GREENFIELD — In Tuesday’s biennial election, Greenfield residents defeated a ballot measure that would have reversed City Council’s July decision to declare the 53 Hope St. parking lot as surplus and sell it to a developer.
Residents voted 2,254 to 1,711 to reject Question 1, a measure that Franklin County Register of Probate John Merrigan petitioned to place on the ballot in August. The city can now continue to draft a request for proposals (RFP) seeking a developer to construct housing or a mixed-use building at the site.
“We are thrilled that the people of Greenfield recognize the importance of housing for the overall development of the community, and we are excited to move forward,” Housing Greenfield Coordinator Susan Worgaftik said as unofficial election results were tallied at Greenfield High School. “When I woke up this morning, I was cautiously confident, and during the day, it was up and down. Right now, we’re very pleased.”
The ballot measure sparked significant controversy, with those in favor of a “yes” vote to overturn City Council’s decision arguing that the parking lot is a needed commodity and that a housing development would add congestion while straining the city’s infrastructure resources. “No” voters, on the other hand, have insisted that the city needs to increase its housing stock and add taxable properties to help offset homeowners’ property taxes.
According to City Clerk Kathy Scott, this year’s election saw a roughly 30% voter turnout, with 4,040 ballots cast in a city that has 13,537 registered voters. Scott said Wednesday that the city had received 339 mail-in ballots.
“Ballot questions bring them in. It’s a known fact in the clerk world that if there’s a ballot question on your ballot, you’re going to get a higher percentage,” Scott said Tuesday.
Precinct 5, where the parking lot is located, saw the greatest number of votes on Question 1, with 565 residents casting ballots. Of those ballots, 346 were “no” votes and 216 were “yes” votes. There were three blanks. The only precincts that had more “yes” votes than “no” votes on Question 1 were Precinct 1 (262-208) and Precinct 2 (273-261).
On July 16, City Council voted 10-1 to declare the Hope Street parking lot as surplus and draft a request for proposals seeking a developer for the roughly 1-acre lot. The council’s decision, though nearly unanimous, followed roughly an hour of public comment in which proponents of the project cited a growing need for housing, while opponents argued that the city lacks the necessary resources to accommodate a housing structure in the area.
The Hope Street lot previously housed a temporary firehouse while the Fire Department’s new 41 Main St. building was being constructed.
Greenfield voter Sean McHugh said he voted “no” on Question 1.
“I voted for this City Council to make decisions, and if every time there’s one that someone doesn’t like, they throw out a referendum like this. It’s just such a waste of everyone’s time,” McHugh said. “Two parking lots that haven’t been in use for roughly five years now are not doing anyone any good. We have a perfectly good parking garage right next door, and it’s not like people have been circling the block for the last five years.”
In an interview late Tuesday evening, Merrigan said he believed the country’s federal leadership and national “chaos” made local voters more concerned about the state of housing availability.
“I think what’s going on nationally with our federal leadership puts people at their knees — it might have been bad timing,” Merrigan said. “There’s so much chaos across the country, people are worried about those in need, and rightfully so.”
Regarding next steps for the Hope Street lot, Greenfield’s Community and Economic Development Director Amy Cahillane said in an interview Wednesday that a public engagement process will begin.
“I’m just grateful to the Greenfield community for recognizing the potential of this lot and for being willing to take the next step down the road of exploring development,” Cahillane said. “What we’re doing now is mapping out our public engagement, and as part of that process, starting to draft the RFP.”
Cahillane added that the city will hold future events to gather community feedback as it works to develop an RFP. She said there is no set deadline by which to publish the RFP at this time, as she does not wish to rush the process.
Mayor Ginny Desorgher, in an interview Wednesday, said she will meet with Cahillane on Thursday to discuss next steps. She added that, as she has promised the community during previous City Council meetings, the city will gather feedback from residents as it works to draft its RFP for the property.
“I’m very happy that it passed and that our voters had their voices heard,” Desorgher said. “We now have the chance to move forward as we planned. … We want to have further input from the community, as we promised residents.”