This post was contributed by a community member. The views expressed here are the author's own.

Health & Fitness

NO ON ARTICLE 3 - NO NEW TOWN HALL!

wasteful spending for New Town Hall

Question: why is the Town Hall on the agenda? 
It is strictly because of years of neglect, and the scare tactics from the Town Manager.  He states that the roof leaks, there is mold on the ground floor, the building is full of toxic materials such as lead and asbestos, and the heating, electrical and other systems no longer serve properly.  He also states that the facility will not survive an earthquake; the facility does not comply with accessibility issues and has no sprinkler system!  

The last three are not required by code for the existing building.  If the roof leaks, fix it.  If mold occurs, call in a removal contractor and ventilate the space.  The asbestos is contained in manufacture and not a hazard.  If the heating, electrical and plumbing systems need upgrading or replacement, do so.  This is true for our homes, why not TOWN HALL!  Testing was done by the State on the lead which determined that if not disturbed in the attic, it is no hazard.  Earthquake resistance, sprinkler and accessibility must be accomplished for either the new or altered building to meet code.

Every problem stated must be accomplished for either the new or altered facility identically.

Question: what is the cost for each presented option? 
The new building will cost $8 million net according to the presentation.  If we add in the interest,  the cost becomes $10 to 12 million.  Town Hall claims their Option 1, add and alter, would cost  the same!  We have produced plan C with more net program area than their NEW scheme for $5.2 million or long term cost of $7 to $8 million.  Note that the Architect’s hand out indicated they have shorted the new plan’s program requirement by some 580 square feet, while their alteration plan is larger than the program requirements by some 2090 square feet.  This alone nets a add-in-cost of some $1.2 million to the alteration plan.  If we cut the corridor and circulation in half as Plan C does, we have cut over $2 million.  If we combine the inspection, health, etc. as shown on the new building plan and plan C, the savings is again some 1100 square feet or another half million dollars.

The proper alteration and addition plan, Plan C, has but some 17,000 square feet, the same as the new proposal, but its unit prices, using the Architect’s estimates, are less and therefore costs but $5.2 million!  Note that these options have similar fee amounts, which would be absent in the other options!  Guess why there are but two options and they cost the same!

Question: what is the funding plan? 
Town Hall claims they have $4.25 million, and the remainder can be borrowed short term and that this will have little or no effect on taxes!  This is pure fiction!  $1.7 million is from the High School Bond issue, for which principal and interest payments, taxes,  are due for years to come.  The half million dollars in the stabilization account is either tax money or moneys not allocated to reduce the tax rate.  We have no idea of the other $2.2 million for sale of property ... what is its value in this recession?  In any case, this $4.25 could reduce the bonding costs of the Library or Water work in progress.  This then would reduce the long term tax rate!  Instead, Town Hall is holding on to it as a separate earmarked account without any benefit to the taxpayers.

Question: what are the options beyond the new or alteration plans? 
First,  there is a long term rental proposal costing in the low $200,000 per year.  This  is gross cost ... roof repairs, boiler and other problems, etc, are the property owners and not the Town’s.  This costs but some $4 million over 20, yes TWENTY years, still less than the $10 to $12 million twenty year cost noted above and without the long term maintenance annual cost to the Town.  In any case we will have to rent for at least one to two years ... why not an extended agreement?  Just as the Registry, social security, and unemployment offices do?  Note that the existing building under this option becomes available to rent (and pay for a rental elsewhere) or utilize for other Town needs. An office is an office is an office! And we don’t need to plow the parking lot!

A fourth option is to vacate for six months, go in and repair, detoxify, do heating etc. work, paint and clean-up with some relocation.  Demolish all walls on the ground floor for future work.  Cannot price this at this time ... certainly less than the first two.

A fifth option is to do nothing but fix the roof and the heating and electrical issues. Cost minimal! 

VOTE NO at the special town meeting ... these other options need to be fully vetted!  The action at town hall, at the Board and Committee levels have not permitted this.  The NEW TOWN HALL is not the taxpayer’s option ... instead it is the wish of the town’s management!  SAY NO!

For further information, to assist, or to volunteer to help defeat this proposal and wasteful spending, contact Dick Heydecker at 508-543-9412.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here

The views expressed in this post are the author's own. Want to post on Patch?