Melrose Cares: Open Community Dialogue




Click here to report offensive or inappropriate posts.



Alderman & City Politics
Start a New Topic 
Author
Comment
View Entire Thread
Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

Educated and informed voter.We do have.Just to get even basic information in order to make informed decisions on important votes. The voters will do.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

Wile E Coyote, Super Genius, neglects to mention that the ignorant, benighted masses of Melrose made JD LaRock the top votegetter in the 2009 school committee election. He served for a year and a half, then resigned to take a job in Europe. I'd argue his leaving was a greater factor in losing the alderman race than people not understanding his resume. Your mileage may vary.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

So fake it will go down in history.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

In Fiscal Year 2016, Melrose has already hit homeowners with a 6% increase in water and sewer rates and the legally allowable maximum tax increase of 2½%.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

Cool
In Fiscal Year 2016, Melrose has already hit homeowners with a 6% increase in water and sewer rates and the legally allowable maximum tax increase of 2½%.
Just got my tax bill 😮

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

Ugh. Happy New Year.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves


My tax bill is 600 more than last year and this is BEFORE what an Override would cost. No, No No, can’t afford it and will vote NO on April 2nd. By the way, I am a Federal worker who is now furloughed because of a mentally ill president and politicians who have no guts. Trust Melrose politicians? No!

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

The Mismanagement lack of Transparency and Coverups. No on any Override.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

Taxes !!!!

My tax bill is 600 more than last year and this is BEFORE what an Override would cost. No, No No, can’t afford it and will vote NO on April 2nd. By the way, I am a Federal worker who is now furloughed because of a mentally ill president and politicians who have no guts. Trust Melrose politicians? No!
I was leaning towards voting yes but got my tax bill today. Yikes! So don’t try to tell me our taxes are low !! Wow between that and my outrageous water bill living in Melrose is expensive. 5.8 is a lot of money for one city department. I will have to vote NO


Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

And remember, it's 5.8 million a year - FOREVER! I often wonder how they could have the stones to even propose such a thing. These people are so out of touch with reality it's frightening. Also voting no - emphatically.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

Melrosian
Taxes !!!!

My tax bill is 600 more than last year and this is BEFORE what an Override would cost. No, No No, can’t afford it and will vote NO on April 2nd. By the way, I am a Federal worker who is now furloughed because of a mentally ill president and politicians who have no guts. Trust Melrose politicians? No!
I was leaning towards voting yes but got my tax bill today. Yikes! So don’t try to tell me our taxes are low !! Wow between that and my outrageous water bill living in Melrose is expensive. 5.8 is a lot of money for one city department. I will have to vote NO


Melrose taxes are not high, stop it. We are much better compared to Saugus than Winchester, just remember that.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

I would like to remember that, but I have NO IDEA what you mean.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

PS
Melrose taxes are not high, stop it. We are much better compared to Saugus than Winchester, just remember that.


I'm going into the archives for a reply to that, and my reply is - bunk. A $2400 water bill is a tax. Trash fees are a tax. Paying for modular classrooms and a learning common is a tax. Shall I continue?

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

REAR OUR LIPS...NO NEW TAXES.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

I Feel Your Pain
PS
Melrose taxes are not high, stop it. We are much better compared to Saugus than Winchester, just remember that.


I'm going into the archives for a reply to that, and my reply is - bunk. A $2400 water bill is a tax. Trash fees are a tax. Paying for modular classrooms and a learning common is a tax. Shall I continue?

It's your reply that is bunk. You have issues with your system if you have a $2400 water bill. I have nothing more to say about that. Mine is $220-$250 quarterly. Get your system checked.

