Commonwealth Report Legislators Method

Worcester County

Petersham

Town · Worcester County · 1,185 residents (ACS 2020–24)

Data through FY2026; built October 19, 2026.

State House

State Senate

School districts

Regional planning agency

Montachusett Regional Planning Commission

Fairness Index

Petersham scores 56 on the Fairness Index for all state aid and 55 for discretionary money. Fifty is a fair share.

All state aid

56 / 10075th of 351 (1 = most above its share)

Equal
64
Need
63
Burden
39
Effort
58

Rank under other weightings: 44th to 106th.

Weighting-dependent: the range crosses the 45–55 band

Petersham received more than its share of state aid on three of four measures; its blended score of 56 stays between 51 and 60 under every weighting tested.

Discretionary money only

55 / 100160th of 351 (1 = most above its share)

Equal
62
Need
61
Burden
42
Effort
56

Rank under other weightings: 146th to 179th.

Weighting-dependent: the range crosses the 45–55 band

Petersham received more than its share of discretionary money on three of four measures; its blended score of 55 stays between 51 and 59 under every weighting tested.

Each bar is one way of defining a fair share: Equal, the same per resident; Need, weighted toward poverty, low income and a thin tax base; Burden, by what each program pays for (road miles, bridges, pupils and so on); Effort, by what residents already pay in property tax relative to their income. The line marks 50. The score is the average of the four. Discretionary money is competitive grants and earmarks that name the town. How the index is built.

State money, FY2017–FY2026

Petersham’s town government and school districts received $23.1 million in formula aid and $725,000 in competitive grants over ten years.

Formula aid

$23.1M

$19,509 per resident (29th of 351) · gross

Competitive grants

$725,000

$612 per resident (121st of 351)

Earmark-account payments

$0

$0 per resident (339th of 351)

Competitive grants to Petersham peaked in FY2025 at $464,000, 64% of the ten-year total.
Formula aid$23.1M total · peak $3.1M in FY2025
Competitive grants$725,000 total · peak $464,000 in FY2025
Earmark-account payments$0 total · none recorded
FY17FY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25FY26

Each class has its own scale. Bars show dollars paid in each fiscal year.

Formula aid is gross: Chapter 70 as DESE attributes it to the town, and cherry-sheet aid before the state deducts charges such as charter tuition and transit assessments, plus other formula programs as paid. Competitive grants and earmark-account payments are Comptroller payments to the town government and its school districts (stage: paid), the same payees as the Fairness Index. Enacted earmarks and earmark payments are different things: enacted earmarks are budget clauses, counted three ways above; earmark-account payments are Comptroller payments to the town government and its school districts from accounts classified as earmarks, which can include prior-year and statewide-program money. Either can be larger. Shared revenue, pass-through contracts, transfers to state entities and unclassified payments, $844,000 in all, are not shown. Rank 1 is the highest amount per resident among 351.

Earmarks

No local earmark was placed in Petersham in ten enacted budgets, FY2017 to FY2026, on any of the three measures.

Names the town

$0

enacted, ten budgets

Placed in the town

$0

enacted, ten budgets

Everything placed

$0

enacted, ten budgets

Losers Club

Member

one of 35 municipalities

Local earmarks are counted three ways: clauses that name Petersham; clauses placed in Petersham, adding organizations located here; and everything placed, adding state facilities located here. Three ways to count a local earmark.

The Losers Club is the project’s name for the 35 cities and towns with no earmark placed in them in any of the ten budgets. It counts enacted earmarks only. Several members won competitive grants in the same years; those appear under State money above.

Local earmarks in the same ten budgets: Petersham’s five nearest peers (enacted)
MunicipalityNames the townPlaced in the townEverything placedPlaced, per resident
New Braintree$290,000$290,000$290,000$298
Florida$0$0$0$0
Leyden$100,000$100,000$100,000$157
Phillipston$150,000$150,000$150,000$79.16
Pelham$16,000$16,000$16,000$11.86

Enacted earmarks and earmark payments are different things: enacted earmarks are budget clauses, counted three ways above; earmark-account payments are Comptroller payments to the town government and its school districts from accounts classified as earmarks, which can include prior-year and statewide-program money. Either can be larger.

