The City Council will vote next Monday, Aug 8, to fund the new Newton Center For Active Living (NewCal) – aka the new Senior Center. If the Council approves the project on Monday, construction should begin next year.
The NewCal project has been a bit of a rocky road up to now. After a lengthy public process Abelmarle was announced as the initial location for the new Senior Center in Aug 2019. The announcement sparked widespread opposition to the chosen location. The committee went back to the drawing board and eventually announced in Augusts 2020 that NewCal would instead be built on the site of the existing Senior Center.
That announcement was followed by an evaluation of a few different options for the construction – i.e. rebuild the existing building or raze it and build a new building. When plans were released in early 2022 for a totally new building on the site, a group of neighbors (Neighbors for a Better Newtonville) objected and organized a public petition in opposition to the decision and in June 2022 filed a law suit aimed at stopping the project. In July of this year the city announced that it had purchased a two family house adjacent to the property, via “friendly eminent domain” so that the site of the new center could be expanded with more open space added.
After all the bumps along the way it will be interesting to see whether the road from here to project completion is smooth and straightforward or another long stretch of new bumps and potholes. No projects of any scale are ever easy or straightforward in Newton. Lets hope that the various fits and starts along the way will have led to a better design and a new Senior Center that everyone can enjoy.
Its not clear to me how the status of the Neighbors for A Better Newtonville law suit relates to this project. As far as I know the lawsuit is still pending but it sounds like the project is moving along regardless.
Hi Jerry – Perhaps I missed it, but I don’t see this item on the City Council agenda for 8/8/22. Can you please post the link about the City Council vote, if you have one? The link you posted does not list a CC 8/8/22 meeting about NewCal.
There is a “Docket” and a “Reports Docket” posted for the 8/8/22 CC meeting. NEWCAL is in the Reports Docket as item 345-22, link below. I don’t really understand the difference between the two dockets, but I “assume” that the vote is occurring.
Perhaps a City Councilor (reading this) could explain the difference in the two type of dockets. I’m more used to seeing a single “Agenda” for committee meetings.
https://www.newtonma.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/89291
Hi Debra, The “Reports Docket” includes the items that have been discussed and voted on in a committee so the items are “reports” from the committees. These are the items up for a full City Council vote.
The one just referred to as a “Docket” are items that will be sent to a committee for further discussion and it includes items where a public hearing needs to be set.
Funding this but cutting literacy intervention for children. #progressive
Jerry: the lawsuit is indeed still pending.
Patrick: all governments use capital funds for capital expenses only—this would be the case here. Those are often bonded. Operating expenses come directly from tax revenue—interventions at the middle schools would by definition have to be from the operating budget, since it would be fiscally irresponsible to borrow to cover ongoing expenses.
Right so ARPA funds wound up in the supplemental capital expense fund. ARPA funds that could have gone elsewhere.
Don’t play shell games.
https://www.newtonma.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/69679/637564512013670000
The Garden City Behemoth is coming. Let’s see how well it blends into the neighborhood. Maybe what this street will eventually need will be more structures of similar scale
I support this project. Although I think Mayor Fuller missed an opportunity for a better campus footprint by not acquiring all of Webster Woods. Specifically, the already developed portion that was formerly Temple Mishkan Tifila.
Offering naming-rights could reduce the cost of the project in Newtonville, or at least offset perpetual care costs. In my opinion, Mayor Fuller should be soliciting a donor in exchange for naming-rights. The Mayor already has a person on her staff whose job is to find grants and endowments for other purposes.
You are right that mayor fuller messed up on webster woods. But she shouldnt have meddled in the free market at all.
Setti agreed to let BC buy it, the transaction settled. Fuller never ahould have touched it and the >15million could have been used for better causes.
We should avoid thinking that funding this project means cutting funds for education. A growing and vitally important sector of our city is its senior population. Providing seniors a modern center seems fair and just to me. NewCal has my support.
Why should we avoid thinking this? The funds available to the city are finite and thus hard choices are necessary. Removing services from disabled children to build a fancy senior center is shameful.