Trash fees are $200 annually (also they are part of the water bill you just decried... so technically you just said the same thing twice). Hate to break it to you, but that ain't much and certainly isn't worth crying about for people on a normal income structure. If it is truly a hardship because you are low income or a senior on a fixed income there are abatement programs that the city offers to cut it in half or get rid of it entirely for you (https://www.cityofmelrose.org/water-and-sewer/pages/water-sewer-trash-discount-abatement-forms)

The learning commons and modular classrooms weren't debt exclusions. They were bonded. There isn't an extra cost to taxpayers for them. Some of your taxes go to pay the bonds but that is all part of the normal tax structure.

So, yes, I would like you to continue. Because all you could come up with was "water bills are a tax". Honestly, that is such a snoozefest of a point at this juncture. Come up with something new already.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

Taxes !!!!

My tax bill is 600 more than last year and this is BEFORE what an Override would cost. No, No No, can’t afford it and will vote NO on April 2nd. By the way, I am a Federal worker who is now furloughed because of a mentally ill president and politicians who have no guts. Trust Melrose politicians? No!
Thanks for being even slightly specific about your tax bill. Do you mind going a bit further about how much your home was assessed at this year vs last year? I am almost certainly positive that your house hadn't been reassessed for a while so you were paying artificially low property taxes for a while now.

I know it is hard to look at a $600 increase and be thankful, but you had years of underpaying taxes relative to your actual property valuation. You honestly should be thankful for those years in which you were not reassessed at a higher rate that more accurately reflected market conditions. That was a lot of money you were saving. If you doubt this, think about what you would put your house on the market for if you listed today. Is it closer to the current assessed value or the older assessed value? That is the value at which you should be taxed. It is only fair.

I can tell you that my property was assessed at $15,000 more than last year and my tax bill went DOWN $10/quarterly, and the assessed value of my property is roughly $20,000 lower than what I think it would sell for on a bad day. The truth of the matter is that property taxes went down in Melrose this year. It is just a fact. I know "facts" are up for debate in this current political climate, but I am hoping there are some sane souls on this board who can understand the actual numbers on their tax bill.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

What It Is
It's your reply that is bunk. You have issues with your system if you have a $2400 water bill. I have nothing more to say about that. Mine is $220-$250 quarterly. Get your system checked.

Trash fees are $200 annually (also they are part of the water bill you just decried... so technically you just said the same thing twice). Hate to break it to you, but that ain't much and certainly isn't worth crying about for people on a normal income structure. If it is truly a hardship because you are low income or a senior on a fixed income there are abatement programs that the city offers to cut it in half or get rid of it entirely for you (https://www.cityofmelrose.org/water-and-sewer/pages/water-sewer-trash-discount-abatement-forms)

The learning commons and modular classrooms weren't debt exclusions. They were bonded. There isn't an extra cost to taxpayers for them. Some of your taxes go to pay the bonds but that is all part of the normal tax structure.

So, yes, I would like you to continue. Because all you could come up with was "water bills are a tax". Honestly, that is such a snoozefest of a point at this juncture. Come up with something new already.


Maybe I wasn't clear enough for you, or maybe you did it deliberately, but in any case, I was referring to my yearly water bill, not quarterly. And for the record, I did have my system looked at to make sure there were no leaks. I also have three kids who shower every day, and generate laundry that needs to be washed. Admittedly, some of that goes to irrigation, but from numerous conversations I've had with other residents, your assertion that your water bill quarterly runs between $220 and $250 seems a little far-fetched, unless you live alone. I don't. And let's not even get started on the way the tiers are structured, which is disgraceful, and in my view, outright thievery.

Your assertion that I don't understand the tax structure is insulting. Of course I know the modulars and learning commons were bonded. The point is that we still have to pay for them, no matter where they fall in the accounting scheme, so they are, in fact, a tax, as is the trash fee. Again, perhaps I should not have assumed you would understand the secondary point that neither of these expenditures was necessary. We were told then that reopening the Beebe was fiscally unrealistic, and all of a sudden now we're being told it's not. Which is it? Your suggestion that there is no extra cost for those bond payments is absolute nonsense. Of course there is. If we didn't have them, there would be no cost.

