The Municipal Buildings Committee (MBC) will present its report to the selectmen on Feb. 1, meeting the deadline established when the committee was appointed. But at least one selectman—Bill Johnson—already appears set to disagree with the report.
According to MBC Chairman Ron Ostberg, the report will include recommendations for each of the three buildings that the group was asked to consider: the old library, Hildreth House, and Town Hall. Ostberg noted that the recommendations are conceptual, not detailed, but they are grounded in the work of engineers, architects, and cost estimators whom the committee consulted, as well as in the public feedback from several morning-long workshops.
At the MBC’s Jan. 20 meeting, Johnson strenuously argued against the committee’s recommendation to renovate and expand Hildreth House. Instead, he advocated a plan he has supported from the first—moving the Council on Aging (COA) out of the Hildreth House and into the old library. Johnson seemed to suggest that the committee had not given enough attention to this plan, a suggestion that Ostberg and other committee members sharply denied. Drawings showing the modifications needed to make the old library usable as a senior center were one option presented at a public workshop in December 2010.
When Johnson referred to the old library as currently “a useless asset” to the town, Ostberg responded heatedly, “That view is not shared. It is not a useless asset. It is part of the patrimony of this town, critical to the value of the town and its center.”
Johnson noted that the old library has much more available space than Hildreth House currently offers. He argued that rebuilding the intersection between Littleton Road and Massachusetts Avenue would allow the street in front of the old library to become one way, with parking on both sides. He also called for a covered walkway to the building from a drop-off point and an external elevator to make the building handicapped-accessible. All these changes, he argued, would cost less than the ones proposed by the MBC for Hildreth House, and therefore would be more acceptable to voters at the Annual Town Meeting on April 1.
Ostberg and other committee members responded that making the old library a senior center would cost somewhat more—not less—than improving Hildreth House. More important, they asserted that the old library would be an inadequate solution, with fewer parking spaces, less dining space, no areas for outdoor use, and no room for future expansion.
Acknowledging that the old library might not be adequate as a senior center in the long run, Johnson said, “The COA needs enough space so that they can prove their premise of ‘build it and they will come.’ Then, if a larger senior center is needed, the town can look for a bigger facility later.” Asked what use he foresaw for Hildreth House, Johnson said seniors could continue to use it “as an adjunct” to the remodeled old library, for example, by sitting on the porch in good weather. Some groups that have traditionally used the building might continue to meet there, he said. “I feel strongly that we should not sell Hildreth House,” Johnson asserted, but he also argued that the town should not put any additional money into the building. “Hildreth House may someday be the right place to do this [put a senior center], but not now,” Johnson said. “Its intrinsic value to the town is as a small home, the wide porch, the view at it and from it.”
Committee and COA board member Lucy Wallace asked Johnson, “If the COA board and seniors say they want to keep Hildreth House, or if they say that they prefer the old library, would you honor their choice?” Johnson responded, “I hear seniors saying many things.” Pressed to give a yes-or-no answer, Johnson remained noncommittal.
Johnson explained that he expects Town Meeting to focus on conservative fiscal management, separating the “have-to-haves” from the “want-to-haves.” A senior center, he later said, is a must-have, while a community center is a want-to-have. “Hildreth House is woefully inadequate [as a senior center]. The old library will eventually be inadequate—and then it will be usable for another purpose.”
MBC member Pete Jackson countered, “I can’t get past the cost thing. I see a lot of dollars in making changes to the old library, and fewer benefits. … And what is the cost of letting Hildreth House sit vacant for six or seven years? You’ve got to deal with the costs.”
Wallace pointed out that the old library would need many more modifications for the COA than as a community center. “The COA needs handicapped bathrooms on both floors, and also a full-scale catering kitchen,” she said, while a community center would need only one handicapped bathroom and perhaps a kitchenette. She suggested that Johnson’s proposal didn’t make sense unless his plan was to eventually sell the Hildreth House property.
“I didn’t say that. When did I say that?” Johnson rebutted. Johnson noted that it would be hard to convince Town Meeting to build new space at Hildreth House when existing space at the old library was under-used. It would be easier, he argued, to have Community Center activities in existing space such as the new Unitarian Universalist Fellowship Hall and the newly expanded facilities at the Congregational Church.
Wallace replied sharply, “We are talking about a public need. Those two very small churches have invested their funds, and taken on a lot of debt, to build what they need. It really bugs me that you are asking those hundred families to give that space for town purposes.”
“They would be paid,” Johnson answered.
Selectman and MBC member Peter Warren suggested that Johnson’s plan might mean asking for more money from Town Meeting. “If we have too many pies on the table, we might lose all of them,” he said. Warren also reminded everyone that remodeling Town Hall was a top priority in the committee’s recommendations, in which case town offices would have to relocate to the old library. “The COA can’t go into the old library in the next two years. We can give the seniors a better space sooner at Hildreth House.”
When Ostberg called for public comment, several members of the Council on Aging weighed in on the debate. Pat White noted that having all COA gatherings in one building—rather than spread over several locations—would bring more contact between the older and younger groups of seniors. “I go to classes in the various church buildings,” she said, “so I don’t interact much with the older group. If it was all in one building, I’d see them more regularly.” White also pointed out that relying on the churches meant that COA activities regularly risked being cancelled, if the church unexpectedly needed its space for a funeral.
Fran Nickerson acknowledged that she had had a number of reservations about Hildreth House in the past but had decided, “It is the only place that makes sense.” Nickerson explained that she had read and analyzed the questionnaire that the COA sent out a couple of years ago and concluded, “The proposal for Hildreth House answers those needs. They cannot be met adequately with the old library.” In particular, she cited the need for the COA to offer meals, which she called a critical issue for elders.
Connie Larrabee agreed, “The crucial thing is meals. We need to serve a daily hot meal.”
Ostberg summed up the MBC’s mission, saying, “This committee has a charge from the Board of Selectmen to look at uses for these buildings. We’ve looked at and priced several options, and we’re within 10 days of making our report. Our job has been to be rigorous and give you really good information. The Board of Selectmen can decide to do what they want at this point. … Our job was to make the report.”
The MBC voted to take no action on Johnson’s proposal.
