Tuesday, November 16, 2021

Who Cares? Trust, Apathy, and Voter Participation

 

Many small New England towns like Shutesbury are lucky enough to have two types of democracy at our disposal: representative democracy, where we elect our governing officials, and direct democracy, through the venerable tradition of Town Meetings.


But voter participation, particularly at Town Meetings, is on the decline. The pandemic has put a strain on in-person meetings and voting, but problems with voter participation predate Covid-19. Towns as diverse as Great Barrington and Mansfield bemoan the trickle of voters that appear at Annual Town Meetings.


In Shutesbury, only 219 out of 1,494 registered voters showed up to Annual Town Meeting, which was held outside and therefore did not have the space restrictions of the school gymnasium. A mere 308 ballots were cast to elect local officials, an activity that did not require voters to remain at Town Meeting.


Why do so few participate in Town Meetings? I believe the answers lie with confidence in the structure of our democracy and a comfortable lifestyle that lulls us into a state of indifference. In other words: trust and apathy.


Trust in Government

At the heart of representative government is the idea that those we vote into positions of authority will have our best interests in mind. As responsible voters, we vet candidates to ascertain whether they mirror our belief system and are committed to responsible governing. Because we don’t have the time or energy to be involved in the day-to-day running of our local government, we put our faith in those we elect to do the job for us. It’s a reasonable expectation.


Since we assume our government is running like a well-oiled machine, we turn our attention to other things: family, friends, work, and so on. Unless a problem arises that we cannot ignore, we go about our business and don’t worry about what is happening at Town Hall. We attend annual Town Meetings and believe that we have a direct voice in how the town is run and how our tax money is spent.


But what happens when we find out about problems in government? We may complain in an effort to set things right and vote for different candidates at the next election cycle. We may make our concerns known at our Town Meeting, registering our opinions on the issues of the day.


This is the way our government is supposed to work. We trust, but we also keep an eye on things. We stay involved.


Unfortunately, this is often not the case. For many voters, problems with local government administration does not prompt a trip to the ballot box or Town Meeting. Some complain about the suboptimal state of affairs, but still do nothing to try to set things right.


The problem is that too many of us just don’t care.


Voter Apathy

In the U.S., where the standard of living is higher than in many other countries, voter apathy is rampant. A voting participation study from 2015 showed the U.S. coming in at a dismal 185 out of 196 countries. Boston’s recent mayoral election saw a mere 28.9% of registered voters hit the polls. 


When National Public Radio asked people why they chose not to vote when they easily could have done so, respondents noted a variety of reasons: they’re too busy, don’t care, don’t trust the system, and/or don’t think their vote will make a difference.


There is little doubt that each vote counts at Town Meeting, yet people still do not attend. This is problematic in many ways:


➤ Votes taken will not reflect the opinions of the majority;


➤ Groups with an agenda can easily “pack the meeting” to attain a certain outcome;


➤ Officials learn to expect minimal attendance and may cater to minority, rather than majority, concerns;


➤ Elections will favor the incumbent power structure, stifling change.


A comment on a recent NextDoor Shutesbury thread spoke to the issue of “empathy”. As taxes continue to rise with no obvious increase in town services, should we not be concerned about others in town for whom this reality causes financial hardship? Between 2010 and 2020, Shutesbury’s total budget and tax rate steadily increased, putting pressure on the 42.4% of us who make under $75,000 annually. Adding additional items to an already large budget will cause more distress for almost half of Shutesbury residents.


The good news is that we can reverse this trend toward apathy if we wish to do so. The pandemic and Zoom have made keeping up with the meetings of various boards and committees easier, and most agendas and minutes can be found on the town website. Take some time to familiarize yourself with the issues of the day before Town Meeting, then show up! Town Meeting is just one day out of the year. Let’s make it count.


Tell Us Your Story!

Do you have strong feelings about Town Meeting? Do you attend? Why or why not? We want to know!


Many voters feel disenfranchised and disillusioned with a system that is supposed to listen to and represent the concerns of all residents and respect the voice of the majority. Yet most towns can’t muster a majority of voters at their Town Meetings. How can the wishes of the people be discovered and discussed when those very people are silent and absent?