The bottom line is that for me, it's less about the tax rate than it is about the deception and wastefulness Melrose has been engaged in for years. The bottom line is that I just don't trust that the City is operating in an up-front aboveboard manner. You can insult and denigrate all you want, but none of that changes the facts, and hopefully the majority of taxpayers have just about had enough of it.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

I Feel Your Pain
What It Is
It's your reply that is bunk. You have issues with your system if you have a $2400 water bill. I have nothing more to say about that. Mine is $220-$250 quarterly. Get your system checked.

Trash fees are $200 annually (also they are part of the water bill you just decried... so technically you just said the same thing twice). Hate to break it to you, but that ain't much and certainly isn't worth crying about for people on a normal income structure. If it is truly a hardship because you are low income or a senior on a fixed income there are abatement programs that the city offers to cut it in half or get rid of it entirely for you (https://www.cityofmelrose.org/water-and-sewer/pages/water-sewer-trash-discount-abatement-forms)

The learning commons and modular classrooms weren't debt exclusions. They were bonded. There isn't an extra cost to taxpayers for them. Some of your taxes go to pay the bonds but that is all part of the normal tax structure.

So, yes, I would like you to continue. Because all you could come up with was "water bills are a tax". Honestly, that is such a snoozefest of a point at this juncture. Come up with something new already.


Maybe I wasn't clear enough for you, or maybe you did it deliberately, but in any case, I was referring to my yearly water bill, not quarterly. And for the record, I did have my system looked at to make sure there were no leaks. I also have three kids who shower every day, and generate laundry that needs to be washed. Admittedly, some of that goes to irrigation, but from numerous conversations I've had with other residents, your assertion that your water bill quarterly runs between $220 and $250 seems a little far-fetched, unless you live alone. I don't. And let's not even get started on the way the tiers are structured, which is disgraceful, and in my view, outright thievery.

Your assertion that I don't understand the tax structure is insulting. Of course I know the modulars and learning commons were bonded. The point is that we still have to pay for them, no matter where they fall in the accounting scheme, so they are, in fact, a tax, as is the trash fee. Again, perhaps I should not have assumed you would understand the secondary point that neither of these expenditures was necessary. We were told then that reopening the Beebe was fiscally unrealistic, and all of a sudden now we're being told it's not. Which is it? Your suggestion that there is no extra cost for those bond payments is absolute nonsense. Of course there is. If we didn't have them, there would be no cost.

The bottom line is that for me, it's less about the tax rate than it is about the deception and wastefulness Melrose has been engaged in for years. The bottom line is that I just don't trust that the City is operating in an up-front aboveboard manner. You can insult and denigrate all you want, but none of that changes the facts, and hopefully the majority of taxpayers have just about had enough of it.
I don't live alone. I have a family. We do not overly regulate our water consumption. Our bill has only ever been over $250 one time in the 5 years we have lived at our house. I would bet everything I own that my water bill experience is closer to the typical resident's water bill experience than yours.

Honestly, $600 quarterly is nuts. I feel bad for you if that is the case, but you gotta look inward here. I run my dishwasher daily. We take daily showers and baths. We do many loads of laundry a week and we are nowhere near touching that amount EVER. There is some type of issue in your house or your irrigation is out of control. I can't imagine what any other reason could be. This is a you problem, not a city problem.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

Yes, $600 a quarter is nuts. That was kinda the point.

The bottom line is that I'm voting no until someone demonstrates beyond a reasonable doubt to me that the money we are spending is being spent wisely. I'm not hopeful, given the history, that that's imminent. An example I neglected before is the enormous amount being wasted on out-of-district placements, and legal fees. The only way I have to express my displeasure is with my vote, and that's what I'm going to do.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

"The truth of the matter is that property taxes went down in Melrose this year. It is just a fact. I know "facts" are up for debate in this current political climate, but I am hoping there are some sane souls on this board who can understand the actual numbers on their tax bill."

