|
|||||
|
Speak Out The well-maintained appearance of the Stevens Municipal Building, which James Whidden (in the Dec. 29 issue of The Community Journal) calls "the lovely town owned brick building," reflects our commitment to historical preservation, and our good faith in leasing the building from the town. He says "minor work now" would adapt the building for town offices. Last May 16, Town Administrator Kevin Paicos declared the building "a non-viable option" for such use, based on inspection reports from contractors he had engaged. Funding for basic upgrades they identified would require approval by town meeting vote, and/or a Proposition 2 1/2 override ballot. Many needed changes were not even addressed. Mr. Whidden states, "George F. Stevens… gave the building to us first as a library and then for any other municipal purpose." Mr. Stevens' will bequeaths land "to be forever held and used by said town as the site of a public library building" and money for the construction on that lot of a building "to be forever used and devoted by said town as a public library." The will specifies unless the town votes to accept the bequest for a library, and follows Mr. Stevens' instructions, the land and money are to revert to his widow. In 1985, as the library outgrew the building, a judge granted permission to use the building "for any other municipal purpose." The library moved out in 1988. In 1996, the town still had no practical municipal use for the building and felt burdened by its upkeep; another judge then ruled the building could be leased for purposes including "artistic, literary or educational" use. Mr. Whidden wishes "to preserve the trust" of Mr. Stevens. One Random House Dictionary definition of a library is "a collection of manuscripts, publications, and other materials for reading, study, or reference." Our Piano Study Center hosts music professors, students and performers from around the world, researching the relationship of piano compositions to pianos of their times. The town did spend $6,000 in legal fees so we could lease the building. In 1995 the selectmen, seeing no practical municipal use for a deteriorating older building, stated at a meeting that someone else needed to occupy it and assume its care. The legal fees would have been the same, whoever wanted to use the building. Ours was the only proposal. Our lease's provision for the building's being returned to the town states: "the lessor may terminate the lease in the event of a determination by the Board of Selectmen that, due to an emergency or extraordinary circumstance, the premises are required for municipal purposes. In the event of such an emergency, lessor's termination shall constitute a termination for convenience." While not clearly defined here, "extraordinary circumstance" seems to refer more to a real emergency than simply to "convenience". Mr. Whidden says we changed our original 1997 proposal to pay $767/month ($9,200/year) rent. The 1995 building appraisal on which that rate was based, assumed the building could be restored and made handicapped accessible for $30,000. The appraisal also recommended that repairs by the tenant be balanced against rent. The lease required installation of ADA-compliant ramp and restroom for occupancy of the building. Having funded $42,585 worth of needed building improvements (not counting $9,100 in inkind donations by professional contractors, nor the $20,000 grant we obtained from the Massachusetts Historical Commission), by Fall 2000 we were permitted to use the building. The town was willing to count this amount in lieu of the $27,600 we would have paid for the next three years' rent. To date, we have spent a total of $75,800 on improvements to the building, not counting our own considerable in-kind labor, plus $10,500 in rent. This totals $86,300, plus building and grounds maintenance and utilities. While occupying the building for six years, we have invested the equivalent of over thirteen years' rent in it. The lease does not specify we must "be open most days." The Request for Proposals says a proposer should have "public events at least six times a year." We have always been open to the public two days a week, year-round, plus other days by appointment. Some weeks we have hosted tours (each three hours or more) almost every day. Our sign in front of the building, all our printed material, and our Web site state our willingness to be open at any time. Mr. Whidden implies we have "no sound business plan." He has not attended our trustees' meetings; what does he know of our plans? He claims we had the lease drawn up to coincide with our retirement in 2010. We originally requested a 15- or 20-year lease, but were told the town could give us only 13 years. During two selectmen's meetings he attended, Mr. Whidden must have heard Mr. Frederick state plainly that we do not plan to retire in 2010, and are making plans for the nonprofit organization to continue beyond that date. Mr. Whidden recommends we donate the piano collection to our nonprofit organization in order to obtain an endowment. While at this point we cannot guarantee the future, our inquiries indicate we have a reasonable chance of success. To secure an endowment, the organization would have to be guaranteed eventual ownership of the collection. We cannot afford to donate the collection to the organization outright; we must provide for our old age and for our children. The cost of the collection is a small part of what would be required for long-term functioning of our organization. The major part would be an endowment to pay for personnel to run the organization, a building and its maintenance, and the continued costs of maintaining the instruments. Without these protections, the collection might be abused and lost to the musical world. We have seen comparable small organizations fail disastrously, disappointing their founders. Having dedicated over 30 years to assembling the collection and building the organization, we must be sure our efforts succeed. |
|||||