Franklin County
Shutesbury
Data through FY2026; built October 19, 2026.
State House
- 7th Hampden · Aaron L. Saunders
State Senate
- Hampshire, Franklin and Worcester · Joanne M. Comerford
School districts
Regional planning agency
Franklin Regional Council Of Governments
Fairness Index
Shutesbury scores 62 on the Fairness Index for all state aid and 97 for discretionary money. Fifty is a fair share.
All state aid
62 / 10037th of 351 (1 = most above its share)
Rank under other weightings: 24th to 52nd.
Stable high: above 55 under every weighting
Shutesbury received more than its share of state aid on all four measures; its blended score of 62 stays between 60 and 64 under every weighting tested.
Discretionary money only
97 / 1008th of 351 (1 = most above its share)
Rank under other weightings: 4th to 13th.
Stable high: above 55 under every weighting
Shutesbury received more than its share of discretionary money on all four measures; its blended score of 97 stays between 97 and 97 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
Shutesbury’s town government and school districts received $28.4 million in formula aid and $8.5 million in competitive grants over ten years.
Formula aid
$28.4M
$14,882 per resident (74th of 351) · gross
Competitive grants
$8.5M
$4,462 per resident (18th of 351)
Earmark-account payments
$236,000
$123 per resident (18th of 351)
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, $1.1M in all, are not shown. Rank 1 is the highest amount per resident among 351.
Formula aid is gross; competitive grants and earmark-account payments are as paid. Other classes, $1.1 million, are not shown.
Earmarks
No local earmark was placed in Shutesbury 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 Shutesbury; clauses placed in Shutesbury, adding organizations located here; and everything placed, adding state facilities located here. Three ways to count a local earmark.
The Comptroller records $236,000 in payments to Shutesbury’s town government and school districts from accounts classified as earmarks over the same ten years. Those accounts can carry prior-year and statewide-program money; no enacted clause was placed in Shutesbury.
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.
| Municipality | Names the town | Placed in the town | Everything placed | Placed, per resident |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Millville | $360,000 | $360,000 | $360,000 | $114 |
| Windsor | $25,000 | $25,000 | $25,000 | $23.47 |
| Ashby | $200,000 | $200,000 | $200,000 | $62.29 |
| Williamsburg | $10,000 | $10,000 | $10,000 | $3.71 |
| Brimfield | $240,000 | $240,000 | $240,000 | $64.78 |
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, Shutesbury received 50% of its proportional share of competitive grant awards.
Local road miles
30.9
323rd of 351 · 16.2 per 1,000 residents (68th of 351)
Town-owned bridges, replacement cost
$2.2M
scored exposure $443,000 · none in poor condition
Road-stream crossings
62
223rd of 351 · culverts and small crossings
Town-owned hazard dams
1
high or significant hazard
Land area
26.5 sq mi
35% state-owned
Seasonal homes
9%
share of housing units
Peak service population
2,097
residents plus seasonal
Core infrastructure index
1.41
roads, culverts, dams, coast, flood, energy
The burden index divides the competitive awards Shutesbury 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. Shutesbury: 0.50. 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.
Burden index 0.50; state median 0.91; 1.0 is proportional. Ranks run from 1, the most among 351.
State land and growth
State land eligible for PILOT
851 acres
5.0% of land area · FY2026
State-owned land PILOT, FY2026
$31,000
payment in lieu of taxes, cherry sheet
PILOT per eligible acre
$36.69
statewide $117 · FY2026
New growth per resident
$14,261
FY2017–2025 · 264th 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 14.1% of Shutesbury’s general-fund spending in FY2025, down from 18.6% in FY2006.
State aid as a share of general-fund spending
FY2006
18.6%
$856,000 of $4.6M · median town 14.1%
FY2016
14.2%
$816,000 of $5.8M · median town 12.2%
FY2025
14.1%
$1M of $7.2M · median town 11.5%
Net of state charges, FY2025
11.9%
FY2010: 17.6% · 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.
Shutesbury’s own cherry sheet carries no Chapter 70 for pupils in its regional district; the state paid $1.1 million 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.
Gross state aid went from $856,000 in FY2006 to $1 million in FY2025, +19.0% 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. Flag: in FY2010, $184,000 of Shutesbury’s gross aid was in receipts the itemized cherry sheet does not show, consistent with school-building reimbursements that ended by FY2024 (not verified line by line). Part of the change since FY2006 may be that phase-out.
