AMHERST — The Town Council later this spring is expected to decide on a request for Community Preservation Act money to cover costs of restoring historic woodwork inside the Jones Library building project, a request that is drawing scrutiny from some residents.
But before councilors act on the $330,000 request, and determine if it should become part of the funding for the $46.1 million renovation and expansion of the 43 Amity St. building, the Finance Committee will make a recommendation at its April 21 meeting.
On Tuesday, a day after several residents spoke both for and against the spending during a public forum, Finance Committee members directed town officials to seek opinions from the state’s Department of Revenue, the town auditor and the Community Preservation Coalition whether it can legally authorize the spending, or whether this violates a so-called “supplanting rule.”
While the Finance Committee is recommending $1.5 milliom in borrowing that will go toward the replacement of the bathhouse at War Memorial Pool and the remaining projects that total $3.13 million, including $1 million to fix the slate roof of Town Hall, members didn’t reach a decision on the library.
The library is asking for less than the $477,000 recommended by the CPA Committee, reduced after determining work on windows by general contractor Fontaine Brothers Inc., is already underway, and far short of its original $1.25 million request.
District 1 Councilor Cathy Schoen, who chairs the Finance Committee, said councilors should have already counted CPA as tax dollars, including the $1 million for special collections.
“When we considered it last April, there was no mention of coming back to the town in the CPA window,” Schoen said. “If there had been, I would have voted to rescind, because I really wanted to shut the door on the use of town money.”
But District 5 Councilor Sam MacLeod, who formerly chaired the CPA Committee, said a group of members deliberated and town attorney KP Law wrote that using the money is acceptable and not supplanting.
“My personal posture is one of respecting the decision the CPA Committee makes, having been part of it and recognizing that nine potential members who get involved in the decision-making process,” MacLeod said.
District 1 Councilor Jill Brevik said she has gotten a lot of conflicting information, and while she wants to respect the committee’s work, she worries that support would be going back on commitment councilors made not to give the project more town money, and might contribute to eroding trust in leadership.
“For me it’s less about trusting the committee — the committee did their job and I think they did a good job — but I think the council has a different obligation and commitment to the taxpayers,” Brevik said.
District 5 Councilor Ana Devlin Gauthier said the idea of “not a penny more” was a comment made by then Council President Lynn Griesemer, and that can’t he applied to the sentiment of the whole Town Council.
“There’s a misinterpretation or misremembering about that ‘not a penny more’ statement,” Devlin Gauthier said. “There was never a vote by the Town Council.”
Griesemer, who continues to represent District 2, thanked the CPA Committee and legal advice from KP Law.
“They know their business, and when they say something to me, I tend to really believe it,” Griesemer said.
While she acknowledges she said “not a penny more,” that is not a council policy, and “I don’t think of CPA as being the same color of money,” Griesemer said.
“I find this an unfortunate situation that every year, for some reason or another, this has to be publicly be redebated on whether we feel we should have a state of the art 21st, 22nd century library in the town of Amherst,” she said.
Grisemer also indicated that the CPA money counters the “enormous opposition” that has cost the project close to $10 million in delays and even saw opponents write the federal government asking to withdraw a $1 million grant that had been obtained by U.S. Rep. Jim McGovern.
Finance Committee member Cathleen Mitchell said she understands that the CPA Committee had to make a different consideration in approving the money than the Town Council will.
Finance Committee member Joe Jayne said the CPA funding is a small amount of the overall Jones building budget. “But I feel like there’s other things we could be focusing on in town where those dollars would go a longer way,” Jayne said.
Pros and cons
At a public forum on the CPA spending Monday, a joint meeting of the Town Council and Finance Committee, Kent Faerber, who co-chairs the Jones Library Capital Campaign Committee, told councilors they should support the money for the “large and complicated” library project.
Faerber said the 1928 Phillipine Mahogany woodwork will be preserved as required by the Massachusetts Historical Commission in its review of the project.
“With hundreds of thousands of patrons going by this woodwork every year, there will be few other projects that will more visibly demonstrate the value of historic preservation,” Faerber said.
The money also can’t be directed to other town priorities.
“Most of the considerations raised about the larger project are not relevant,” Faerber said. “For instance, disapproval of this project will not free up for roads, schools or any other town needs.”
Virginia Adams of Vermont, who served as the principal historic preservation consultant in obtaining its regulatory approval under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act, the statutory authority for the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, wrote a letter supporting the spending. “It is my professional opinion that the proposed CPA-funded restoration of the historic interior woodwork at the Jones Library is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and is eligible for CPA funding.”
Walker Powell, a town planner who serves as a liaison to the Historical Commission, wrote another letter about that committee’s support.
“They agreed that the woodwork represented a significant part of building’s historical character and felt that the requested funding would allow for more comprehensive restoration of the woodwork. Costs had risen due to changes to the scope during the historical review of the project, and these funds would help cover that gap.”
Jeff Lee, who represents the Amherst Historic Preservation Coalition, said the CPA request is not compliant with the law, violates the non-supplanting rule of CPA and doesn’t qualify for the Secretary of the Interior treatment for historic properties.
He pointed to a letter from Mina S. Makarious, an attorney with the Anderson Krieger law firm, explaining why this funding isn’t proper.
“I also wonder why if this money is being paid out of taxpayer funds, why this isn’t being credited to taxpayers rather than to the library share of the project,” Lee said.
Vincent O’Connor of Summer Street said the request, when there is destruction of the historic character of the library building, “is such a flagrant abuse of the historic preservation feature” of CPA.
“This appropriation should be rejected, and I think the council and the CPA Committee should take a much broader look at historic preservation than continuously giving money to this project and other projects related to town properties,” O’Connor said.
Maria Kopicki of South Amherst said the woodwork restoration will happen whether the money is appropriated or not.
“This is about promises you made, and were made on your behalf, and the trustees made,” Kopicki said.
Other projects, like pickleball courts, didn’t get funded by CPA. “What I’m asking you guys to do is to keep your word,” Kopicki said.
