The Town of Hampden Select Board on May 1 discussed plans to move some town operations into the former Thornton Burgess school building (referred to in the meeting as TWB), focusing on immediate repairs, energy upgrades and water-quality issues residents have raised.

Why it matters: The building reuse would involve multiple funding decisions at town meeting, possible change-of-use approvals, and work that could range from minor repairs to multi-hundred-thousand-dollar systems (lighting, flooring, filtration). The board emphasized that voters should understand both short-term costs to occupy the building and larger long-term renovation needs.

Town staff reported a vendor estimate of $219,000 for a full LED lighting retrofit that included assumed rebates; the estimate said about 400 existing fixtures would be replaced. Staff and board members discussed delaying a full retrofit until the town has clearer data on occupancy and energy usage because payback depends on how many hours the town operates the spaces. Concerns were raised about maintenance: high gym ceilings and limited equipment to change fixtures could make bulb replacement costly.

Board members flagged several near-term repairs that should be funded if the town moves into the building: flooring in at least two or three classrooms (noted as trip hazards), masonry repairs, plumbing and electrical fixes, and door-security upgrades. On the warrant, staff said there is a request for an additional $75,000 on top of roughly $100,000 already appropriated; that additional funding would be intended to address flooring and immediate safety items.

Water-quality tests and PFAS/PFOS surfaced as a separate issue. The board reported a most recent test at 11 parts per trillion; speakers noted the current regulatory threshold referenced in the meeting is 20 ppt and that a proposed or discussed lowering to 3 ppt has been reported by federal or state agencies. At the levels reported, staff said filtration “may not be needed” and that operational mitigations (bottle dispensers or a filtered water cooler) could be a lower-cost short-term option. The board discussed applying for available grants aimed at PFAS mitigation but said final decisions should reflect evolving standards and test results.

Permitting and septic/well interactions were raised as potential constraints. Staff said MassDEP and the town health agent were reviewing whether the size of the septic system and the planned occupancy would trigger additional permitting; there may be a need to re-calculate projected occupancy to show lower usage and resolve a potential conflict between well locations and the septicsystem design.

Board members reviewed how the TWB-related warrant articles will be handled at town meeting: (1) a change-of-use article that requires a two-thirds vote, (2) a move-cost appropriation, and (3) a renovation-cost appropriation. The board discussed presenting all three articles together so voters see the full plan before any votes. Board members noted that the change-of-use article is a two-thirds vote while the appropriation articles require a majority. They also discussed the political strategy: if an appropriation passes and the change-of-use fails, the town could still decide on occupancy options rather than leave the building vacant.

No formal votes were taken at the May 1 meeting. Staff were directed to provide clearer phased costs (what is needed to occupy now versus future upgrades), continue public outreach and coordinate tours scheduled for the coming days so voters can see the building conditions firsthand.