Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...

Cities and towns across the South Coast are counting pennies as they craft their fiscal 2027 budgets. New Bedford Mayor Jon Mitchell has proposed shuttering Fire Station 9. Fairhaven elected officials are asking the Town Meeting to raise property taxes. Dartmouth Town Administrator Cody Haddad warns of potential service cuts a year from now. 

Local officials across the region point to the same challenge — they say the state is not providing enough local aid.

The Senate recently proposed a $53 million increase — or roughly 3% — in unrestricted local aid. But while senators celebrate this “historic” amount, towns and cities are struggling to make ends meet. 

Greater New Bedford area faces budget challenges

New Bedford is facing a projected $32 million deficit, according to Mitchell, who plans to address it with higher taxes, layoffs and service cuts, many of which City Council members object to. 

Mitchell proposed closing Fire Station 9, leading firefighters to protest. Last week, Sen. Mark Montigny, D-New Bedford, secured $500,000 in the Senate budget to keep the station open temporarily, though the budget still has to go to a conference committee with the House. 

Mitchell told The Light that the city has become “much more efficient,” including saving millions on energy costs because of its solar-energy program. But with insufficient state aid, he said these efficiency measures can’t make up the difference. He described the Senate’s proposed increase as a “drop in the bucket.” 

Fairhaven Town Administrator Keith Hickey said balancing municipal budgets has become increasingly challenging, partly because of inflation, but also because of “unfunded mandates from the state.” 

“I think [the state] would acknowledge that the revenues they provide to communities is not what was anticipated when some of these formulas and funding resources were first established,” Hickey said.

Fairhaven is facing a $649,000 budget deficit in its 2027 fiscal year, which begins July 1. Town officials plan to seek a Prop 2½ override — a permanent increase in property taxes — from the Town Meeting to cover the shortfall. Hickey predicted that the town will do the same in fiscal 2028. 

The town has proposed eliminating the tourism department and a “handful” of full- and part-time positions. Hickey added that if the state doesn’t provide relief, Fairhaven may have to make cuts to public safety in fiscal 2028. 

Haddad, Dartmouth’s town administrator, said it’s “undeniable that the state has underfunded municipalities across the commonwealth.” He added that he was “excited” to see the Senate’s proposal, but said one increase won’t make up for years of underfunding, and he hopes the rate continues to grow.

Unlike New Bedford and Fairhaven, Dartmouth is not facing a budget gap in fiscal 2027. The budget — which still needs to be approved by the Town Meeting — is a 4.7% increase from fiscal 2026. Haddad said the town couldn’t fund all the requests, but that it would add 8½ positions to the School Department. Haddad credited this to the town’s “conservative” financial approach, not help from the state. 

But the lack of state aid will catch up with the town as soon as fiscal 2028, Haddad said. 

“We’re becoming more and more reliant on our residents,” Haddad said. “If we don’t see a significant change in aid, you’ll see either a Prop 2 1⁄2 override on the ballot in the next several years, or you’ll start to see service levels significantly decrease.”

Municipalities across the commonwealth are facing the same financial challenges, said Adam Chapdelaine, executive director of the Massachusetts Municipal Association. 

A report by the association shows that unrestricted local aid has not kept pace with inflation since the Great Recession. According to Mitchell, New Bedford would have received an additional $187 million — an average of roughly $12 million a year — in unrestricted aid since 2010 if unrestricted local aid had kept pace with inflation. 

According to a Fiscal Alliance Foundation study released last month, state aid is 24% of local revenue in Massachusetts, compared with a national average of 28%. If the state funded municipalities at the national-average rate, local aid would rise by $1.82 billion, the report says. 

Senate proposes more unrestricted aid than House 

Each year, Massachusetts cities and towns receive a “Cherry Sheet,” named for the cherry-colored paper on which the document was originally printed. The document breaks down total local aid for cities and towns. The majority of local aid is distributed in two categories — Chapter 70 for schools and unrestricted general government aid. 

Aside from property taxes, unrestricted general government aid (UGGA for short) is municipalities’ primary source of non-education funding. As the name suggests, there are no restrictions on how it can be used. 

The House budget, released in April, includes $1.33 billion in unrestricted aid, a $10 million increase over fiscal 2026. The Senate budget proposed increasing unrestricted aid by $53 million, for a total of $1.38 billion. 

The Senate proposed distributing the additional $53 million in unrestricted local aid on the basis of population, with no city or town receiving more than 4% of the total state funding. Senators say this is a step toward a more equitable formula, but advocacy group MassBudget warns the approach could disproportionately benefit wealthy communities. 

MassBudget’s director of research and policy analysis, Phineas Baxandall, said he’s “heartened” to see a larger increase from the Senate. But he said the population formula would make the unrestricted aid distribution less progressive. 

