I'm really only interested in better internet too, though it would be good to have access to local network tv stations that are too far to pick up via antenna.

I checked their website and they make it seem like the "TV Select" plan is the only option ($59.99/month for 125+ channels). I chatted with customer service and there is one other option - Streaming TV Choice, which requires an app (no cable box) and still costs $44.99/month for local channels plus 15 others that you can choose.

Xfinity (in other areas) has a Limited Basic plan with just local channels and a few other random channels for $30/month. Spectrum should have something similar.

The state statute mandates five members of existing city boards and committees - up to four more "at-large" members can be added depending on how the city sets things up. There are very specific guidelines on how the CPA funds can be used (and lots of legal precedent excluding specific uses) so misappropriation would be highly constrained and likely to trigger a lawsuit or state intervention. More info here: https://www.communitypreservation.org/CPCs

One Worcester - if you have business skills you can volunteer to help local non-profit orgs: https://www.1worcester.org/

Look at it this way - undocumented residents who need to drive to work, school, etc. will do so whether they can get licensed or not. If we enable them to get a license, at least some of them will choose the legal option, which will 1) ensure they can pass a driving test (demonstrating basic skills, knowledge of local driving laws, some level of confidence behind the wheel) and 2) enable them to get insurance so if they do get into an accident there will be coverage to protect them and others involved (if they were at fault). Not to mention basic human decency, to allow people who are already here and maybe have been for years to have a legal option to transport themselves and their kids. I don't care if the state makes a few bucks off the licensing fees, it's worth it for the other benefits.

Another new one that runs to a different bakery/cafe every Saturday: https://instagram.com/woo_runs_on____?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=

Fair enough, I would say that qualitatively one would expect higher crime rates in larger cities, just by virtue of their density (and the somewhat greater concentration of poverty, drug dealing, etc.). Relative to crime rates in other major cities in MA, we aren't really an outlier. If you just want to look at how often we hear about crimes, then yes the absolute number comes into play, and we are on the high end because of population (still better than Springfield which has fewer people).

Worcester was #10 in Massachusetts last year in terms of violent crime rate (not too bad considering we are the 2nd largest city): https://thisweekinworcester.com/fbi-2021-most-dangerous-cities-in-mass/

Five year olds don't understand the concept of taxes, but they might have some concept of the value of nicer parks to play in and a better place to call home. (They might not quite be ready to discuss historic preservation).

FY22 Annual Budget has a breakdown of revenues and expenses: https://opendata.worcesterma.gov/documents/be84fb023e6c45c89000c7f6d281c263/explore

This is a state program that is partially funded by fees recorded at county registries of deeds. There is a pot of money used for matching funds that Worcester currently receives none of because we haven't adopted CPA. Other cities have seen a lot of benefits from the additional revenue (worth noting that CPA funds can't be used to pay for other standard city operating expenses, only new projects that fall under one of the specified categories).

A committee would be formed, made up primarily of members of other boards (conservation commission, historic preservation, affordable housing trust, etc.) - they would be the ones to evaluate funding proposals and send the best on to city council for approval. This is all written into the Act, so Worcester can't circumvent the committee and only very specific uses of the funds are allowed.

Nothing that literally compels them to spend the money, but they are required to set up a committee (populated in part from other relevant city boards/commissions) which collects proposals and recommends which to fund. City council would ultimately approve the use of those funds. No reason the city shouldn't want the extra cash to spend, though. Also the new affordable housing trust can be allocated CPA funding to help with projects they choose to support. (Source: used to work as a planner developing CPA plans).

We had a good experience with Patriot Home Inspectors here in Worcester - $400 for a detailed inspection and report with photos, an additional $75 for radon test. They pointed out a lot of issues, making it clear that most were minor, and explained what to keep an eye on. https://www.patriothomeinspectors.com/services-rates