From my earliest days, I had the ability—sometimes very exciting, often scary—to slip into and merge with the stories I was being told, or read or watched. Most recently, I began watching “The Peripheral” on Amazon Prime—a mostly fascinating, often frightening look at the future. And then I became an unnamed character in the most recent series of articles about housing in Great Barrington. For a storyteller, it is disconcerting to surrender your story to someone else. Especially when it’s so very complicated and defies any simple telling. In my case, many people combined their efforts out of the public eye to help me find a new place to live, including “the developer,” who, like all of us, defies any kind of quick characterization or simplistic judgment. I personally appreciate his kindness. But these are days when everyone seems to be picking sides in a world so much more complex than simple.
I wrote “A Red Family” about a man who grew up in the South, the son of a very wealthy and powerful white family with a slew of Black servants. He left his inherited fortune behind to live in a poor village amongst mill workers and risked his life as a union organizer. He joined the Communist Party because, at that time, they were the only people fighting to integrate the South. As my father also discovered, that decision turned out to be a mistake. And Junius Scales became the only American to be imprisoned under the terms of the membership clause of the Smith Act, ironically serving time after he had quit the Party. Despite his errors in judgement, no simple telling of his story can portray his great compassion and his bravery and willingness to admit his mistakes.
So, what follows are my opinions, not about any individuals, but about a system that is out of whack. Because it’s become especially clear to me that relying on The Market—what some regard as the central element of American capitalism—hasn’t worked for many of us in the Town of Great Barrington. Yes, there has always been tension between the public good and private interest. Even liberal reformers have accepted the need for profit but have advocated for placing some limits on how much profit businesses and corporations can make for their products and services. While some would dismiss the idea as the dreaded socialism, I believe that there are some critical human needs like healthcare, housing, food, and water, for example, where public access and public ownership should take precedence over privatization and profit.
It seems to me that many of the conversations about this enduring public-private conflict tend to ignore several striking realities: There has never been—and still isn’t—a level playing field. When it comes to wealth and taxation and political effectiveness, the criminal justice system, public education, health care—insert your favorite critical issue—the wealthy are more powerful and wield far more influence. Ours is clearly an Unfair America.
Secondly, and what is particularly clear to me, is that there is no accounting for community in The Market. You can’t really add how one feels walking down the street to the spreadsheet. So yes, the changing commercial real estate market has created opportunities for more people to live their retail dream and offer tourist-centered goods. But what is the human cost to those who relied on their neighborhood stores? When I arrived in Great Barrington about fifty years ago, there was never a need for Amazon. The stores that survived were the stores that provided what the working and middle class community wanted and needed at prices they could afford: There were downtown barber shops, a shoe store, several shops for clothes, and auto parts, and hardware stores on both sides of the street, drugstores and home-made donuts, and two funky bar restaurants on Railroad Street. Retailers understood that, to survive the loss of the soon to be hibernating visitors, you had to make sure you served the locals.
I attended many of the meetings about Downtown Redevelopment; what so many folks highlighted was the need to maintain the character of Great Barrington, the odd mix of stores that kept us a small unpretentious New England town. The consultants seemed not to get it, and the Town Manager at the time seemed not to care. As we quickly discovered, it is so very easy to lose charm, to sacrifice individuality in the name of progress. It is so easy to manufacture sameness. Main Street is a highway leading out of town.
Most recently, in what seems to me like endless talk, the term “market” has affixed itself to “housing.” These days we hear a lot about “Market-Rate Housing.” In America, certainly not just Great Barrington, that’s supposed to be self-explanatory, and to those using the terms favorably, marks the fact that we’ve pretty much found ourselves in a cul-de-sac. In many ways, it’s the end of the conversation. Because in America, The Market rules. And we’ve all been taught: Our market-based economy is the essential and distinguishing aspect of life in America. It’s what makes us special: Remember the mantra that in America, with hard work and vision, anyone can become a millionaire.
For many of us, though—I’m guessing about 50 percent or more of us—that is just another indication that we aren’t really living in the same world as the wealthier members of our community. Along with the unstated corollary, that because those millions have eluded us, we are basically failing.
In December 2020, Ana Hernández Kent and Lowell Ricketts of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis took a look at wealth distribution in America. “Wealth is what a family owns, minus what they owe.” And in the United States by 2019 our total wealth had reached $96.1 trillion. A total divided amongst 129 million families.
“To be in the top 10 percent, a family needed $1.22 million or more … Together, these roughly 12.9 million wealthy families owned 76 percent of total household wealth in 2019.”
“To be in the middle 40 percent, a family needed at least $122,000 in wealth. Together, these approximately 51.5 million families owned 22 percent of U.S. wealth in 2019.”
