The Highs and Lows of Shutesbury's Annual Town Meeting

 Shutesbury’s 2022 Annual Town Meeting (ATM) was remarkable in many ways. Efforts to increase attendance coupled with a vote on a proposed new library enticed more than 500 voters to show up. The Article 5 library vote rocketed past its ⅔ majority requirement, with 422 in favor to 85 against.

Article 46, the Citizens Petition I sponsored, did not pass. This article requested an immediate set aside of $700,000 in Free Cash reserves to replace the asphalt section of the Shutesbury Elementary School roof. At least I was able to advance the Article from its lowly second-to-last position to place it with other Capital Items, immediately after Article 13.

I wasn’t surprised by the Article’s failure. I remember attending Town Meetings 20 to 25 years ago when a packed gymnasium voted to give the school whatever funds it requested. Over time, I noticed an attitude shift whereby many townsfolk considered a new library building to be a priority. By 2010, the town was considering accepting a library building grant. That is also the time frame when discussions of chronic roof leaks began showing up in Select Board and Finance Committee (FinCom) Minutes.

Questionable Commentary from “The Table”

What did surprise me was the quality of the discussion regarding Article 46. Much of the opposition came from town officials who described the project as a priority while they postponed it yet again. Several incorrect statements regarding Free Cash were made authoritatively by one particular FinCom member, something I found distressing–particularly since it was decided at last year’s ATM that minority opinions must be delivered from an audience microphone, not from the FinCom table.

According to the Division of Local Services (DLS), Free Cash is unused funds from the previous fiscal year’s budget plus any leftover money in the Free Cash account from previous years. The excess budgetary funds can be unspent money from the town’s various departments as well as receipts that exceeded estimates. Free Cash can be offset by certain deficits, can be a negative number and should be limited to paying one-time (not recurring) expenses.

Free Cash can accumulate when the town consistently raises more money in taxes than it spends, resulting in budget surpluses.

Here are a few of the misstatements (paraphrased) put forth from “the table”, usually considered a source of reliable information, with their factual corrections.

Statement:  We can’t drain Free Cash. It is the town’s “rainy day fund”.

Fact: According to the DLS, stabilization funds are considered “rainy day funds”. Free Cash can be drained and, as noted above, can be a negative number. 

Statement: If this Article passes, our Free Cash balance will be -$17,000.

Fact: Using FinCom’s numbers, committing $700,000 in Free Cash reserves would have left the town with nearly $33,000 in the account:

Free Cash ending balance $457,772 

Pending amount for school roof not moved at ATM   + $275,000

        $732,772 

Article 46     - $700,000

        $  32,772

Statement: Free Cash is the town's checkbook. The Treasurer uses it to pay bills. We use it to balance the books, pay bills, etc. after the end of the fiscal year.

Fact: Free Cash is NOT the town’s checkbook. I consulted with Shutesbury’s Treasurer and Accountant, each of whom explained how the town pays its bills throughout the fiscal year and beyond. 

Throughout the year, Department Heads submit invoices and/or receipts to the Town Accountant, who adds them to bi-weekly warrants. The warrants are submitted to the Select Board who approves and signs them. The Treasurer then prints checks, signs, and mails them. The Treasurer is responsible for moving money from a general fund into a payables account to cover the checks.

When bills from one fiscal year come due after the next has begun, Town Accountants use an accounts payable system which expends funds from the previous fiscal year to be paid once the new one has begun. This occurs during the month of July. Money for unpaid bills beyond July are encumbered so the DLS does not count these funds when certifying Free Cash for the newly begun fiscal year.

Statement: We can’t tie up Free Cash for such a long time.

Fact: Without another Town Meeting vote, Free Cash funds cannot be moved again before June 30. After that date, remaining funds are unavailable until they are certified by the state; for Shutesbury, this is usually sometime in the fall. 

No doubt that is why town officials said they would address the roof issue in the fall. However, since Free Cash is unusable from after ATM until the fall anyway, it wouldn’t matter if it was set aside in the spring or the fall.  

