On Sept. 15, the city of Greenfield published a lengthy list on Facebook of “FAQs” about the Hope Street parking lot referendum, which are long on hopes and aspirations — but short on “facts.”
Greenfield voters gathered 856 signatures to place the Hope Street issue on the Nov. 4. ballot. This stimulated the city to unload an information drop for the public two months after the City Council voted to sell the parking lot. It would’ve been preferable to have such information shared two months before the city council’s decision was made.
We should not confuse FAQ’s with FACTS. Here are some examples
• The city states that “growth in property tax revenue can help to control or reduce costs for residents throughout Greenfield.” But our infrastructure costs can outstrip tax revenue growth, and increased housing supply will not guarantee lower rents. This is one reason why renters have filed a rent control ballot question statewide.
• The city admits that what will be developed on Hope Street “is not yet known and is dependent on what developers propose…if no winning bid is selected, the City may decide to adjust and issue a new RFP.” The city has sold some surplus property in the past for almost nothing, because bids sparked little or no interest.
• The city wants “Market-rate housing…that is not subsidized by the government in the way that ‘affordable’ housing typically is.” Free market housing will not help low-income people. Why are we seeking public subsidies for unaffordable housing?
• The city claims that restoring the Hope Street parking lot “would require a significant construction project” at a cost of “at least $400,000.” The city lost at least $600,000 in parking fee revenue while the temporary fire station was in use for three years. The Hope Street lot restored could generate $200,000 a year in revenue, which is more than the $172,000 we tax the Greenfield Acres high-rise.
• The city suggests that “drivers currently paying to park on-street or in the Olive Street garage would simply shift to Hope Street.” This makes us wonder why the city built the Olive Street garage to begin with — because when the Hope Street lot was closed, the Olive Street garage remained at less than half capacity. Workers and court users (200 to 400 people on any given day) who lost parking at the courthouse, employees who park on Prospect Street up to Grinnell, and YMCA members who need more parking — all know a Hope Street lot today would be filled near to capacity.
• The city Council never saw a feasibility study before it voted in July to make “surplus” the parking lot — even though Greenfield’s 2024 housing plan said a feasibility study was a needed next step. Now the city says that conducting an additional study at this stage would be “a waste of taxpayer resources.”
• The city believes that if we add dwelling units downtown, we will see “a built-in customer base for nearby businesses.” But we are pushing retail storefronts out of town and exacerbating “retail leakage” by expanding development areas hardly walkable from our downtown.
• We are told “some of the infrastructure (electrical, water, and sewer) that was brought to the Hope Street lot for the temporary fire station may be helpful in the development of the site.” The Fire station committee in 2020 was told that the modest utilities under the temporary fire station would add nothing to any new construction plans on the lot.
• The city assures us that the Greenfield Fire Department has the “equipment and training” needed to serve a new apartment building at Hope and Prospect. “Typical ladder trucks will reach up to the 9th or 10th floor.” Is it a coincidence that the city is pushing for taller buildings — but still has not revealed any renderings of what height of building they want at Hope Street? We sincerely hope they have ruled out a 10-story building as part of its “urban” plan.
• Finally, it sounds like magical thinking to conclude that “potential increases in the student population as a result of new housing in Greenfield…will not require significant capital investments.”
When the City Council voted to sell Hope Street, voters had less than 30 days to gather 430 signatures. They collected double the signatures in two weeks. Voters want real facts before selling Hope Street. The city’s FAQs are built on hopes — not facts.
John F. Merrigan, Patricia Coffin, Fran Lemay, Jr, and Todd “Happy” Boynton are all voting to repeal the city council vote to sell the Hope Street parking lot by voting YES ON QUESTION 1 on Nov. 4.