Fixed costs against the 2½% limit, FY2016–FY2025
Health insurance, FY2016–25
+44.6%
$369,000 to $534,000 · all towns +54.0%
All fixed costs, FY2016–25
+41.5%
$640,000 to $905,000 · all towns +53.0%
Years squeezed
3 of 9
fixed costs grew faster than allowed levy growth
Health insurance
3 of 9
years it grew faster than allowed levy growth
Nine years at 2.5% add 24.9%. Grown that way from FY2016, Shutesbury’s health insurance would have been $461,000 in FY2025; it was $534,000, $73,000 above the path. Its fixed costs would have been $799,000 in FY2025; it was $905,000, $106,000 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.
Local earmarks against the health-insurance increase
Over the nine budgets, earmarks naming Shutesbury came to $0, 0.0% of the $165,000 rise in its health insurance.
| Measure | Earmarks | Share of the increase | All towns, pooled |
|---|---|---|---|
| Names the town | $0 | 0.0% | 28.2% |
| Placed in the town | $0 | 0.0% | 42.3% |
| Everything placed | $0 | 0.0% | 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
Shutesbury’s required school contribution is 2.0% of median household income, 312th highest of 351.
Chapter 70 aid, FY2026
$1.6M
to the town’s district
Required local contribution
$1.8M
FY2026
Share of household income
2.0%
312th of 351 (1 = highest)
Real aid per pupil, FY2017–26
−5%
after inflation
Shutesbury runs its own district for some grades and belongs to Amherst-Pelham for others; Shutesbury accounts for 8% of that district’s foundation budget.
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
Shutesbury received $8.5 million in earmarks placed in the town and competitive grants over ten years, 2.2 times the $3.9 million its size, need and institutions predict.
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
Shutesbury 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 Shutesbury 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.
| Municipality | Fairness Index | Formula aid per resident | Competitive per resident | Earmarks placed in the town, per resident (enacted) | Burden index | School contribution, share of income |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shutesburythis town | 62 | $14,882 | $4,462 | $0 | 0.50 | 2.0% |
| Millvillepeer | 56 | $14,661 | $545 | $114 | 1.93 | 2.0% |
| Windsorpeer | 53 | $9,357 | $3,955 | $23.47 | 1.38 | 1.5% |
| Ashbypeer | 56 | $15,057 | $337 | $62.29 | 0.63 | 2.3% |
| Williamsburgpeer | 41 | $9,541 | $578 | $3.71 | 1.40 | 2.2% |
| Brimfieldpeer | 50 | $12,874 | $303 | $64.78 | 0.46 | 2.7% |
| Oakhampeer | 61 | $18,722 | $794 | $12.20 | 1.24 | 3.2% |
| Chesterpeer · lowest in class of 30 | 61 | $16,538 | $4,421 | $0 | 2.11 | 2.4% |
| Hubbardstonpeer | 59 | $16,583 | $264 | $66.58 | 0.33 | 2.3% |
| Conwaypeer | 48 | $12,799 | $405 | $0 | 0.68 | 2.5% |
| Hopedalepeer | 54 | $14,756 | $309 | $141 | 0.38 | 3.2% |
| Princetonbest in class of 30 | 39 | $8,727 | $417 | $299 | 0.96 | 2.3% |
| Chesterlowest in class of 30 | 61 | $16,538 | $4,421 | $0 | 2.11 | 2.4% |
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.
Fairness Index
Representation
State money
What the town carries
- MassDOT Chapter 90 apportionment and Road Inventory
- FHWA National Bridge Inventory, 2025
- MassDOT Bridges layer (GeoDOT)
- North Atlantic Aquatic Connectivity Collaborative, road-stream crossings
- DCR Office of Dam Safety inventory, via MassGIS
- American Community Survey housing tables, U.S. Census Bureau
- State grant award lists (Community One Stop, MVP, Green Communities and others)
- DLS Databank, state-owned land eligible for PILOT
- DLS Databank, new growth
Costs and the 2½% limit
- DLS Databank, Schedule A general fund expenditures and revenues
- DLS Databank, health insurance expenditures
- DLS Databank, revenue by source (state aid)
- DLS Databank, cherry sheet receipts and charges by program
- DLS Databank, new growth and levy limits
- Boston-area CPI-U (BLS) and state-local price index (BEA), via FRED
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