Last month I commented on the fact that the Finance Committee’s report on overrides compared Amherst’s tax rate to Longmeadow’s. I believed that comparison was not very useful because I was sure that, overall, Longmeadow’s residents have higher incomes than Amherst’s residents. This month I did some research to check my assumptions.
The most recent actual numbers I could find are from the 2000 federal census, which is data from 1999. I was right.
The census broke incomes down into many brackets: less than $10,000; intervals of $5,000 (actually, $4,999) between $10,000 and $59,999; then intervals of $14,999 between $60,000 and $99,999; then intervals of $24,999 between $100,000 and $149,000; then $150,000 to $199,000 and above $200,000. The higher the income, the fewer the divisions.
Longmeadow had 5,738 households; Amherst had 9,150. The census data lists households as “families,” with subgroups of “married-couple families” and “female householder, no husband present,” and “nonfamily households.” I decided to compare the two types of “families” as a way of reducing the effect on Amherst’s data of households of students who are, presumably, temporarily poor. But I do want to state that when it comes to taxes and services, we non-family households are the most valuable residents Amherst has.
Longmeadow had 4,446 “family” households and Amherst had 4,553. Among those households, 546 in Longmeadow enjoyed a household income of over $200,000; in Amherst, it was 166. Not surprisingly, all of those households were married couples. These most affluent families represented 13.8% of married-couple families in Longmeadow, but only 4.8% of similar families in Amherst.
In both towns there was a bulge of families with incomes between $60,000 and $124,999: in Longmeadow, 44.1%, in Amherst 35.2%. 86.9% families in Longmeadow and 50.9% in Amherst had incomes of at least $60,000.
But all this was almost eight years ago. What about now?
I doubt that the relative affluence of Amherst and Longmeadow residents has changed much. We do know that during these years, UMass, our largest employer, went through two rounds of major layoffs and early retirements. I know personally many people who live in Amherst who worked for UMass in 2000 but no longer do; most, but not all, are retired. Retirees do not have as high an income as they did as employees; if they were lucky, their pensions might be 80% of their salaries. For most, it’s less (these were “early” retirements). The other thing we know, looking at housing construction in Amherst, is that most new houses are large and expensive; so we can guess that many new residents have incomes that are higher than most long-term residents.
And then there is that half of family households whose incomes didn’t reach $60,000, plus the “nonfamily households,” in which half had incomes between $15,000 and $60,000. My conclusion is that many households in Amherst cannot afford a significant tax increase.
I also believe, after decades of involvement in and observation of town government, that the town will not make changes to improve its fiscal situation until far more citizens understand the cost of not doing so.
People continue to argue against economic development as if someone in town were trying to turn Amherst into Route 9 in Hadley. No one wants that, and in any case we don’t have the land for it. Of course having more businesses, even a few more of them, to help pay for our services helps; every dollar off my taxes is a dollar off my taxes. We need to encourage our small businesses, especially in our downtown, to prosper and grow – and pay taxes.
Another thing we can do is to make room for more housing that is for people who do not have children attending school. Let’s face it: no family that sends two or more children to our public schools pays enough taxes to cover the costs of the services they use. This town needs more people who pay taxes but use very few services. That means smaller housing units, not McMansions.
It’s time for more of the members of the Select Board, School Committees, and Library Trustees to make clear where they stand on raising the funds they all help spend. Traditionally the Trustees and School Committees have acted as if they were above the fray when it comes to local taxes; I’m glad to see that some current members are paying attention to where the money comes from. All public officials should be expected to do so, and to talk about the real effects on Amherst citizens of increased taxes, not just the programs that might have to be cut.