I asked the director of senior service three weeks ago (July 13th) for exact numbers on how many Newton seniors (of which my wife and I are) regularly use the current senior center. So far, no answer. Before large amounts of $$ are spent, the city ought to have hard numbers on usage that are available to the public. Hopefully, NewCal is not another ‘build it and they will come’.
The NewCal discussion reminds me of the controversy surrounding construction of the Newton Free Library, main branch decades ago. At that time Mayor Mann, chief advocate of the project, caught lots of flak for his “boondogle.” As it turned out, the new library was a tremendous success, and it stands as Mann’s chief legacy.
I predict that a renovated and user-friendly NewCal will witness greater numbers of seniors participating in programs there, as happened with library use after the new library building opened.
I absolutely think this NewCAL project should move forward. The building is old and has 5 steps to get in. It’s not wheelchair accessible and having it be accessible is HUGE if we want seniors to access it. It is long overdue. Also, having state-of-the-art and building a new building where seniors can hang out, and utilize day programming and services is really important for our seniors to build community.
I know that the watch tower or widow’s peak (whatever we are calling it) is a nod to the existing building, or, cynically, something that proponents of the project can point to opponents who wanted more of the historic facade retained. But in my opinion, it looks quite silly given the scale of the proposed building in the rendering. Would prefer to see a living green roof or solar panels.
I’m 64 and am embarrassed that the Newton is spending so much money on seniors when Newton’s young people are in crisis because of the aftereffects of Covid isolation. Extra money, including ARPA money, should primarily be spent on the public schools. Period.
As a reminder, one of the main reasons for the extended COVID isolation was to protect seniors. This was done at great emotional cost to young people, who were far less susceptible to COVID. And now, seniors want even MORE for themselves. This is so selfish.
Right now, there should be more money on the young and less on the old. The young were isolated during the COVID crisis to protect seniors, and seniors should now return the favor by helping the young recover from the aftereffects of isolation.
The City Council should NOT approve the funding for the Senior Center.
I’m in my 80s and have never had anything to do with the senior center, except for appreciating that lovely classical Newtonville building.
Newton spends quite a bit of its budget on school-age children: more than half, in fact. From my perspective, as a retired teacher, that large portion is fine as we should invest in the younger generation. Senior citizens also deserve their share of funds. It is not an “either/or” nor should it be construed as such.
I can’t follow this line of thinking. It is an either/or. The city has finite funds and is deciding to spend in one area and cut in another. That is the decision that is being made. Seeing it any other way is utterly illogical.
This city is in a fiscal crisis but loves to pretend that it isn’t. It really is bizarre.
Hi Bob Jampol: The overall U.S. government spends more than twice the amount on senior entitlements than it does on elementary and secondary education.
For 2020 (last year available) the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Economic Analysis* reports Social Security and Medicare spending to be $1,897B and elementary/secondary education spending to be $803.5B. Importantly, Social Security/Medicare spending is dispensed by the federal government, while almost all of the elementary/secondary education spending ($802.1B) is dispensed by state and local governments.
Seniors who complain about the relative lack of local spending on themselves, while ignoring their huge federal entitlements, are self-serving. Seniors who feel they owe nothing to the young people who lived in crushing isolation for over a year, for the benefit of seniors, are worse than self-serving.
[*The data cited can be found at BEA.Gov in tables 3.12 and 3.15.5.]
To defend Bob, I neither think he was being self-serving, nor do I think he was advocating that we don’t “owe anything” to our youth. Quite the opposite in fact. I’m not sure how you get that from his statement.
In my view, Newton as a community should be able to pay for both high quality schools and high quality facilities for our seniors. And if we need to start having a conversation about an override to pay for these types of things, wouldn’t it be “self-serving” to oppose that particular action?
I’ll also note, that in an era of large excess tax receipts at the state level, I find it shocking that additional local funds are not part of the solution at the state level. We aren’t the only community struggling with higher costs. There is a disconnect between the local level and the state level.
I would have preferred the historic building be maintained and preserved. I would have preferred the building be sited at Albemarle field, in conjunction with a new pool complex, or near Webster Woods as Mike mentions. I think this particular project is too big, too expensive, and I’m not a huge fan of the design. There is a part of me that continues to feel that this was put in Newtonville because other constituencies complained more (Park folks, Newton Centre folks). Not the best siting, but the most achievable site. That’s frustrating.
