A poll was conducted, residents weighed in, and the results favored a community center use over private development for the Academy School building. So what happens now?

On Feb. 11, the Board of Selectmen (BOS) discussed and approved a series of actions to further explore and flesh out a community center option, including contracting with Colliers International, a local project management firm frequently used by the town and schools, and forming a new committee to specifically focus on a community center design.

While the board was in agreement that the process needs to keep moving forward, selectmen were split on several specifics including how soon a referendum question could be brought to the public.

Contracting with Colliers

The board approved a contract with Colliers International for consultation services and project management for a total of $10,000. Per the contract, Colliers will review existing studies and available reports, work with an architect, develop project concept or floor plan, develop total project budget including potential operating costs, and explore historic tax credit opportunities.

First Selectman Tom Banisch said since the previous Academy committee had been working with Colliers to develop cost estimates for the public poll, it made the most sense to stick with Colliers.

“We have spoken with them and they are able to pick up where they left off, so we already have six months of work put into this project by them,” he said. “We will take a look at the operating costs as well as the final costs of actually renovating the building. My intention is to bring it to the voters at the May budget referendum. We will have public hearings so people can have input and we will name a committee hopefully by the end of this week to direct this effort.”

Selectmen Al Goldberg and Scott Murphy expressed concern that May might be too soon to bring a question to the voters.

“I think all five of us agree on the need for a referendum, but I guess I don’t feel the need for a referendum in a specific time frame,” said Murphy. “I want to do it the right way and do it right the first time. I am slightly concerned that if we rush to a May referendum that we won’t have our ducks in a row and we won’t have all of the facts ready to present to the public.”

Banisch disagreed, stating that people were trying to rule out a May referendum before any committee work begins or before a potential question is even crafted. Selectman Bruce Wilson argued that since a cost estimate—$14 million—was used for the community center in the poll, the town already has a lot of work put in to having an accurate cost estimate.

“Logically we already have the dollar amounts out in the community,” he said. “If we were able to ask that question and have faith in the response we got from the poll, then we are not really rushing anything. We are just putting a fine point on the data we have already got.”

Additionally, the selectmen had very different ideas on what kind of question could or should be asked at a May referendum.

One or Two?

When the roughly 2,400 residents weighed in on the Academy poll, the community center was the clear favorite with 59.1 percent support compared to 40.9 percent opposition. Selectman Bruce Wilson said that result was clear and if the town went for a May referendum, it would be a chance for the broader public to affirm that support.

“We expect the public is going to get two bites at the apple here,” he said. “This first question [in May] is going to be simply the direction from the community that says, ‘We want you to go ahead and put this project into your capital plan’ and presumably make it a priority in the capital plan. Once we have gone through all of the design work, which will take months and months, we would then put presumably a bonding package together, whether it is just the community center/Academy property or it is a bigger town capital project I can’t say right now, but that would be the final go-no go. That would be where we say, ‘OK, if you say “Yes” here then we are committing to spend real money in the form of a bond.’”

Regarding other town capital projects, voters are also likely to be asked to support some version of the schools’ 10-year, $100 million capital maintenance plan in the near future.

Wilson said the May question wouldn’t be a bonding question, but that there is value in affirming the poll results at referendum because a ballot question result has some level of legislative authority while polling numbers do not.

“In any project I think it is wise and prudent to minimize risk early when the cost of that is very low as opposed to pushing that risk out to later in the project where the cost can become very high,” he said. “This is a scheduled referendum, it costs us virtually nothing, and it gives the taxpayers an opportunity to echo the voice of the poll respondents in a way that we can rely on.”

Goldberg strongly disagreed with Wilson and said there should be only one referendum question.

“I don’t agree with the need to take two bites of the apple, especially looking at the precedent of how we have handled these things before,” he said. “I don’t think there is a need for the first referendum you are describing. I think this design committee should do its work and whether that takes two months or six months, at some point they will have a proposal to bring to this BOS and we will decide if it is ready for public consumption. I only see the need for one referendum at this point.”

Selectmen didn’t come to an agreement on if Academy would go to referendum once or twice. Timing and committee work over the next few months will likely determine if a question can end up on the May ballot.

The Committee and Community

The board approved the formation of the Ad-Hoc Academy School Community Center Design Committee. The committee will consist of five members and is charged with working in consultation with Colliers International to create a design proposal, create a cost estimate, hold public input or workshop sessions for the public, and recommend to the BOS by April 8 next steps for the design proposal.

