Sure, Ross still wants to keep college students from cramming into apartments like clowns in a Volkswagen, but now Councilor Stephen Murphy has come out of nowhere with a plan to tax college students, Channel 4 reports.
Rather than deal with the fact that the city has an incredibly uneven "payments in lieu of taxes" system for local non-profits, Murphy wants to charge students attending college in Boston at least $100 a year for the privilege of studying here. Students actually from Boston would be exempt under Murphy's plan, which would require approval of the state legislature and the governor.
Neighborhoods:
Free tagging:
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
I beg to differ
By Stevil
Fri, 06/19/2009 - 9:36am
Councilor Murphy adds, "The only thing growing around here are enrollments and endowments, and I want colleges and universities to step up and say we are going to be a better partner. We agree that we bring some cost to the city's taxpayer, and we are going to compensate by offering this money on behalf of the students we accept."
I beg to differ - the city's budget is up 58% in the past 10 years on a flat headcount (could that be rewritten flathead count and still mean the same thing?).
Anyone know what it takes to be "from boston". I have a feeling you can just register to vote and file a tax return if obligated and you are a "resident"-perhaps change your driver's license over. Like Councilor Ross' well intentioned law to restrict students piling into a single home, hard to enforce practically and legally.
Of Geese and Golden Eggs
By SwirlyGrrl
Fri, 06/19/2009 - 2:08pm
So let's zero in and kill off anything that keeps our city from becoming NewBaltimore or NewDetroit.
And if he thinks that endowments are growing, he's either math-challenged or smoking crack - even the walled island of Boston was affected by the stock market tumble and real estate crash - but Murphy probably didn't hear about that part because he probably thinks that watching the national news would make him a traitor to the motherland or something.
Great idea! Now there's
By Turner
Fri, 06/19/2009 - 9:47am
Great idea! Now there's another thing for college students to choose to either pay off or buy ramen.
Don't Waste Your Energy, Mr. Ross
By issacg
Fri, 06/19/2009 - 9:51am
Your plan violates several provisions of the federal constitution and even if the legislature were foolish enough to go for it (I don't think even the legislature is that foolish) it would be laughed out of federal court on motion.
Listen, it is true that the universities don't pay a lot in PILOT (Massport, for instanace, pays many times what all of the universities do combined). However, that is a result of poor negoitiating on the part of the City. Frankly, it would be far more cost-effective and beneficial for residents for the City to negotiate in-kind benefits (such as the construction AND MAINTENANCE of street improvements, street furniture, etc. by the Universities) rather than to demand more cash - the City hasn't covered itself in glory when it comes to demonstrating its ability to spending prudently.
still at it
By Harris
Fri, 06/19/2009 - 9:58am
Murphy's been trying to do something like this for years. I remember interviewing him about it for the Dig, around the time he was running for Andrea Cabral's job.
Meta-awesomeness
By adamg
Fri, 06/19/2009 - 10:06am
How cool is it, then, that it took the I Team to uncover this story? This is what they're reduced to?
it would take the i team...
By Harris
Fri, 06/19/2009 - 11:19am
...to find my old story. I think it's somewhere in the bowels of the former Dig office, buried under an old rusty series of tubes.
You Know What Would Be Awesome?
By Matt L
Fri, 06/19/2009 - 10:01am
If the tax caused local schools to lay off even more employees! Kudos to Steve Murphy and his short sidedness!
What this idiot doesn't
By anon
Fri, 06/19/2009 - 10:18am
What this idiot doesn't understand is that students bring billions of dollars into the local economy and make the city attractive to employers. The economic boon higher ed provides to Boston far outweighs the reduction in real estate taxes. Furthermore, several institutions, like Northeastern for example, which are always being bashed for low or no PILOT payments, often do pay real estate taxes on property they are not required to by law.
If the city really wanted to go after lost real estate revenue, they wouldn't be spreading out half empty government buildings throughout the city, trying to put a new city hall on prime waterfront land, and maintaining massive housing projects in the middle of neighborhoods.
And the major universities
By HenryAlan
Fri, 06/19/2009 - 10:33am
And the major universities also supplement law enforcement by funding and maintaining their own departments. But really, the best argument against this is yours -- imported students bring tremendous levels of economic activity to Boston by direct spending in the short term, and innovative entrepreneurship in the long term. Without this, Boston would resemble Detroit.
Edit to add:
In other words, students are like any other resident -- they benefit the city by their activities, and should not be seen as a drain on services. No doubt, if an accounting were done, they would be found to be among the better net contributors.
FYI
By JohnAKeith
Fri, 06/19/2009 - 10:29am
FYI, the PILOT program is a state law not a city law. The city cannot assess a property tax on any tax-exempt land, which includes churches, hospitals, universities, museums, and any other registered not-for-profit.
There are approximately 8,500 non-profits with land holdings in the city, based on my analysis.
Councillor Murphy is obviously trying to work around the law by assessing this "fee".
Obviously, it's a "tax" and one that is going to be applied unevenly, which makes it pretty much illegal, wouldn't you think?
Keep trying Steve. Eventually you'll either a) get a law passed; b) lose re-election and fall into oblivion.
I'm guessing (b).
1.3 billion dollars....
By Pete Nice
Fri, 06/19/2009 - 10:46am
wow thats a lot of real estate Northeastern has. I can only imagine what Harvard owns.
But this is a stupid idea.
I might agree that if students are being loud or disorderly in residential neighborhoods they should be fined and pusnished a little more, but $100 a student is dumb.
What am I missing?
By riggs not logged in
Fri, 06/19/2009 - 10:31am
What am I missing here? Students (at least a significant portion who don't live in a dormitory) pay rent to a landlord. The landlord is obligated to pay property taxes, which among other things, funds "city services."