A chart from MassBudget shows that lower-income municipalities tend to receive more unrestricted aid. They warn this could change under the Senate’s proposed formula. Credit: MassBudget

Today, cities and towns with lower incomes tend to receive more aid. According to a MassBudget report, 15 municipalities with above-average incomes still receive above-average UGGA, but none with very high per-capita incomes receive very high per capita UGGA. 

Baxandall warned that this would change under the Senate’s proposed formula, which doesn’t factor in need.

In fiscal 2025, Weston — one of the wealthiest towns in the state — received about $40 per person in unrestricted aid, according to The Light’s calculations. The same year, New Bedford received about $280 per person. 

Under the new formula, wealthy cities like Weston, which got the least aid per person, would do relatively much better than cities like New Bedford, which were favored in previous UGGA distributions. Weston would see a 20% increase in unrestricted aid, MassBudget has calculated, while New Bedford’s unrestricted aid would rise by only 2.8%. 

Other mid-sized Gateway Cities would also see modest increases. Fall River’s unrestricted aid would grow by 2.5% and Lawrence’s would increase by 2.9%. Meanwhile, Edgartown would receive 50.6% more unrestricted aid and Nantucket’s aid would rise by 117.1%. 

Baxandall added that outside of local aid, municipal governments are largely funded through property taxes — a “very inequitable system.” Wealthy towns like Weston have higher property values and can provide more services to their residents. This inequity makes local aid even more important, he said. 

“The gap between municipalities’ own fiscal capacity and its residents’ needs can be filled through that local aid,” he said. “That’s why the targeting of local aid is so important, and that’s why we were concerned to see a proposal that lacks that targeting.” 

Senate Ways and Means Chair Michael Rodrigues (D-Westport) did not respond to a request for comment about the proposed UGGA formula. 

In a press release, Montigny said the Senate’s proposed increase in state aid will help “offset the heavy burdens and tough choices local taxpayers are grappling with.”

Montigny’s press release notes that the net state aid provided by the Senate budget to New Bedford — including unrestricted aid and other funding — represents a 6.3% increase, while the current inflation rate is 3.8%. During the Senate budget debate, lawmakers adopted an amendment to establish a commission to further review the UGGA formula. 

New Bedford representatives open to increasing aid 

Each New Bedford lawmaker said they see the need for increased local aid. 

Rep. Christopher Markey, D-Dartmouth, said the House’s proposed amount “is satisfactory under the circumstances of the entire state budget” but that he’d support the Senate proposal if the state can afford to do it. Rep. Steven Ouellette, D-Westport, also said he’d support the increase. 

“I always want more for my communities,” Ouellette said. 

Rep. Christopher Hendricks, D-New Bedford, told The Light that cities and towns need more support, noting that a lot of New Bedford’s public infrastructure spending comes from unrestricted local aid. 

Rep. Antonio F.D. Cabral, D-New Bedford, previously said that he has submitted legislation every year since 2010 to “fix or create” a fair state aid formula. Rep. Mark Sylvia, D-Fairhaven, is co-sponsoring Cabral’s legislation this session. 

During the House budget debate, three amendments that would have increased the total by $168 million were rejected (1308, 1316 and 1325). All of New Bedford’s representatives voted against each amendment, including Ouellette, who co-sponsored one of the amendments he voted against. 

Ouellette told The Light he voted against the amendments because they were “argued out on the floor,” but did not offer further reasoning. The other representatives said that the amendments — all filed by Republicans — were not realistic or fiscally responsible. 

Several representatives pointed out that the minority party also filed an amendment to cut the sales tax by 1.5%, which would have resulted in at least $1 billion in budget cuts. 

“Voting in favor [of the amendments] would have been a symbolic gesture rather than a meaningful step forward for the communities I serve,” Rep. Mark Sylvia, D-Fairhaven, said. “Symbolic votes may make headlines, but they do not fix roads, they do not fund schools, and they do not support the families counting on us to get this right.”

Jamie Perkins is a graduate student in journalism covering state government for The Light as a summer intern. Email them at jperkins@newbedfordlight.org.

19 replies on “Mass. Senate proposes ‘historic’ increase in local aid. Is it enough?”

  1. This is like a single person, running to mommy and daddy because they didn’t budget enough for their bills, but really spent their money partying and boozing it up. For God sake, let’s get someone in the city and school that actually know how to financially handle the locality!

  2. STOP PROPOSING CHANGE TO STATE AID AND GET IT DONE.

    THIS IS HURTING ALL OUR TOWNS AND CITIES AND SHOULD BE THE NUMBER ONE ISSUE IN OUR COMMONWEALTH.

    OUR STATE LEGISLATORS HAVE TO STOP BEING A RUBBER STAMP FOR THIS GOVENOR.