I don't understand how the blanket statement above could be remotely true. The city got their 2.5% increase. Any shift between res&comm was nominal. It is possible that if your assessment went up $10k while the average went up say $30k then your taxes went down, but a general statement that taxes went down seems wrong.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

The housing market is crashing and rates are going up, so I don't think it will pass. The houses are coming down so that's why people wanted to sell at this time. The override should be for the police and fire. The schools will stay the same as they have for the passed forty years that I know.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

First step is to get rid of Taymore, and replace her with a real educator, like the one that the SC ignored the last time. She's the leader of a mean girl group, not an educator. Whatever success the schools have had is in spite of her, not because of her.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

JMA
"The truth of the matter is that property taxes went down in Melrose this year. It is just a fact. I know "facts" are up for debate in this current political climate, but I am hoping there are some sane souls on this board who can understand the actual numbers on their tax bill."

I don't understand how the blanket statement above could be remotely true. The city got their 2.5% increase. Any shift between res&comm was nominal. It is possible that if your assessment went up $10k while the average went up say $30k then your taxes went down, but a general statement that taxes went down seems wrong.
Residential Tax Rates in Melrose

2019: $10.81
2018: $11.33
2017: $11.80
2016: $12.33
2015: $12.96

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

Those are tax rates. I thought you were well versed in the basics of prop 2 1/2? The rates go down to offset the increased assessed values, but the end result is still a 2.5% increase in the levy on existing stock.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

The OP with whom you were arguing was talking about the tax rate. Don’t believe me? See the direct quote below. I was providing the numbers to back up what he/she was saying. YOU chose to argue based on a different measure. Of course the levy went up 2.5%, as it does and should every year given basic inflation, nevermind the measurable population growth that results in the need for more municipal services.

“I can tell you that my property was assessed at $15,000 more than last year and my tax bill went DOWN $10/quarterly, and the assessed value of my property is roughly $20,000 lower than what I think it would sell for on a bad day. The truth of the matter is that property taxes went down in Melrose this year.”

PS- your earlier assertion (or that of whichever poster is agreeing with you) that trash service is unnecessary is ludicrous.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

It doesn't really matter what the tax rate is as a stand alone figure. It has to be coupled with the assessed value and Prop 2 1/2 restraints. It also doesn't matter what you think a property might sell for. That's apples and oranges.

In any given year, there will always be some outliers. Some property owners will see a reduction in the actual tax dollar amount. Most, like me, will not. For example, my assessed value did go up, and with the reduction in the rate the actual tax increase was a less than it would have been had the rate not been reduced, but it had to be reduced to fall within the Prop 2 1/2 ceiling. My actual tax bill did go up, by just about 2.75%, in real dollars. The real measure of whether taxes went up or down is the actual amount collected citywide, and by that measure taxes did go up. If the city collected more in one year than it did the prior year, taxes went up. His individual bill was less than a 2.5%. I believe him when he says his bill total fell. That's good for him, and will almost always happen in a few cases. Mine was not. It increased by slightly less than $600. As long as the total amount citywide did not exceed 2.5%, the law has been complied with.

And yes, the assertion that trash pick up is unnecessary in Melrose is ludicrous. We, unlike Winchester for example, don't have a drop-off facility like they do.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

The OP was not simply talking about the tax rate as evidenced by the quote you provided:

"The truth of the matter is property taxes went down in Melrose this year"

If they were talking specifically about rates they would have said rates. My message was simply to correct that. I may have assumed that by showing the decreasing rates you were supporting their argument that taxes were going down on the whole.

