Should Public-Private Dorms at UMass Pay Property Tax?

Report on the Meeting of the Amherst Finance Committee, September 2, 2025

This meeting was held over Zoom and was recorded.

Present
Cathy Schoen (District 1, Chair), Mandi Jo Hanneke and Andy Steinberg (at large), Bob Hegner (District 5), Tom Porter (nonvoting resident member). Absent: Ellisha Walker (at large) and Joseph Jayne (nonvoting resident member)

Staff: Paul Bockelman (Town Manager), Athena O’Keeffe (Clerk of Town Council)

The Finance Committee raised the question of whether the dorms built on UMass-owned land by a private developer should pay property tax on the building, even though the land is tax free. Fieldstone Apartments, which opened last fall at the corner of Lincoln Avenue and Massachusetts Avenue in the heart of the UMass campus, was constructed by Axium Infrastructure of New York City and Balfour Beatty Campus Solutions of Philadelphia on university-owned property. The complex houses 623 undergraduates and 201 graduate students, and has a café and wellness center operated by UMass that are open to all enrolled students. 

These dorms are run by for-profit entities, so Finance Committee members asked if they should be taxed. The completed private dorm constructed by Archipelago Investments on Olympia Drive on land purchased from a fraternity has been assessed at $18.5 million and does pay real estate tax. Although there are other public-private partnerships on campuses, Finance Committee Chair Cathy Schoen was unable to find any other example in Massachusetts. Town Manager Paul Bockelman thought there might be a similar project at UMass Boston. 

The committee thought the topic was worth investigating and will get legal advice and the opinion of Town Assessor Kim Mew. Bockelman said he thought that Fieldstone was constructed with the idea that it would not be taxed, and he expected a legal fight if the town tried to impose a tax. 

Financial Indicators Hinge on Union Contracts and Health Insurance Costs
The Finance Committee was anxious to begin working on the FY2027 Financial indicators, and asked departments to report on their projections for the coming fiscal year, so that the committee could determine if there should be an across-the-board increase for all departments or differential increases based on need.

Bockelman said that a great deal hinges on the yet-to-be settled union contracts and health insurance costs, and that it would be good to know if other factors were involved, such as the loss of federal funding. He suggested that if a priority was fixing the town’s roads and sidewalks, an override should not be taken off the table.

Andy Steinberg noted that an override would be difficult to sell, because Amherst residents already pay the 14^th highest rate of property taxes in the state, and so much of our property is not taxable. He recalled the March 2025 presentation by Town Engineer Jason Skeels  that estimated that it would require $3 million more a year to maintain the roads in their current condition and $5 million more to improve them. He recommended putting out these facts to support the idea of an override.

Mandi Jo Hanneke stated that we compare the tax bill with the services provided in Amherst relative to similar towns, and that it may be necessary to provide fewer services. Resident member Tom Porter agreed that the town may need to decide how much we can afford for services.

Schoen suggested using some of the capital stabilization fund to take pressure off of the operating budget, especially for the construction of a new DPW building, but also for some road repair. These discussions will continue at the next Finance Committee meeting in two weeks.