May 22, 2026 By Carol Britton Meyer
The select board discussed Tuesday night next steps related to the proposed Hingham Center for Active Living project on Bare Cove Park Drive – which failed to pass by a two-thirds vote at the recent town meeting – but have not yet decided on a particular path forward. At the same time, they are encouraging citizens to share their ideas as the conversation continues.
“A tremendous amount of work went into the design,” Chair Liz Klein said, while expressing appreciation to all those who were involved over the last decade in efforts to improve the senior center. “The priority of supporting the seniors in our town has not changed, and we will figure out how to do that.”
Noting that a senior center to meet the needs of Hingham’s growing older population was one of the 2021 Hingham master plan’s recommendations, Klein went on to say that her goal that night was to “debrief and to discuss potential options – with additional feedback from the public.”
A common thread to the lengthy discussion was the numerous concerns voiced by citizens about the location and $25 million cost of the project and related tax impacts as well as “misinformation” that was brought forth during the town meeting discussion about the CAL warrant article, according to a number of project proponents.
Competing financial costs
Board member William Ramsey, who is well aware of those concerns, shared his thoughts. “As we move past this year into years of competing financial costs [referring to major capital projects proposed for the future], any step forward will require an understanding of what the school capital program will cost and a clear estimate of the size and scope of [a second] potential override. . . . We also need to take into account what we heard about location and cost concerns.”
Ramsey said that as the board’s liaison to the proposed CAL, he is “proud of this effort. The group of advocates was outstanding, doing the work of 50 people, seven days a week. It was a tremendous effort that can’t go unnoticed and should be recognized.”
Acknowledging that “plan A didn’t work,” he went on to say that regarding the proposed CAL, “it was a good location and a beautifully designed building. The $25 million cost was amazing, but [the warrant article] didn’t pass.”
Senior center need addressed in 2021 master plan
Ramsey also noted the number of capital projects that are not passing in other communities and the increasing cost of gas and groceries. “Things are rough right now,” he said. “There have been a lot of inquiries about private locations and buildings [as potential sites for a new CAL]. However, there is a procurement process – we can’t just make an offer on a building,” he said.
Even a smaller building at a lower cost if that were to happen “will require a debt exclusion and will be a heavy lift,” he said.
A debt exclusion results in a usually long-term but temporary property tax increase to pay for a specific capital project, while a Proposition 2-1/2 override funds essential services and ongoing costs that cannot be covered within the cap and results in a permanent increase in the tax base.
“There’s a lot of disappointment about the plan not working out, but we need to move to the [undecided as yet] next step,” board member Julie Strehle said, noting that some people think the current proposal “is too big and too expensive, and some people didn’t like the idea of [not using the space once occupied by the police station to expand the current senior center footprint].”
While open to suggestions from the public, Strehle said the town needs “to be careful about not just grabbing the next idea [for a location] and buying and retrofitting a new senior center into an existing building. I’m very worried about that.”
‘Current state of senior center is inadequate’
Klein said she heard “loud and clear” the concerns about costs and related tax increases in general, “and we need to be sensitive to that. I’m also trying to discern whether there is an appetite for any capital project, regardless of the location [of the proposed CAL]. We all agree that the current state of the senior center is inadequate, and we need to figure out the best path forward – whether a new building, increased services for seniors, [or other considerations].”
In the meantime, CAL Director Jennifer Young is working on a plan to further support seniors in the community, according to Klein.
The discussion was then opened to public comments. CAL Building Committee Chair Tom Carey – speaking as an individual citizen – acknowledged the various competing capital projects and “groups wanting different things” and said he isn’t “particularly discouraged” as a citizen “that this one proposal failed. There was a great deal of opposition and misinformation/misunderstanding.
“The committee hasn’t been disbanded, . . . and the town would be well-served if it was tasked to go back to work if the select board wanted to add in an authorization to look at potentially privately owned property [referring to last year’s town meeting charge to look at potential town-owned properties]. We would be happy to do so,” Carey said.
‘Rolling up our sleeves’ to revisit proposal
As a committee member, Carey talked about “rolling up our sleeves” and revisiting the proposal. “It’s not too big in terms of what’s needed and compared with other communities, but we could pare the size back [as one option].”
