|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Three months after a state agency and New Bedford’s mayor endorsed a waterfront spot for an energy research and development center, the project is in limbo in face of City Council opposition.
A city-owned parking lot between Merrill’s on the Waterfront and the Fairfield Inn & Suites will stay as it is for the time being; the state has suspended pursuit of that location. But the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (CEC) is still pursuing the project.
Although it’s not clear exactly where in the city, the agency is focused on New Bedford as the site of the Ocean Renewable Energy Innovation Center, devoted to research and business development for new, ocean-based alternative energy technology, including wind power.
“It’s certainly not dead,” public information officer Jonathan Darling said in mid-December, weeks after the state agency halted its effort to win City Council approval of a proposed lease for that parking lot and a portion of the historic stone-block Bourne Counting House next to it. Mayor Jon Mitchell supported that location.
The agency planned to use a part of the counting house on MacArthur Drive for offices and meeting space. It also aimed to put up a building to accommodate startup companies and a space for building prototypes for ocean-related energy gear — chiefly, but not exclusively, wind power.
Two council members and one property owner have objected to the location, saying they feel the project is out of place on the waterfront and would interfere with existing businesses. One council member questioned whether the proposed 15-year lease is the best possible deal for that property.
In a recent interview, At-large Councilor Linda Morad said she was not opposed to the project itself, but she said the location would interfere with existing businesses, and take up space that trucks need to conduct daily commerce.
“Why put something in front of the restaurant?” Morad said, referring to Merrill’s. “I am hoping it’s dead there,” she said of the project location. She said it appeared the location did not have enough support on the council.
Darling said the city has been in frequent contact with CEC officials, but he could provide no further details other than to say that the work continues.
“It’s not off,” Darling said, referring further questions to the agency about the future of the Innovation Center, which had been slated to open in 2026.
If not that spot, where?
The state agency is saying little about where the project stands now. In November, it withdrew a proposed 15-year lease from consideration by the council’s Committee on City Property.
In an email response, the agency said it is reviewing the project schedule, budget and possible sites. A written statement from Bruce Carlisle, managing director of offshore wind at the CEC, implied that New Bedford is still being considered.
“MassCEC remains steadfast in its mission to advance the climate tech industry and create good jobs in the South Coast region and across Massachusetts,” Carlisle said.
Carlisle said that the investments included in the Mass Leads Act — a measure supported by Gov. Maura Healey and adopted in 2023 to foster economic development — “will build on New Bedford’s already strong ocean innovation economy and lengthen the city’s lead in this industry.”
The agency said New Bedford is being considered for the Innovation Center, not other communities. The state chose the MacArthur Drive spot from five locations in New Bedford that were winnowed from an original list of seven possible locations.
The state had committed to bankroll the entire $15 million estimated cost of launching the project. Of that sum, $10 million was supposed to be coming through the state from the federal American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA), the pandemic-relief program.
The agency said that the funds allocated under ARPA have been committed to the project, and would have to be spent by the end of 2026.
The CEC’s schedule had called for work on the Innovation Center to begin in early 2025, with operations starting in the summer of 2026.
Mayor Jon Mitchell championed the project for continuing efforts to make the city a center of ocean-based alternative energy development.
“We have built out a great deal of the port over the last few years,” Mitchell said in September. “We also need a place where new innovation is materialized and commercialized so that we can continue to have a competitive edge over other ports.”
Opposition to waterfront site
One property owner, lawyer and retired Superior Court Judge Richard Moses, whose firm is in a building next to Merrill’s on Homer’s Wharf, wrote a three-page letter to the council in November objecting to the proposed center on that site.
“The claimed purpose of this building is to accommodate the offshore wind industry with little or no consideration of those who have invested in the City for decades and all of the people participating in the New Bedford Fishing Community,” Moses wrote.
He said the new building would interfere with area businesses, take up parking needed by Merrill’s and businesses in the Bourne Counting House, and disrupt truck traffic associated with the fishing industry.
When the full council first considered the proposed lease in late September, a few members expressed reservations, saying they’d heard from constituents opposed to the location.
