To the Editor:
My family and I moved to Shrewsbury five years ago, attracted to this town by its excellent education system which my parents were eager to enroll my brother and I in. However, times change, and with schools going remote an excellent education system alone is no longer enough to attract young families to our town. With ongoing closures due to the pandemic, it is essential that Shrewsbury invests its parks, historic sites, and outdoor recreation.
The benefits of having plentiful and well-maintained outdoor recreational spaces are plentiful. A happier, healthier, more social Shrewsbury is possible with more investment in our public spaces. The main drawback is the slight tax levy associated with the act, yet once we look closer this element becomes more complex.
We are already paying taxes to the state which are going towards the Community Preservation Act, however, by not adopting it we haven’t been able to utilize our share of these funds. It’s worth the small additional investment “Question 4” proposes to access state funds we’re already contributing towards. Not to mention much of these additional state funds will be used to pay for projects that we are already paying for. These include, but are not limited to, repaving parks, repairing school playgrounds, and the upkeep of historical sites. Freeing up more town funds by using funding from the Community Preservation Act will give us more breathing room in our budget which, when utilized strategically, will help us avoid or delay future tax hikes.
With more outdoor space we can also show that Shrewsbury is a great place for families to live and invest in. As a teen who loved nature, I always struggled to find places near me to visit and enjoy. With the Community Preservation Act the future youths of Shrewsbury will always have somewhere to go to appreciate nature and gain a greater love for our town and all its natural beauty.
I hope you’ll consider voting Yes on “Ballot Question #4”. Thank you for taking the time to read this letter.