flynn further stated that his comments represented his views, and asked the Council President if they were accurate.

“Like you said, that’s your opinion, and I’m not going to give an opinion on your opinion,” Louijeune said.

Mayor Michelle Wu told reporters on Thursday that she “hoped to hold a hearing next week and vote next Wednesday,” with the clock ticking for tax rates to be set monthly, meaning the Council would have to act quickly on the petition, to be submitted to the House of Representatives for a vote at the end of November. The mayor says her plan aims to fend off a double-digit tax increase for homeowners.

Flynn, a critic of the mayor’s tax plan, has done just that two alternatives offeredblocked the House Rule petition from being added as a late issue to Wednesday’s agenda, which required unanimous consent. He later cited concerns about transparency and backroom negotiations that did not involve the City Council.

The revised petition is the result of a compromise The mayor contacted four business leaders this week who opposed Wu’s original plan and withdrew their opposition based on shifting the city’s tax burden lower beyond what is allowed by state law.

An earlier version of the bill, which drew criticism as it would further burden a struggling commercial sector facing declining values ​​and vacant office buildings, passed the City Council and House of Representatives, but stalled in the Senate towards the end of formal legislative sessions in late July.

Negotiations resumed privately at the end of last month between the mayor, Senate President Karen Spilka, Boston senators and business stakeholders involved in this week’s deal – which would reduce the annual property tax increase for the average single-family homeowner from 14% to about 9% and the quarterly settlement of January from 28% to 18%.

Mejia and Murphy expressed concern about whether a hearing on the House rule petition would be held ahead of a possible vote next Wednesday.

“Is there any expectation that this body will hold a hearing to discuss this new tax proposal because it seems like a lot of other people in town have had the, I would say, pleasure (and) opportunity to really be involved in this conversation, but we on the council do not,” Murphy said.

Mejia noted that she had assumed a hearing would be held, under protocols that call for a hearing after a case is placed in committee, but worried that would not happen after Flynn questioned whether a hearing would take place , and whether that would include public testimony.

“If he questions it, then I questioned it too,” Mejia said.

Councilor John FitzGerald requested two formal panels representing both sides of the debate.

Councilor Gabriela Coletta, chair of the Government Operations Committee, assured her colleagues that it was always her intention to hold a hearing – scheduled after the meeting for next Tuesday – with public testimony, but said that in terms of panels “that is still must be determined.”

“This is an important issue for all of us and for the city of Boston,” Coletta said.

The continued discussion following the day’s adjournment vote led to Councilor Tania Fernandes Anderson saying she would withdraw her vote for adjournment after asking why her colleagues had voted to end the meeting if they did not want to.