“To be in the bottom 50 percent meant a family had less than $122,000 in wealth. That represented about 64.3 million—or half of—families in 2019, owning just 1 percent of the nation’s wealth. Further, of this group, some 13.4 million families (about 1 in 10) had negative net worth—they didn’t even have a slice of the pie.”
Let that reality sink in: Half of America’s families own only 1 percent of our national wealth. Take a look around you, 50 percent of our citizens—so many of us who work hard, pay our taxes, help our friends and neighbors yet aren’t sharing the wealth our work produces. Think about the farmworkers who pick the fruit and vegetables we rely on. Think about the folks up early in the morning gathering our garbage. Think about the hospital staff who ensure that beds are made for their patients, the halls are clean, food is prepared, the dishes done. The support staff that keep our schools going. What about all those who wait on you when you eat out, make your coffee, serve your sushi, flip your burgers?
The Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis created this pie chart to clearly illustrate how our wealth is divided in America:
Kent and Ricketts came up with some important conclusions: Those groups that historically had less of a share of national wealth, like Black and Hispanics families and families with only a high school education, increased their share from 2016 by anywhere from 25 percent to 60 percent. Some point to these gains as an indication of how well the economy is working for everyone. Meanwhile, wealthier families and families with a bachelor’s degree and higher gained from 2 percent to 5 percent during those three years. These gains, though, tell only a small part of the story. Because when it comes to those with the higher percentage of wealth, “small percentage gains translated into large gains in dollar terms. Thus, wide wealth gaps remained, and wealth levels among Black, Hispanic and less educated families remained low—making it difficult for these groups to fully participate in the economy and have financial stability.” (Emphasis added.)
Since we’ll be looking at housing, and especially market-rate housing, how do these statistics translate to the lives real people are living? Who are the people who possess the top 10 percent of our wealth? Well, it translates to 13 percent of all white families in America, compared to 1 percent of Black families and 3 percent of Hispanic families.
Onto the educational accomplishments of those of the top 10 percent: 16 percent of families have a bachelor’s degree and 27 percent of families have a postgraduate degree, compared to 4 percent who didn’t complete their bachelor’s degree.
Now, who is more likely to be in the bottom half of our wealth distribution: 75 percent of Black families and 67 percent of Hispanic families and 41 percent of white families. As for education levels: 79 percent of those with a GED and without a high school degree, 58 percent of those with a high school degree, and 31 percent of those with a bachelor’s degree are in the bottom half of wealth distribution.
Kent and Ricketts summarize: “[T]he wealth of the bottom half of families—roughly 64 million families—adds up to only 1 percent of total U.S. household wealth … which makes it extremely difficult for them to weather financial emergencies in tough times or to gain upward mobility in good times …” (Emphasis added.)
Census Reporter], which describes itself as “an independent project to make it easier for journalists to write stories using information from the U.S. Census bureau,” has provided additional data about the age and sex and race of Berkshire County residents:
First, a quick definition of median: It is the middle number in a sort of numbers, with an equal number above and below. It’s important to note that the median age of Berkshire residents is 20 percent higher than the median age of residents in Massachusetts and 25 percent higher than the median age of residents in the United States. Our residents are older, and this is relevant to the issue of housing, and the particular housing needs of older folks here in the county.
Another important definition from The Economic Times: “The per capita income of a geographical location (say, a country, state, city, or others) measures the amount of money earned by every person in that area. It determines the average income of a person in a country, a state, or a specific region. This helps us evaluate the standard of livelihood and the quality of life of people in the geographical location.”
Census Reporter also offers information about per capita income and median household income and the poverty level in Berkshire County:
While per capita income, $43,115 is 10 percent higher than the U.S. average, it is only 90 percent of those living in Massachusetts. Meanwhile, median household income, $60,749, is about two-thirds of the figure for Massachusetts of $89,645 and about 90% of the median household income in the U.S. of $69,717.
Half of Berkshire households have an income lower than $60,749. And almost 42 percent of families have an income of under $50,000.
I’ve learned over the many years of doing research that statistics often vary. In this case, when it comes to declaring income, the U.S. Census bureau offers a slightly different view by combining data from several recent years:
Now that we have some idea about income here, let’s take a look at what people can expect to pay for housing.
The Census Bureau provides statistics about the amount of rent charged over these years:
Again, we’re talking about median rent, so half the renters were paying more than $894 a month. Fortunately, there are programs available to those who qualify enabling them to get some financial help to pay for their housing needs. Rentdata.org lists the costs of “Fair Market Rent” in Berkshire County. They explain that “Fair Market Rent is determined by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) each fiscal year. The HUD conducts careful surveys each year to determine the distribution of rents paid by recent movers across the entire country.” HUD gets information from 100 different people in each of the areas they are surveying. Their calculations are based on the 40th percentile of rents, or the dollar amount below which 40 percent of the standard-quality rental housing units are rented by recent movers to the area.