What the town carries

Measured against what it maintains, Petersham received about its proportional share of competitive grant awards.

Local road miles

61.6

212th of 351 · 52.0 per 1,000 residents (23rd of 351)

Town-owned bridges, replacement cost

$7M

scored exposure $2.5M · three in poor condition

Road-stream crossings

74

185th of 351 · culverts and small crossings

Town-owned hazard dams

0

high or significant hazard

Land area

54.2 sq mi

36% state-owned

Seasonal homes

7%

share of housing units

Peak service population

1,277

residents plus seasonal

Core infrastructure index

0.38

roads, culverts, dams, coast, flood, energy

The burden index divides the competitive awards Petersham received from FY2017 to FY2026 by what it would have received if every program had split its money by its own measure of need: road miles for road programs, crossings for culvert grants, town-owned hazard dams for dam repair, jobs for economic development, residents for libraries. 1.0 is proportional. Petersham: 0.99. State median: 0.91. Bridges count by replacement cost and condition, not by number, and only bridges the town owns. Ranks run from 1, the most among 351.

State land and growth

State land eligible for PILOT

1,990 acres

5.7% of land area · FY2026

State-owned land PILOT, FY2026

$112,000

payment in lieu of taxes, cherry sheet

PILOT per eligible acre

$56.35

statewide $117 · FY2026

New growth per resident

$21,354

FY2017–2025 · 169th of 351 · median town $20,524

State land eligible for PILOT is the Division of Local Services’ count of state-owned acres on which the state pays a payment in lieu of taxes; the payment follows the land’s assessed value, not its acreage, so the per-acre figure is a comparison, not the formula. The state-owned share on the land-area tile above is the MassGIS map of all state-owned open space, a wider count. New growth is the assessed value of new construction and improvements added to the tax base, summed FY2017–FY2025 and divided by 2020–24 residents; taxed at the prior year’s rates, it adds to the levy limit beyond 2.5%.

Costs and the 2½% limit

State aid covered 21.0% of Petersham’s general-fund spending in FY2025, down from 21.7% in FY2006.

State aid as a share of general-fund spending

FY2006

21.7%

$562,000 of $2.6M · median town 14.1%

FY2016

27.8%

$990,000 of $3.6M · median town 12.2%

FY2025

21.0%

$1.1M of $5.4M · median town 11.5%

Net of state charges, FY2025

20.2%

FY2010: 23.0% · median town 10.0%

State aid is the gross cherry sheet as entered on the tax rate recap; spending is the town’s general-fund expenditures as filed with the Division of Local Services. Net subtracts the charges the state assesses on the same cherry sheet (charter and school-choice tuition, transit, county and other assessments), itemized from FY2010.

Petersham’s own cherry sheet carries no Chapter 70 for pupils in its regional district; the state paid $526,000 in FY2025 Chapter 70 to the district on its behalf, outside these figures, while the town’s assessment to the district sits in its spending. For a regional member the share understates state support for school costs.

Petersham’s state aid kept pace with both price measures: FY2025 aid was 30.7% above its FY2006 aid grown by Boston-area consumer prices and 16.2% above grown by the government price index.
FY2006 aid
$562,000
At FY2025 consumer prices
$871,000
At FY2025 government prices
$980,000
FY2025 aid
$1.1M

Gross state aid went from $562,000 in FY2006 to $1.1 million in FY2025, +102.8% in dollars. Consumer prices are the Boston-area CPI-U, up 55.1% over those years; government prices are the federal price index for state and local government purchases, up 74.5%. Fiscal-year averages.

Fixed costs against the 2½% limit, FY2016–FY2025

Health insurance, FY2016–25

+29.4%

$82,000 to $106,000 · all towns +54.0%

All fixed costs, FY2016–25

+54.9%

$306,000 to $474,000 · all towns +53.0%

Years squeezed

7 of 9

fixed costs grew faster than allowed levy growth

Health insurance

6 of 9

years it grew faster than allowed levy growth

Nine years at 2.5% add 24.9%. Grown that way from FY2016, Petersham’s health insurance would have been $102,000 in FY2025; it was $106,000, $3,694 above the path. Its fixed costs would have been $382,000 in FY2025; it was $474,000, $92,000 above the path.

