Norwell Republican Blocks Boston Property Tax Proposal

“The City of Boston drives the economic engine of the Commonwealth, and what they are doing — and what they are proposing — will, in my assessment, have a devastating impact on the local commercial real estate industry,” he said.

Wu has repeatedly stressed the need for the Legislature to act urgently on the measure. She says her administration needs state lawmakers and the governor to greenlight the proposal (a compromise negotiated between key business groups and City Hall) by early December to give the City Council and state revenue officials time to set property tax rates before payment taxes. invoices are sent out in early January.

The proposal would give the city the right to temporarily shift more of Boston’s tax burden to commercial properties, beyond what is allowed under state law, so residential property owners don’t see a big jump.

More than 70 percent of Boston’s budget is financed by property taxes. But with downtown commercial property values declining as a result of the post-pandemic rise in remote work, the city faces the prospect of either levying significantly higher tax rates on residential property owners to make up the difference or officials cutting their tax rates. Let’s say there will be hundreds of millions of dollars from the budget. Measure Wu would soften that jump by easing the transition to higher residential property tax rates over a three-year period.

“It is unfortunate to see procedural delay used in a local home rule petition, especially since state representatives from Boston already voted for the measure and it is their constituents who face the potential for devastating tax increases that our consensus resolution will help resolve. ” Wu said in a statement Thursday.

Business groups, including the Real Estate Council of Greater Boston, the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce and NAIOP, a commercial real estate development organization, declined to comment.

The House previously voted to pass an earlier version of Wu’s proposal during formal sessions over the summer before the measure stalled for months in the state Senate. The current version of Wu’s proposal represents a compromise with the business groups that lobbied for her original home rule petition. A legislative committee advanced the bill to the full House Thursday morning after Wu testified in support of the amended bill during a hearing on the issue Wednesday.

However, DeCoste blocked the bill on Thursday using a parliamentary maneuver. He questioned whether there was a quorum or whether more than half of the House’s 157 representatives were present for the vote. Fewer than a handful of lawmakers were in the chamber to vote.

DeCoste said he spoke with business leaders from the four cities he represents south of Boston, including Rockland, Hanover and Hanson, who he said “made a very compelling case.” . . that they will suffer disproportionately” if the bill is passed.

“I’m sorry we waited so long. I regret that we did not discuss this months ago,” he said. “But here we are.”

The House plans to return for another informal session on Friday, where the bill could appear again. But if fewer than half the House members show up (which is likely given the time of year), DeCoste or another representative could stall the bill again.

Personally, DeCoste has not committed to blocking him again. “We’ll see,” he said.

Thursday’s hurdle, even if temporary, underscores the challenge Legislature Democratic leaders face as they try to move the bill through small informal sessions.

Even with supermajorities in both houses, Democrats repeatedly watched Bills stalled due to GOP opposition over the past year after they allowed major legislation to go beyond the deadlines lawmakers had set for themselves to take a formal vote.

The bill’s delay was good news for some business leaders, including Peter Forman, president and CEO of the South Shore Chamber of Commerce, which represents businesses in 25 communities south of Boston. He said he told DeCoste this week that his organization generally opposes taxing commercial properties at higher rates than residential properties, as Boston does. But Forman said he did not specifically push the representative to take action to block the bill.

However, he does not oppose DeCosta, who is not elected by Boston voters, negating a bill that would directly impact Boston property owners.

“Boston is trying to break the ceiling,” Foreman said. “Being the largest community in the state, they will set a new, higher standard that other cities will likely want to adopt, and I think it will cause some economic harm in the state.”

But for Massachusetts Action Council, whose members have been advocating for the legislation for months.this latest setback was frustrating, disappointing, and hard to accept.

Carolyn Willers, the group’s executive director, said many of its members, especially those on fixed incomes, will not be able to afford the expected property tax increase without passing the home rule petition.

“We’ve heard from people who are really afraid of losing their homes or who have said they’ll have to cut back on other basic needs” if the legislation doesn’t pass, Villers said. “To have a legislator who doesn’t even represent the constituents or the people who will be directly impacted by this step in and delay things seems really irresponsible.”

Catherine Carlock of the Globe staff contributed to this report.

Niki Griswold can be reached at [email protected]. Follow her @nikigriswold. Matt Stout can be reached at [email protected]. Follow him @mattpstout.