In just about three days, a petition circulated by Precinct 7 Town Meeting member Paul Joy garnered 300 certified signatures in support of bringing an article before Special Town Meeting, asking members to weigh in on the town’s plan for reconfiguration of the space at the Beech Street Center.
“We wanted to provide an opportunity for Town Meeting to hear exactly what has been proposed at the senior center, the Beech Street Center,” said Joy, who filed the petition with fellow Town Meeting member Bob McGaw, who represents Precinct 1. “And while the town has argued this doesn’t constitute a change of use, it’s our hope that this does prompt both the Council on Aging and the town to come to a new agreement associated with the future use of the Beech Street Center.”
This past weekend, more seniors inquired about signing the petition, according to Council on Aging Chair Karen Donelan.
At the Council on Aging’s meeting Tuesday night, Donelan said while the petition seems to have gained significant support, her major concern was one of legality: what exactly happens, regardless of whether it passes or fails?
Previous Columns
“And what do we do if there’s a big, difficult fight and we end up in a place where we don’t know what to do next as a board?,” she asked her board members. “I’ve struggled with this a little bit.”
According to McGaw, the Select Board and moderator have agreed Article 4 warrant is considered to be non-binding. The petitioners, however, feel differently, arguing that the proposal constitutes a change of use, which, per the 2011 Memorandum of Understanding between the Select Board and Friends of the Council on Aging, requires a two-thirds, binding vote.
The concept for the center, in general, involves merging the staff for each branch of the Community Services Department—Council on Aging, Recreation and Veterans Services—into the Beech Street Center, without encroaching on any of the public-facing senior services, such as the front desk or the lobby, where many come and go for meal pick-up or senior programming.
The revised office plan, therefore, includes the construction of a door at the rear of the building to create an entrance for a recreation-only front desk.
“The major concern is there are unanswered questions,” said Joy. “We’ve heard the Council on Aging asking for additional clarifications before they make a decision regarding the change … This has to do with office space, the construction timeline, the budget, the parking, the use of programming within the Beech Street Center.”
According to Select Board Vice-Chair Matt Taylor, who serves as a liaison between the two boards, the expected cost of such a project would be roughly $30,000 in fiscal year 2025, which ends June 30.
To counter that cost, the Recreation Department’s departure from the Homer Building at the Town Hall complex creates space in the building for the Retirement Board, which is currently occupying offices on Concord Avenue, to move in after its current lease lapses. Select Board Chair Elizabeth Dionne recently said the board’s move to Town Hall—not necessarily into the same space occupied currently by the Recreation staff— will save the town as much as $40,000 annually in rent.
As for the timeline, Town Administrator Patrice Garvin previously explained that the lease for the Retirement Board is set to expire in October, and the town wants to ensure the Facilities Department has ample time to relocate multiple offices before then. Taylor noted that exterior work is more dependent on the weather and thus needs to be completed before the ground freezes.
On Tuesday, several members of the board once again expressed an interest in delaying the recreation staff’s move to the building until after the library staff moves out, as well as delaying the proposed construction plan.
Member Peg Callanan initiated a motion to that effect, seeking to delay the addition of any additional recreation programming at the center until council members have reviewed the result of a recent survey sent to seniors, and the library staff moves out. Though it was seconded, a 4-4 vote meant the motion failed.
“I’m really saddened by the tension, the frustration, the lack of trust that we’ve experienced over the last year on both sides,” said Callanan. “It’s not been easy, certainly for the town staff as well as the seniors.”
There was also talk of a trial period, allowing the staff from both departments to see if the plan as proposed (prior to any construction) was feasible. Community Services Director Brandon Fitts and Taylor said they agreed with the sentiment of a trial period, but emphasized benefits the reconfiguration would have for seniors, namely expanded access to the center through evening hours, and daytime support in the building when Council on Aging staff are out.
“I’m not beholden to making any modifications to the building if that doesn’t further serve the needs of seniors,” Taylor said. “I do want to be really clear: we can’t keep running the way we have been. We’re starving recreation.”
At least one member of the Council on Aging warned against delaying the project to death.
“There’s not going to be any programming that is not going to be upheld. I boil this down to replacing a window with a door,” Council on Aging member Scott Kinkade said of the proposed physical change to the center. “That gives the recreation department the ability to take care of those walk-ups; it frees the lobby of people coming in for recreation department business. I see it as mired down in wanting to delay this to death.”
Echoing the sentiment of other members of the Council on Aging on Tuesday, including member Maryann Scali, Joy said he wants to ensure the seniors’ voices are heard.
“I worry that we’re seeing a pattern of, ‘We plan to come up with a plan’ … as opposed to coming up [with a plan] and having serious discussions and agreements with various groups,” Joy said.
Joy was referring to the past year, during which members of the community expressed concern with the town’s plan to combine the Recreation Department, Council on Aging and Veterans Services under one streamlined organizational structure.
The reorganization involved identifying redundancies in administrative roles in the Recreation Department and Council on Aging and merging them so that one office administrator serves both town departments. Each department, however, continues to have dedicated programming personnel and other relevant staffing to maintain operations.
“We’ve been dealt a lot of cards here,” Donelan said. “I think we have some cards left we can play and one of them is expanded services for seniors, which I think we can better envision when we have the survey information. We’ve had several suggestions for what that might look like— some are hours in the building and some are in the community. “
Special Town Meeting will convene on Wednesday, May 21.
