January 12, 2016

Melissa Arrighi, Town Manager

Board of Selectmen
Building Committee
Re: Plans for Simes House
Dear Melissa:
The Community Preservation Committee feels that option A is
dramatically different from what was originally recommended to Town
Meeting under Art 16A. The Committee voted on January 11th to urge
the Town Manager, Board of Selectmen and the Building Committee
not to support option A at this time. The Committee believes it is
premature to move forward with Option A.
Below are our concerns with Option A.
The Simes House must be self-sustaining. By not building a kitchen,
which can support functions, we undermine the income capabilities of
the building.
Reducing square footage reduces the real estate potential of the
property. Less square footage means less income. The Committee is
not supportive of spending $3,200,000.00 on renovations to a building
that could be a financial burden to maintain and operate.
The historical and architectural integrity of the building will be
compromised. By not building the addition for the elevator and stairs
you would need to demolish the back of the building to accommodate
moving the elevator and stairs into the building. This would create
more historical destruction than preservation.
CPA Article 16A, which was recommended to Fall Town Meeting by the
CPC, is not reflected in option A. The changes are so different from the
CPC recommendation, it undermines the committees original Article.
It also undermines the CPA Statutes requirement that only the CPC can
make recommendations to Town Meeting for CPA expenditures. The
CPC makes these recommendation though its application process
which is an additional requirement under the CPA Statute.
Our suggested solutions:

The CPC at this time is proposing to revisit the original cost estimate,
which was prepared for Fall Town Meeting (the PM Report). The
purpose is to re-estimate the project by removing as much as can be
removed. This exercise needs to be prepared in writing. We are calling
this option B.
Our hope is that the working group can improve option A and produce
an updated cost estimate on option B. The CPC is willing to utilize it
administration fund for this independent examination of cost. With all
the information available we as a community can make a better
decision.
Sincerely,
Community Preservation Committee
Bill Keohan
Frank Drollett
Jeff Metcalfe
Michael Tubin
Paul McAlduff
Joan Bartlett
A llen Hemberger
Christine Pratt
John Mahoney