To the Editor:
The Community Preservation Act (CPA) is coming before Town Meeting, and I support it—as long as it comes with a clear commitment to fund it smarter, not bigger.
CPA should not become an excuse to raise taxes or a way to sidestep the discipline of Proposition 2½. If adopted, it should be implemented in a way that is as close to tax-neutral as possible for residents. That’s not only fiscally responsible—it’s essential to maintaining public trust.
At its best, CPA is not about spending more. It’s about spending smarter.
Our Town already invests in capital projects through its Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)—including parks, recreation, historic assets, and other community priorities. CPA would create a separate, dedicated funding stream for certain eligible projects within those same areas. Used well, it gives us a more targeted way to fund needs we already recognize, while also bringing in state matching dollars. That’s a meaningful advantage—but it only works as intended if CPA is used to replace, not simply add to, existing spending.
That’s where discipline matters. When CPA funds are used for eligible projects, the Town should correspondingly reduce reliance on the capital budget in the CIP. Otherwise, CPA risks becoming not a smarter tool, but an easy path to expanding capital spending in a way that increases the burden on taxpayers.
Put simply: as we shift, we pay less.
To make that more concrete, if the Town typically targets around 5 percent for capital spending, we should bring that number down modestly over time—perhaps to something like 4.5%—as CPA takes on some of those eligible projects.
This isn’t about mandates. It’s about alignment, discipline, and trust.
CPA may allow us to do more in certain areas, and that can be a good thing. But more is not always better if it comes without discipline. The goal should be balance—investing in our community while remaining mindful of the taxpayers who make those investments possible.
CPA can be a valuable tool. It can help preserve what we value, enhance shared spaces, and strengthen our Town for the long term. But it should be paired with a commitment to responsible implementation—one that treats CPA as a funding shift, not a funding surge.
If Town Meeting adopts CPA with that understanding—if we truly fund it smarter, not bigger, and remember that as we shift, we pay less—it can be a lasting win for both our community and our taxpayers.
Sincerely,
Ron Powell
Town Meeting Member, Precinct 3
