DON’T READ THIS IF YOU HATE CHANGE
O.K. If you’re still with me then I have your attention. Good! Because I’m going to write about a subject that has been kicked around long enough. It’s time to resolve it. “IT” is the proposal for a senior/community center… or a senior center… or a community center. Call it what you will, the question of building one has been floating for more years than it took Columbus to convince Queen Isabella to fund an expedition to a place no one knew existed. Beset with questions never answered, a suitable location never determined, design concept never settled upon, and funding never put into place, the idea of building such an attraction has never even gotten past the starting gate. But like the swallows forever returning to Capistrano, the thought of actually building the thing is constantly resurrected.
There are actually two separate and distinct groups who have been active in voicing what they see as a need for such a center. These are the seniors and their organization, and the community center board. Both of these have many common goals in the design of any center, both can help with initial funding, and both have strong feelings about where it should be located… right in the heart of town… more specifically where the Sampson house now sits.
Frankly, in my tenure as your mayor, I had always hoped to see a community center on 5th Street, a gateway from the Valley to the historic core. A wooden exterior dressed-up with wooden historical interpretive panels; it would have attracted the attention of every traveler driving through. Designed in such a unique and bold fashion it would have stood out from all the other architectural cookie-cutter buildings one sees rising out of the ground these days. However, this idea has grown more impractical in my mind with each passing season… and for one reason – no land is available for such a center. I had been hoping this might change… but it now has become apparent that to continue hoping somehow Jerusalem on the hill might appear is like waiting in the rain for the bus that never comes. It’s time to move on. So… let’s examine the suggested alternative – the Sampson site.
Sampson House (Current Community Center)
Upon first examination it would appear that, even after removing the current non-historic structure, there just isn’t enough land upon which to build such a center. There are more users for such a facility than was first imagined… and many of these require different features. A dance studio is obviously different from a lecture hall or room. An assembly room is different from a game room… and so on. Any community center must be able to accommodate citizens for these and other activities. The building must also house offices for operational staff and associated record keeping. This includes a marketing director, an essential activity for insuring that the center pays for itself. So where does fate enter into all of this? Why with the recent acquisition of the Courthouse of course!
After much thought, I believe the Courthouse is the ideal location for our city offices. Any romanticized sense that the Miller house is perfect as presently constituted for city operations is ignoring the fact that the building is in fact a nightmare for efficiency in operations. It is woefully short for storing the records needed to serve the public… in planning, record keeping, customer service, and office management it is deficient. There is an alternative solution. MOVE THE OFFICES TO THE COURTHOUSE!
What a natural fit. The Courthouse is the soul of the city. The city offices are the heartbeat of the city. Let’s not ignore fate. Let’s bring them together. By making this move we can solve the problems inherent with the Miller house… but we will also open the door to expanding the design of the community center because now it can encompass the entire block.
Jacksonville Courthouse Building
Neither the Miller house nor the Sampson house is listed as “significant” on the National Historic Landmark District Register. The Miller house might have been, but once there was a fire and the second story was removed, that designation was irretrievably lost. This loss is the community center’s gain.
Consolidating the tax lots into one single parcel dramatically alters the possibility for the footprint of any proposed structure. The Sampson house could be removed and the Miller house could remain and be used for offices and storage needs of the center. This would allow the new center design the option of removing similar space, thereby allowing other rooms to be expanded. With a single tax lot, the new structure can even be joined to the Miller house so that it becomes part of the design.
What I am proposing here does not involve any city money or expense. The city would not operate the center, but would sell the land or simply lease it for a nominal price on a fifty-year lease… say a dollar a year. The lease would be of value to the community center board when seeking grants to build the center. Either way it reduces the land and buildings inventory the city now finds itself with. Site maintenance and management would be transferred to the lease-holder thereby reducing city expenses.
It’s win-win for all parties. But it goes far beyond that. Its real value is in bringing together all the many elements in Jacksonville that would be using the center… and it brings more visitors into the city, precisely the reason cities build community centers.
It’s a bold plan but there will never be a better time to move forward. The cards are dealt. Why not play the hand?
Paul Becker is the current Mayor of Historic Jacksonville, Oregon.