April 9, 2026 By Marisa Ronan
As a Hingham resident of more than 30 years, I support investments that help residents remain active, connected, and engaged. And I unquestionably support seniors, especially since I am now a senior myself. An improved senior center, or Center for Active Living (CAL), could be a meaningful community asset. However, I cannot support the current proposal to construct a new CAL at Bare Cove Park.
The proposed 26,000 square-foot, $30+ million facility is oversized, overpriced, and built on optimistic assumptions about participation, funding, and long term sustainability. It relies on an “if you build it, they will come”
strategy—assuming that a dramatically larger building will generate the participation, programming, revenue, and donations needed to eventually grow into its footprint. This represents a fivefold expansion from the current 5,000 square-foot center and would require a fundamental transformation in staffing, funding, programming, and transportation.
This proposal must also be viewed within the context of the Town’s broader financial commitments. Beyond construction costs, this CAL would add decades of operating and maintenance expenses at a time when Hingham
faces rising debt, increasing labor and energy costs, deferred maintenance, and competing capital priorities. Serious discussions of an override in the next couple of years underscore these pressures. The proposed sale of Town
assets, including the Lincoln School Apartments, further highlights the challenge of sustaining existing infrastructure.
Ultimately, these financial pressures fall on residents through higher property taxes and rising electric and water rates. In addition to the proposed CAL, affordability is already strained by the $8 million FY24 override; recently
completed projects such as the Public Safety Facility and Foster School; the approved but unbuilt community pool; and multiple capital projects coming before this month’s Town Meeting. These include the Library chiller system, multiple extraordinary school capital needs, Weir River Water System projects, and the Lighting Plant transmission and distribution facilities project. As spending mounts, many seniors on fixed incomes are struggling to remain in Hingham, while younger families and first time homebuyers—including the adult children of longtime residents—face increasing barriers to staying or settling here.
Marshfield’s Center for Active Living, often cited as a model, illustrates the challenge inherent in the current proposal. Marshfield’s 24,000 square-foot facility operates with a $1.25 million (2024) budget, significant Town
support, extensive external funding sources, 27 staff members, and more than 150 volunteers—and it took many years to reach that scale. Replicating this level of success in Hingham would be uncertain and would likely require a long term financial commitment well beyond current projections.
Key operational questions for the proposed CAL also remain unresolved. These include realistic timelines for growth in participation and programming; plans for expanding staffing and transportation; contingencies if revenue or funding falls short; and the flexibility of the building if current assumptions prove inaccurate. Critical decisions such as fees, nonresident use, café operations, and off-hours building usage have not yet been defined, making it difficult for taxpayers to evaluate the proposal with confidence.
Everyone agrees that Hingham can and should support its seniors. But a successful CAL does not require overbuilding or overcommitting the Town’s resources. The current proposal is too large, too costly, and too
speculative to justify. To be clear, a NO vote is not a vote against seniors or against an improved CAL. Rather, it is a call for a better, more realistic proposal—one that aligns with Hingham’s needs, financial capacity, and long term planning. For these reasons, I will vote NO on the current Center for Active Living proposal at both Town Meeting on Monday, April 27, and at the polls on Saturday, May 2.