I have very strong feelings about this. IMO, the issue is not whether the state can be trusted to get the funds to Seekonk. The real issue is whether the state will adjust state aid based on the ability of a town to further screw business.

Seekonk is already a boon to the state. The businesses are a boon to Seekonk. For anyone who is unaware of our local property tax structure, here is a quick lesson. Residents pay $9.64 per thousand and commercial pays $20.04. If it were not for our commercial base, our residential taxes would be MUCH higher if we wished to maintain the same level of services.

To the credit of the businesses in town, I do not hear them whine and complain about their property taxes as they have done in Attleboro. So if we can continue along without targeting our business partners, I think we will be a stronger community for it.

To be fair seek, businesses are always a target, no more than tax payers. Every time the state raises the sales tax, or applies the sin tax to a new item they are targeting business, and with the latter specific industries.

Assuming we actually get the .75 % of the tax I would be for it if and only if the money went to pay for infastructure, and not to the schools in the 65/35 fashion.

A good chunk of those businesses on RT 6 carry liquor licenses and have large amount of patron from out of state or out of town, that subsequently cause more of a drain on our emergency services. Furthermore the traffic load on RT 6 is horrible, particularly on the weekends, and neither fall River ave, or County Street were designed for that amount of travel. So I would be perfectly willing to spend .2 cents for every dollar to help fund our infastructure. And it's not like someone is forcing me to pay that tax and it's one tax I don't mind. It's not targeting anything I have to have to survive. Going out doesn't really affect my quality of life. If I don't want to pay the tax I either don't go out to eat, or take the time to drive to a town that does not have that tax. But since I believe RI already has higher taxes, and Rehoboth does not have any restaurants, and anything Swansea may have will cost me far more in gas to get to; I doubt that will happen.

I also don't think many people will put that much thought into it.

Quote :

FOXBORO - Foxboro on Monday night became the first community in eastern Massachusetts to say no to a local option meals tax.

Residents at a hastily called special town meeting voted 45 in favor, 85 against adding 0.75 percent to the 6.25 percent sales tax at restaurants.

"This is one time that I don't feel Foxboro should be the leader for surrounding towns," said Selectwoman Lynda Walsh, successfully opposing the proposed local meals tax increase.

Voters agreed, however, to add 2 percent to the hotel and motel excise tax the town collects. Increasing the rooms tax from 4 percent to 6 percent will bring in an estimated $231,000 in new local revenue per year. The vote on the room occupancy tax - close enough to require a hand count - was 90 in favor, 73 against.

The failed meals tax increase would have meant an estimated $458,000 annual boost to the town, according to calculations based on the state Department of Revenue's figures. Selectmen Paul Feeney, Lorraine Brue and Paul Mortenson and other residents argued the town needs the money for police, fire and other services.

Opponents of the meals tax argued the tax would hurt businesses in Foxboro in a down economy, reduce tips to restaurant employees, and said asking for money without citing a specific need is poor policy.

Chris Dunn, owner of Primo's sandwich shop on Mechanic Street, noted the sales tax recently went up from 5 percent to 6.25 percent. He said another hike will be one more reason for a customer to pass on the idea of buying a meal out, and that every lost sale matters to struggling small businesses.

Advisory committee member John Gray said it's wrong to add a local tax with no specified purpose.

"To me it's almost on the edge of stealing," Gray said.

But Feeney said the correct procedure is for a future town meeting to decide how money is spent.

In all, 177 registered voters came out to have their say on the three-article warrant.

The final article, to pay a $4,447 debt to Town Counsel Deutsch Williams was approved, without debate, by a vote of 150 to 10.

More than 20 Massachusetts towns and cities have accepted either or both local option taxes, John Robertson, deputy legislative director for the Massachusetts Municipal Association, said Monday.

Among the communities to say yes were Amherst, Bedford, Braintree, Cambridge, Chelmsford, Melrose, Raynham, Springfield, Winthrop and Worcester. Greenfield's council earlier rejected the meals tax, and its mayor on Monday vetoed the lodging tax.

Foxboro selectmen scheduled the unusual summer town meeting to give the town the chance to capture as much of the new revenue as possible in the current fiscal year.

Last week, after hearing opposition from the Tri-Town Chamber of Commerce and from Lafayette House restaurant owner Ron Young, the advisory committee voted 8 to 4 to urge town meeting to oppose the local option meals excise tax. The committee split 6 to 6 on the lodging tax.

The town can revisit the tax questions at a future town meeting.