The economic woes of central Massachusetts have drawn national attention, at least for a day. In today’s NY Times, on the first page of the “National” section, is this long article about Springfield, Mass. The final vignette in the story sums it up:
The situation is so disheartening it is forcing out people like Bernie Cohen, a lawyer and 25-year resident who said he “always believed you need to live in the community you’re working in.” Now, Mr. Cohen and his wife say they are frustrated that from their Victorian home they can hear gunshots, including one from a nearby murder. And they are increasingly concerned about the education their two children are receiving.
“While I don’t want to sacrifice my ideals,” Mr. Cohen said, “I don’t want to put my kids’ safety and education at risk.”
I live inside Rt. 128, and I confess that my focus often doesn’t stray as far west as perhaps it ought to. So I’m glad the Times published this story. It’s a reminder that there is much to do in this state – and that it really does matter who wins in November.
I live in Springfield. Do you know what the problem is? Economics. The city isn’t economically independently viable due to the concentration of poverty here, the reliance of property taxes to provide basic services, and the many years of frozen aid in the past 20 years (the city never recovered from the problems of the late 1980’s).
<
p>
Over 25% of the people in the city are in poverty. Over 75% of the students in the schools are considered “low income”, and that doesn’t even begin to describe the problems that these kids have.
<
p>
There is virtually no middle class left in the city. The median income was $30.4k in 2000 — those were booming times so I think it probably has dropped. Compare to Agawam, a middle-class town just across the river. They were at $49.4k.
<
p>
We have several dense neighborhoods that can’t even attract a replacement tenant at grocery stores. Even a Springfield-based chain won’t put a store in where there are nearly 40,000 people in a 1-mile radius, choosing instead to target the wealthier suburbs where there are 8,000 people in a 1-mile radius. Why? Because the 40,000 people are mostly poor, the 8,000 people are mostly middle and upper class.
<
p>
The city has a lot of dense housing left over from the industrial age. Federal programs (tax breaks, grants) have encouraged these to be only filled with low-income residents. We have buildings assessed at $20k per living unit. If a suburban community feels that a $400k new house is a money-loser, how do you feel about a $20k apartment?
<
p>
There is a feeling that the high cost of housing in Boston has advocates pushing Section-8 tenants to Springfield because they can get more for their vouchers. Surrounding towns build only over-55 low-income housing, concentrating the poverty here.
<
p>
The city is right in the middle of the CT-MA-VT-Canada illegal drug trade. Guns and shots abound.
<
p>
Jobs are down. A lot of manufacturing has left even in the past 5 years, but a lot of white-collar jobs have left too. Medium-size companies have been bought out, their management moved elsewhere. Even call centers have closed, the jobs moved to India.
<
p>
Healthcare is probably the only stable industry in the area right now, plus Mass Mutual, the state’s largest company.
<
p>
And since Springfield is so dependent on state aid, guess what happens when the state freezes aid to cities and towns? While 30% of YOUR town’s revenues may have been frozen, the other 70% still increases like clockwork – 2.5% more. Springfield is the other way around — 30% increases, 70% is frozen. Would your town be able to succeed under such conditions?
<
p>
The governor, with unanimous support from the state legislature, has said “Springfield should only pay for what it can afford”. Not a single state legislator has come to bat for us. None. All say “there is no money for you”.
<
p>
This translates to lower wages for teachers (many are leaving for suburban jobs that pay $10k more), and hence higher percentages of new and uncertified teachers.
<
p>
This translates to a municipal workforce that hasn’t had raises in three years, and therefore is phoning it in much of the time. Cops look the other way when they see crimes they deem too minor. They’re focusing only on the violent assaults and murders.
<
p>
This translates to people, when faced with choosing where they want to live, say “Springfield? Why would I live there? The taxes are high, the services stink, and it’s not a safe place”.
<
p>
And what is the Romney administration doing? It is raising taxes even higher, it is cutting services, and it is talking about selling off the few assets the city has — like public parks and golf courses.
<
p>
The Romney-appointed control board has done considerable good. It has made the city government more accountable, it has improved efficiency. I’ll give them full credit on that.
<
p>
But there is no light at the end of the tunnel. There is no reward for reform, all we hear is “sorry, you can’t afford to have the same quality of life as those in other communities”. In other words, “you don’t deserve anything more than you have”.
<
p>
Want to know how to reduce the pressure to develop every last acre of this state with McMansions? Make cities like Springfield, Lowell, Worcester, New Bedford, Holyoke, Fall River, etc., more desirable places. Instead of programs to convert dense tenements into low-income housing, create programs to modernize them into apartments that people will choose to live in — with air conditioning, elevators, and room to park a car or two.
<
p>
We need to reduce economic segregation in this state because people are using the high cost of housing as a club to keep out “undesirables” — even if that means keeping out decent people too. Would this state celebrate if the highest house price was $50k? No, because that would mean that someone might have to live near someone who could only afford a $50k house. People like their segregation too much because government isn’t funded enough to solve the quality-of-life issues that come with poverty.
Thanks for writing it up. You might think about doing a separate user post with this material, esp. in light of today’s NYT article.
From the extreme other end of the state, your comments about lack of state aid and attention resonate with me. Rural areas fare as badly as cities in the ‘wrong’ place in this state.
<
p>
With a Speaker and President within walking distance of each other in the North End, I don’t see this getting better any time soon.
For those of you who live out east, I would recommend a few stories from the Valley Advocate by Melissa DaPonte Katz on the situation in Springfield: “Drowing in Subsidies” and “Their Neighbors’ Keepers.” They deal with specific issues — subsidized housing and fear of crime — but give a closer look at Springfield.
The NYT article addressed my neighborhood, Forest Park. On our civic association email list we have seen more inspired discussion than ever about the condition of the city, as a direct result of the NYT article. It’s a good thing. Some respond with indignation about what seems like a negative portrayal, but even still, most acknowledge that there is a lot of truth in the story, in terms of the city’s portrait.
<
p>
We need to be able to pick up and move on, though. It’s helpful to say, “We have a problem here,” but “So what, now what?” is becoming my impatient response. We need a vision for growth, change and adjustment.
<
p>
For instance I keep hearing from people who have lived here all their lives about how it was in the ’30s, the ’40s, the ’50s. We don’t want to go back to those days, do we? It’s too easy to look back at the economic boom of the ’40s and ’50s and put a misty glow around it in our memories. (Not my own: I’m 34.) Economic times are different now… a lot tougher. It’s a terrible era to try to earn a living raising a young family.
<
p>
That is probably the case in any American city, especially on the east coast, and in the rust belt. Many of my high school and college friends have given up on the east and moved south or west, if they’ve bothered to stay in the US at all. What’s to keep anyone in a single place to establish roots, and contribute to the welfare of a city, if there’s “nothing in it” for them?