Local government in greater Boston area (Springfield, Cambridge: homes, school districts, property tax)

[gettingoutofpa]

As a relatively new MA resident, I'm curious to learn what town/small city has the best local government in the area (and the worst). For example, I was intrigued by the recent Cambridge decision to offer mini-bonds to raise money. It looked like a clever and creative way to make money. In contrast, I've heard complaints from people in various towns about a lot of back-room decision making which reminds me more of the turn of the last century vs. the 21st.

Obviously this is highly subjective, but it made me curious. Which towns (and smaller cities - not Boston - I'm thinking places like Framingham which just became a city) seem to have the edge on transparent, accountable government and is even - dare I say it? - thinking about the future? Not really looking for a partisan debate here, as this type of thing usually transcends party.

[tysmith95]

Worst: Somerville

[mdovell]

This is very open ended. Are you looking at financial stability? Political?

I know of some that are dramafests. Others might have issues only if you talk to locals. There also can be a difference between the city/town and its school district. There are also other services that can tend to be somewhat under local control like housing and water districts.

Brockton for example I do not think is a totally bad area. It has a school system that is the envy of most other small cities in Mass. However politically they are very divided. There's a number of issues where things are cut right down the line. Mayor Carpenter initially won but 100 or less votes. I don't think personally he is a bad guy. Often times he does the right thing but he isn't really translating the decision making process well to the public.

Keep in mind there is also a significant brain drain in government right now. Retirements coupled with an improving economy add up.

[gettingoutofpa]

Interesting that you mention the brain drain. I've heard others discuss that a lot of local governments (public services) are staffed with 55 and older workers raising the specter of significant staffing issues in the future.

I really didn't have an agenda per se and was more looking at political measures of success - what the political culture is - of various towns. I've lived in quite a few states over the years and local town politics, in my own and talking to others in a variety of towns, seem to be very closed door (vs. transparent). Some towns seem to work pretty well despite this, others not so much.

[Dm84]

Originally Posted by mdovell

Brockton for example I do not think is a totally bad area. It has a school system that is the envy of most other small cities in Mass. However politically they are very divided. There's a number of issues where things are cut right down the line. Mayor Carpenter initially won but 100 or less votes. I don't think personally he is a bad guy. Often times he does the right thing but he isn't really translating the decision making process well to the public.

Brockton is basically a failed city with one of the worst school districts in MA, just like Springfield, which you think is one of the most prosperous places in MA lol.

[xo_kizzy_xo]

Cronyism is alive and well in a lot of local governments. Everybody *knows* somebody. When I was a kid I remember my parents talking with neighbors about open secrets and things which were voted against but overridden anyway because somebody owed somebody a favor.

Lots of NIMBYism in several towns including mine. Some towns would rather raise property taxes than either lift or amend whatever retail/business by-laws already on the books because of *exclusivity*.

It's true what's been said that the average age of a town meeting member/council member is mid-50s. Most skewer older than that. They've been voted in multiple terms because opponents are far and few between. They're household names in their municipalities. Many of them want to keep the status quo. I suspect this is but one reason why younger people tend not to run for local office...?

[GeoffD]

Originally Posted by Dm84

Brockton is basically a failed city with one of the worst school districts in MA, just like Springfield, which you think is one of the most prosperous places in MA lol.

Pretty much.

[GeoffD]

Originally Posted by gettingoutofpa

As a relatively new MA resident, I'm curious to learn what town/small city has the best local government in the area (and the worst). For example, I was intrigued by the recent Cambridge decision to offer mini-bonds to raise money. It looked like a clever and creative way to make money. In contrast, I've heard complaints from people in various towns about a lot of back-room decision making which reminds me more of the turn of the last century vs. the 21st.

Obviously this is highly subjective, but it made me curious. Which towns (and smaller cities - not Boston - I'm thinking places like Framingham which just became a city) seem to have the edge on transparent, accountable government and is even - dare I say it? - thinking about the future? Not really looking for a partisan debate here, as this type of thing usually transcends party.

Cambridge Mini Bonds is borrowing money that has to be paid back by the taxpayers 5 years later. It is not a way to "make money". Since it's a short term note, it's also a really bad way to borrow money since you're not locking in historically low long term interest rates. If you're taking on debt, you want to issue 20 or 30 year bonds.

[gf2020]

I usually think that a town that has a lower property tax rate then it's comparable neighbors is generally a good sign of a "well run" community. To me it means they have kept their spending in check.

Look at Shrewsbury ($12.66) vs. Westborough ($18.46), Marblehead ($11.02) vs. Swampscott ($16.00), Medford ($10.24) vs. Malden ($14.09).

[timberline742]

Originally Posted by gf2020

I usually think that a town that has a lower property tax rate then it's comparable neighbors is generally a good sign of a "well run" community. To me it means they have kept their spending in check.

Look at Shrewsbury ($12.66) vs. Westborough ($18.46), Marblehead ($11.02) vs. Swampscott ($16.00), Medford ($10.24) vs. Malden ($14.09).

I would think this has more to do with commercial base than quality of management. Also, values of homes. The higher the value the less you can charge in till rate to achieve the same revenue.