As for the budget issue, I think we have a long term operational deficit with the school system. With our pensions too. I keep reading about teacher shortages, so I imagine that teacher salaries, health care costs and such are going to keep rising beyond our tax base. I think it is inevitable that we will need a tax override long term.
I get the disconnect just like some of the other posters above. I would prefer we focus our efforts on the school system for the foreseeable future. I think it is harder to sell a tax override when you spend millions on a project like this.
With that said, sometimes I don’t get what I want. That’s life in a democracy. I didn’t support blocking the project via the lawsuit because it seemed in my opinion to be unlikely to win on the merits, and I’m tired of delay tactic lawsuits in Newtonville. That’s doesn’t mean I love this particular project.
I’m glad they found a way to expand the green space, which is very much needed in Newtonville. If they are going to build this thing, I want it to be used, I want it to be an active building, and I want it to be busy at least 16 hours a day or more. Morning classes. Evening events. When not being used by the senior center, I’d love for the general public to use the building, including Newton Educational Center for classes. I’d want the high school and the senior center to do more together. And I’d want the green space to be clearly open to the public, not just seniors, and to have nice tables, chairs, shade, etc. If you are going to do this, let’s make it great and let’s make it useable. Newtonville could use some additional activity, especially in the evenings. Let’s make that happen if this comes to pass.
I mention this partially because I feel the neighborhood was promised a great deal when it came to Newton North and use of its facilities, and over time that hasn’t come to pass. And over time promises made (about traffic, about drop off locations, about parking, about use of facilities like the pool and for adult classes) seem to disappear after a few years. The city has a problem with maintaining trust with projects like this, and making the building useable, user friendly, and active would go a long way. Easy sign up for rooms online. No random red tape. Finding ways to say yes versus automatically saying no. Not letting “staff time” block events or use. We are not a user friendly city. Let’s have the senior center be the start of a better resident experience.
I’m getting close to the age where I might use this. Maybe in the end I’ll love the facility being close to my home. I’ll certainly miss the old building.
fig nailed it! Newton “should be able to pay for both high quality schools and high quality facilities for our seniors.” I couldn’t agree more.
We have an embarrassment of riches in this community. But in my opinion, City Government has done a mediocre job of developing any new sources of revenue to pay the bills.
Even when voters handed the city a golden goose of homegrown taxes from legalized cannabis, the The Mayor and City Council managed to screw it up. And don’t get me started about all the value the City Council left on the table with Northland, or how much value they actually took off the table at Riverside. A few million lost here–a few million missed there… it all adds up to less for students, seniors and everyone in between.
I’m all for a nicer senior center as long as we are building what seniors want/need rather than the City’s vision of what it should be. I feel like there tends to be a disconnect on what listening to what people want,
I don’t particularly care for the oversized look however I don’t think fighting to keep the old facade without considering function makes sense. There were posts about how the accessibility what an issue to the buildings prior set up as a library and how windows wouldn’t align properly with changes to make it more accessible. I love old buildings but in this case there seems to be a common sense reason for changes.
I agree with Fig that does not do a good job of honoring its promises with the community such as NN, the lighted stadium at South etc. The Senior Center should prioritize use by Seniors but an attempt should be made to allow community access when the spaces are not being used by seniors.
As far as an override though that is likely inevitable, wouldn’t that make it difficult for the same seniors to get to stay in Newton? I’m thinking those in particular that fall in the middle class. I like Mike Striars ideas about getting more creative for other sources of funding and amenities.
Left out city in “I agree with Fig that the City does not do a good honoring its promises…
That’s been built into all the planning and the renaming it as NewCAL. The idea since the beginning has been for this building to also be used during the hours that it’s not functioning as the Senior Center and be available to the community after hours.
Oonly people who have been paying extremely close attention to this project would know or remember that it was highly debated during the site selection process if this is a Senior Center or a Community Center. The seemingly non-negotiable component a full size gymnasium was often questioned in regards to how in demand that would be for Seniors.
Frankly, I am not comfortable with the argument pitting the importance of the wants and needs of Seniors against those of Children/Schools. Newton should be able to do both. But I question the price tag.