Please go to this blog post announcement link on NextDoor and weigh in. The only way we can get our town government to reflect our wants and needs is to attend Town Meeting and vote. If we can address the reasons people avoid doing so, perhaps we can change—for the benefit of us all—the direction of our local government.



Weekly Factoids, Special Edition: Inspirational Quotes, courtesy of Brainyquote

 

People have moved beyond apathy, beyond skepticism into deep cynicism. - Elliot Richardson

 

The death of democracy is not likely to be an assassination from ambush. It will be a slow extinction from apathy, indifference, and undernourishment. - Robert M. Hutchins

 

Voting is completely important. People in America think democracy is a given. I think of it as an ecosystem, and what gets in the way of it is politicians and apathy. - Henry Rollins

 

Is it ignorance or apathy? Hey, I don’t know and I don’t care. - Jimmy Buffett




Tuesday, November 9, 2021

New Library Cost Estimate, Redux

 

Now that the Shutesbury Library Trustees have submitted a building program to the MA Board of Library Commissioners (MBLC) for a 5,928 square foot library building, it is time to update my recent post estimating costs for the proposed building and its attendant increased costs to taxpayers. Let’s start with the heftiest portion: ongoing operating costs.


Ongoing Operating Costs

Our library’s operations budget will surely increase once the project is completed. As I noted in an earlier post, the Town of Erving’s library budget increased 266% between fiscal years 2017 and 2022. If Shutesbury’s library budget increases by the same percentage, taxpayers could see a permanent, annual increase in their tax bills of $122.84 and a $0.49 rise in the tax rate to accommodate a library budget of $174,628 by fiscal year 2027.


It is notable that the MN Spear Library budget increased 218% between fiscal years 2005 and 2018, from $22,663 to $72,193. If costs have skyrocketed before a new library building is a reality, it seems safe to assume that that upward trajectory will only accelerate after a new library is built.


Exploding library budgets need not be a foregone conclusion, however. Leverett built a new library in 2003 and its library budget (including building maintenance) increased by only 61% between the years 2005 and 2018, from $56,249 to $90,689.





Updated - Total Construction Cost Estimate Based on Increased Square Footage

Using the formulas presented in this blog post, I have refigured the approximate price of a 5,928 square foot library and its cost to Shutesbury taxpayers:


5,928 s.f. * $729 s.f. cost =$4,321,512 * 36% (Shutesbury’s portion of the cost) =$1,555,744 - $520,326 (public and private money saved) = $1,035,418


20-year bond for $1,035,418 at 2.5% interest = $66,419 annual payment


Total interest = $292,964


The $66,419 annual payment would add $0.29 to the tax rate and $73.61 to the average tax bill each year for 20 years.


Outdoor Structures

Not included in the above estimate are two outdoor structures described in the Trustees’ building program: a 700 s.f. pavilion and a 200 s.f. storage shed. According to New England Outdoor, a no-frills pavilion measuring 720 s.f. costs $33,309 and a simple vinyl-sided shed costs $9,729. The pavilion has myriad options that can add to the cost; the shed has a few, as well. The basic cost for both structures: $43,038 (33309+9729).


It makes sense that both the shed and the pavilion would be placed on concrete pads. estimates from Porch.com for concrete work in our area show an average price of $1,689 for an installed 200 square foot shed pad and $5,561 for the 700 square foot pavilion pad.


Remodeling expense gives a similar price tag: a range of $1,582 - $2,189 for the 200 square foot pad with installation and $5,538 - $7,661 for the larger 700 square foot pavilion pad. These estimates reflect the website’s “Better”, or mid-priced, option. 


Adding the least expensive concrete pad estimates ($1,582 +$5,538) to $43,038 gives us a new estimated total construction cost of $50,158 for both outdoor structures. This number is likely on the low side, considering the current inflationary environment and escalating building costs


Shutesbury will pay the full amount for each since the Pilot grant money will not cover the cost of an outdoor pavilion and shed. Still, the Trustees and Friends could fundraise the amount necessary to build these structures if the town decides to move forward with the project—and possibly give some local contractors the option to bid on the jobs, as well.


