While I understand that Hanscom could bring a level of complexity, that distinction is not relevant in this particular discussion because the CCBC is not calculating
the non-Hanscom population. The benchmarking used the TOTAL Lincoln population.
The issue at hand is that the town census shows 600 (~40%) more seniors than the US census for all of Lincoln. Hanscom does not affect that.
More importantly, the Hanscom discussion does not change the fact that
the CCBC is not being forthcoming about sources. The CCBC said, in writing, and I quote: “The
CCBC has used the Town Census numbers for every town, to ensure full comparability”. That is simply not true. Regardless of Hanscom or not, the CCBC benchmarking is using different sources for
other towns and not for Lincoln. They used the *lower* numbers for other towns from one source and the *higher* numbers for Lincoln from a different source. At the very least, there should have been a caveat explaining this.
I would also note that, given the upward bias of a town census, due to the methodological issues I describe in my previous post, there is little reason to believe the
ACS is a less accurate population measure.
By using the higher numbers for Lincoln but lower numbers for other towns, it seems like we’re trying to justify a center bigger than our needs. If we add this to the
fact that the COA refuses to provide attendance data, we dramatically increase the probability that the town will be building another building that is way too big for our real needs.
Karla Gravis
Weston Road
