The Real Way to Keep Stoneham Affordable: Invest in Our Community

We all want to keep Stoneham affordable. That's not up for debate.

The real question is: what does "affordable" actually mean--and for whom? Affordability isn't just about what your property tax costs you, it's about what everything you need to provide for your household costs you. When you live in a community that cannot provide your family the quality of service they need, that means you must pay your own way to give your family what they need.

So let's look at what voting no actually does to household costs in Stoneham. Because the math doesn't support the narrative that rejecting the override keeps us affordable. In fact, it does the opposite. The claim that voting no on the override keeps Stoneham affordable is outright false.

Cheap is Expensive

There's a lot of talk about voting no sending a message of "fiscal responsibility", but being proactive costs less than being reactive. Fiscal responsibility doesn't mean waiting until infrastructure fails or services collapse. It means making smart, responsible investments today--before small problems become expensive crises. Unfortunately, our inability to fund our departments has caused Stoneham to be reactive for years.

Take a look at our school system: State law mandates that every child who needs special education services receives them. When Stoneham doesn't have enough staff, the district must send students to other schools. The cost averages $100,000 per student, according to both our current and previous superintendents, with much of that going to transportation alone. We're paying six figures to send a child to another town when we could hire qualified staff and set up our own classrooms here, serving multiple students, building long-term relationships and institutional knowledge in-house, and saving the districts thousands of dollars in out-of-district placements. But without being willing to front the costs of these long-term efforts we are forced instead to burn taxpayer money on the more expensive, short-term solutions.

The same pattern repeats across town departments. The Department of Public Works has operated on a skeleton crew for decades. When mechanic positions go unfilled, town vehicles get sent to private shops at premium rates. Contracting out costs more per hour than having town staff do the work in-house, whether that be plowing snow, paving roads, or having Stoneham Ford fix our vehicles. But the DPW can't afford to contract everything that needs doing, so some maintenance simply doesn't get done.

Police and fire are so understaffed that we have to pay our overworked men and women in uniform overtime rates instead of hiring additional staff at baseline salaries. We consistently pay hundreds of thousands in overtime every year--sometimes passing the million-dollar mark--because we refuse to fund these services up front.

The Stoneham Public Library is at risk of losing its state certification due to underfunding. Without certification, we lose access to the statewide interlibrary loan network, digital resources, and state grants. What this means is that Stoneham residents would continue to fund state library programs through our taxes, but get locked out of those programs and funds ourselves. We'd be subsidizing other towns' libraries while watching ours fall apart.

Does that sound "fiscally responsible" to you?

You Still Have to Pay

What will actually happen if we fail to pass an override to fund our town? Those costs don't disappear, they simply shift. Your bills still go up, just not on your property tax line. And when town services get eliminated, the need doesn't disappear either. People with means find private alternatives. People without means lose access entirely. The "affordability" argument claims to protect vulnerable residents. In reality, it devastates them.

Every household in Stoneham is facing increased trash fees because the town can no longer afford to subsidize collection through the operating budget. That money needed to go elsewhere.

An underfunded and understaffed fire department shifts those costs onto your home owner's insurance. Insurance companies rate fire departments when setting premiums, and staffing is the biggest factor. The Override Study Committee found Stoneham's Fire Department operates at 50% of federally recommended staffing levels. Understaffed departments get worse ratings, and worse ratings mean higher premiums. A two-class drop typically increases rates 7-15%. That's real money coming out of every homeowner's pocket, immediately slashing any supposed "savings" gained by not funding our fire department.

Seniors on fixed incomes face the worst of it. The Council on Aging provides healthy and affordable meals, and they provide transportation to medical appointments. When the Council on Aging has to cut these services, seniors either pay significantly more per meal through delivery services or they have to rely on already stretched thin charities like the Stoneham Food Pantry. Without transportation programs, they face a steep incline in round-trip costs through private medical transportation. Fixed incomes can't absorb these hits when Social Security's modest increases have been far outpaced by inflation. When these town services disappear, seniors don't have options; they just have higher costs or complete loss of access.

Families stretching every dollar get squeezed from multiple angles. The Override Study Committee's report states explicitly that without new revenue, the school department will need to continue raising fees for participation in activities. Recreation programs disappear or become unaffordable. The library--where families without computers or internet access the technology they need--faces closure. For many families, these aren't luxuries--they're the infrastructure that makes working and raising kids in Stoneham possible.

Add it up: trash fees, insurance premiums, school activity fees, services disappearing, recreation programs becoming unaffordable, library access lost. Households will pay more without the override than with it through scattered bills and the complete loss of access to resources they need.

Does that sound like "protecting our most vulnerable" to you?

Your Property Values Take a Hit

It seems insignificant when placed next to the human cost, but there is also the financial reality that affects every homeowner:

For most homeowners--especially seniors--home equity is their primary financial security. Property values don't appreciate automatically. They depend entirely on whether Stoneham remains a desirable place to live.

What makes a town desirable? Strong schools. Safe neighborhoods. Well-maintained infrastructure. Recreation programs. A functioning library. When towns underinvest, property values stagnate or decline. Families with options move elsewhere. Homes sit on the market longer. And seniors on fixed incomes watch their life's investment erode while still facing rising costs everywhere else.

Young families bring energy, tax dollars, and Main Street spending. When we can't offer quality schools and services, they choose better-funded towns, taking all of that with them and leaving the families with roots here to pick up the pieces.

Passing an override protects property values by protecting the quality of life that makes Stoneham worth living in. Cutting spending to avoid a tax increase can cost homeowners far more in lost equity than the override ever would.

Does that sound like "savings" to you?

The Real Choice

The larger $12.5m override is projected to cost the average Stoneham household about $120 per month. The $9.3m one around $90. That's real money, presented transparently on your property tax bill, distributed based on property values, and spent efficiently on services that benefit everyone.

Voting no costs more. Through higher fees, wasteful spending on consultants and contractors and overtime, and service losses that force private alternatives or eliminate access entirely. And the people hit hardest are exactly those the "affordability" argument claims to protect: seniors on fixed incomes, families stretching every dollar, residents who can't afford private alternatives when town services disappear.

Does that sound like "keeping Stoneham affordable" to you?

• Affordability isn't achieved by doing less--it's achieved by doing things right.
• Affordability means being smart about spending today so we don't face a crisis tomorrow.
• Affordability means making responsible investments that protect what matters most: our community and our future, so that we can ensure every resident can thrive here, whether you're a senior on a fixed income, a young family buying your first home, a renter, or a business owner.

Keeping Stoneham affordable means keeping Stoneham strong, and that requires all of us to invest in our shared future.

The article was originally posted to SaveOurStoneham.org.