Cross-posted in ONE Massachusetts
There is a strong and thoughtful grassroots movement gaining ground in the Commonwealth advocating for a balanced approach to the budget deficit. “Speakouts” are scheduled in numerous communities where people will join their neighbors and elected officials in constructive discussions about how we all can Support our Schools, Towns, Health Care & Services! We’ll also learn about HB2553/S01416 – “An Act to Invest in Our Communities” sponsored by Rep. James O’Day and Sen. Sonia Chang-Diaz.
At these meetings, we will request our state elected officials to support our communities and public structures by endording this legislation that would provide our state with revenues to help reduce a $1.8 billion budget gap that jeopardizes the services and programs we all care about.
We all want a state that is a great place to live, work and raise a family. That means we need good schools, safe neighborhoods, and a strong economy.
The decisions we make today will shape our communities for years to come. We have built a state with the best public schools in the nation, jobs that pay enough to support a family, safe communities and a good quality of life. These things are the foundations of our future economic success. Deep budget cuts threaten to undermine what we have accomplished and weaken our communities.
The following Speakouts are scheduled, so mark your calendar and plan to attend. We’ll continue to update the BMG Events Calendar when other Speakouts are scheduled.
March 22, 6-8 pm
Hibernian Hall, 182 Dudley St, Boston
Organizers: New England United for Justice, Dorchester People for Peace, Boston Coalition to Fund Our Communities – Cut Military Spending 25%, ONE Massachusetts, Mass Senior Action Council, 1199SEIU, Greater Boston Central Labor Council, Mass Communities Action Network
Contact: Mimi Ramos, 617-265-7100 or Mike Prokosch, 617-282-3783
April 5th, 6:30-9:30 pm RESCHEDULED!!!!!
Wall Towers, 10 Church St, Lynn
Organizers: New Lynn Coalition, North Shore Central Labor Council, N2N
Contact: Carly McClain, 781-595-2538
March 29, 7-9 pm
Newton Public Library, Newton
Organizers: Newton Dialogues on Peace and War
Contact: Prasannan Parthasarathi, 617-552-1579
The “Act to Invest in Our Communities” would (1) increase the personal income-tax exemption and (2) increase the tax rate, including (3) a greater rate for unearned income.
<
p>This is a change to the tax code that would be more progressive, raising revenues while lowering some people’s taxes (and raising some others).
<
p>There’s no legislative tie-in to local services, which is not surprising as it is a revenues bill not an appropriation.
<
p>Nonetheless the authors could have set up a dedicated fund for these revenues for the purpose of funding local services. That would have at least signaled legislative intent, and also made it easier to show what the funds are for.
just 5 weeks before the House Ways and Means Committee begins to debate the budget, to commit our selves to organize a few neighbors and friends to tell our our Rep that we will support his/her vote on new taxes to lessen the Governor’s proposed cuts, is key to our ability to repair and restore our public education system. And our pot hole filled roads and bridges. And our leaking water systems. And crumbling public transportation system. And our pressed public health system. And on and on,
<
p>No earmarks. Government is a seamless system that creates and sustains a healthy community.
<
p>Sustainable communities depend on the decisions we make today.
Hi All:
<
p>I just hope that someone (preferably someone with Senator Chang – Diaz’ office) reads my previous post entitled “Taxation in Massachusetts”. Before raising the tax rate, the Commonwealth and its’ elected officials should look at enforcing (or strenthening) the revenue generation methods that are already in place. As I stated before, enforcement of sales tax on items purchased over the internet could produce hundreds of millions of dollars.
<
p>Respectfully Submitted,
Sincerely,
Wayne J. Wilson, Jr.
Roslindale
Member, Ward 19 Democratic Committee
..by minimizing the amount sent to the Commonwealth for it to distribute to its policial clients via corrupt formulas.
<
p>For example – the 2010 revamping of the Ch. 70 school aid formula required by the 1993 act is now ten years overdue, adn continues to channel school funds to a few communites benefitted by the Moskowitz formula. Some pay less than ten percent of their municipal school budget with the rest being paid for by the state.
<
p>Why should the majority of communities in the commonwealth subsidize the state largesse when some pigs are more equal than others?
Tempting as it may be to use, you may want to stick to accurate phrasing.
From ‘dictionary.com’
<
p>
<
p>I was thinking of Number Three, but Two may apply. And at ten years overdue, Number Four in the ‘archaic’ sense would also apply.
<
p>
Connotation incorrect. I withdraw my earlier statement, and instead confirm that you know what the word means, and how to exploit its almost entirely alternate definitions.
if they are at their target local share, are paying the same flat tax rate on property valuations and aggregate income as everyone else for their schools (except for the wealthiest districts, which have their contributions capped, so a fair number of them are taxed at considerably less than the same flat tax rate).
<
p>Some of those districts are paying less than their target, and those districts can’t be forced to pay more because of Prop 2.5.
<
p>The courts mandate that every child receive an adequate education, and the foundation budget defines the minimum level of funding at which it is possible to do that. THe basic concept of the Chapter 70 formula is that the state will add chapter 70 aid on top of the required local spending to assure that at least the foundation level is reached.
<
p>Most who want the foundation budget re-evaluated assume that it would be much higher if today’s high stakes expectations were factored into the budget assumptions. Are you advocating for more spending in your pointing out that the foundation budget has not been reviewed as the statute says it should?
<
p>And do you disagree with the notion of a flat tax rate to set the expectations for required local contributions? Most who don’t like the flat tax think it should be progressive, or that it shouldn’t be capped.