Current Town Hall houses nine employees, dubbed a “liability” 

Residents at this year’s Annual Town Meeting voted, almost unanimously, to allow the Select Board to pursue reuse, rehabilitation, or disposition of the current Town Hall at 78 Hopedale Street. 

A Request for Proposals went out in July and responses are due by Sept. 1. Any agreement the Select Board reaches with a bidder would require Town Meeting approval. 

At the May 20 meeting, then-Select Board Chair Bernie Stack said the building was given to the town by William Draper in 1886, which coincided with the incorporation of the town. Stack said, “I think it would be more appropriate to say it was a building given to the town with a hall, and not a ‘Town Hall’.” 

Stack recalled what the building was like in the 1940s and 1950s, saying it contained the town post office, a library annex, town barbershop, town dentist, an insurance company, and the town’s water department. “Does it sound much like a town hall? Not really,” adding that it eventually evolved into today’s Town Hall. 

Stack said the building, which is currently home to nine town employees, has “lots of problems” since the building has received little upkeep over the years. He said the building is expensive to heat in the winter [some office temps cannot rise above 40 degrees], there are drafty windows, leaky pipes covered in asbestos, etc. 

“I could go on and on, and I don’t want to, but there are some serious, serious problems with that building. It would be nice to say ‘Well, we could repair it’- well, we looked at repairing it back around 2012-2013, and it was a $6 million project then, you can well imagine what it would be today…I know it’s hard to wrap your mind around this phrase but it’s less expensive for us to lease something, or to build something, than it is to repair it,” said Stack, adding “I know that there’s a lot of sentiment with a lot of these buildings, but I think it would be nice if this building reverted back to the commercial use that it once had and if it’s appropriately done, I think it’s something we would be pleased to have.” 

In May, Town Meeting members expressed concerns about keeping the historic façade, seeking grants to cover the costs of any repairs, etc. 

Town Administrator Mitch Ruscitti addressed the issue of grants. He said the town is, in fact, eligible for a $50,000 grant through the Massachusetts Cultural Council, however “The updated cost to renovate the building today is about $20 million,” adding “We can’t spend more than 30% of the total assessed value of the building without triggering ADA compliance which we can’t meet without the installation of an elevator which would cost $2 million.” 

Ruscitti reiterated that only nine town employees work in the current Town Hall. “We understand we have to invest in our spaces for our children and our schools…It seems counterproductive to put $20 million into a building where nine people work.” 

During public comment, Josh Otlin, former chair of the Hopedale Historical Commission, said he would be saddened to see the Town Hall “in any other state than it has been historically,” but said the project needs to be viewed in the larger fiscal context of the town’s “complex set of long-range capital planning challenges.” He said, “I believe that the proposal is pragmatic, and I believe that it’s an appropriate response to dealing with a building that, while I think has great sentimental value, I think needs to be correctly understood as a liability for our local government.” 

Selectperson Glenda Hazard said she is hoping for a historic renovation. “Probably nobody’s more attached to Town Hall than I am, but we’re here because previous town meetings declined to spend the cost to renovate when it was cheaper…We’re kind of forced to take an action of this kind.”  

Ruscitti said the town will likely lease office space in the downtown area to rehome the nine employees. 

“We would likely spend $150,000 this winter in broken pipe repair in keeping the heat on [in Town Hall], so it seems to be a better cost benefit to spend $300,000 or $400,000 to rehome us than it does to keep wintering in that building knowing that it’s a liability.”