I did not post about trash removal btw.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

What he should have said was that HIS taxes went down. To say that taxes went down is silly on it's face. They didn't. Either he misspoke, or made the erroneous assumption that because his did, everyone's did.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

if it’s not for the police or fire, I’m a NO. Schools have had their chance and have blown it. They keep putting incompetent people at the helm who never get the job done correctly. And forget me, this is the opinion of the majority of melrosians. We are a middle class community folks, nothing more, nothing less. NO if it’s for the schools, YES if it’s for police and fire.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

Correct
What he should have said was that HIS taxes went down. To say that taxes went down is silly on it's face. They didn't. Either he misspoke, or made the erroneous assumption that because his did, everyone's did.
I made it quite clear that I meant rates considering how much I mentioned assessed value in my post. I also made it clear that I realized that some people's taxes would go up because of increased assements. That's why I asked the original poster I was responding to what their new assessment was.

Now, as for you, your taxes went up 600 annually. Your tax rate went down. If you listed your house for sale today, would you list it closer to the assessed value from last year's bill or this year's bill? This can be rhetorical if you'd like, I already know the answer. We should all be taxed on the value we would actually sell our property for. It's only fair. Your taxes in total went up but really they went down too. It would be like me getting a new job that payed 20k more per year, my tax rate going down, but still complaining that I was paying more in total tax money. I know houses are different than jobs in that the money isn't liquid, but it is still value that you have gotten that needs to be taxed at its appropriate value. To argue that it should be charged on an outdated assessment is silly on its face.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

My taxes went up from the preliminary assessment so without the override I am paying more. If the override passes, I will be paying even more which scares me because the gas rates doubled in the last bill and I have gas heat.

The override is that basic to me. I pay over $6K in taxes now on a modest older home and that's more than enough. Like everyone else I have utilities, car insurance, home owners insurance, and other costs that even with frugality, I can only reduce so much but are not optional expenses.

I don't want to pay more so I am voting no.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

What It Is
Now, as for you, your taxes went up 600 annually. Your tax rate went down. If you listed your house for sale today, would you list it closer to the assessed value from last year's bill or this year's bill?


Neither. I would list it for what I thought the market value is. I wouldn't even consider the assessed value.

What It Is
We should all be taxed on the value we would actually sell our property for.


And how pray tell is that supposed to work? Market conditions change too fast to make that in any way equitable or workable. It would also lead to violating Prop 2 1/2 because compliance with that is based on assessed values, not current market value.

What It Is
Your taxes in total went up but really they went down too.


What? They either did or they didn't.

What It Is
To argue that it should be charged on an outdated assessment is silly on its face.


All assessments are outdated. They don't in any way reflect fair market value. It's apples and oranges.

The concerns of the prior poster UP are fair and accurate. I have all of the same concerns, in addition to having just watched my 401K drop 10% in value since October 1.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

You know I was just saying that you should get taxed closer to what your fair market value of your house is. You are being daft purposefully. They reassess annually. If your house value goes up in that time then you are saving money. If it goes down over that year, you get taxed a bit extra.

How have the last 10 years gone for you in that regard? I'm thinking your assessed value was a good deal under what you would have put it on the market for for almost every single one of those years. Even with the current market slow down, my assessment is roughly 20k lower than what I'd list it for.

What I am saying is the assessed values are fair. It is just plain dumb to think they wouldn't change the assessed values to reflect market conditions. If the market truly slows a lot, you will see the assessed values drop next year. God forbid, 1 year out of 10, you pay taxes on slightly more than your home is worth. When the other 9, you were paying on less. I don't even think that's the case. I'd be willing to bet your current assessed value is less than you would put it on the market for right now. Your are not answering that (obviously) and being quite phony about it.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

What It Is
You know I was just saying that you should get taxed closer to what your fair market value of your house is. You are being daft purposefully.


It's becoming more and more obvious that you just don't get it. And now you've felt it necessary to resort to personal insults. Great.