Selectmen are looking to fill the committee as soon as possible but again got hung up on the kind of people that should be on the committee. Language in the committee charge says “representatives with a knowledge of building construction and rehabilitation, and other individuals as determined by the Board of Selectmen to ensure the composition of the committee represents a diverse array of interests and opinions,” but Goldberg found that definition too narrow.

“I think we are looking for committee members who can listen to the public and help define what should be in this building,” he said. “I am far less concerned that they themselves have a construction or building rehabilitation background.”

Banisch said building construction is not a requirement to be on the committee.

“Again I think we are trying to put to fine of a point on it here,” he said. “I think it would be nice if we could find people who have that background, but of course whomever we put on had better listen to what the people of the town are saying because that is what we are doing.”

However, the committee composition discussion helped land the board on another critical issue: What exactly is a community center in Madison going to look like?

“I find that when I talk to folks in this community, the word community center means different things to different people and I think we would all agree that before we go to referendum that we better get the public a pretty good definition of what is going in that building and the way to get that definition is to listen to the public,” Goldberg said.

Members of the public also expressed concern that there isn’t a coherent idea right now of what would be in a community center. Resident Gus Horvath said it was fine for the board to have a goal to try to make a May referendum date. However, he pointed out that there will be public hearings so the public can voice opinions on what should be in the building between now and May.

“It would be very easy to make the May referendum date if you just said you are going to rehabilitate the building to meet code as it exists,” he said. “But you may come out of the public hearings with some features that a lot of people think we should have in the building that may require moving walls or whatever and you are not going to make the referendum date if that comes up at a public hearing.”

Horvath said the board should expect to hear a lot of ideas from the public.

“You need to have some flexibility because God knows what you are going to get when you have the public hearing,” he said. “Someone is going to say they want a swimming pool.”

Resident Maureen Lopes, who served on the Senior Commission when the Senior Center was first being built, said there are a lot of ideas currently floating around out there.

“What I am looking for in this process is as thorough a planning process as we had to go through with the Senior Center,” she said. “It wasn’t just, ‘Oh, let’s throw a pot of money at the voters and see if they will go for it or not.’ I know there has been some public discussion about can it get on the ballot for May. As a citizen, I would be looking for a real plan, including how will it be staffed.”

Lopes said she also wants to make sure a community center proposal considers what the town already has and what else the town needs to invest in during the coming years. She said people talk about the Guilford Community Center, but reminded people that Guilford doesn’t have a senior center or an arts barn or any looming capital school costs.

“I am one of these people who are looking at long range strategic planning, too,” she said. “This is only one piece and if I am in this town for another 15 to 20 years, what am I being bonded for in total? It’s not one piece at a time—that’s not how I look at the world.”

The board unanimously approved both the committee charge and the colliers contract. Selectmen will now look to staff the committee and prepare to start public information sessions or public hearings on a community center option in the coming weeks.

Visit the town website www.madisonct.org for more information and upcoming meeting dates.

The Academy Dilemma in Brief

The Academy School building has been vacant for more than a decade and multiple administrations have struggled to find a popular solution for the building and its lot.

The parcel is 5.1 acres in the historic district and in the R-2 Residential Zone, which allows for single-family residential, municipal, educational, recreational, and religious uses. The building itself is 53,000 square feet with three floors, 16 classrooms, a gym, theater, kitchen, cafeteria, and music rooms. The building is also on the National Register of Historic places, which means there is a risk of litigation if the building is demolished.

The BOS established the Academy Building Guidance Committee (ABGC) after the public pushed back on private development options presented in February 2018. The committee found four feasible private development options and three public/community uses for the building.

GreatBlue Research conducted polling on the seven options. GreatBlue amassed 10,000 phone numbers for Madison residents—for both landlines and cell phones—and called until it logged 400 responses for a statistically significant result during the week of Nov. 26. An online version of the poll went live on Dec. 3 and logged the max 2,000 responses in a span of two weeks.

Polling results were announced at the Jan. 28 BOS meeting and the results, for both the phone and online poll, favored a community center option. The ABGC then put forward the following recommendation:

“The results set forth in the GreatBlue report show that a majority of those polled and surveyed support the town’s continued ownership of Academy School, restoration of the building as a community center, and strong opposition to the sale or development of the surrounding ball fields and parkland. The committee supports the findings of the GreatBlue report and recommends that the BOS be guided by these findings in presenting a plan to Madison residents for vote at referendum.”