April 9, 2026 By Marisa Ronan
A NO Vote Is Not Anti-Senior: Evaluating the Center for Active Living Proposal
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 five fold 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.
Thank you for your articulate comments. I’m aligned, particularly on the property tax impact, ongoing operating costs and the future affordability of Hingham for seniors.
Thank you! The seniors have kept the schools updated and things running for many years. Time to take to take care of us.
Speaking TRUTH TO POWER…..
People who offer their time and talents volunteering are to be commended.
BUT….
Why are we in a take or leave it position for a SENIOR CENTER? The 2015 study identified the needs of our older population.
Since February 2025, Hitchcock Shoe…225 Beale Street…. has been available for sale….$6,000,000. ….6,000 sq.ft. of office space, 19,000 sq. ft. of open space, 3.75 acres with parking for 140. PROXIMITY, POTENTIAL, and PRICE.
The Hitchcock Shoe building has been dismissed by the “POWERS” in Town Hall. What about fiduciary accountability to date, and at the Town Meeting in 2025?This could have been presented as an alternative so that the HCAL is not an “ALL” or “NOTHING” vote.
The story of how the Hitchcock family company was founded and grew, is just one example of the past visionaries that made the Town what it is today. Growing up here, these were a part of the PRIDE of Hingham. This Town was a COMMUNITY…. historically, from its beginning, and in the recent past.
Now it is a AAA bond investment and we are asked to pay more taxes for that privilege.
It is time to wake up to the reality some people want to STAY in their HOMES…
Please consider a NO vote on the HCAL, we need to allocate our money to more pressing issues.
As an 81 year old nearly 40 year resident of Hingham who has voted in favor of every previously proposed tax increase I support the town providing adequate facilities and services for seniors. I have concerns, however, about supporting the currently planned Center for Active Living without additional information. The proponents have gone to great lengths to convince us it will cost each resident little to build, but they have done little to tell us what it will cost to maintain and operate. Maintenance costs and utilities such as heat, electricity and water will not be trivial for a 26,000 square foot building. An unsigned flyer recently handed out at the library emphasizes the tremendous increase in the number of programs which will be offered in the new facility but there has been minimal mention of how the staffing for those programs will be funded. The true cost of a facility such as this is not just the construction cost but also includes the operational costs which town residents will have to bear for years to come. We need to know what those costs will be and how they will be funded.
I also want to see the town-wide market research conducted to understand the number of seniors who would actually use the center and for what services. Or did that not happen? I too am a senior who will vote NO for the reasons cited in Marisa’s excellent article.