The Free Cash allocated by ATM to the proposed library will likely be tied up for a much longer length of time. That project still needs approval from voters, after which it will need its own design and engineering study–no doubt a more time-consuming endeavor than the study for the school roof. 

A Double-Standard for Cash Set Asides

A voter came forward to question the process by which the town allocates money to building projects based on whether a design study has been completed. They asked why the town could not appropriate money for the school roof project when Article 5 asked voters to do so for the proposed library. Neither project had a design study completed, after all.

The Town Administrator went to the microphone to explain that the library project had certain parameters outlined by the MA Board of Library Commissioners, one of which was a required vote on the project before the design phase. The process of having a design study completed is followed by the town in all other projects, she noted.

This is not entirely true. At last year’s ATM, voters passed Article 7, which set aside $17,000 for the SES HVAC control system design study and Article 27, which appropriated $200,000 for doing the work. Why then was it impossible for this year’s ATM to vote on both the design study and the estimated cost for the roof replacement? 

This fact was commented upon by another FinCom member, but no explanation from other town officials was offered.

The word “process” is tossed around quite a bit by town officials but it is unclear how it works. Shutesbury’s process can only be one of three things:

1. The process is adhered to identically in every circumstance.

2. The process is adhered to most of the time, but is subject to exceptions.

3. There is no true process; each case is considered and decided individually.

Considering past practices, it appears Shutesbury’s process is either No. 2 or No. 3. 

In case No. 2, the SES roof project could easily have been made an exception to the rule, just as the HVAC system and the proposed library were excepted. Prioritizing the project should have been no problem considering how long the roof has been leaking.

In case No. 3, the same logic applies. The roof is in poor shape and needs immediate attention. Considering this project on its own merits should have put it at the top of the list.

As I’ve noted in previous posts, the Town Buildings Committee has been advocating for the entire SES roof replacement since 2017.

This year, both the Town Buildings Committee and the School Committee voted to bring a funding request to Shutesbury’s Capital Planning Committee to have the issue placed on the ATM warrant. A majority of the Capital Planning members failed to support that request.

Hopeful Signs?

Still, I feel hopeful regarding our neglected school building. Town officials are speaking publicly about the roof project quite often these days. FinCom has announced a fall Special Town Meeting to vote on funding for the replacement project, which it estimates will be done this fiscal year.  

For the past few years, Shutesbury has failed to secure a grant from the MA School Building Authority to help defray the costs of the roof replacement. This year, the Town Administrator announced that the Authority agreed to tour the SES building, a development attributed to the assistance of our State Senator. Though the Authority is completely independent and immune from political influence, it is good to see town and school officials working together on the school’s behalf. When I spoke with the School Committee chair, it was noted that both the SES Principal and Superintendent made eloquent appeals to the MSBA representative, seemingly to good effect.

Soon we will know whether a true majority of townspeople want to build a new library. Come fall, we will find out whether the SES roof replacement will be postponed once again. On the first issue, we were able to vote twice; on the second, not at all. To my mind, this “process” needs improvement. 

How to be Heard at Annual Town Meeting

Town Meeting is a form of local government unique to New England. Both a legislative body and an event, the democratic nature of Town Meeting gives voters who attend a direct say in how their small-town government is run.

Shutesbury’s Annual Town Meeting (ATM) is being held outdoors on May 21 this year and promises to be very exciting. This year, residents will be asked to vote on several significant articles:

➢ The acceptance of the Small Library Pilot Project award and a possible debt excluded override vote to fund a new library; 

➢ Replacement of the asphalt shingle section of the Shutesbury Elementary School roof;

➢ The borrowing of $225,000 to purchase a new dump truck; 

➢ A completely revamped Town Buildings Committee charge;

➢ A slew of local option property tax exemptions.

With so many important issues on tap for voters to weigh in on, attending ATM this year is of the utmost necessity. But many voters stay away from this democratic exercise because they feel disempowered. They think outcomes are pre-determined and their votes do not count. 

