Opinion: Failing to Protect Historic Character of Jones Library Casts Doubt on Legitimacy of Entire Project
Jones Library. Photo: Wikimedia Commons
A version of the following column appeared previously in the Amherst Bulletin.
Scott Merzbach’s article in the Daily Hampshire Gazette of July 11 regarding the Jones Library project’s loss of approximately $2 million in historic tax credits due to its continued failure to meet state and federal historic preservation standards missed a critical piece of the story. A review of correspondence (see also here) between Library Director Sharon Sharry, Brona Simon, Executive Director of the Massachusetts Historical Commission, and Ann Piesen, Federal Preservation Officer at the National Endowment for the Humanities, reveals that Sharry repeatedly failed to disclose publicly, serious concerns on the part of the historical commission about the adverse effects of the Jones Library project on historically significant aspects of the building.
In a letter dated Nov. 22, 2023, Simon expressed to Piesen her concerns about the project’s significant adverse effects on the historic integrity of the 1928 structure. This letter was also sent to Sharry, putting her on notice that the MHC was troubled by the project’s detrimental effects on the historic property. The town’s application for $2 million in tax credits was pending at this time.
On Dec. 4, 2023, two weeks after Sharry received Simon’s letter, the Town Council debated whether to increase the borrowing authorization for the project by $10 million. In a Dec. 18 vote that some councilors described as “the most trying vote they’ve had” in light of the project’s exploding costs, the council approved the authorization increasing the borrowing limit to $46 million.
Sharry did not publicly share the concerns expressed in Simon’s letter about the project’s adverse effects in either of these meetings, although that information was obviously material to the Town Council’s deliberations.
Having received a copy of Simon’s November 22 letter, Sharry had reason to know that the town’s application for approximately $2 million in state historic tax credits was likely to be denied. Not surprisingly, it was denied. In a December 29 letter, Simon advised Sharry that the proposed project “does not meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Rehabilitation of Historic Properties.”
Sharry then resubmitted a slightly amended application. This was denied by letter of April 26, as Merzbach noted in his July 11 article.
In denying the tax credits, Simon concluded that many key aspects of the proposed plan failed to meet one or more of the governing standards that were established by the Secretary of the Interior and adopted into law by the state.
Among other things, she pointed to the proposed demolition of portions of the original 1928 historic building as well as the proposed demolition of a significant portion of the 1928 west facade, north facade and east facade on the children’s wing. Simon also noted that the size, scale, and massing of the proposed addition would completely cover part of the original building and be visible from the front of the building.
Regarding the proposed alterations to the interior, she found that the removal of two sets of historic wood stairs and the alteration of the floor plan and circulation patterns failed to meet required standards.
Given that the library project is already approximately $7 million short of funding, it was incumbent upon Sharry to notify the Town Council, the library trustees and the public that this anticipated $2 million in funding was off the table. If any other elected officials knew about the April 26 letter, they also failed to come forward with the information.
In June, following the town’s rejection of the lone construction bid that exceeded the project’s budget by $6.5 million, the Town Council voted on two motions by Cathy Schoen regarding continuation of the project. Her first motion, to ask Town Manager Paul Bockelman to halt the project, lost by a single vote, 7-6. In an 8-4 vote, the council rejected her second motion to advise Bockelman to hold off on paying the architects $550,000 for “value engineering” work.
When the Town Council considered these two critical motions, Sharry had not informed them about the MHC’s denial of $2 million in historic tax credits. It wasn’t until a July 9 Jones Library Building Committee meeting, when Sharry was questioned about an invoice from a consultant hired to help seek the tax credits, that she finally acknowledged that the tax credits had been denied.
How would councilors have voted on Schoen’s motions if they had known that the project could no longer expect to receive the $2 million in tax credits?
Sharry’s suppression of material information regarding the financial and physical viability of the proposed Jones Library expansion plan casts doubt on the legitimacy of the entire process.
It’s time to pull the plug on this wasteful and unnecessary boondoggle. The town’s money is desperately needed elsewhere.
Mickey Rathbun is a resident of Amherst.
This news is distressing to say the least. Willful suppression of critical information which might have affected the Town Council vote is disgraceful. Where is honor in this blatant bias that affects public servants and the general populace? What do the trustees of the Library have to say about it?
Sadly, my sense is that the cited deception by Ms. Sharry is not an isolated incident. As to the trustees, the behavior, public and otherwise, of some has long been suspect.
Just cull through what has already been responsibly reported in the Indy, supported through public records by outstanding investigative journalists, to understand why, what should have been a cooperative town-wide effort to complete needed updates to the Jones during the last 10 years has become such a cluster.
That a citizen, whose company is employed by the Jones, has publicly slandered and libeled another for their opposition to the Demolition/Expansion Plan should serve as another example of how far proponents of the Plan are willing to go to get what THEY want.
Given the egregious behavior of the Library Director, a town employee, one has to wonder if department heads are immune from disciplinary action.
“How would councilors have voted on Schoen’s motions if they had known that the project could no longer expect to receive the $2 million in tax credits?”
Good question, but isn’t the real* question: “What did they know and when did they know it?”
=====
*As in https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/curious-history-what-did-president-know-and-when-did-he-know-it