Matched single-family homes
4,483 increased; 130 decreased.
Middle estimated change: +$927
Who carried the increase?
The same Town-wide rate change did not land evenly.
From FY2022 to FY2026, estimated property tax rose for 4,483 of 4,614 matched single-family homes (97.2%). It fell for 112 of 142 matched commercial properties (78.9%).
A falling tax rate did not create the same result for every property type. The assessment path mattered.
First, see the difference
The “typical” result was only the middle. The distribution tells the larger story.
One average can conceal how many properties moved in each direction—and by how much.
Matched commercial properties
112 decreased; 30 increased.
Middle estimated change: −$438
Estimated decreaseAbout the same, within $1Estimated increase
Why it matters
A Town-wide rate can look reassuring while the dollars move in opposite directions for different properties.
The rate fell from $20.49 to $17.45 per $1,000. But the median matched single-family assessment rose 34.0%, while the median matched commercial assessment rose 8.9%. The larger residential value increase outweighed the lower rate for most matched homes.
See every estimated-dollar band for all five property groups
| Property group | Down $500+ | Down under $500 | About the same | Up under $500 | Up $500–$999 | Up $1,000–$1,499 | Up $1,500–$2,499 | Up $2,500+ | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Single-family residential | 36 | 94 | 1 | 672 | 1,762 | 1,134 | 767 | 148 | 4,614 |
| Condominiums | 0 | 7 | 0 | 57 | 200 | 166 | 44 | 9 | 483 |
| Two-family residential | 11 | 37 | 0 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 54 |
| Commercial | 67 | 45 | 0 | 12 | 6 | 1 | 6 | 5 | 142 |
| Industrial | 12 | 37 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 59 |
Read this as distribution—not causation. These counts show what happened to the tax proxy for stable-use matched records. They do not explain why a particular assessment changed, identify a policy choice, or replace an official bill.
Starting value mattered too
Among matched single-family homes, the higher starting-value groups carried larger middle-dollar increases.
The five groups each contain roughly one-fifth of the 4,614 matched homes, ordered by FY2022 assessed value.
$224,400 → $295,600 middle assessment
$277,400 → $371,800 middle assessment
$319,600 → $425,800 middle assessment
$378,300 → $504,900 middle assessment
$488,800 → $680,000 middle assessment
This is why “the average bill rose” is only the doorway. A resident needs to know which properties were compared, where their starting value sits, how their own assessment moved, and whether an exemption, abatement, or parcel-specific adjustment changed the official bill.
What would another levy amount ask properties to carry?
Start with the annual amount that would actually fall to property taxes.
Then distribute that amount across the accepted FY2026 candidate taxable real-property base. This is a sensitivity model—not a proposal, forecast, certified rate, or affordability verdict.
If this is debt: enter the annual debt-service amount—not the project price or authorized principal. If other dependable revenue pays part of a choice, enter only the amount remaining for the levy.
Uniform-allocation scale$36.91
per $100,000 of assessed real-property value for a $1,000,000 annual levy amount
Calculated from $2,709,335,687 of candidate FY2026 taxable real-property value.Blue-shaded results recalculate when the annual levy amount changes.
| Assessed-value band | Eligible real properties | Middle assessed value | Middle illustrative annual effect | Middle half |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Under $250,000 | 654 | $103,100 | $38.05 | $5.33–$76.83 |
| $250,000–$399,999 | 1,952 | $338,950 | $125.10 | $111.79–$137.74 |
| $400,000–$599,999 | 2,354 | $469,400 | $173.25 | $159.41–$193.62 |
| $600,000–$999,999 | 843 | $692,900 | $255.75 | $233.54–$285.35 |
| $1 million or more | 100 | $1,400,100 | $516.77 | $406.35–$848.63 |
| Class | Eligible properties | Middle illustrative annual effect | Class share of modeled amount |
|---|---|---|---|
| Residential | 5,670 | $154.72 | $921,462 (92.1%) |
| Commercial | 167 | $159.41 | $64,354 (6.4%) |
| Industrial | 66 | $36.47 | $14,184 (1.4%) |
What this adds
It turns “another million dollars” into a scale residents can recognize.
It does not decide whether the choice is affordable. That still requires the households already under pressure, the services residents value, the full funding plan, the duration of the obligation, and the risk or value of acting—or not acting.
Model boundary: one uniform allocation across 5,903 candidate taxable real properties. It excludes personal property and does not reproduce actual classification, exemptions, abatements, special assessments, revised bills, or parcel-specific adjustments. The accepted sensitivity base differs from the official DLS real-property class total by −$133,159 (−0.0049%), within the contract’s accepted 0.01% control.
What we can say—and what we still cannot
Distribution is part of affordability. It is not the whole answer.
Supported now
Property type, starting-value groups, and a standardized levy scenario
- Same-property, same-use historical comparisons
- Anonymous dollar-change bands
- FY2026 real-property sensitivity by class and value band
- Visible periods, formulas, qualifications, and reconciliations
Still needed for a verdict
The household and service consequences behind the property numbers
- Official parcel bills, exemptions, abatements, and adjustments
- Household income connected only through privacy-safe bands—not identities
- Neighborhood or area patterns through an accepted geography crosswalk
- Commercial public costs, incentives, revenue, and service effects
- Privately owned nonprofit parcel and taxable/exempt history
Missing does not mean zero. Until those sources and controls are accepted, the report should name the unanswered question—not manufacture a clean-looking map or an affordability verdict.
Sources and methodology
The result can be followed from public source to calculation.
cske_gis.reporting_massgis_assessment_history_v1 · FY2022 release M339_CY2021_FY2022 to FY2026 release M339_CY2025_FY2026.
cske.reporting_affordability_tax_class_series_v1 · $20.49 per $1,000 in FY2022 and $17.45 in FY2026.
cske.reporting_affordability_parcel_levy_sensitivity_v1 · FY2026 uniform-allocation sensitivity across candidate taxable real property.
Fresh read-only database query: Aug 27, 2026, 1:22 PM ET. The release includes only aggregate outputs. Owner text, addresses, source parcel identifiers, and personal records are not included.
Open the complete method and limitations
- Match the endpoints.Keep positive-value records present at FY2022 and FY2026 with the same exact source use code.
- Calculate the tax proxy.Assessed value × official DLS tax rate ÷ 1,000 at each endpoint.
- Count the movement.Changes within $1 are “about the same”; the remaining properties are grouped into transparent dollar bands.
- Model the next amount separately.Multiply each accepted standardized per-$1-million impact by the annual levy amount entered by the reader.
- Keep the claims bounded.No official bills, household identities, policy causes, or affordability verdicts are inferred.
Known limitations: MassGIS snapshots do not explain every appraisal judgment or intervening transaction; the comparison omits use-changing and unmatched records; the sensitivity is real-property-only; and neither calculation proves that commercial development helps or hurts residents.