In the August 1st Finance Committee meeting it was shared by Jonathan Yeo that the original estimate before the city started the site selection was $10 million and now the City Council will vote on $20 million with virtually no push back from the Finance Committee other than an abstention from Julia Malakie. One can only imagine what the final cost will be.
I have seen no good data as far as how many Seniors use the current Senior Center and since that argument has been that the Seniors deserve this, that should be the focus. If it isn’t a Senior Center, but rather a Community Center then it should be labeled and debated as such.
To me, it has always been a vanity project for that Mayor.
Plowing ahead with a new senior center while at the same time cutting literacy interventionalists for children should make you feel badly.
Saying Newton “should be able to do both” does not provide moral cover. Newton cannot do both and is thus making a choice between the two.
I really don’t have anything to do with this, but as a ‘senior’, i do feel forced to say that i’d rather see scarce resources spent to help young folks live full, healthy and, hopefully, happy lives in this tough world, than on an old fogey like me whose only got a mere fraction of what’s already been a ‘long’ life left, and is very lucky to have been able to survive and live relatively comfortably for most of it.
@Patrick– My three children graduated from Newton schools years ago. So I’m not as familiar with school related issues as I once was. But I’m certainly interested in the issue you’ve raised regarding literacy funding. Please help me [and others on V-14] understand the details of the cuts you’re so angry about. How much was cut? How did that cut impact your family?
Thanks Mike – will do – tomorrow when I have time. Those who followed the budget crisis at NPS this past budget are encouraged to chime in.
So for those who have been living under a rock:
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2022/06/01/metro/newtons-fiscal-2023-budget-place-despite-no-vote-city-council/
and:
https://www.nbcboston.com/news/local/newton-teachers-supporters-protest-against-plans-for-school-layoffs/2683239/
So I hope you enjoy your new non-frivolous senior center, knowing that it was paid for partly by removing services for dyslexic children.
Is it too late to scrap this waste of money altogether and put the money into schools, athletic fields, or road improvements?
Looks like it passed the City Council according to Fig City News.
Elated!
A functional senior center is not a frivolous luxury. Many seniors are living alone and isolated, many on fixed incomes. The Senior Center provides many <a href="https://www.newtonma.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/86746/637955510681709412"programs including opportunities to socialize, fitness classes geared towards the abilities and safety of older people, support groups, assistance accessing social services. Just as it’s important to support our children (and the older people I know, including myself, agree on the importance of spending money on our schools), it’s also important to support our residents as they age. For years it’s been clear that the current building is inadequate, especially because it isn’t accessible for those with disabilities. Why can’t we value both groups of Newtonians?
Meredith you do know that most of the current building is accessible for those in wheelchairs or have you ever been in the building? I have
Amen.
Hey kids, sorry about the lousy record in keeping the schools open during Covid and then not giving you almost any ARPA Money after Covid. Sorry also about the athletic fields and the music programs.
On the upside, the seniors will be getting a full gym, even though many aren’t even going to the grocery store anymore after Covid. And the mayor will be getting a great picture of a huge empty senior center when she campaigns for her next higher office and wants to get the senior vote.
If it’s any comfort, many residents, and City Councilors, “are disappointed” about the mayor ignoring you, and will continue to value you in, you know, their thoughts.
Newton is now officially broken.
It is clear we need a better facility for our senior center but so much money was thrown away when the Mayor and Jayne Collino tried to push the Albermarle Park plan. Once again, our Mayor was really unaware of how heavily used that park is. Yes, we absolutely should be able to properly fund our schools and a senior center but Newton has not been able to do that for awhile. The pitiful amount of green space in front of the current senior center building was a graveyard for broken outdoor furniture during the pandemic. The city couldn’t even keep that in useable condition at a time when we were all looking for comfortable outdoor spaces as they were working on putting new benches in Newtonville. No one has answered the question about the numbers and info about the current users of the senior center. That would seem to be something that should be known as we design the new center. And will this 20 million dollar investment only be open M-F 9-4? I guess seniors don’t go to jobs. I have always wondered why we don’t have more branch locations-like using existing buildings for programs around the city. We have some beautiful school buildings that could be used after school hours, we have other spaces, like Scandinavian Living Center and the old Newton Centre Library that already welcomes some city programs. Update buildings like the Bath House at Crystal Lake to be used year round. The absence of creative thought in this City in recent years in astounding. I do hope that the house they are buying is used for green space and not for parking, After all, the rules for parking for new buildings, etc. are being reduced so if the City allocates more parking for the senior center while taking away parking requirements for other businesses and residential projects what kind of message will that send?
