In the financial year of 2009, Massachusetts was reported to take 9th rank amongst the most dependent states on local property taxes. The state of Massachusetts is wealth and has scope of income and enhanced development gained from property which has increased the state’s ability of dedicating the sources in the local community for funding education (Warren 69). In addition, a large part of revenues from federal education, for example the funding of Title 1, has been proportionally distributed to a significant number of students from low income groups. From this perspective it becomes evident that Massachusetts is able to gain less of funds compared to other U.S states with larger number of low income group students.
There were various factors interrelated in nature which helped in providing the base for shaping the education reform in Massachusetts and similar states from 1991 to 2012. The initial factor was the enhanced pressure on tax base of property that was created through the education financial exigencies and sectors of municipality (Sattler 1-28). Municipal and school boards also complained of the capital challenges they faced as a result of their collaborative dependence on the tax base of property to fund their governance respectively. In order to make their case, challenges were identified ranging from compounding impact of enhanced costs, declining transfers in provinces and decline in property taxes elasticity because of mounting issues from payers with regard to property tax load burden.