« Go Back   « Go Back
Summary of Question 1

The proposed law would limit certain taxes, and change laws relating to school budgets and compulsory binding arbitration. It would impose a limit on state and local taxes on real estate and personal property equal to 21/2% of the full and fair cash value of the property being taxed. If a locality currently imposes a tax greater than 2Vi% of that cash value, the tax would have to be decreased by 15% each year until the 21/2% level is reached. If a locality currently imposes a tax of less than 21/2%, it would not be allowed to increase the tax rate. In either situation, a city or town could raise its limit by a 2/3 local vote at a general election.

The proposed law would provide that the total taxes on real estate and personal property imposed by the state or by localities could never be increased by more than 21/2% of the total taxes imposed for the preceding year, unless two thirds of the voters agreed to the increase at a general election.

It would further provide that no law or regulation which imposes additional costs on a city ortown, or a law granting or increasing tax exemptions, would be effective unless the state agrees to assume the added cost. A division of the State Auditor's Department would determine the financial effect of laws and regulations on the various localities.

The proposal would limit the amount of money required to be appropriated for public schools to that amount voted upon by the local appropriating authority. It would also repeal the law which provides forcompulsory binding arbitration when labor negotiations concerning police and fire personnel come to an impasse. In addition, the petition would provide that no county, district, or authority could impose any annual increase in costs on a locality of greater than 4% of the total of the year before.

The proposed law would also reduce the maximum excise tax rate on motor vehicles from $66 per thousand to $25 per thousand, and it would allow a state income tax deduction equal to one half of the rent paid for the taxpayer's principal place of residence.

1980 - Plymouth County - Question 1Do you approve of a law summarized below, which was disapproved by the House of Representatives on May 6, 1980, by a vote of 5-146, and on which no vote was taken by the Senate before May 7, 1980?

View as: # | %

Plymouth County Results
« Return to Aggregate Results

 
City/Town Ward Pct Blanks Total Votes Cast
Totals
106,153
61,370
5,802 173,325
Abington
 
4,024
1,941
122
6,087
Bridgewater
 
4,091
2,376
260
6,727
Brockton
 
21,868
10,984
1,482
34,334
Carver
 
1,875
943
60
2,878
Duxbury
 
3,900
2,212
131
6,243
E. Bridgewater
 
2,916
1,146
180
4,242
Halifax
 
1,670
961
50
2,681
Hanover
 
3,533
1,854
72
5,459
Hanson
 
2,368
1,156
105
3,629
Hingham
 
6,159
4,277
493
10,929
Hull
 
2,757
1,641
253
4,651
Kingston
 
2,164
1,255
83
3,502
Lakeville
 
1,701
930
47
2,678
Marion
 
1,163
887
56
2,106
Marshfield
 
5,766
4,053
144
9,963
Mattapoisett
 
1,773
1,168
61
3,002
Middleborough
 
3,913
2,642
152
6,707
Norwell
 
3,094
1,666
149
4,909
Pembroke
 
3,898
1,856
75
5,829
Plymouth
 
7,825
6,599
982
15,406
Plympton
 
602
340
6
948
Rochester
 
911
477
19
1,407
Rockland
 
4,193
2,217
171
6,581
Scituate
 
5,754
3,415
156
9,325
Wareham
 
4,267
2,552
309
7,128
Whitman
 
3,968
1,822
184
5,974
County Totals
106,153
61,370
5,802 173,325