Town of Hampden committee readies public forum after survey finds most favor preservation but worry about costs

The Town of Hampden Old Townhouse Committee met April 14, 2026, at Town Hall to review a community survey and to plan a public forum and outreach campaign in advance of a future town meeting. The committee’s presenter said, “We had 287 responses,” and walked members through demographics and option preferences.

The presenter said the survey skewed older — “73% of people have lived in Hampden for at least 15 years” — and that the three preservation-related options combined to about 51% of responses while the options to sell or convert the building to a fire station drew roughly 8% and 5%, respectively. “The cost is the biggest concern,” the presenter added, noting that many people favored saving the building in principle but balked once estimated costs were presented.

Committee members reviewed a restructured positioning memorandum that lists nine options for the Old Townhouse, including doing nothing, adaptive reuse for mixed or institutional use, a public-private partnership, converting to a civic center or preserves, or selling to a private owner followed by demolition. The presenter said the memorandum now includes updated pricing and a decision framework to help outline trade-offs.

Members agreed to make the full document available on a landing page so residents can review details before the forum. The presenter said the document was converted to PDF to prevent inadvertent changes and that Brian (referenced by committee members) will host the file. The committee discussed whether to release all nine options at once to avoid repeated questions and to give the public a complete picture.

For outreach, members endorsed a short multimedia approach: a 7–10 minute podcast or video to play at the forum, a few concise slides showing core financials, and a set of whiteboards at the event so attendees can discuss each option in small groups. Committee members suggested a short social-media campaign in the two weeks before the forum; one proposal was roughly five social posts over 14 days directing residents to the landing page and to the forum.

Heather was reported to have several draft social posts ready; members also discussed using AI to draft a cadence of posts and to create visually engaging pie charts and a brief landing-page summary. Several members emphasized encouraging in-person attendance and argued against answering detailed policy questions on Facebook, preferring to direct people to the public event.

The group set preparatory work and roles: draft probable audience questions, assemble short slides and talking points focused on the financial implications of preserving versus other options, hold a dress rehearsal with mock Q&A, and assign who will staff each whiteboard station. Members discussed that Don serves as the nonvoting chairman but that answering technical financial questions could be shared among the group.

At the meeting the committee recorded a motion related to scheduling the next meeting and forum logistics; the motion was seconded and adopted by voice vote (four members responded “aye”). The transcript does not record the exact motion text; the committee treated the voice vote as approval to proceed with the outreach and scheduling steps discussed.

Next steps set by the committee include publishing the memorandum and survey results on a landing page, finalizing the short podcast/video and slides, assembling probable questions for a rehearsal, and returning for a follow-up meeting the week before the forum to finalize roles and materials. The presenter closed by saying they would continue to circulate materials and prepare the multimedia and printable handouts ahead of the community event.