I write to comment on last week’s letters to the editor and ad voicing support for Question 3, proposing a change to the Community Preservation Act surcharge. Because I worry any time I see the word “charge,” I took a moment to look into the supposedly favorable math being touted by the supporters.
The numbers check out. If we change the surcharge from 1.1% to 3%, the average household will be required to pay about $175 more per year, or about $15 per month. That’s less than a trip to the movies. The return on that modest investment is, however, somewhat startling. That leverage is driven by the state’s increased match rate, put in place to incentivize local governments to maximize their CPA funding.
At our current 1.1% level, Harvard raised about $264,000 in 2022, which the state matched with its own $115,000 (44% of what we raised), putting a total of $375,000 of CPA funds in our coffers. Had we instead been operating at the 3% level, we would have raised about $690,000 ourselves, and the state would have matched with $510,000 (at a higher rate of about 70% of what we raised), giving us well over a million dollars in CPA funds to work with.
From this, I see that not only have we here in Harvard been leaving millions of state matching dollars on the table, but also that the state tax payments of Harvard residents are being directed to match CPA funds raised by other communities. (For example, neighboring Ayer, at 3%, itself raised over a million dollars in CPA funds.)
Sorting this all out, as someone who wants to stretch her dollar while at the same time make the best use of our local playing fields, open spaces, and historical sites, this is an offer that is too good to refuse: I am willing to invest $175 a year.
Sima Baran
South Shaker Road