One more time - it doesn't matter what the assessed value is. If your assessed value drops, the tax rate will be set higher. If your assessed value in the next assessment goes up, the new tax rate will be set so that the city gets it's 2 1/2 increase. It may or may not go up, but your taxes will go up. The goal is to assure that the City gets every cent of the 2 1/2 percent they are allowed to increase the tax levy by. Assessed value is meaningless unless it's considered in conjunction with the current tax rate, and neither has anything at all to do with current fair market value.

What It Is
It is just plain dumb to think they wouldn't change the assessed values to reflect market conditions. If the market truly slows a lot, you will see the assessed values drop next year.


Of course they will change the assessed value, but it reflects changes in market conditions in the prior year, not current conditions. During the the last bubble, when valuations due to market conditions dropped for several straight years my actual tax bill rose every single year because the tax rate was set higher to compensate so that the city would get all of it's 2 1/2 percent increase.

What It Is
I'd be willing to bet your current assessed value is less than you would put it on the market for right now. Your are not answering that (obviously) and being quite phony about it.


I'm not daft, dumb, or phony. My current assessed value is quite a bit lower that the current market value. I'm pretty sure I alluded to that several times already. My assessed value for this year is 637K. Projected market value varies quite a bit depending on what tool you use, but for our purposes, let's use Realtor.com's projection, which is 703.5K. Unless there is a precipitous drop in market values across the board, I fully expect my and most other assessed values to go up next year, in which case the tax rate will probably go down again to compensate for Prop 2 1/2 limitations. Again, even that's not really relevant. My taxes are likely to increase by around 2 1/2%. There will be some outliers, but I doubt very much if I'll be one of them.

I'm not going to waste my time trying to explain this to you any more, and I'm not at all impressed by your descent into insults. That's chicken$hit, and I have no time for that.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

So you are getting a discount. That's nice. I see I are very thankful for it. And its such a big discount that it will take many multiple years of tax increases for your assessed value to reach your actual value. So, like a true late-stage capitalist, you are happy to rail against an override that would allow your taxes to come in line with the actual value of your house so that others can foot the tax on the closer to accurate assesments of their houses. Typical selfish thinking of this board. Also, if daft and phony are insults to you, you really shouldn't be calling people silly or, worse, chicken$hit. You sensative little soul.

The poster Come On said earlier that I was lucky my taxes went down 40 per year. I'm not lucky. The opposite actually. It means iIam one of the ones whose house is assessed close to accurately and am being taxed at the proper amount. I am subsidizing the people on this board who complain about their high taxes but aren't even taxed on close to their assessed value due to Prop 2 1/2 limitations. That's not to say I mind what I pay and am not willing to pay more. But it is time that people start paying on what they own value-wise. 2.5 percent each year isn't getting us there.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

A discount? What on earth are you talking about? He's paying exactly what he's supposed to be paying.

As for an override...I have no idea what the total tax levy receipts are right now, but let's say it's $200 million. A %5.8 override would be a 2.9% increase, over and above any Prop 2.5 increase. That means that next year's taxes would increase by 5.4%.

If we were paying based on this year's market value, the tax rate would have to decrease to comply with Prop 2.5. Your tax bill probably wouldn't change at all.

Exactly what part of this simple fact do you not understand? Unbelievable.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

What It Is
Even with the current market slow down, my assessment is roughly 20k lower than what I'd list it for.


Baloney. Go to the Assessor's database, find your assessed value, and list it. Then go to Zillow, or Redfin, or Realto.co get a current projection of market value, and list that. And don't fudge the numbers just so they fit your narrative.

"Correct" says his assessed value is $637 and his projected market value is $703. That means he's being taxed at the rate of 90.6% of projected market value. I went to the database and picked a random house on Foster Street. The assessed value is $525.1. Then I went to Realtor.com and found the projected market value. The Realtor.com projection is $579.5. Guess what? That home is being taxed at 90.6% of current projected market value.

