Members of Gloucester's City Council and School Committee listened Tuesday night as representatives of the quasi-public Massachusetts Development corporation outlined four recommendations for the potential re-use of the Fuller School property.
But before getting too excited about any of these proposals, city officials and residents alike need to recognize there were some flaws inherent in last night's presentation before it even began.
For one thing, MassDevelopment was working with a limited scope, given that it can, by its charge, only deal with projects that include private-sector interests with the potential to generate tax revenue.
For another — given that charge — two legitimate potential options are, at this point, not even on the drawing board. That's the potential for using the school and its grounds to house a centralized city government complex, and the potential for re-using it as a renovated school building, perhaps housing at least two of the current elementary school programs under a consolidation and redistricting that, as we've already noted, the school district needs to carry out anyway.
So before diving into anything, city officials must find a good means of gauging public consensus regarding both those and any of the MassDevelopment options.
While both the School Committee and the mayor's office are pursuing separate surveys to garner such input, it's hard to see those drawing the answers needed. The School Committee's survey on future school uses and the need for a new school building, for example, is being sent to the "school community" only. And it's uncertain whether the mayor's survey, to be mailed to all residents, will include all of the Fuller options.
The MassDevelopment recommendations, meanwhile, pose all sorts of problems on their own.
A potential "big box" retail extension of Gloucester Crossing, one of the recommended options, could be a logistical and economic nightmare if the city has to find either a buyer who would develop the property, or — worse — large-scale retail tenants that would be willing to lease with the city holding onto the site. The city simply does not have a good track record as a revenue-generating landlord. And none of those issues even address the city feeding right into more loses for Gloucester's downtown.
Two other choices — with commercial office development, or a sharing of commercial office space with a potential public safety headquarters — pose the same landlord and tenant concerns, with the city frankly unable to take that kind of economic gamble.
And while the fourth option — the one favored by the Kirk administration — holds some potential as a community center, potential public safety complex and a potential new home for the Cape Ann YMCA, that raises significant issues as well. Those include whether the Fuller site really is an acceptable location for a police and fire complex, or whether other sites would be safer and more efficient.
Sadly, Tuesday night's MassDevelopment presentation wasn't just a case of putting carts before horses, it was more like sending the carts rolling downhill with the horses still in the barn.
Here's what the city needs:
A legitimate assessment — perhaps even through a special referendum — of public sentiment outlining up to 10 options for the future use of the Fuller property. Those include:
The four MassDevelopment recommendations, with options of selling or leasing the site for any uses involving solely commercial uses.
The extensive renovation and re-use of Fuller as a consolidated school.
Converting Fuller into a central headquarters for the city's municipal offices and services — with or without the public safety departments.
Now, let the real discussion and campaigning begin.
