Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Community Center topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Building committee urges sale of former school to nonprofit as preferred way to create community center
Summary
After a months‑long review and a resident survey of 103 responses, Sabattus’ building committee recommended selling the former school to a nonprofit (option 3) with a 3–5 year return clause, arguing it balances services for seniors and youth while limiting long‑term town costs.
The Sabattus building committee recommended that the town pursue a sale of the former school building to a nonprofit organization as the best route to create a community center, the select board heard at its Dec. 11 meeting.
The committee presented three options: (1) create a town‑run recreation department with an estimated $600,000 initial operating ask to hire a director and launch services; (2) partner with a private realty approach to hold the property while seeking purchase funds; or (3) sell the building to a nonprofit at a reduced price with a three‑to‑five‑year reversion clause if the nonprofit cannot sustain operations. The committee recommended option 3 as “balancing the town’s fiscal responsibility and the desire to provide accessible community services,” a committee representative told the board.
Resident organizers said community input supports a community facility. “We had 103 respondents to our survey,” said Maddie Peacock, a resident who helped coordinate outreach. “Seventy‑one of those responses were for a community center; 90 said seniors would use it; 65 referenced library use.” Peacock also said the group has identified grant and fundraising paths and would pursue letters of intent and pledges to support a nonprofit bid.
Board members questioned the survey’s representativeness. One select board member asked whether a Google‑form survey of 103 people adequately represented roughly 2,500 taxpayers; Peacock replied that she personally reviewed responses and found that duplicates were unlikely. The board also asked for more detail on governance and protections the reversion clause would provide if a nonprofit failed to meet obligations.
Several residents urged that any sale include explicit safeguards so the town retains some control if the nonprofit changes course; the committee said the recommended purchase agreement would include a 3–5 year return clause to protect the town.
The board did not make a final decision at the meeting but directed staff and the committee to continue outreach, investigate grant opportunities (including an upcoming Land and Water Conservation Fund meeting), and return with additional financial and governance details. The committee said a feasibility study is needed before the board considers any sale or town‑run option.
