Letter: Town Council Has an Obligation to Investigate Financial Viability of Jones Expansion
Photo: istock
The following letter was sent to the Amherst Town Council on November 16, 2024.
I am writing to let you know about a letter Bob Peirent received last week from Brona Simon, Executive Director of the Massachusetts Historical Commission, that suggests potential complications in the ongoing Section 106 historic review process for the Jones Library project.
Simon’s letter, dated Nov. 1, 2024, concurred with the town’s findings that “the Project will have an ‘adverse effect’ on historic properties through the physical destruction of part of the Jones Library, alterations to the interior circulation and historic materials, and construction of a rear addition, and changes to the visual setting of the Amherst Central Business Historic District and the Strong House.”
In light of these findings, Simon stated that she looked forward to consulting with the town to explore alternatives that would eliminate or minimize the adverse effects of the proposed project. To that end, she requested that the town provide an “alternatives analysis” that should, at a minimum, include alternatives analysis of 1) roof materials, 2) staircases and circulation, 3) woodwork, and 4) the size, scale, and massing of the proposed addition.
In her letter, Simon also took the town to task for failing to invite the MHC to attend the October 9 Consultation Parties Public Meeting regarding Section 106. This despite the fact that the MHC is the body that is ultimately responsible for negotiating a Memorandum of Agreement with the town for the elimination, avoidance, and minimization of adverse effects.
As you may know, the town must negotiate a satisfactory Memorandum of Agreement with the MHC before the MHC signs off on the Section 106 process. Only at that point can the NEH and HUD release grants totaling approximately $2.1 million. The MHC must also make a determination that state historic preservation regulations have been complied with before authorizing the Massachusetts Board of Library Commissioners to release funds for the project.
Judging from the nature of Simon’s requests, it appears that the MHC may require substantial changes to the proposed project, including, perhaps, preserving the interior and replacing the Buckingham slate roof with real slate. The town and Jones Trustees President Austin Sarat have stated that any changes to the project resulting from the Section 106 review will be addressed through change orders, an expensive and cumbersome process that will add significantly to the cost of the building. If the MHC insists on a redesign of the addition, I cannot see that being addressed by a change order.
Paul Bockelman’s suggestion that the terms of the project have been settled is far from the truth. The Section 106 process is just beginning. To my knowledge, the town has yet to send its alternatives analysis to the MHC. Nor has the town undertaken a NEPA environmental analysis, as required by HUD. The town has failed to respond to public requests for information about its obligations under NEPA. The required archaeological review has not been completed and it will become difficult if not impossible to do if the ground is frozen.
It is not only in your power, but it is your duty as stewards of the town’s financial security to demand a thorough analysis of the costs that the town is realistically facing at this point. There is a very real danger that the town will lose $2.1 million in federal funding, in addition to the $2 million already lost in historic tax credits. Who will make up that shortfall?
I must emphasize that NONE of these problems has been caused by the significant number of Amherst residents who have objected to the project in its present form. Rather, these issues have arisen because the project has been poorly managed from the very beginning. The Section 106 review should have been done at the outset of planning so that historic preservation requirements could be incorporated into the building’s design.
Although Bockelman has insisted that Town Council has no further role in the process, that is by no means the case. It is not only in your power, but it is your duty as stewards of the town’s financial security to demand a thorough analysis of the costs that the town is realistically facing at this point. There is a very real danger that the town will lose $2.1 million in federal funding, in addition to the $2 million already lost in historic tax credits. Who will make up that shortfall? Trustees have secured $2.2 million in pledges plus $1 million in Amherst CPA funds. Even if all of the $2.2 million in pledges are realized and they do whatever it will take to keep the $2.1 million in NEH and HUD grants, they will still need to raise over $7 million more, plus whatever additional costs are incurred to meet Section 106 requirements and any other overruns that their very modest contingency can’t meet. Does anyone seriously believe that the capital campaign will come anywhere close to raising that amount? Given the seriously precarious nature of the country’s financial situation under President-elect Trump, would-be donors may well be reluctant to commit substantial sums of money.
A copy of Brona Simon’s letter is attached (see here). You will see from her tone that she is displeased with the town’s dismissive handling of its responsibilities under Section 106. I urge you to consider the ramifications of this letter for the financial viability of the proposed project.
Mickey Rathbun
Mickey Rathbun is a resident of Amherst
Mickey Rathbun is right to warn of the “very real danger that the town will lose $2.1 million in federal funding” by its years-long flouting of the historic preservation laws governing the Jones Library’s demolition/expansion project.
If the Town forfeits those federal grants, because it fails satisfactorily to complete the historic preservation process under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, it will forfeit a great deal more than the money. It will forfeit the Town of Amherst’s reputation with its Member of Congress, Jim McGovern.
Congressman McGovern put his reputation and the resources of his office into the effort to get these grants from HUD and the National Endowment for the Humanities.
Just what do you think his reaction might be, if these grants cannot be funded because the Town and Library Trustees have failed, for eight years and counting, to comply with the historic preservation laws? How willing do you think he and his staff might be to advocate, another time, for something else that the Town of Amherst needs?