The proposed center “has nothing to do with the working waterfront,” Morad said at the September meeting. She said she’d heard from people on the waterfront objecting to the location, and suggested the former Star Store and the soon-to-be vacant Hastings Keith federal building — both in downtown New Bedford blocks away from the waterfront — as alternative sites.
Ward 6 Councilor Ryan Pereira expressed reservations at the September meeting, and more recently questioned the lease terms.
“How can you justify that lease amount?” Pereira asked in a recent interview. “It’s not a good deal for the city at all.”
In a letter to the council, Mitchell said the project included no costs for the city. The lease called for the state to pay $38,000 a year to the city, adjustable each year to reflect inflation. Mitchell’s letter said that’s equal to the amount the New Bedford Port Authority receives in parking fees from the site.
Ward 2 Councilor Maria Giesta, who heads the Committee on City Property, said she opposed the location as potentially interfering with established waterfront businesses, especially fishing and fish processing. She has opposed offshore wind power development as an interloper on the waterfront, and a hazard to offshore fishing grounds.
Giesta said in an interview that the CEC contacted her to cancel the session.
“They said they needed some time to figure out stuff,” Giesta said
She added a broad statement about potential new port developments that are unrelated to fishing: “Changing anything on the waterfront is a big no for me.”
Email reporter Arthur Hirsch at ahirsch@newbedfordlight.org.
Linda Morad strikes again! Against anything and everything like the true CAVEwoman (citizen against virtually everything) she is. Next election can we please vote out these anchors holding back the city? Morad needs to be retired.
Wind jobs pay more than fishing.
And are far safer.
You can always count on NB council members to ensure NB stays in the economic dark ages and retains its position as the leading butt of jokes in the rest of the state. I’m actually surprised more haven’t expressed opposition.
What is the utilitarian reason to have a research center on waterfront property? There is a lot of underdeveloped, underutilized, or vacant property (with and without buildings) in various areas of New Bedford which could well serve the project purpose. It seems to me that the waterfront should remain available to those new projects that will demonstrate real value being in that specific area i.e. the current wind staging facility, seafood processing, docking and boat services, tourist facilities and businesses, ocean transportation etc.
It is great for the city that the state will allocate funding to this project in New Bedford where other alternative energy research and development activities are happening; having it located somewhere other than the waterfront may be a better alternative.
Is this considered a waterfront related project? That’s a requirement of the waterfront overlay zone. Not only that, it’s proposed next to a very significant historic building. The projection itself is a plus for the city but many are rightly questioning the location. Some have suggested vacant buildings such as the Federal building. Tgeee weee seven proposed sites: what were they and why were they rejected? Did the city participate in evaluating each? Did City Planning Department (nearly invisible these days) weigh in on a location? Is that rendering an accurate depiction of the design what’s proposed? If it is it should be rejected forthwith as inappropriate for that area. New Bedford can, and should be picky about the particulars of this important investment
I’m guessing existing buildings would cost a lot more to retrofit all research technology, office space, and other aspects like the building layout would probably be a lot less expensive when creating a new building than renovating any other existing buildings.
Over 10 years of John Mitchell and every year taxes have gone up. We have a bloated city budget that continues grow and the last thing our city needs is more nonprofits, state agencies, or new city operated buildings that do not contribute to our tax base. Time for a leadership change in City Hall, the taxpayers of New Bedford deserve better.
Another project Massachusetts, and New Bedford proposes to use ARPA (Federal tax dollars for pandemic relief) funds on, the federal debt is only $36 Trillion Dollars and growing daily with the interest on the debt costing Federal tax payers over $1 Trillion Dollars per year to pay the interest alone.
Everyone should remember this since everyone will be affected in 2035 when their Social Security, Disability, and Medicare benefits are cut by 13% and Social Security, and Medicare deductions are increased for both employers, and employees. For everyone who has felt the increased prices for everything from groceries, gas prices, utility bills, every type of insurance rates, and property taxes, look at your payroll deductions for SS & Medicare, and retirees look at your benefit checks and do the math, if you think it’s tough now, you should think about what it’s going to feel like in 10 short years, even more so for people who have little, to no retirement savings, and will have Social Security as their only source of income.
The ARPA money that wasn’t used to fund Pandemic relief needs exclusively should have taken that money back instead of wasted by Democrats in cities and states across America.