He also noted that expanding the current CAL isn’t viable because of the lack of parking. Among possible solutions for that challenge, he alluded to potential remote parking for staff; creating a parking strip “around that beautiful green semi-circle” at the front of town hall that could accommodate about 40 cars; and “struggling for awhile” using part of the former police station “where the cells are now located” – but no one could think that’s a good solution,” Carey said. “Paving over one of the fields for parking wasn’t acceptable [due to significant opposition from sports groups and the community].”
Council on Aging member Joshua Ross conveyed his thanks to all those who put in long hours toward creating a new senior center – “some for years and some for decades.”
‘A lot of people not given opportunity to speak’
He expressed concerns that “a lot of people were not given the opportunity to speak and to refute some of the [information] that was presented. There was a lot more to say. [Project proponents] said that seniors are a priority, but town meeting did not, noting that a majority of voters supported the project, but a two-thirds vote in support was required for the project to move forward.
Ross noted that the COA’s charge of “supporting and advocating for our seniors will continue. With or without town [meeting] approval, we need to make [the current senior center] an adequate facility for the growing number of seniors in town.”
Ross also mentioned plans to upgrade the front of the current building and potential parking solutions, including reconfiguration of the front driveway. “We also need outdoor programming for seniors – the fields and areas that Hingham Rec uses may have to be shared. This is the choice left to us. The Council on Aging and CAL staff will continue to push for seniors in the town.”
‘Heartbroken’ at outcome
Nes Correnti said she is “heartbroken” about the outcome of the vote and “the lack of support,” advocating for increased efforts to be sure citizens are fully informed. She also referred to misinformation that was shared at town meeting. “All the information needs to be given to citizens [ahead of time] so they can digest it and so that [advocates] don’t have to give a summary of a decades-long project in six minutes at town meeting.”
Yvette Kanter said that, despite the fact that the warrant article didn’t pass, she believes that “Hingham is for its seniors, but they didn’t show up [to support the project] that night – and there was a lot of misinformation thrown around with no regard.”
Klein agreed about claims that misinformation was shared during the town meeting warrant article and that “not everyone got to speak. Town meeting is the legislative body of this town, and it matters who shows up.” She also expressed concern about “under 1,000 citizens deciding our destiny. Please make it a priority to be there, to vote, and to be informed ahead of time,” she said.
Neither Klein nor any of the other speakers explained what they meant by “misinformation.”
Klein also said the town “should continue to work with the town moderator about how we can have a [more] balanced discussion” at town meeting. That didn’t happen, and it was disappointing,” she said. “I’m not sure [if things were different] that would have changed the vote, but people should have had a chance to speak.”
Fears of being ‘taxed out of town’
Lizzie Eldredge talked about “the number of seniors surrounding the podium [at town meeting] expressing concern “that they will be taxed out of town. I don’t hear any mention of that tonight,” she said. “This is a real problem that needs to be addressed – how to give tax breaks to seniors who don’t have a high income so they can remain in town.”
Eldredge also suggested considering redistricting students currently at Plymouth River School to another school that is not at its full capacity (Foster School is current in that category) and creating a senior center in that one-story building. “I’m playing the devil’s advocate here,” she said. “Why not make do with what we have to avoid taxing people right out of town?”
Correnti noted that in response to Eldredge’s suggestion, “There’s not enough space to put Plymouth River School kids in the three other elementary schools,” even considering Foster School.
Glenn Mangurian also expressed disappointment at the outcome, wondering if the vote indicated “a change in attitude from investing in the greater good. We paid $2.5 million for an excellent design and construction documents. The project is shovel-ready, but there’s nowhere to build it other than Bare Cove Park Drive or unless another town-owned property materializes,” he said. “There’s not an appetite to spend another dollar to study this project. I think people are temporarily done with it, and I think that unfortunately, the project could be off the table for another 10 years, which really saddens me.”
Klein ended the discussion noting: “We obviously have a lot of work ahead of us. It’s a balance between what our community members can afford and what they value and want to invest in this community.”
Town Administrator Tom Mayo provided an email – calideas@hingham-ma.gov – for citizens to share their ideas and comments about possible next steps, potential alternative locations, and other related information. The select board will compile the feedback once there’s been ample opportunity for citizens to respond.
Also, in response to an email from the Hingham Anchor about next steps regarding other warrant articles that did not pass at town meeting – including the sale of the Lincoln School Apartments and 8 Short Street –Klein said the board hasn’t defined a plan yet “but will be working on both in the coming weeks.”