Rebuttal: Who Will Actually Pay For Baxter Road's Relocation?

To the editor: I refer to Mr. Balkind’s recent letter to the Current (“Who Pays to Relocate Baxter Road?”). He asserts that the taxpayers of Nantucket will not have to pay the multi-million dollar cost of relocating the northern portion of the road and related infrastructure. He concludes by noting that “it is essential that we all understand the facts.”

I couldn’t agree more. Mr. Balkind seems to take comfort from the erosion misfortune on Sheep Pond Road as his authority. It is worth remembering that, in 2008, after a portion of Sheep Pond Road washed away, the Town was found liable for failing to protect the public way from erosion and failing to provide alternative means of access for the homeowners on that road. The Town had to pay the costs associated with constructing the new road there as well as the fees and costs to obtain access rights (the Town was not found liable for any resulting loss in property values).

It is well-settled law in Massachusetts that a betterment is a special property tax that is permitted where real property within a limited and determinable area receives a special benefit or advantage, other than the general advantage to the community, from the construction of a public improvement. If a city constructs a sidewalk, street, or sewer, for example, it may be considered a betterment. But replacing a sidewalk, street or sewer is not a benefit – it’s called maintenance. The residents of northern Baxter Road already have public access, utility connections, and (in many cases) sewer connectivity. As these are services that the Baxter Road residents already enjoy as members of the community, there is no special benefit derived from the Town’s spending money to maintain those services. Indeed, that’s what annual tax payments are for.

Finally, I think trying to allocate private benefit from public works is a dangerous exercise. Indeed, Mr. Balkind seems to embrace a somewhat limited conception of shared sacrifice or citizenry. As a summer resident of Nantucket, I get no direct benefit when capital expenditures are made on behalf of the Nantucket Public Schools. And, as much as I’d appreciate a tax refund for my share of that tax revenue spent on the schools, I also must concede that Nantucket is enhanced when we have good schools that serve the educational needs of our Island’s youth. And so it is with fire and police protection, street maintenance and cleaning, parks and recreation support, and the like. These are public goods and inure to the benefit of all residents. I think the temptation to advance a “pay as you consume” approach to these basic elements of community life should be resisted. In my judgment, the quality of life on the Island would suffer by the attempted quantification and allocation of benefits from public goods and services.

Sincerely,

David Golden