No surprise: Monitor against the tax cap

Not surprisingly, the editorial writer of the Concord Monitor came out against the tax cap this morning calling it a gimmick: ["Concord voters should reject tax cap gimmick"].
There is some interesting information in here, specifically how the tax cap will affect what the county takes in from the public. Also, there is the issue of the school tax which will not be included in the tax cap now but would probably be included when the Legislature overturns the Board of Education's autonomy next year [There is no guarantee that this will happen but it is a very strong possibility].
As we all know, the Monitor's editorial board and writers have always been way left of center and haven't seen a tax they didn't like. Not that there is anything wrong with that either. That is their preference. The point is that this editorial probably surprised no one.
What is hilarious though is the statement the city government works:

At a budget hearing a few weeks back, the Concord City Council was preparing to vote to set aside money to purchase property for a new public library. The project is much needed, and the site is promising. Nonetheless, voters were peeved - at the expense and the timing. The council listened, and the project was delayed.

This is just how city government should work. There's little evidence to the contrary in Concord these days.

Clearly, the editorialist hasn't been watching city government that closely in recent years. Or, the person doesn't regularly look at the council packet to see the complaints in it. Or, the person is ignoring gripes many average citizens have had about the council and how it runs.
You can run for office and try and change it, like Mayor Coeyman did in the old days, before the community was overrun by connected attorneys. But in these modern times, that is an exercise in futility and ultimately, failure.
You just can't fight city hall anymore unless the public is informed and aware of the problems in the community and is willing to truly work to solve those problems. You also can't fight city hall when the media is unwilling to expose corruption, question public policy, and question leaders. This isn't happening either. Go back to the issue of the editor of our daily newspaper censoring facts - not opinion, but facts - from a submitted opinion piece because she didn't want to upset a former city councilor and current candidate for the county attorney's job.
When this happens, you can no longer trust the people who are bringing you the news.
There is the issue as well in the editorial of the need for a new library. The editorialist thinks it is needed but it is a questionable statement indeed.
The current library was built to withstand a nuclear war. There is absolutely nothing wrong with it in any way, shape, or form. Is it tired? Yes. Is the space utilized as well as it could be? No. But that doesn't mean you spend $15 million-plus on a new library; that means you spend a few hundred thousand to figure out ways to find better uses of the space. In addition, the cafe component of the new library plan could potential drive for-profit cafes out of business downtown. As it is, the free DVD and video offerings at the library are probably making life difficult for for-profit businesses like Cinema 93 [In a future post, I'll be taking a deeper look at the library issue].
Ultimately though, the tax cap is about bringing citizen control over the budgeting process. It isn't an end all or be all. It won't "solve" the problem. It's not a "gimmick" at all; it's a tool like any other tool. And the council can overturn the tax cap with a simple two-thirds vote plus one. In the case of Concord's council - a mayor, four at-large councilors, and 10 ward councilors, or 15 votes - they would need 10 votes plus one to overturn the cap. Since consensusitis rules over our council - and has for many years - a vote of 11 elected officials to go over the tax cap is not impossible at all. But better to have the tax cap in place and have it overturned by the council when needed than to not have the tax cap at all.
Later this weekend, I will post more thoughts on the tax cap, why it is needed, how it works well in Massachusetts, and how our community can grow and prosper - and not suffer - if it is approved by the voters in November.