Correction: The Library Trustees have informed me that, because the pavilion will be attached to the proposed library building and the MBLC supports the kayak lending program, these structures are considered eligible costs under the Small Library Pilot program meaning that 75% of these costs would be covered by the grant.


Construction Costs are Rising

Recently, the price tag on Deerfield’s Tilton Library renovation and expansion project was revised due to higher building costs. In 2017, the project cost was set at $8 million. A recent meeting between Deerfield residents and town officials produced a new estimate of between $10 and $12 million since inflation over the past year has raised the price of building materials considerably. Since the Massachusetts Board of Library Commissioners’ grant award of $4 million is static, the town of Deerfield is forced to cover the higher costs or leave the project incomplete.


If Shutesbury approves the Small Library Pilot project, construction will likely begin sometime in 2023. Though there is no way to predict what construction costs might be like in a year and a half, it would be prudent to factor in inflationary pressures when considering what a new library building might cost Shutesbury residents.


Shutesbury’s Population is Declining

In 2009, the Shutesbury Library Trustees proposed a 5,800 s.f. library based on population forecasts of 2392 people in 2020 and 2490 in 2027. In 2020 the population was actually 1717 people, well below the forecast. The newest library plan describes a population decrease from the present 1717 to 1554 people in 2030 and 1335 by 2040. As you can see, the proposed library keeps getting bigger while the population keeps getting smaller. People are moving out of town because of the high property taxes. That means we will have significantly fewer people to share the tax burden of this bigger, new library—a scary proposition and one for which I cannot offer an estimated long-term cost.  



Year

Forecast / Actual population

Library size proposed

2001

        / 1810

4000 sq ft

2009

        / 1836

5800 sq ft

2020

2392 / 1717

5928 sq ft +

2027

          2490/                        


2030

            1554 /


2040

            1335 /




Can the library project be downsized to fit a dwindling population? If you think it can, let the Shutesbury Library Trustees know! They are taking comments until November 15 on this subject. Contact them via email: librarytrustees@shutesbury.org


The “How Affordable is Your Housing” poll on NextDoor is still open if you want to participate.



Weekly Factoid:

 

Between 2010 and 2020, Cape Cod and the Islands experienced the greatest population increases while the four Western Massachusetts counties of Berkshire, Hampshire, Hampden, and Franklin sustained the greatest losses.

 

Source: The Boston Globe 

 


Tuesday, November 2, 2021

How Shutesbury Can Promote Housing Affordability

Compared to other small towns in Western Massachusetts, Shutesbury is one of the least affordable. Our fiscal year 2021 tax rate of $22.61 ($23.37 for FY2022) is the sixth-highest out of 351 Massachusetts communities while our per capita income is the 289th highest (near the bottom). Paying the average single-family tax bill of $5,662 takes 21.1% of income, the 16th highest. Shutesbury has been among the 10 highest tax rates in Massachusetts in each of the last 10 fiscal years.

Benefits of Homeownership

Homeownership is a proven wealth-builder for middle-class families. Census surveys show that persons who own their home have much more wealth than renters— 89 times more in 2017. Home equity accounts for the lion’s share of homeowners’ wealth.


A 2018 study from Harvard’s Joint Center for Housing Studies noted that more than half of the nation’s households were headed by persons aged 50 years and older. In Shutesbury, the over-50 crowd makes up 48% of the town’s population and the majority—90%—are homeowners; only 16% of Shutesbury homes are owned by persons younger than 45 years.


Ideally, housing expenses such as mortgage payments, homeowners’ insurance, real estate taxes, and repair and maintenance costs should consume less than 30% of gross household income, according to experts. One big advantage to having a mortgage rather than paying rent is the stability of the former compared to the latter. Thirty-year mortgages also have the advantage of being paid off eventually, usually later in life, when the income reduction associated with retirement is on the horizon.


4 Ways Shutesbury Could Lower Property Taxes

How can the Town of Shutesbury be more supportive of its residents who are homeowners?  The answer lies in reducing the one area of housing costs over which the town has control: property taxes.  


