Watertown Protesters Say Harvard's Entry Strains City Budget

WATERTOWN—Angry Watertown residents, children and politicians came out in full force Wednesday night to rally against Harvard’s recent purchase of the Watertown Arsenal, calling on the University to pay higher payments to the city in order to offset potential lost tax revenue.

More than a hundred people gathered to criticize Harvard for its unwillingness to pay higher payment in-lieu-of taxes to Watertown, saying the University is jeopardizing the city’s ability to fund schools and city services by “hiding” behind its tax-exempt, non-profit status.

“This is a huge overreach of their purported tax exempt status,” said Watertown Town Manager Michael Driscoll. “To take this action will cripple the financial stability of this community.”

The site—once covered with toxic waste before $100 million of federal, state and local money was used to clean the property—now is home to numerous consulting and Internet firms.

“The taxpayers spent $100 million cleaning up this site,” said Mass. State Senator Steven A. Tolman. “That was done so this would be the cornerstone of Watertown development.”

Watertown officials said the property would have generated $4.8 million per year in tax revenue if Harvard had not purchased it, and said the University’s payment should at least equal that amount.

“We’ve waited over 200 years to bring this property onto our tax base,” Driscoll said. “All we want is for Harvard to pay its fair share. No more, no less.”

Harvard bought the 30-acre property for $162,641,000 last week from a Philadelphia-based developer, and University officials said they have been working for weeks to finalize a payment plan for the acquisition.

Wednesday’s rally featured a direct attack on Harvard’s most recent offers, including one offering sliding scale payments every year, beginning with $2.7 million, for the next 20 years.

The Watertown Town Council criticized the offer and adopted a resolution on Tuesday for a home rule petition to try to force Harvard to pay full property taxes. The petition would have to receive the approval of the Mass. state legislature.

With public animosity towards Harvard growing, Driscoll blasted Harvard University spokesperson Joe Wrinn for recent comments in which Wrinn called Wednesday’s planned protest “ridiculous” and “continued theatrics.”

“If this is a play, it would be called ‘An American Tragedy in Watertown,’” Driscoll said. “There’s nothing theatrical about less firefighters, fewer teachers, and having a large senior citizen population subsidize Harvard.”

Watertown residents used the fear of lost school revenues as a major rallying point, as a group of elementary school children lined the street holding a string of signs that combined to read, “If Harvard Lived Here, We’d Be Broke By Now.”

Other signs read, “Our kids are more important than real estate” and “I pay my taxes. Harvard—Pay Yours.”

Revenue from the Arsenal site represents one-third of Watertown’s total annual budget, 45 percent of which goes toward city schools.

“Harvard is a schoolyard bully, but instead of asking for our milk money, they are asking us to hand over our children’s education,” Tolman told the crowd. “They are asking us to hand over our town’s future.”

“Unlike Boston or Cambridge, we can’t absorb this loss,” added Mark E. Boyle, Watertown’s director of planning and development.

But after the rally, Wrinn reiterated his belief that Watertown officials and residents were sensationalizing Harvard’s purchase.

“This is total theater,” Wrinn said. “It just creates a mass hysteria that in no way reflects the conversations that are going on behind the scenes.”

Wrinn said “open discussions in good faith” have continued between Harvard and Watertown for the last month, and that Wednesday night’s rally was not indicative of what impact Harvard will have on Watertown.

“To bus in children and elderly people and tell them that Harvard will destroy their lives is totally ridiculous,” Wrinn said.

And Wrinn said Watertown officials were unfairly holding Harvard’s endowment of $19 billion against the University, claiming that Harvard’s strong financial position obligates it to offer the community higher payments.

State Representative Rachel Kaprielian mentioned the size of Harvard’s endowment five times in the first two minutes of her speech.

“It’s obviously very effective demagoguery,” Wrinn said. “The endowment is an easy target, but it’s not a vault filled with cash somewhere collecting dust.”

But Tolman said the rally was not meant to simply attack Harvard—it was intended to present the town’s concerns about the University’s presence.

“It’s not anti-Harvard to put Watertown interests first,” Tolman said. “It’s not anti-Harvard to protect the future of our community.”

Despite the public protest, Wrinn said he felt confident that continued discussions with Watertown officials would achieve a suitable agreement.

“This will eventually pass,” Wrinn said. “Through good faith efforts we will arrive at an agreement.”

But Clyde L. Younger, president of the Watertown Town Council, said that it will take more than a final agreement to repair relations between the University and Watertown.

“The issue is respect,” Younger said. “All we’re asking is for Harvard to be a good neighbor.”

—Staff writer Imtiyaz H. Delawala can be reached at delawala@fas.harvard.edu.