    MAURA HEALEY MUST BE REMOVED FROM THE GOVERNOR’S OFFICE.

  3. Let’s stop attacking the state the senate the,Governor for the real culprit here..the $460 million cut in Federal aid to Massachusetts by the Trump admin which is costing us jobs cuts in essential services like fire education and public infrastructure. Should the state given more,aid to local communities to keep up w the pace of inflation ..yes but the real problem here is,a federal govt which punishes Massachusetts you and me because ot doesnt like our politics..thus doesnt win you hearts,and minds it HARDENS hearts against those who punish people ..ALL of us will be affected by these cuts in Federal aid so KEEP YOUR EYES ON THE PRIZE AND IN NOVEMBER IN THE YEAR OF OUR 250 OLD DEMOCRACY ELECT A HOUSE,AND SENATE THAT HELPS NOT PUNISHES OUR COMMUNITIES

    1. Trickle down economics in action (as you all remember Ronald Reagan’s budget director David Stockman advocated for cutting income taxes on the wealthy arguing that the additional money they would retain would be spent which would filter down through all economic classes (a fallacy of course as history notes that the rich just socked away the additional wealth).
      Cutting federal funding to the states has resulted in today’s “trickle down” economic affect on local budgets…in affect throwing out the baby with the bath water. No amount of recalculating state money to local government will make up for the reduction in federal aid.

      1. Also Reagan put WEP in effect which reduced the amount those of us that worked in the private sector then public service. We earned it, we deserved it. It wasn’t until Biden, the democrats and republicans got together and removed it, eliminating WEP! January 5, 2025. We have to stop misusing funds and making it a crime to those that do.

    2. You’re welcome to your opinion, but the blaming the federal government is a complete joke. Our state and city officials have let us all down, by exhibiting poor leadership, reckless spending, and making poor decisions. All you have to do is look at the exodus of businesses and residents, it’s at an all time high. 100% it is time for new leadership across our state.

    3. Decades of a poorly managed state government controlled by tax and spend Democrats is the problem, not Trump. Perhaps trying to live within the budgets might help in the long run. Voters in MA seem to think that Federal and State governments actually HAVE and create money – they don’t. It all comes from us, the taxpayers. You want more Fed money then we’ll all pay more in taxes one way or another. Slash the state and local budgets and reform the bloated pension system for a start but that will never happen.
      FYI George the USA is a Representative Republic not a democracy

      1. Well if the voters in Massachusetts think federal and state actually create money, they need to back to school and learn about debits and credits. No wonder every other country wants to come to the US. They think money grows on trees. With 25% not doing their job, sitting back while others busts their butt is more like it. Time for those who sit around to lose their jobs! I have a list, it starts at the top! Why have the higher ups when the lower level employees do the work and know the value of a dollar!

  4. The state should administer the funds directly to the departments. Keep the funds out of the mayor and the superintendent’s hands. Have direct proof of dispersement to the state. Why not our water bills go to Boston, obviously it stops the misuse of funds. All departments have an administrator, they make a good wage, hold them responsible.

    1. That sounds like a great idea! All funding from state goes directly to the department its for! No using money meant for Peter to pay Paul! This way each department is responsible for their bills. And the Mayors office and associates would have money for pensions and insurance and anything covered by city!

      1. I believe the money taken out of the AFSCME employees for retirement may go directly to the NB retirement board on Orchard st. They then manage it, currently Eric handles it, investing, earning money. Keep the mayor and the schools hands off of it. A way to get a better balance is to have all employees pay in the same. They keep it at what you start with. So if you have 40 yrs in (could be if the came out of high school), which you be at as low as 2% where as the new employees are paying 8 or higher. So put everyone up to 8%.

  5. This is absurd! Cut their jobs! They obviously don’t know how to balance a budget!

  6. A higher residential property tax rate with exemption for owner occupants would solve a lot of NB’s problems. The worst case scenario is that some of the slum lords decide to sell and free up properties for locals.

  7. For years state aid, reckless spending, government expansion, and no economic development have been a major problem in our city. With every article that brings new information it just shows how badly our city is damaged and how all our elected officials have failed us.

    1. They only things thriving in New Bedford have been wavered property tax or given the property. Or given some form of a grant. Even then they fail and want more bailout money. While you have someone like Mike Panagakos who worked his way up from the bottom to the top. Everything he has, he’s worked for.

  8. Same story every year we need more money. Cuts need to be made and smarter decisions in regard to spending. Raising taxes every year and depending on state and federal money is not the answer. Keep your house in order. I can’t help but think how much that BILLION Dollars the state spent to care for illegals could have really helped local governments. Spent wisely and stop spending money you don’t have that’s what I have to do.

Comments are closed.