As Shutesbury’s Town Moderator, Paul Lyons is responsible for running Town Meeting efficiently and acknowledging voters who wish to speak to the assembly. He has been encouraging residents to share their feelings about ATM, trying to get to the root of why so few voters attend. I spoke with him recently about the ways people can get more involved in Town Meeting, and have their voices heard.

Here are some of my questions and concerns along with the substance of Mr. Lyons’ responses. Additional fleshing out of concepts is courtesy of the Massachusetts Moderator’s Association website and websites of municipalities using the rules of procedure laid out in the Association’s publication, Town Meeting Time.

What rules of procedure are used at Annual Town Meeting?

The type of Parliamentary procedure used by most Town Moderators at Town Meetings is contained in a handbook called Town Meeting Time. This book is published by the Massachusetts Moderators Association and uses a modified version of “Robert’s Rules of Order” fine-tuned to fit the unique nature of New England Town Meetings (see “Resources” below).

Is it possible to change the order of warrant articles?

Yes, though there must be a good reason since it is assumed that the Select Board had a rationale for putting them in a specific order. Any voter can make a motion to move articles on the warrant using these motions:

Postponing/Advancing an Article–all require a motion and a second:

• Postpone to a Time Certain (either the same or a different day; often used to rearrange articles): Can be debated, is amendable, requires a majority vote;

• Lay on the Table (to kill or postpone an article): Non-debatable, is non-amendable, required ⅔ vote;

• Postpone Indefinitely (to kill or postpone an article): Can be debated, is non-amendable, requires a majority vote;

• Advance an Article (for earlier consideration): Can be debated, is amendable, requires a majority vote.

Some citizens feel they have no voice at ATM compared to town officials. Can you comment?

Town officials often speak more and have fewer time limits because their speeches are informational. However, when they are giving their personal opinion they are subject to the same time limits as everyone else–usually, two minutes. As for how many times a participant may speak, the Moderator usually uses their best judgment in order to make certain everyone who wants to has a chance to speak.

If voters believe there is erroneous information contained in an officially-sponsored warrant article, can they be prevented from speaking by Town Officials?

No, this is always up to the Moderator, who can use their judgment regarding time limits in cases where citizens have important information to share with Town Meeting.

In the case of a contentious vote, such as the upcoming vote on the Small Library Pilot Project, will you, as Moderator, commit to a secret paper ballot vote on the floor of ATM this year?

Yes, I will call for a paper ballot.

Remember…

➢ Shutesbury’s Annual Town Meeting will be held on Saturday, May 21 outdoors behind Town Hall.

➢ The ATM warrant must be made public at least 7 days before Town Meeting.

➢ In addition to the voluminous warrant, there will be elections of various town officials–including a contest between a newcomer and an incumbent for one of three Select Board seats.

➢ This is an unusual Town Meeting year in that we will be asked to accept the Small Library Pilot grant and, if we vote to do so, we will be asked to borrow $1.2 million for a new library. The vote to actually borrow the money will be toward the end of June “at the ballot box” in the form of a debt excluded override vote. 

➢ We are, above all, a community. We can disagree without being disagreeable. Let us treat each other with respect, kindness, and open-mindedness. Let’s enjoy ourselves! There’s no reason Town Meeting can’t be fun.

Make your voice heard by attending Annual Town Meeting! 

Other Resources:

Shutesbury Town Meeting: Formal Aspects

Citizens’ Guide to Town Meetings

Massachusetts Moderators Association: For the Public

Town Meeting Handbook: Becket, MA

Q & A with Don Wakoluk, Candidate for Shutesbury Select Board

Courtesy of Clipart Library

According to Shutesbury.org, “Boards of selectmen have general supervision over all matters that are not specifically delegated by law, or by vote of the town, to another office of board.” The Select Board is answerable only to the voters of Shutesbury.