Right?
Unless they live in a dorm
By Stevil
Fri, 06/19/2009 - 12:09pm
Very good point - unless they live in a dorm - that might be a fair way to do this by assessing a fee per student living in tax exempt dormitory (per John's post perhaps not legal-but I'm sure there's a way to make it so) - the best way to do this would be by negotiation. The typical formula is 25% of the property taxes the property would pay if taxable - fairly easy to figure out and reasonable to cover the costs of public safety and administration for an extra unit of housing.
The city does have leverage - all these places are looking to build new structures etc. especially dorms where even if a fee is imposed they make a killing - imagine owning hundreds/thousands of apartments, renting at market value and putting all the property tax in your pocket. There is a civic cost to housing all these students and the burden should not fall just on the residents/City of Boston which gets only a marginal economic advantage for housing these students (most revenues like sales tax etc. go to the state which kicks back a small percentage to the city).
Oh and per just about all my previous posts - this revenue should be used as an offset to the property taxes not incremental to the city. The city should be able to get along just fine on their $3 billion a year with room to spare.
100 per semester comes out
By ShadyMilkMan
Fri, 06/19/2009 - 10:55am
100 per semester comes out to 200 or so a year, which is not all that much of a burden per person. Sure they pay 50,000 to go to that school, but thats not the city making money, that is the college. Northeastern pays the city of Boston the tuition of one student per year in Pilot funds. That seems off balance to me
So fix the PILOT program.
By riggs not logged in
Fri, 06/19/2009 - 11:18am
So fix the PILOT program.
Isn't another layer of bureaucracy, another tax, another bit of government instrusion the sort of thing college-kid-haters are also hyperventilating themselves over in their screams of fury about at the fascist-liberal-commie-liberal-muslim-terrorist liberalist neighborhood-organizing liberals who stole Washington?
Oh right, taxes are okay—–as long as they're on someone else!! (Preferably an under-represented class that is typically unable to speak with a unified voice due to class, circumstances, financial ability, legal status, etc.)
I'm such an ass for misremembering that tidbit.
One more question, what exactly does a DINO from Hyde Park know about the problems facing traditionally student-saturated neighborhoods? Hyde Park has a lot of college students requiring "city services," does it?
Its comments like yours that
By ShadyMilkMan
Fri, 06/19/2009 - 2:16pm
Its comments like yours that make people like and vote for Menino. I think your attack on his not having lived life as a live in student to be a little distasteful.
1) I did not vote for the
By riggssm
Fri, 06/19/2009 - 3:03pm
1) I did not vote for the Mayor when I lived in city limits (I'm a few blocks into Brookline at the moment, but work in Boston proper).
2) My comments about a city councilor make people want to re-elect the Mayor? Er ...
3) You identify Northeastern University as paying the tuition of "one student" in PILOT money*. Then you proceed to defend and advocate a new fee on students.
Not to get dramatic and shout or anything, but why doesn't Mr. Murphy FIX THE PILOT PROGRAM?
* As reported by the Globe in December, 2008, it's less than the tuition of one student, at $30,600.
Couple of points
By Kaz
Fri, 06/19/2009 - 10:59am
1) Menino is already on top of the PILOT program's deficiencies. He has been holding meetings about this since January. You can read the meeting minutes at the city's PILOT program's website.
2) I guess we weren't a-skeerred enough in April when the "I-team" tried to drum up anti-university hatred regarding the PILOT program and Murphy's legislation back then. Way to retread your own path, Shortsleeve. I guess it's easier to be edgy...when you've already been there before. You'll always have that inside investigative stuff nobody's ever seen before, even if you're showing it a second time, but that's just because nobody watches you.
Too bad Emerson's out for the summer
By Brighton Billy
Fri, 06/19/2009 - 11:29am
'Cause then they could compare Murphy to Stalin or Pol Pot (having learned earlier this year that Hitler comparisons aren't OK).
And then David Y. could defend them again.
Just curious
By Kaz
Fri, 06/19/2009 - 12:23pm
Didn't we fight a war over this...isn't Boston the home to the START of that war??
Let's see, so if you don't reside in Boston, then you're not represented in the City Council...but they want to charge you, as a non-resident, a tax for getting an education in their city.
Taxation.
No Representation.
Have we learned nothing?
Stephen Murphy - Dr. Evil
By Will LaTulippe
Fri, 06/19/2009 - 1:50pm
"One hundred billion dollars!"
Uhh, these people don't work, big guy. They don't have an income with which to pay $100. And if they do, THEY ALREADY PAY THE MASSACHUSETTS INCOME TAX, YOU MORON.
Whoo boy
By SwirlyGrrl
Fri, 06/19/2009 - 2:01pm
Smells like a
polecatpoll tax to me. I find the concept of taxing somebody for existing to be a bit dubious, but IANAL.Any lawyers want to poke holes in this folly? I'm sure there are a few law students and professors who would take the challenge.
Best quote from Councillor Murphy
By JohnAKeith
Fri, 06/19/2009 - 9:01pm
From the minutes of the April 29 task force meeting:
Councilor Murphy stressed that non-profits consume essential City services and sited specific examples including: student riots, death benefit payouts, false alarm fire responses / calls in District D associated with college students, and others.
Obviously, Stephen Murphy is the biggest tool in City Hall.
Yes, it was the students' fault that a Boston Police officer shot a woman in the eye and she died which resulted in the City having to pay her a death benefit after being sued by her parents.
If you follow his thinking to its logical conclusion, we shouldn't tax students but should outlaw Red Sox games.
Students
By SwirlyGrrl
Fri, 06/19/2009 - 9:25pm
You can't live with 'em, you can't shoot 'em.