Property taxes are considered regressive because the same rate must be paid regardless of income. This is a particular burden for older homeowners, especially retirees. It can also be an issue for single-parent households. Many have watched the value of their home increase far beyond the price paid, inflating their tax bills as their income has dropped. 

 

Each $1.00 reduction in the tax rate would save the owner of a home valued at $250,454 about $250 annually. Enter your home’s value in the tax calculator to see the exact savings for your situation. 


Here are a few ways Shutesbury might lower taxes on its homeowners.

Remove Extraneous Line Items from the Annual Budget

This year’s Town Meeting revealed that town officials have been keeping debt payments in the budget after the debt is retired and using the money to prop up the town’s savings. The amount in question, $112,695, remains in the budget and adds $0.50 to the tax rate and $125 to the annual average single-family tax bill. This is your money that the town is sitting on. 


Whether we build a new library or not, the $25,000 line item for the Library Building Fund could be removed from the budget. This would save taxpayers $0.11 on the tax rate and approximately $28 on their tax bill. 

Repeal the Community Preservation Tax (CPA)

In a recent blog post, I advocated for repealing the Community Preservation Act tax because great sums of money are accumulating but not being used. Each year, Shutesbury levies an additional 1.5% on the tax you would pay on the value of your home minus a $100,000 exemption. Using the average house value of $250,454 and the fiscal year 2021 tax rate the formula looks like this: :


($250,454 - $100,000) * $22.61/$1,000 of value * 1.5% = $51.03 


A non-binding poll on this question appeared on NextDoor Shutesbury recently. It is not too late if you wish to opine on this issue.

Downsize Town Government

Shutesbury’s cost of government is high compared to its population. Despite a  reduction in both taxable parcels and the number of residents, our budget continues to increase. 


As the population declines the size of town government should as well. Salaries and hours could be reconfigured once incumbents have left or retired. Some positions were made full-time, possibly with the expectation that the number of residents would increase; perhaps they could revert back to part-time. Shutesbury could look to other towns with similar populations and compare how their various positions are structured and funded.


A reduction in salaries would also decrease the cost of benefits, including health insurance—for which Shutesbury currently pays $520,000 yearly.


Cutting the General Government budget line by just 10% would net a $56,370 annual savings based on the fiscal year 2022 budget. That would shave $0.25 off the tax rate and save the average homeowner $62.

Regionalize the Elementary School

A big chunk of Shutesbury’s budget is dedicated to education. The Amherst-Pelham Regional system line item is $1,611,136, a reduction from the prior year of nearly $65,000. This reduction was achieved by skillful negotiation on the part of Shutesbury’s School Committee to make our town’s portion more equitable and in line with State Statute.


The Shutesbury Elementary School line item stands at $2,238,079 for fiscal year 2022. Though the School’s website states that it serves 125 children between Preschool and Grade 6, that number has dropped to 112.


Is regionalization the answer? I am no expert on school issues, but the statistics make me think that considering the issue should be pursued. A 10% decrease in the elementary school budget would net a savings of $223,808 based on this year’s budget. That is approximately a $1.00 reduction in the tax rate and a savings of $248 annually on the average tax bill.


Assuming that regionalization does not entail making Shutesbury the new regional school location, the empty SES building—with its large parking lot and a new roof—would be a boon for the town. There is ample space for storage, community gatherings, exercise, computer, and even cooking classes. The building could be renovated to accommodate many uses—including a new library.


Incorporating all four of these proposals would take $514 off of the average tax bill.

Some of these changes will take time to implement while others could be voted on at the next annual Town Meeting—meaning we could soon take the first steps toward improving affordability for all Shutesbury residents. That’s us, folks!


Savings at-a-Glance




Are your housing costs too high? Use Cent$ible Shutesbury’s new handy-dandy Affordable Housing Calculator to find out!



Weekly Factoid:

 

Massachusetts Per Capita Income, 2020: $78,458

 

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

 

Shutesbury Per Capita Income, 2020: $25,299

 

Source: Massachusetts Division of Local Services


Information Mining on Shutesbury.org

Photo by Kenny Eliason on Unsplash Municipal websites provide a wealth of information for citizens willing to explore what they offer. Thou...