I personally think the percentage-of-median approaches to defining middle class are meaningless because they reflect nothing about buying power or standard of living. Using an extreme to illustrate the rule, look at the figures for Detroit.
Lower limit: $24,214 Median: $36,140 Upper limit: $72,280
Now, there is no way that lower limit or even the median is enough to support what most would consider even a basic middle class lifestyle of homeownership or renting a decent place, having health insurance and a car that is legally plated and insured, and a few small extras in life, never mind things like paying for the kids' college or taking vacations. But it is a poor city, so you can be both below the poverty line and in the middle class based on the percentile method. It makes more sense, IMO, to define middle class as a set of financial milestones/goals and build out the income range from there, but that would require really grappling with the fact that the bottom 80% of the income distribution is in the midst of a long downward standard-of-living slide. Easier, then, to simply redefine middle a chunk of the whole, regardless of whether lower middle class is synonymous with food insecure and one crisis away from homeless.
... but to the original question, we are solidly middle class using statewide numbers which is no surprise since we've always had a median-ish income for our area.