AMHERST — Amherst Town Council is allowing the Jones Library expansion and renovation project to continue moving forward, nixing a measure that could have rescinded the borrowing authorization to pay for the work.

At the end of a nearly four-hour meeting Monday, in which both proponents and critics of the project offered almost two hours of public comment, councilors voted 9-3, with one councilor absent, to let Town Manager Paul Bockelman decide this month whether to sign a contract with low bidder Fontaine Brothers Inc. of Springfield to undertake the work at the 43 Amity St. building.

“I trust that the costs of rescinding the already authorized borrowing are far worse for our town than moving forward with the current project,” said At-Large Councilor Mandi Jo Hanneke, who voted against rescinding, and continues to support the $46.1 million project to modernize and enlarge the building from 48,000 square feet to 63,000 square feet.

“The Jones is a second home for all our residents, but after 100 years, the actuality of this vision has outgrown the home, and the library needs to be upgraded and expanded to meet changing times and uses,” Hanneke said.

Hanneke was joined in keeping the project going by District 1 Councilors Cathy Schoen and Ndifreke Ette, District 2 Councilors Pat De Angelis and Lynn Griesemer, District 3 Councilor George Ryan, District 5 Councilors Ana Devlin Gauthier and Bob Hegner and At-Large Councilor Andy Steinberg.

Those voting for rescinding the borrowing authorization, and stopping the project, were District 4 Councilors Jennifer Taub and Pam Rooney and At-Large Councilor Ellisha Walker. District 3 Councilor Hala Heather Lord was absent.

“I am still of the feeling that it’s in the best interest of the taxpayer, the town, and just performance of good government, to change the direction and vote against advancing this particular library expansion project any further,” Rooney said.

Taub, Hegner and Schoen used a provision in the town charter to call the emergency meeting and to consider rescinding the $35.28 million in borrowing for the project approved and authorized by the Town Council in April 2021, as well as the rescission of the 2023 supplemental borrowing authorization of $9.86 million. The remaining money for the building project is $1 million from the town’s Community Preservation Act account.

“I don’t think in this time of economic upheaval, when we’re on the brink of what could be a full-fledged recession, that this is the time to take on a project that, in my assessment is a risky financial undertaking for the town,” Taub said.

While he understands the town has other needs, including road repairs, building improvements and possible layoffs at the schools, Hegner said the library project should continue.

“Let’s try to set our acrimony over the library in the past and let’s focus on the problems facing the town as we go forward,” Hegner said.

Schoen said she thinks it’s still a high risk project, especially if library trustees have to dip into the nearly $9 million Jones Inc. endowment if fundraising efforts falls short.

“I think the plan may work, and let’s hope the endowment holds and doesn’t get swamped, because the town will be at risk,” Schoen said.

A town priority

Bockelman said the library project has been a priority for town for well over a decade and won’t cost a penny more than the $46.1 million. In essence, he said, the town is getting two dollars for every dollar spent. Town spending is capped at $15.75 million, with the remaining money coming from $15.57 million from the Massachusetts Board of Library Commissioners, along with fundraising and other grants.

“In my mind, that is fiscally prudent,” Bockelman said. “Leveraging tens of millions of non-taxpayer dollars for this public building is fiscally prudent.”

Bockelman said that Fontaine’s $35.9 million bid is still valid.

“In short the project is within the budget and maintains a contingency of 8.5%,” Bockelman said, observing that the only way to go above $46.1 million is if the Town Council appropriates additional money.

Monday’s meeting was only held in person for councilors, trustees and staff, a decision Griesemer made based on the volume of public comments and emails in advance, which Clerk to the Council Athena O’Keeffe said numbered in the hundreds. In addition to Bockelman and O’Keeffe, staff present included Information Technology Director Sean Hannon and Jones Library capital campaign manager Ginny Hamilton and capital campaign co-chairman Kent Faerber.

While doors to Town Hall and the Town Room weren’t locked, due to the tight quarters of the meeting space, members of the public were directed to participate remotely via Zoom, with signs posted in several prominent places explaining that “Tonight’s Town Council meeting will in person ONLY for town councilors, Jones Library trustees and staff. If you wish, you are also able to join virtually.”

A handful of people, on a mild evening, followed the proceedings on smartphones while sitting on the front steps of Town Hall. When Griesemer announced the public comment period, she said 248 people had Zoomed in, with about 60 seeking to talk. “I think, unfortunately, we had to make the call we did,” Griesemer said.

Public comments

Public comments came from both those who support the project and those with concerns about it.

Sharon Kearney of Kestrel Lane said she sees the library as an asset, and momentum should continue on the project.

“This is a time where there are deliberate efforts to restrict access to information, by defunding libraries and educational institutions,” Kearney said. “I believe we must rise to the challenge as a community to fight against these efforts.”

“Libraries and schools are our most important public institutions,” said Bill Wehrli of Carriage Lane. “How we fund and support these libraries and schools is a measure of our commitment to our community and the coming generations.”

Courtney Cullen of Pine Street, though, cited the unstable financial environment and potential skyrocketing costs, with taxpayers being asked to foot the bill, and calling the current plans “woefully ugly.” “The proposed plans turn the Jones into a postmodern tomb, destroying the trees and surrounding grounds in order to create a very familiar box,” Cullen said.

“From the very beginning it’s been unnecessarily ambitious, and now with various curtailments on expenses, it doesn’t even meet the best ambitions of the original project,” said Sandy Muspratt of North Prospect Street, adding that this would be throwing good money after bad.

Lauren Goldberg from KP Law told councilors that the memorandum of understanding with trustees is binding, and should the project costs exceed the funding available, the endowment would be tapped. If trustees reneged on this, the town would be responsible for paying the contractor.

“The town can only spend the money it has appropriated,” Goldberg said.

Hanneke said she trusts the elected trustees. “The library trustees has backstopped their share,” Hanneke said. “They were elected to make that financial decision; it’s not up to us a council to usurp their job on the matter.”

Bockelman also told councilors that repairing the Jones, rather than renovating and expanding, would likely cost $20 million to $22.4 million, along with $500,000 to $1 million to create a plan. That is more than the $15.75 million the town is currently spending.

“The repairs would fall more heavily on the town, and we’ve already talked about that being more expensive than the town commitment by far,” Steinberg said.

Griesemer concluded the meeting by expressing confidence that trustees and their fundraisers will meet the $13.8 million commitment. “I think you’ll do it,” Griesemer said. “I know you will.”

Trustees President Austin Sarat praised Hamilton, Faerber and trustee Lee Edwards for their fundraising skills. But Sarat added that democracy is messy, hard and takes patience, and that trustees shouldn’t be seen as opponents. He suggested setting an example of model behavior by shaking hands with others who aren’t in agreement.

“We are not advocates for a project, we never have been, and that’s unfair to us. We’re advocates for the town, and we have a vision that is different from yours,” Sarat said. “But it’s not about a project, it’s about the town.”

Scott Merzbach can be reached at smerzbach@gazettenet.com.