Monmouth preservation committee proposes two‑year extension to pursue grants for Academy restoration

The 1856 committee asked the town to let it continue grant-seeking and fundraising for two more years in hopes of securing money to finish the restoration of Monmouth Academy.

"So my proposal is the 1856 committee request that it continue grant requests and fundraising for 2 more years," said a committee member who presented the plan, arguing a state preservation grant opportunity could yield roughly $240,000 that would pay for interior work and add value to the building.

The request came during a packed discussion of options for the Academy, which the committee and residents described as historically significant and useful for town meetings and voting. Committee members and supporters said incremental improvements — insulation, wiring and interior work — would make the building more functional and could allow the town or a nonprofit to use or rent parts of it for civic events.

Opponents and skeptical residents repeatedly told the committee the town has signaled it will not authorize more taxpayer funding. "The taxpayers don't support it," a participant said, pressing that the cost of ongoing maintenance and insurance (discussed in the meeting at roughly $8,000–$10,000 a year) makes continued town funding difficult to justify.

Participants debated several alternatives: (1) asking voters in November whether to keep or dispose of the building; (2) forming or partnering with a nonprofit that would operate the property and assume some expenses; or (3) leasing the building to a nonprofit for a nominal fee while the town retained ownership. Committee members said forming a nonprofit that could take full responsibility before November would be unlikely, but some proposed asking the select board for a short extension of support to allow time to pursue grants and private donors.

Speakers also discussed practical barriers to volunteer work on the building: donated labor on town-owned property must meet insurance and qualification requirements, and paid work requires the town to solicit bids under municipal procurement rules. The committee emphasized it will assemble fact sheets and an FAQ ahead of next week’s select board meeting to answer questions about occupancy, costs and timelines.

The meeting included brief routine business: members moved and seconded approval of minutes from the prior meeting and later moved to adjourn. A public meeting on the topic is scheduled for next Wednesday; committee leaders said they will present a clearer plan then and try to recruit volunteers and outreach help.

If the select board accepts the committee’s request for additional time, members said they will continue applying for grants and pursuing private donations, approach local foundations, and explore options to reduce the town’s financial exposure. If the board declines, participants said the question of sale, demolition or other disposition could move to a townwide vote.

The committee’s proposal highlights the tight balance between historic-preservation goals and taxpayer resistance: proponents urged a demonstration of measurable progress if the town grants more time, while critics demanded precise financial plans and assurances taxpayer costs would not increase.