I have never written before but have been following this discussion of the senior center for years. I retired about five years ago and just before the pandemic I visited the senior center because I was interested in taking classes there. I took a tour and was so shocked at the poor and quite depressing condition of the building that I never went back. The conditions at the senior center are a disgrace for a community as affluent as Newton. There is a very dedicated staff making the most of a bad situation. I think folks who feel like Newton does not need a new senior center should visit and see for themselves.
As to how many people would use a new senior center nobody really knows, but I think it is likely that there are many people like me who would love to go if it it were housed in a large enough space with adequate parking and easy access. I also think folks would go to programing at least through the early evening. I have been taking classes through the Newton Recreation Department which scatters it’s programing around the city. In many ways it would make sense to let them have some space in a new and expanded building and that might lead to more full time use of the building
For those of us old enough to remember the fight over the library (who needs a new library?) which is now a focal point for various programs for all ages in Newton far beyond books. If you build it they will come
Lynn:
I think that is the best short summary of the need and potential positives that I’ve read. If they are going to build this and we are going to lose the historic building, I really do hope the project is a tremendous success. A lot of it depends on Newton’s govt to deliver on its promises: to the seniors who have been promised a great facility, to the general public who have been promised a useful building it can use and is active, to the residents of Newtonville who want more green space, etc.
My hope is that perhaps this project will be a success, and the potential New Art Center project taking over the Church of the Open Word building across the street will move forward. Wouldn’t that be something to have a new senior center and a new art center (literally) forming an area of activity in Newtonville?
The devil is in the details of course.
ps. I hope the city does archival photography/video of the senior center before it is demolished.
@Patrick–
Thanks for responding. I’d previously read the articles you linked. I’m aware of the bigger picture regarding school funding. In fact, that subject was loosely covered here on V-14 awhile back, and I posted criticism of Mayor Fuller’s position. It’s my understanding that the Mayor subsequently redirected some funds in order to reduce the planned cuts.
What I’m most interested in, is how the cuts that were still made ended up impacting students. For example, your early post was the first time I learned that the city actually cut literacy funding for students. I agree with you that cut is indefensible and completely unacceptable, coming on the heels of COVID driven at-home learning.
I disagree that the cuts in education funding have much to do with the Senior Center. The City of Newton should be more than capable of doing both [as fig mentioned]. Unfortunately the capability of the city is oftentimes limited by the ability of the people running it. There’s not many new ideas coming out of City Hall these days. Newton will continue to struggle with funding issues, until we elect more people with a vision for the future and a knack for thinking “outside-the-box.”
Hi Mike.
The cuts in funding do have much to do with the senior center. The mayor had funds available and steadfastly refused to increase the allocation to NPS, resulting in the cut services to children who struggle to read. She then used those funds to go ahead with this project.
The sad truth of all of this is that it makes it impossible for me to advocate for a tax override, as I would have to have faith in the city leadership to be good stewards of the additional funds, which I do not.
According to Fig City News, Newton is funding this senior center, so far, with a $19.5MM bond issue and $2MM in ARPA funds.
The bond issue is additional debt that will be added to Newton already huge burden in unfunded pension benefits to…some other seniors. In other words, Newton is now as broken as the federal government in sacrificing the needs of the young for the needs of the old.
To their credit, I think that if Newton’s senior citizens understood all this, they would not want a new senior center. Unfortunately, Newton’s elected officials are too afraid of losing the senior vote to explain the center’s funding to them.
Debra:
As much as I had issues with the project location and funding to some extent, the vote was unanimous (with 3 absences). Either way, the city council didn’t agree and the mayor strongly supported the project.
Maybe it was because of the power of senior voting. But it is a very rare thing to have our city councilor’s agree on anything to such a degree.