These figures are then used by Public Housing Authorities to determine the maximum monthly assistance payment for a family enrolled in HUD’s Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program. These can include low-income families, the disabled, and the elderly.
There is a difference between HUD-set Fair Market Rate rent prices and what individual landlords have decided to rent their apartments and houses for. Planetizen explains the difference between Fair Market Rate housing and the marketplace many of us, who don’t qualify for financial aid, deal with when looking for an apartment to rent: “[T]he real estate market, where property owners and landlords set selling prices and rents and residents respond to those prices with varying levels of demand.”
This is the Market Rate housing that is often referred to in articles about our housing crisis—including all the controversy over the decision of many homeowners to withdraw their houses and apartments from long-term rental use and convert them to short-term rentals. This loss has been felt by many working in the community looking for places to rent om a yearly basis.
Many renters have re-discovered the reality of Market Rate Rents as the need to renew their lease approaches at a time when rents are rising. Market Rate rental prices are set at the discretion of the owner, and so, once again, renters are put in the position of paying what the owner is asking or looking elsewhere. That, according to economists, is The Market at work.
What does this mean for so many these days? The Market has recently seen a 13.79 percent increase in rents in the last year. As many Americans will testify, their wages certainly haven’t matched that increase. And along with the hike in housing costs, you can add the rise in almost all prices, including necessities like food and gasoline due to inflation.
CNBC News recently advised readers on how best to calculate the amount of money they should be spending on housing: “There’s been a lot of discussion about affordable housing recently, especially as home prices and rents hit record levels. Is your current home affordable? Here’s how to tell.
“The most common rule of thumb to determine how much you can afford to spend on housing is that it should be no more than 30 percent of your gross monthly income … For renters, that 30 percent includes rent and utility costs like heat, water and electricity … That means if you earn $75,000 a year before taxes, you should spend no more than $1,875 a month on your housing.”
News outlets throughout the nation have focused on escalating increases in rent. Abha Bhattarai reported in the February 10, 2022 issue of the Washington Post that “Rents are rising nationwide. Average rental listings jumped 14 percent last year, to $1,877 a month, with cities such as Austin, New York and Miami posting increases of 30 to 40 percent, according to real estate firm Redfin.
“‘Rents really shot up in the second half of 2021,’ Daryl Fairweather, Redfin’s chief economist, told The Washington Post. ‘The pandemic was kind of a pause on the economy and now that things are reopening, inflation is picking up, rents are going up and people are realizing they don’t have as much disposable income as they might have thought they had.’ Many Americans say they’re seeing big swings as they prepare to renew their leases.”
Bhattarai offers four possible reasons your monthly payment is going up:
“1. Booming demand as more people want to live on their own. Put simply, demand for rentals is way up. As the pandemic wears on, more people are looking for their own space: Young adults who had hunkered down with their parents at record rates are moving out. People who had roommates now want to live alone. Couples who separated or got divorced each need a place of their own …
“2. A pricey—and competitive—housing market that has locked out many would-be home buyers. The housing market has become incredibly competitive during the pandemic. The median home sale price rose nearly 17 percent last year to a record $346,900, according to the National Association of Realtors. But as the wealthy scooped up second homes and investment properties, homeownership has become increasingly out of reach for many others. The NAR estimates that nearly 1 million U.S. renters were priced out of the housing market last year because of rising prices and competition from all-cash offers. As a result, the share of first-time home buyers has fallen to an eight-year low, which means more people are renting for longer than they otherwise would. That’s given landlords and management companies ample leverage to raise rents …
“3. Expiration of rent freezes and other measures that helped keep rents low early in the pandemic. Early in the pandemic, many cities, states and management companies placed limits on rent increases and in some cases, froze prices altogether. But as those measures expire, many renters say their landlords are factoring in two years’ worth of rent increases …
“4. More wealthy renters. The pandemic has led to seismic shifts in the way people work and live. Among them: the opportunity for white-collar workers, particularly in high-paying industries such as tech and finance, to work from anywhere. As a result, experts say some people are beginning to move from pricey hot spots, such as San Francisco and New York City, to more affordable enclaves, such as Nashville and Tampa. And they are often choosing to rent until they figure out where to permanently buy …” (Emphasis added.)
WGBH News in Boston recently focused on the impact recent rises in rent is having on Massachusetts residents. “Even a $200 rent increase can be catastrophic for Massachusetts’ poorest residents. Competition for housing has driven up home prices to record levels across Massachusetts. Some of the biggest gains have happened in communities where residents can least afford to pay more.” (Emphasis added.)