The Select Board is an elected position, with a term of three years. Each year, one of those positions comes up for election/re-election. This year, Melissa Makepeace-O’Neil is running for re-election and Donald Wakoluk is running against her as a newcomer.

I reached out to both candidates with a request for a question-and-answer-style interview. Incumbent Melissa Makepeace-O’Neil did not respond. Here is what Donald Wakoluk had to say. 

                                                         

1. Why are you running for the Shutesbury Select Board?  What do you hope to accomplish?

After AMP met with town hall and pro solar farm statements were published on the town webpage, I felt that elected and unelected officials had become tainted by the interaction. No Notice of Intent had been filed regarding Solar Farms and these comments from town officials were a violation of trust in our boards and bylaws. I ran as a write-in last year and decided to run on the ballot this year. The false rumors of large sums of money from AMP have divided the town. As an ex-Army officer trained in democratic, inclusive leadership, I feel it is my duty to offer hope to ALL residents and welcome them to participate in running town hall.

2.  What do you see as the major issue/issues facing Shutesbury today? Ten years from now?

A lack of inclusive leadership, an unwillingness by elected officials to hold public discussions of divisive issues other than under the constraints of board meetings conducted via zoom, an absence of seeking consensus from residents who are not board members, and unrepresentative government. Climate change over the next decade will force the town to seek cooperation with nearby towns to develop environmental and economic solutions to its effects.

3. What do you believe Shutesbury residents value the most about their community?

We are a rural town of forests, wetlands, and pastures. A dirt Road-town, punctuated by intentional villages sharing a common vision, independent from surrounding cities. We have created the jobs and economic opportunities found at the ends of our dirt roads. I think we are the embodiment of Daniel Shays's social democracy.

4. Where do you see Shutesbury in 3 years? 10 years?

In the short term, at the crossroads of a new green economy. Where our homes become energy-independent hubs of rural innovation, residents who are examples of self-reliance and higher education creating uniquely skilled labor. In ten years, we’ll become the foundation of environmental resilience that will lead the world in surviving the ravages of global warming.  

5. Do you support economic diversity among Shutesbury residents?

I fear the divisiveness we currently tolerate will lead to ever more have-nots ruled by a privileged few. Only an inclusive representative government will build a town of equals. 

6. At the FinCom meeting of April 5, 2022, the Town Administrator (TA) accused you, as Tree Warden, of not doing your job because there was very little money spent from that position's expense account. Will you elaborate on this incident? I believe you were at the meeting earlier on behalf of the Conservation Committee but had left before this issue was raised.

I didn’t vote for the TA, the DeFacto mayor, no one did, I wasn’t aware it was a job for life. I have saved the town thousands of dollars by convincing National Grid to remove hazard trees and not spending the expense account. That’s called leadership and thankfully will pay for the removal of the current hazard trees at the fire station. In my opinion, the leaders we’ve placed in town hall have been the cause of every divisive issue this town has faced over the last decade due to poor decision sharing. 

Dr. Seuss' The Lorax - Theatrical Trailer

Shutesbury Annual Town Meeting, May 21, behind town hall, promises to be very exciting this year. In addition to the contested Select Board seat, voters will be weighing in on a slew of new property tax exemptions, a revamped Town Buildings Committee charge, the replacement of the asphalt roof on the elementary school, and–this is a biggie–whether or not to fund the construction of a new library building. 

Please attend and make your voice heard! Every vote counts!

4 Tips Local Government Can Take from Personal Finance

Courtesy of Clipart Library

 Why can’t the government be run more like a household?

Perhaps you have heard of the Government-Household analogy which purports that government could run more efficiently if it was forced to abide by the rules of household finance:  spend within your means, limit debt, and “tighten your belt” during times of economic hardship.

Usually, this argument is made regarding the federal government, where comparisons between federal debt and household debt are spurious, and living within your means is irrelevant when you are able to print money and increase taxes at will. The reality is that this idea is bandied about to make political hay and not as an attempt to make “big government” less wasteful.

Local government is another matter. Small towns with Annual Town Meetings answer to the voters, who, in theory, have a direct say in financial matters. Town finances, being simpler than state and federal finances, are more easily understood by taxpayers who see their tax bills increase with every new expense. Although small towns sometimes take on debt, the terms are less favorable for them than for the federal government and they must get approval directly from the voters before borrowing.

These differences make local government more amenable to the precepts of personal finance. I used articles from the following personal finance websites to inform this post, condensing and combining concepts that are applicable to both personal and public finances.

7 Money Management Tips to Improve Your Finances

Money Management: 4 Tips for Mastering Your Finances

The 5 Principles of Personal Finance Everyone Must Follow

Personal Finance

The Difference Between Wants and Needs

Without further ado, here are four principles that can be applied to both municipal and personal finances:

Create a Budget and Spend Less than your Income/Revenue

Knowing how much money you have coming in over a certain span of time and spending below that threshold is a primary tenet of personal finance. This practice allows you to save money and keeps you out of debt. A budget is a popular tool to achieve this goal.

The primary source of revenue for small towns is the property tax, which is set in response to the size of the town’s proposed budget. In practice, this usually means that an increased budget is not a problem for a small town since the tax levy (and tax rate) simply increases to cover higher expenses. 

This doesn’t mean that rising taxes are inevitable. Towns can opt for level-funded budgets to keep a lid on tax rates. If there are unavoidable increases in either household or municipal budgets, cuts are made elsewhere to keep the budget in balance.

Save with Explicit Goals in Mind

Personal finance sites exhort readers to create funds for several important financial goals: an emergency fund for use during economic downturns, an account to fund big purchases, and a retirement fund. While the last objective applies to households only, the other two can apply to municipalities as well.

Emergency Fund

For households, this generally entails putting aside enough money to cover expenses for three to six months in the case of job loss. This money could also be used to pay for things such as unexpected medical bills.

Municipalities have their own mechanisms for setting aside money. Town cash reserves are usually in the form of Free Cash, which is leftover money from the previous year’s budget, and Stabilization, described by the state’s Division of Local Services as a municipality’s “rainy day fund”. After Free Cash levels are certified by the state, some of that money can be moved into Stabilization with a vote at Town Meeting. Free Cash and the total of all Stabilization accounts (communities can set up several if they so choose) make up the town’s cash reserves. Some towns return a portion of free cash to the taxpayer in the form of a reduced tax levy.

Saving to Fund Large Expenditures

Creating an account to save money for future purchases makes sense for households and local governments alike. 

Putting away money each week for planned expenditures like the eventual replacement of household appliances, maintenance and repair of the family car, and other planned expenses can spare a family’s emergency fund and make budgeting more consistent. 

Towns have similar concerns, such as the costs of maintenance and repair of their buildings and vehicles, as well as soaring employee healthcare costs. Planning ahead for large expenditures such as roof replacement projects on town-owned properties can help keep town budgets from escalating every year, burdening taxpayers.

Is there such a thing as too much saving? For households, probably not–unless hoarding cash is turning you into a miser. For local governments, socking away tax money with no spending plan in place increases tax bills for residents with no benefit. 

I’ve written previously about Shutesbury’s tendency to save vast sums of money each year–much more than neighboring towns–while using very little of this cash hoard to fund necessary expenses such as replacing the roof on the elementary school and funding the Locks Pond Road culvert project without borrowing.

Prioritize Needs over “Wants” 

Balancing a household budget often requires deciding which expenses are necessary and which are not. If food costs increase, for example, it makes more sense to cancel cable service than to buy less food. The cost of some necessary items can often be trimmed, as well–such as purchasing a less pricey phone and contract to cut expenses.

Local governments should follow this rule as well. Does it make sense to buy new town vehicles now, simply because they were requested by retiring department heads, or wait until the new employee can have a say in the matter? Is it responsible to move a large amount of money that could be used to fund the school roof replacement and apply it instead to the construction of an $8,300,000 library? These issues were discussed on April 14 at a joint meeting of the Finance Committee, Personnel Board, and the Capital Planning Committee (Zoom link is available from the Shutesbury Town Clerk). I attended that meeting and I found the logic behind these decisions to be very puzzling.

Avoid Debt Whenever Possible

Mortgage debt aside, personal finance gurus warn against incurring too much debt. By creating a budget, learning to save, and prioritizing budgetary needs, households are better able to avoid taking on debt.

Municipalities can acquire debt more easily and inexpensively than households, but that doesn’t mean they should. Borrowing costs add to residents’ tax burden when cash reserves are available to use. If the town wants to replace the reserve money by raising and appropriating money for that purpose, it will be less burdensome for taxpayers since no borrowing costs will be included and the town can levy the amount over a period of time that fits the needs of the town, not those of the bank.

The pandemic, supply chain shortages, record inflation, and a new war in Eastern Europe have all contributed to escalating costs and an uncertain future. Meanwhile, the Shutesbury school roof continues to need replacement. Households are feeling the pinch, prioritizing spending, and tightening their belts. Shouldn’t our local government do the same?

Affordability: How Shutesbury Ranks Compared to All MA Communities

Last year, I compared Shutesbury’s tax rate, average single-family tax bill, and cash reserves with those of other Franklin County towns with similar populations. I found that our tax rate was lower than Wendell’s though our average tax bill was higher. I also discovered that Leverett was much wealthier than Shutesbury, with Leverett taxpayers dedicating a mere 13.4% of household income to the payment of property tax bills compared to Shutesbury’s 21.1%.

How does Shutesbury’s affordability compare to the rest of the state? To find out, I compared our town’s fiscal year 2021 and 2022 tax rates, average tax bills, tax burden, and level of Free Cash to all 351 Massachusetts municipalities to see how we stack up. Here are the results.

Tax Rate

Shutesbury’s tax rate of $21.83 is the fourth-highest in Massachusetts–only the Western Massachusetts municipalities of Greenfield ($22.32), Wendell ($23.24), and Longmeadow ($24.64) have steeper rates. Last year, we were in sixth place, with Adams and Wilbraham joining the small group of communities with a higher tax rate than Shutesbury.

Note that this tax rate comparison reflects only the municipalities’ residential tax rate (and, in some cases, open space) and doesn’t include other classes such as commercial, industrial, and personal property. For communities with a split tax rate, some of the tax levy is shifted from residential to commercial properties, which usually pay a higher rate. Like many small towns in the state, Shutesbury has a single tax rate.

Average Tax Bill

Shutesbury’s average single-family tax bill edged up to $5,876 in FY2022 from the prior year’s $5,662. Our ranking changed as well: Shutesbury placed at No. 167 out of 351 communities for the highest average tax bill in FY 2022, a drop from its 2021 rank of 153.

How did that happen? Pandemic-induced real estate sales boosted values across Massachusetts, pushing the median home sale price statewide to an all-time high of $510,000. Cities and towns adjusted their total single-family values to reflect this change, which lowered tax rates. For Shutesbury, the value of all single-family properties rose from $187,324,770 in FY2021 to $201,594,118 in 2022, which produced a tax rate of $21.83 compared to the previous year’s $22.61.

This is a perfect example of how a lower tax rate does not necessarily reflect a reduced tax burden, as evidenced by the uptick in the average single-family tax bill. The average single-family value rose to $269,151 in FY2022 from $250,434, a value that produced a higher average tax bill despite a drop in the tax rate:

269,151 ✕ 21.83 /1,000 = $5,875.56

Some bills will be higher and some will be lower; on average, however, the tax burden increases.

Single-Family Tax Bill as a Percent of Value

Shutesbury ranks fourth in the state when it comes to the percentage of a property’s value our tax bills represent. For FY2022, the average tax bill of $5,876 represents 2.18% of the average single-family value of $269,151. Compare this to Leverett, where households pay, on average, 1.88% of value in taxes ($6,515 average bill on $345,831 average value). 

In 2021, Shutesbury ranked sixth (2.26%) for this metric, with Adams and Wilbraham again showing a higher or equal (in the case of Adams) percentage of property value reflected in residents’ tax bills.

Wealth Indicators

An important metric to consider is the wealth of a community’s residents and how much of the average household’s income is needed to satisfy the annual tax burden.

With 20.49% of the average household’s income dedicated to paying property taxes, Shutesbury’s FY2022 ranking stands at No.19–meaning that only 18 other communities in Massachusetts pay a higher percentage. That’s a small improvement over our 2021 ranking of 16 and 21.10%. 

Per capita income for Shutesbury was reported as $26,831 last year, compared to $28,682 for this fiscal year, a decrease from last year.

Comparing per capita income with the Massachusetts average, Shutesbury falls short. According to the U.S. Census, Massachusetts's per capita income is $45,555 (in 2020 dollars).  

Shutesbury households do better when it comes to median annual income, which the U.S. Census reports as $85,000–slightly higher than the state-wide value of $84,385.   

Free Cash

Shutesbury’s Free Cash levels have dropped over the past fiscal year, from 19.73% of the operating budget in 2021 to 14.58% in 2022. The fund itself has decreased only slightly, however, from $1.4 million in FY2021 to $1.2 million in FY2022. 

This stash places Shutesbury well beyond the Division of Local Services’ suggested reserve level of 3% to 5% of a municipality’s operating budget. For FY2021, Shutesbury ranked No. 17 (click link, export to Excel, sort), for the highest percentage of Free Cash as a percent of its annual budget. This year, we ranked No. 36–though 29 communities have not yet had their Free Cash reserves certified by the state.

Tying it All Together

Compared to all municipalities, Shutesbury gets low marks for affordability based on its exceptionally high tax rate and single-family tax bills. Our town also requires taxpayers to fork over a larger percentage of their income than most other communities to satisfy their local tax obligations. Lastly, our high tax rate results in residents paying a higher percentage of their property’s value, resulting in a heftier tax bill.

Why is Shutesbury such an expensive place to live? As this Shutesbury.org document shows, the annual budget has slowly crept upwards over the past two decades, as has the tax rate. Property values have not kept pace, however, which means comparably less value is funding higher budgets. Beginning around 2010, values began to languish while annual budgets did not. It was around that time that the tax rate began to rise in earnest as stagnant property values struggled to prop up budgets that continued to climb.

The town has developed some financial policies that have seriously exacerbated this problem. One, which I have written about before, concerns the tendency to stockpile cash with no clear goal in sight. Over the years, Shutesbury has postponed work on the town’s infrastructure despite having more than adequate reserves. This practice increases taxpayer costs due to inflation and a worsening of the issues affecting the neglected structures.

Instead of using reserves as necessary and creating a plan to replenish those reserves over time, relatively small amounts of the town’s savings are applied to various capital outlays, with the balance being borrowed, incurring unnecessary interest costs. In addition, there are line items built into the budget specifically to pad reserve accounts, resulting in overcharging taxpayers without benefit to them. These items include previously paid-off debts and funds set aside for a specific building project, which may or may not occur. 

Shutesbury officials often lament that we need additional revenue to lower residents’ tax burden and make the town more affordable. That scenario seems absurd since the town has no business presence to lighten the tax load. A more reasonable approach would be to limit Shutesbury’s spending within the parameters of a town with slow-growing property values and a dwindling population.

Weekly Factoids:

 

How Did You Fare During 2021?

 

Profits Soar as U.S. Corporations Have Best Year Since 1950

Source: Bloomberg Quint

 

Corporate Tax Rates on Taxable Income, Then and Now

 

1950:  First $25,000 = 23%

Over $25,000 = 42%

 

2021: All Taxable Income: 21%

Source: The Tax Foundation