If you're saying your home has only a $20,000 difference between assessed and market value, unless it's tiny, you are way off. If your house is assessed for $600K I would expect projected market value to be about $662,000. But hey, if you want to list it for $620, feel free.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

Any Yes voter, teacher, Taymore, Mayor or Alderman that wishes to debate the facts please leave a message here. Melrose Local Tv I am sure would be happy to cover it or we can get private support. Let us get this all in the open. Leave a message on this site on when and where? Let us meet in a public place and argue facts and see where we end up!

Would ove a question and answer with Mayor.

A meeting on the plan for the future with Taymore

A meeting with the Alderman that refused Monica proper facts and information needed. How man people vote yes without this infoirmation

A discussion with the School Commitee on why no one is being held accountable.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

Live Debate
Any Yes voter, teacher, Taymore, Mayor or Alderman that wishes to debate the facts please leave a message here. Melrose Local Tv I am sure would be happy to cover it or we can get private support. Let us get this all in the open. Leave a message on this site on when and where? Let us meet in a public place and argue facts and see where we end up!

Would ove a question and answer with Mayor.

A meeting on the plan for the future with Taymore

A meeting with the Alderman that refused Monica proper facts and information needed. How man people vote yes without this infoirmation

A discussion with the School Commitee on why no one is being held accountable.
I’m still waiting for OUR debate, “Live Debate” or should I call you “VOTE NO”? How many other handles do you use on here? I bet half of these threads are just you logging in and talking to yourself. You chickened out last time....stop wasting people’s time with your constant “keyboard warrior” demands for debates. You won’t show and no one wants to listen to you.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

Educated and informed voter.We do have.Just to get even basic information in order to make informed decisions on important votes. The voters will do.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

Much of the talk in Melrose of late has centered on the upcoming tax override vote, with each side of the debate making their presence known and stating their respective cases to all who will listen.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

It is what it is

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

I am willing consider voting "yes" only when city hall and the superintendent's office come forward with requested information on past spending as well budget projections. In the past, they refuse to release this information, even to our elected alderman and school committee members who have had to repeatedly enforce compliance with the State's Public Records laws by filing complaints with the Secretary of State's office. I consider this obstructionist and undemocratic behavior by the mayor, school committee chair, superintendent of schools and other complicit public servants as a personal attack against the taxpayers and students of Melrose. This abhorrent behavior continues to this day and was the primary reason the last override failed miserably. Melrose taxpayers would like to make an educated decision on the override, but cannot if these city officials continue to deny information requests.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

Apparently the message board is doing the job it's supposed to be doing. That's the freedom of speech.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

This is the first time that I've heard of someone wanting to pay property taxes on the price that they would list their home for. The Market goes up and down so its not a stable figure. For example, the housing market went down nationally 6% in December, for no apparent reason. Property taxes can't move around like that and make sense. It's customary to tax on the assessed value because although the number may lag behind, it needs to be stable. It can go the other way too. You can sell for less than your assessed value but the buyer isn't going to pay lower taxes. Think about all those $1interfamily transfers.

To use a site like Zillow or Redfin? These are estimates that a commercial site is giving in order to further their business aims.

If you want to send city hall the amount of money you'd pay if your home was assessed what you would list it for, if it's more that your normal taxes, they should happily oblige you.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

The reason you don't see many administration supporters posting here is because every time they do try to pass on the administration's propaganda, they are totally and thoroughly debunked with facts they can't dispute.

The administration is scared to death of this site, both now, and in it's prior incarnation. Why else do you think Dolan banned access to it, a practice that continues to this day?

This is the only place where voters can get even a portion of the truth. They certainly can't get it from city officials, who continue to mislead, obfuscate, and outright lie about all things fiscal. Melrose is a house of cards. The sooner that house of cards collapses, the sooner we can get a mulligan and fix the mess we've allowed to happen.

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

I think it’s April 2 2019.
It’s all smoke and mirrors so just put on the mask and breathe deep into the illusion.
Wake up and vote No!

Re: Melrose Gets What it Deserves

It is big dark secret, just the way they want it.