EASTHAMPTON — Mayor Salem Derby has created a proposal for a “campus-style” facility that would combine several needs of the city — a senior center, a new parks and recreation department and recreational gym space.
“This focused facility responds directly to the City’s most pressing municipal space needs,” the 24-page proposal states in its opening pages. “A senior center worthy of its users and a recreation complex that finally provides staff with proper offices, a functional equipment garage, and a full-size gymnasium.”
He floated the idea at a Senior Center Building Committee meeting Monday, sparking an introductory conversation about the project proposal. Residents and committee members offered a wide range of responses; many were open to the idea but had questions. Some were quicker to oppose the idea.
“Hearing from the feedback that I was getting, I was trying to find a way to create a project that might serve the needs of the city in a robust way,” Derby said. “But also broaden the appeal of the project overall to the voters.”
The report analyzes vacant city-owned land at 226 Park St. Design plans for the proposal include a number of details such as estimated room sizes, pros and cons of the site and comparisons to similar complexes. There is also a proposed timeline of 4.5 to five years for opening, with an estimated cost range of $22 million to $34 million. The proposal estimates a monthly tax increase of $27-$36, or $324 to $432 a year, for the average Easthampton household.
The conceptual site layout includes six different zones: the parking lot and entrance, a main lobby, a senior center wing, a recreation complex wing, an equipment garage and a trail link to Nonotuck Park. Derby feels the complex could offer a space for intergenerational connections between the recreation space and senior center.
Financial outlook
Members considered typical questions related to any large-scale project: Is this something voters want and would they approve a debt exclusion or override to pay for it?
That discussion tied into a previous request from the committee that was on the agenda, which asked for a $100,000 appropriation to conduct a feasibility study of the committee’s desired location for a new senior center, also using the 226 Park St.
The city-owned site was previously chosen as the committee’s No. 1 spot for a senior center, based on more than two years of work done by this committee, a previous Ad Hoc Senior Center Building Committee and the Council on Aging to move this project forward. The ad hoc group compiled a 33-page report examining the best locations in Easthampton that informed the decision.
Derby wanted to table the appropriation request, not wanting to overextend city finances when several other capital funding needs, such as a new ambulance, might be necessary. After the first budget meetings at the start of May, Derby said it would be clearer if the appropriation could be made.
The committee ultimately decided to pause its work, including the appropriation request, until June, when the city will have a better budget outlook.
Derby said Easthampton, like many communities in the area, is facing a difficult financial situation in the near future, adding that it is unclear if an override or debt exclusion is what the public wants at this time.
Derby said the city is facing an approximately $4 million deficit in reserve and stabilization accounts that had been drained in recent years. While the city may restore a large chunk of that deficit this coming year, he said an override may be needed next year to maintain basic city services.
“That gives me a lot of pause as it relates to looking at a debt exclusion for a new project, because I can’t really in good conscience put forward a debt exclusion for a new senior center at the same time as we’re going to be going for an override to keep basic services,” Derby said.
“I agree with you if you need an override next year, putting another override forward [for a new facility] just doesn’t make sense,” said Committee Chair Dan Rist.
However, Rist said he still favors a stand-alone senior center and feels a feasibility study is crucial to determine if the Park Street parcel is a viable location. He also wants a professional to review Derby’s proposal. “A feasibility study is the next step. We can’t judge whether the site is OK — we need the engineering.”
Rist emphasized at the meeting that this does not guarantee the Park Street site for a new center. “We’ve already done two years of work. The ad hoc report has tremendous detail and one of the details is the site,” he said.
Questions and concerns
Committee Vice Chair Thomas Brown raised multiple points, asking if a new committee would need to form, if Parks & Recreation Director John Mason could handle a new recreation facility and if the city could staff such a building.
A new Parks & Recreation Department has long been considered a needed capital project.
“Parks and Rec staff has been working out of a situation where they, during the winter, were working in a garage that max got to 41 degrees,” Derby said. “So I have staff working in a building that is inappropriate for people to be working in.”
Committee member Leslie Button said if the project moves forward, she doesn’t know if Easthampton residents could afford the tax increase. “There are a lot of people in this city who cannot afford that with everything else that is going up.”
“I understand that Parks and Rec has needs but maybe those should be looked at separately,” Button added.
Many residents urged the committee to reexamine the Park Street site for several reasons including site quality, effects on wildlife and neighborhood disruption. One resident questioned if younger seniors actually use senior centers, feeling that a campus-style complex would attract more people.
Resident Beth Tiffany said she didn’t consider going to the senior center when she retired, but now she loves it and goes frequently. “I see the need for the senior center. I also like the intergenerational idea. And I also feel that the park department needs a decent place to work. So it’s really hard to say what comes first in the priority.”
