Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Buildings topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Needs assessment finds major deferred maintenance at 30 and 32 Commons; council weighing bond or long‑term lease option
Summary
A consultant’s comprehensive needs assessment found extensive deferred maintenance and life‑safety deficiencies at 30 and 32 Commons; town staff told the council March 6 they plan to take two options to voters: a $1.5 million bond or a long‑term lease with Church Community Housing.
Get email alerts on the Municipal Buildings topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Town staff and a consultant presented a final comprehensive needs assessment March 6 for two historic structures on the Town Commons — the building commonly called the Fire Barn (30 Commons) and the Odd Fellows Hall (32 Commons) — and outlined two different paths to address long‑deferred maintenance.
The consultant's photos and narrative cited rot, broken windows, defective siding, stair and landing deterioration, roof‑line deflection and interior failures in the kitchen and finishes. Town staff described an "Option 2" that would authorize the council to seek a bond not to exceed $1,500,000 to repair both buildings to code; staff said consultant estimates, including 20‑year maintenance, bring the combined cost closer to about $2.0 million.
Nut graf: The council and residents discussed two broad approaches: Option 1, a 99‑year lease to Church Community Housing that town staff say would transfer most capital repair responsibility to the nonprofit while preserving some municipal uses inside the buildings; and Option 2, a taxpayer‑funded bond to bring the buildings up to code and keep ownership and control local. Both options raise questions about municipal control, long‑term stewardship, senior services and how the Odd Fellows use of space will be honored.
Under Option 1 as described by staff, Church Community Housing would execute a long‑term lease (presented as 99 years in discussions), rehabilitate the buildings and manage residential and community uses, with the town retaining designated space for municipal purposes such as a senior gathering area. Staff said the Portsmouth model was reviewed as a template, and that any final lease/MOU would be negotiated after a favorable vote at the Town Financial Meeting. The council asked staff to provide clearer MOU terms to voters before the financial meeting.
Several residents, the Preservation Advisory Committee chair and representatives of local groups urged a more collaborative process and raised concerns about losing municipal control through a long lease. The Odd Fellows membership raised questions about preserving its meeting space; town staff said they had talked with lodge leaders and would update existing agreements. Other residents pushed for a citizens' advisory group and suggested pursuing historic‑district designation and state preservation grants to reduce local taxpayer burden. Staff and Christian Belden of Church Community Housing told the council they would try to structure tenant selection and use to favor local residents where legally possible, but acknowledged that grant programs and fair‑housing rules limit absolute local preference.
Ending: The council said it plans to present options to voters at the Town Financial Meeting (noted in the meeting as May 20). Staff agreed to produce clearer warrant language and to circulate the proposed MOU/lease template so voters can review terms before the meeting.