Fixed costs are employee benefits, retirement, insurance and similar costs in the general fund; health insurance comes from a separate DLS report. Allowed levy growth is 2.5% plus new growth, as a share of the prior year’s levy limit; a year counts as squeezed when fixed costs grew by a larger percentage.

Flag: health insurance changed by more than 30% in one year in FY2019 (+32%), FY2020 (−54%) and FY2021 (+65%). Swings this size usually mark costs moving between budget lines, into or out of trust funds, or into the state’s Group Insurance Commission, so the comparison may reflect accounting as well as cost.

Local earmarks against the health-insurance increase

Over the nine budgets, earmarks naming Petersham came to $0, 0.0% of the $24,000 rise in its health insurance.

Local earmarks FY2017–FY2025 (enacted, nine budgets) against the FY2016–FY2025 rise in health insurance
MeasureEarmarksShare of the increaseAll towns, pooled
Names the town$00.0%28.2%
Placed in the town$00.0%42.3%
Everything placed$00.0%45.2%

An earmark is a one-year appropriation; a health-insurance increase recurs in every later budget. Earmarks are counted on the three measures and are not adjusted for the January 2024 mid-year cuts or the FY2026 hold. All towns: pooled over the towns that reported health insurance in both years. All dollars nominal. Method.

Schools

Petersham’s required school contribution is 2.7% of median household income, 167th highest of 351.

Chapter 70 aid, FY2026

$1.2M

to the town’s district

Required local contribution

$1.4M

FY2026

Share of household income

2.7%

167th of 351 (1 = highest)

Real aid per pupil, FY2017–26

+1%

after inflation

Petersham runs its own district for some grades and belongs to Ralph C Mahar and Montachusett for others; Petersham accounts for 9% and 1% of their foundation budgets, in that order.

Real figures use the CPI-U, fiscal-year average, in FY2026 dollars. The required contribution is the local share the state sets under the Chapter 70 formula; the share of income divides it per household by the town’s median household income.

Expected and actual

Petersham received $779,000 in earmarks placed in the town and competitive grants over ten years, 20% of the $4 million its size, need and institutions predict.

Expected
$4M
Received
$779,000

The expectation comes from a statewide model of all 351 municipalities that uses population, road miles, jobs, poverty, income, tax base, school-aid share and the presence of hospitals, colleges and nonprofits. Those factors explain about 55–60% of the differences between towns. The model leaves out many legitimate reasons a town may receive more or less, such as a single large project, so a gap is a starting point for questions, not a finding about anyone’s conduct.

Earmarks here are placed in the town, the second of three measures (enacted); competitive grants are Comptroller payments (paid). Method.

Peers

Petersham is one of three municipalities, among itself and its ten nearest peers, with no earmarks placed in them in the ten budgets.

Peers are the ten municipalities nearest to Petersham on population, income need and tax-base need. The best and lowest performers are the highest and lowest on earmark dollars placed in the town per resident in the wider class of 30 nearest, the second of three measures.

MunicipalityFairness IndexFormula aid per residentCompetitive per residentEarmarks placed in the town, per resident (enacted)Burden indexSchool contribution, share of income
Petershamthis town56$19,509$612$00.992.7%
New Braintreepeer · best in class of 3055$17,191$1,081$2981.253.1%
Floridapeer · lowest in class of 3064$19,543$1,744$00.143.2%
Leydenpeer52$13,247$3,201$1572.172.2%
Phillipstonpeer50$12,743$1,191$79.161.392.9%
Pelhampeer47$13,701$594$11.862.692.5%
Goshenpeer58$15,373$3,510$81.971.882.3%
Bernardstonpeer55$15,799$1,227$00.442.9%
East Brookfieldpeer55$15,885$104$94.640.063.2%
Heathpeer70$20,313$6,568$65.360.841.5%
Ashfieldpeer45$10,211$1,970$48.861.852.4%

Formula aid per resident is the ten-year gross total; competitive grants are ten-year totals paid, FY2017–FY2026; earmarks are enacted clauses placed in the town over the same ten budgets. Add up to ten towns to the table; adding needs JavaScript.

Sources

Every figure traces to a public record.

Every figure on this page is built by script from these public sources. Method and limits.

Parcenomics helps towns turn numbers like these into a plan. Municipal services · Contact