Redfin provides greater context to Bhattarai’s consideration of the “pricey—and competitive—housing market.” According to Redfin, one of the country’s largest real estate firms, “In July 2022, Berkshire County home prices were up 20.0% compared to last year, selling for a median price of $318K. On average, homes in Berkshire County sell after 15 days on the market compared to 66 days last year …” (Emphasis added.)
It’s important to place rising home sales and rising rents and all-around inflation in a larger economic context. There has been a very noticeable increase in hunger amongst Berkshire families, and increases in the numbers of those seeking assistance from local food pantries. I’ve seen this first hand over the decade and a half I worked with Mel Greenberg and Berkshire Bounty to pick up donated food from extraordinarily generous local shops like Fuel Great Barrington, Great Barrington Bagel, the Big Y, and Guido’s and delivering it to agencies like People’s Pantry, the Senior Center, and the Children’s Health Program.
Project Bread offers data about food insecurity in Massachusetts: “Food insecurity among households with children is trending upwards. Recent trends show that food insecurity among households with children in Massachusetts is trending upwards from the low we saw in April 2021 when families were receiving a whole host of federal and state level benefits. In 2022, rates have been fluctuating between 19 percent – 22 percent, and as of early September 2022, an estimated 21.5% of households with children are facing food insecurity. The rising costs of housing and other basic needs, like food, are factors that can likely be attributed to the rising rates of food insecurity.” (Emphasis added)
SNAP is the federal food stamp program. Project Bread reports: “As of January 2022, Massachusetts has surpassed 1 million SNAP recipients in the state. Enrollment data show that Massachusetts continues to see increases in SNAP enrollment. As of August, enrollment is 33.2% higher than it was in February 2020.”
As Jesse Stuart at WSBS Radio in Great Barrington notes: “It’s no secret (or maybe it is) that many families throughout the Berkshires are struggling to make ends meet. Many folks were never really able to bounce back financially after the heart of the pandemic. Add to that, affordable housing is still difficult to come by, and let’s not forget, food costs have risen by 14 percent since 2021. Yes, 14 percent! That’s just crazy if you ask me. Many of us are feeling the pinch in the supermarket aisle.” (Emphasis added.)
Berkshire Bounty has been working hard to meet the increasing need for food: “Berkshire Bounty has seen explosive growth over the last five years, collecting and delivering an increasing amount of food every year: from 8,000 lbs in 2017 to over 400,000 lbs in 2021. The COVID-19 pandemic and increasing numbers of food insecure community members has in part led to this growth.”
All of this brings me back around to my starting point. There’s now an increasing gap between what The Market dictates and the very real financial condition of many of the citizens of Berkshire County. Based on the recent trend to convert and redevelop and build from scratch a variety of Market Rate rental units, there is an ever-increasing number of people—many moving here from elsewhere—willing and able to pay rents that many Berkshire citizens are unable to afford.
For those who believe in The Market, that’s just the way things go. Some believers will say if you can no longer afford to buy and rent and live in Great Barrington, you should move to a place you can afford.
This is the description of the illustration that graces the Great Barrington Master Plan of 2013: “The graphic represents the historic villages of Housatonic and Great Barrington, linked, as they have been for generations, by the central spine of the Housatonic River and the Housatonic Railroad. They are surrounded and framed by the rural landscapes and natural beauty of the Berkshires.”
Like many similar documents, the Master Plan offers some lofty rhetoric that less and less resembles reality and suggestions for many things including more affordable housing that haven’t happened soon enough: “Maintaining our unique rural-urban configuration and traditional-modern eclectic will preserve our appeal as a model small town for a long time to come. This special balance defines our character, and must be given our consideration in all future decisions.”
I can’t think of anyone who wouldn’t want to live in the village pictured above. But I’ve spoken to quite a few people who today no longer recognize the Great Barrington they first fell in love with—or grew up in. Many of their favorite stores are long gone. As they walk the streets many times during the year, they’re seeing fewer and fewer recognizable faces. The children of their friends can’t afford to stay. And the Housatonic residents, who for years have been plagued with brown water they prefer not to use, are wondering if they are indeed linked to those in Great Barrington—worried that Barrington voters will hesitate to spend the tax money necessary to provide safe drinking water to their Housatonic neighbors. And so more and more that illustration resembles a dream.
To return to where I began: We’ve looked at median household income, but I wonder if there is a calculation for median familiarity? Or for a median sense of belonging? Of community?
There are times when I imagine The Market as a machine. It seems to have been built without empathy. With a severely limited capacity to care.
But most of all, from my point of view, we need a lot more public and less private when it comes to meeting essential human needs. Not just for the top 10 percent, but for all of us. And, as for some of the affordable housing we’re building, I’d much prefer building communities shared by a representative mix of us, middle income families living alongside families in greater need.
And in place of The Market, it seems to me that we require a process that adds the human heart to the equation. That protects and expands community. And for that, we need people who care less about profit and more about providing.
