Connect with us

Boston, MA

Boston’s bid to hike commercial property tax couldn’t come at a worse time – The Boston Globe

Published

on

Boston’s bid to hike commercial property tax couldn’t come at a worse time – The Boston Globe


The recent op-ed by Ashley Groffenberger, chief financial officer for the City of Boston, highlights the deeply concerning approach Boston City Hall is taking on commercial property taxes (“Boston needs a temporary tax hike on commercial properties,” Opinion, May 30).

Need proof? Just look at how some of the commercial buildings in Boston have traded recently. Just last month, 147 Milk St. sold for almost a quarter less than its sale price three years ago. And just a few months ago, Synergy purchased 179 Lincoln St. for just under half of the building’s 2020 sale price.

Examples like these persist, highlighting how Boston’s commercial real estate sector has struggled to rebound as post-pandemic trends, including remote work, have become the long-term reality. Increased taxes on these businesses could not come at a worse time.

Advertisement

Forcing commercial owners to pay more in taxes would harm property values for those who stay and drive others to set up shop outside of Boston. Either case is bad for the city and its residents. Because Boston depends so heavily on commercial property taxes to fund public safety, education, trash collection, and so many other essential city services, it needs existing properties to thrive, and it needs to attract further businesses to these properties.

Boston City Hall must focus on making the city’s economy more competitive, not less.

Mike Edward

Boston

The writer is chair of the Greater Boston Real Estate Board and president of the commercial real estate services firm Perry CRE.

Advertisement





Source link

Boston, MA

A federal judge in Boston has blocked parts of Trump’s order to limit voting by mail

Published

on

A federal judge in Boston has blocked parts of Trump’s order to limit voting by mail


President Trump holds up an executive order to limit mail-in voting as Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick looks on in the White House’s Oval Office in March.

Alex Wong/Getty Images


hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Alex Wong/Getty Images

President Trump’s executive order to limit voting by mail has hit a legal hurdle.

On Thursday, a Boston-based judge blocked parts of the order that, at least so far, has not directly affected mail-in voting for this year’s midterm primary elections.

Advertisement

The legal fight, however, is likely to continue. The order pushes the boundaries of Trump’s authority under the Constitution, which gives state legislatures and Congress — not the U.S. president — the power to set the rules for federal elections.

The Trump administration is expected to appeal the new ruling by U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani, a nominee of former President Barack Obama, as a separate appeal of an earlier ruling by another federal judge moves forward in a similar set of lawsuits based in Washington, D.C.

Among other directives, Trump’s order from March calls for the Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Postal Service to create lists of adult U.S. citizens or eligible voters in each state. It also calls for USPS, which is independent of a president’s administration, to deliver mail-in ballots only to people on those lists.

In response, USPS has proposed using information from state election officials to create voter lists. Postmaster General David Steiner told lawmakers Wednesday that under the proposal, the Postal Service would not deliver the mail ballots of any states that refuse to turn over their absentee voter lists to the federal government.

For the D.C.-based cases, the judge found in late May that it was too early for an emergency ruling that would block directives that the Trump administration has yet to carry out. Democrats are appealing that judge’s ruling to the U.S. Appeals Court for the District of Columbia.

Advertisement

Editor’s note: USPS is a financial supporter of NPR.

Edited by Benjamin Swasey



Source link

Continue Reading

Boston, MA

Boy, 13, hospitalized after being found unresponsive in swimming pool at Beverly home

Published

on

Boy, 13, hospitalized after being found unresponsive in swimming pool at Beverly home


Local News

The boy was stabilized and flown to a Boston hospital, police said.

A 13-year-old boy was flown to a Boston hospital after he was found unresponsive in a swimming pool at a home in Beverly on Wednesday afternoon, police said.

Police and firefighters were called to a home on Parramatta Road after bystanders pulled the boy from the pool, the Beverly Police Department wrote in a press release.

Advertisement

Bystanders administered CPR until first responders arrived, according to police. First responders continued CPR and other “life saving measures,” police said.

An ambulance took the boy to Beverly Hospital where he was stabilized. He was then taken by medical helicopter to a Boston hospital, police said.

The incident is currently being investigated by Beverly police, the department said.

Sign up for the Today newsletter

Get everything you need to know to start your day, delivered right to your inbox every morning.

Advertisement

Sign up for the Today newsletter

Get everything you need to know to start your day, delivered right to your inbox every morning.





Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Boston, MA

Federal judge in Boston bars Trump from implementing proof of citizenship requirement to vote – The Boston Globe

Published

on

Federal judge in Boston bars Trump from implementing proof of citizenship requirement to vote – The Boston Globe


A federal judge on Wednesday permanently barred President Donald Trump’s administration from implementing most of his first executive order on elections, part of which sought to require people to show documentary proof of citizenship when they register to vote.

The ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Denise Casper in Boston effectively converts a preliminary injunction she issued a year ago, in which she temporarily blocked many of Trump’s efforts to overhaul elections, into a permanent ban.

Casper rejected the administration’s argument that the lawsuit to block the changes brought by Democratic state attorneys general was premature because the rules had yet to be implemented. Instead, she agreed that the Constitution gives states and Congress the authority to regulate elections, and that Trump’s requirements violated the separation of powers.

The Constitution “does not grant the President any specific powers over elections,” she wrote.

Advertisement

Among other proposed changes, Trump’s order would have required people to provide documentary proof of citizenship when registering to vote, prevented mail ballots from being counted if they arrive after Election Day, even if they were postmarked by then, and punished states that failed to comply by withholding certain federal money.

It was the latest in a string of rulings against the elections executive order Trump signed just months after taking office for his second term. He has since signed another executive order on elections, seeking to create a national voter list and limit mail balloting. That directive also faces multiple legal challenges.

Last fall, a federal judge in Washington, D.C., overseeing a separate challenge to the first election executive order by civil rights and Democratic Party-aligned groups blocked the government from taking steps to include the proof-of-citizenship requirement on the federal voter registration form. That judge later barred the Secretary of Defense from requiring documentary proof of citizenship when military personnel register to vote or request ballots.

In an apparent nod to the difficulty of implementing a proof-of-citizen requirement by executive order, Trump is pushing legislation in the Republican-controlled Congress to create such a mandate. The SAVE America Act has passed the House but has stalled in the Senate, leading Trump to advocate for eliminating the filibuster that is blocking the legislation.

On Wednesday, he abruptly cancelled the expected signing of a bipartisan housing bill, saying he won’t sign legislation until Congress passes his proof of citizenship requirement for voting.

Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending