Cartoon: Jonesing for All We Need

6 thoughts on “Cartoon: Jonesing for All We Need”

1. Exactly! I would laugh if it wasn’t so depressing. Bravo for picturing it like it is.

2. My immigrant grandfather, schooled in Talmudic wisdom, liked to say “There are really three sides to every story — your side, my side and the right side.” Hopefully reconstruction of the Jones Library will transform it into a modern 21st century public library accessible to the entire community.
   Amherst must recognize and address the underlying problem which is its inadequate property tax base, burdened by tax-exempt properties such as UMass, Amherst College, Hampshire College, and town-owned land. For years there has been vigorous opposition to commercial development and solar power projects that would provide much-needed tax revenue. Amherst also is saddled with thousands of units of off-campus student residential rental housing that are a drain on municipal services. Compare Amherst’s financial straits notwithstanding its $21.27 per thousand dollars of valuation property tax rate with neighboring Hadley’s $12.18 rate.

3. I agree with some, and disagree with other parts of what Mr. Pill said. One, I think the library was a step too far. We are taxed based on property tax, but I just like to say, tax base, I wholeheartedly agree, we don’t have enough. The colleges?, when we cite those it sounds a bit like scapegoating, except for “possibly” the University. Amherst College is privately owned. The University is owned by the state, and perhaps the state could do something else. I would point out that we are in a unique position, with not one, but three colleges, and I’m not sure how many examples we have to follow. Having the town own land, ……….that is a waste, it could be developed. The thing about commercial development is that it may not look exactly the way some of us want it to, but it serves a purpose. Off-campus student housing: given our circumstances, I’m not sure how that could be stopped. As far as using municipal services, I could point out that the properties do in fact pay taxes. As far as the tax rate, I believe it fluctuates, a little search told me that is presently $17.95 per thousand, but Mr. Pill’s point is taken, I think it is at least that, and usually over $20 per thousand.

4. The Development that has occurred, hadn’t added that much , other than an insignificant tax paid to the town . Other than that,it is hard to quantify any other benefit to the taxpayer . The downtown is hardly robust . So why allow further development ?
   It feels like the town is being over leveraged by pie in the sky visions .

5. One correction to a comment above: the Town-owned conservation lands is an amenity, not a burden — these cost the Town of Amherst essentially nothing in human services (schools, police and fire protection, roads…) but provide all of us with environmental services (cleaner air and water, places to exercise and recreate and inspire…). By imagining the Town-owned land in Amherst as part of a fictional neighboring town Wild Amherst, you’ll understand why these land holdings are not the problem; instead, it’s the properties owned by the private colleges and public university are significantly undertaxed relative to what they cost the town in services.

   One solution might be to negotiate substantial PILOTS with these institutions. In light of what happens in similar communities around the country, these should be gladly accepted as a moral obligation to the community. And if our little Town needs leverage in such negotiations with our big higher-ed institutions, perhaps it comes from the “flush” lever connected to the tank connected to both the pipes supply and waste pipes, while leaving the rest to your thirsty or fertile imaginations….

6. Michael Pill’s comment that the new Jones Library will become a “modern 21 century” public library” echoes the project’s marketing slogan that only sounds like it says something meaningful, when it ignores the fact that Jones Library as it was, WAS already a functional 21st century library. People loved the Jones, but understood the building was neglected and disorganized. No one disagreed that its infrastructure needed to be upgraded, but it did not need to be demolished, only renovated. If the marketing slogan intended to imply the demolition will create a library for the next era, history has repeatedly shown that people living in one era have no idea what will be considered “modern” in the next. People living in the 20th century could not fathom the changes we’ve already experienced in the 21st century, such as the impact of the pandemic and Zoom on working remotely. We have no idea how libraries will be used in the coming era. Thinking we know more is just hubris.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.