As for the idea that Newton is sacrificing the needs of the young for the needs of the old, I think if anything Newton is extremely focused on maintain its AAA bond rating. Interest rates are still low historically, so if we are going to bond a project like this, now is the time to do it.
I’m going to pivot now to advocating for the additional funds for the schools, as I know the value of the reading tutors. Just because this project was approved doesn’t mean we can’t still push for the funding needed for the kids. It was never an either/or situation. And I’m going to push for an override over time, to account for the fact that I think we will need one to keep funding our priorities as a community to the same level. Hopefully when the SALT tax deduction limit expires in 2025, it won’t be renewed by a Republican President and Republican Congress.
And when the NewCAL opens, I guess I’ll stop by for a class or two and to use the gym/walking track, especially on hot days. Hopefully it will turn out great and worth the money. Hope springs eternal, even if our limited tax receipts do not.
Most City Councilors feel that voting “against” seniors means not getting re-elected. And we don’t need more debt right now, no matter the interest rate.
All Newton residents, including seniors, need to start speaking up for the young. Because Ruthanne Fuller certainly isn’t going to care otherwise.
Debra:
Sadly that’s been the case forever. A quick story: My local library growing up was in a somewhat less than developed area, and it was in dire need of improvement, especially in the kids reading area. Looking back, it just was a few shelves and a small area for children. The community recognized the need, and asked for a half a cent increase in the sales tax rate for 5 years to pay for renovations, among other items. The proposal lost by such large margins due to the senior vote that even today I remember the disappointment and shock. And sense of betrayal. And I wasn’t past 10 years old. Some memories stick with you.
I’ve grown more sympathetic to the struggles of many seniors as I’ve gotten older. But there is no denying that funding for projects can sometimes be a zero sum game. But again, I’ve got hope things will improve over time here in Newton.
@Patrick– Do you happen to know exactly how much money Mayor Fuller cut from the literacy program and approximately how many Newton students were impacted?
If you want to see the totals to date for ARPA funds, the link is https://www.newtonma.gov/government/mayor-fuller/special-projects-and-initiatives/american-rescue-plan-act-arpa
While I support the schools, blaming the Senior center for the lack of literacy funding is just not true. Newton can’t have it all if people say no to an override. The school budget is huge and growing. The question becomes how much of our taxes should go towards NPS. I don’t advocate that literacy specialists should be cut. However, I also don’t think NPS deserves carte blanche in its spending. I do think that there is bloat in NPS. One example in my opinion is the chromebook initiative.
@Patrick-Unless I am mistaken, if there was an override, it would not be used for some amorphous general operating expense. It would need to be for a specific purpose or project.
What do you mean it isn’t true? Money was withheld from the schools and instead spent here. Are you implying that this is not the case?
Yes. I am saying it is not true. Did anyone specifically say we can’t fund literacy initiatives because we need to fund the senior center? If so, please point me to the exact conversation.
ARPA funds have been used for several initiatives. $1.4 million for lighting the fields. Could that not have gone to funding literacy tutors?
Funny – I just got an email today for my kids’ Newton soccer programs. Newton soccer is being charged $50k by the city this year to use the fields, increasing to $75k in 2023 and $100K in 2024. Of course, this means registration fees for soccer will have to increase, and some families (and their kids) will no longer be able to participate.
As a taxpayer and a parent, I think the city is under-investing in kids, as evidenced by the above, the recent debacle around school funding / cuts and the general attitude towards the public schools during COVID. Absent tax increases, funding is a zero sum game. I hope the senior center is worth it, but let’s not pretend that other priorities aren’t getting cut or impacted.
I wonder if this controversy could have been avoided had the City not shuttered and sold off a number of school buildings in the 1980s; a terrible decision that continues to reverberate to this day.
@FWG– I’ve heard that argument many times. You’re drawing a conclusion without doing any calculation. It costs nearly as much to maintain an unoccupied institutional building as it does an occupied one. So if you tell me where the city would have gotten the money to maintain the “shuttered” buildings for 30-40 years, your argument might have some merit.
FWG – Good rule of thumb for all municipalities: never sell public land. It’s gone forever and you can’t anticipate future needs. Quite the opposite has been true – the city has benefitted from buying private land related to three building projects: Cabot and Zervas Schools and NewCal.