I thought I would make my way up to the UMass Dartmouth Bed Bath & Beyond campus to see how the arts students are doing.
The answer is they’re not.
Astonishingly, even though the semester has begun, and these students are paying big money tuition and fees to the university, there is no learning space for them.
I talked to a construction guy who said he had not yet received instructions from the university on how to renovate the space. He was a very nice gentleman, so I hope he’s not in the dog house with UMass officials for talking to a member of the press about what the local public university is doing. Or not doing.
Related
He was doing the right thing by being straightforward. The local university has set a poor example by being anything but straightforward through this whole Star Store mess.
Here’s what I saw there: The former Bed Bath & Beyond store is roomy and lit brightly with fluorescent lights, and its air-conditioning is certainly welcome with this late-summer heat wave. An expansive one-floor room is divided up by floor-to-ceiling shelves, and you can see the boxes of the Master of Fine Arts students lining some of the areas that I guess will eventually be their studios.
Some of the smaller, electric kilns that the ceramics students use have been moved there, but I saw no sign of the bigger, heavy-duty brick ovens that were built into the downtown New Bedford building. The looms for the fiber students are there, and they are all crowded into one of the big cubicle spaces for the time being.
It’s not that the B, B & B digs are horrible. They’re not. But they are very definitely not the urban arts campus that the UMass students contracted with the university for when they agreed to come to this wonderful New Bedford arts college. And this inappropriate Route 6 campus is very definitely one more example of how the state university system of Massachusetts has somehow become like a private corporation, beholden only to the bottom line and the private-sector funding model of university president Martin Meehan and his rubber-stamp board of trustees.
The Massachusetts state university system should be primarily funded by the state taxpayers — as the state college system is — and not student tuition and fees, and private-sector donors seeking their names on buildings or colleges. That’s a wrong-headed funding system that the Massachusetts President’s Office and board has bought into in recent years after a succession of state legislatures and governors failed to adequately fund higher education in Massachusetts.
The concept of a public university embraced by Meehan and the university board of trustees is narrow and unworkable, particularly for the universities that serve lower-income areas like Boston and Greater New Bedford. It is far more close-fisted than the public university funding systems are in far more conservative states.
The gifted and enterprising UMass Dartmouth MFA students, however, who have come from across the country to be at this public arts school are trying to hang on, but it’s a challenge.
“The facilities won’t be ready for at least another two weeks,” wrote Fallon Navarro to me. Fallon is one of the student heroes of this whole bureaucratic cluster, er … interaction.
“We were told the day before the semester started (Wednesday, Sept. 6),” she said. “And they still won’t give an exact time as to when we can access them.”
I hope these students are talking to a lawyer for a class-action lawsuit. What President Meehan and his local enforcer, Chancellor Mark Fuller, have done to them is nothing short of outrageous.
Meanwhile, the news about the efforts to re-establish the UMD College of Visual and Performing Arts campus in New Bedford seems to get more discouraging, instead of more encouraging, every day.
In response to some of the latest news, Sen. Mark Montigny’s office issued a press statement this week that puts into context some of the posturing of local officials, but also some of their earnest efforts.
Everyone, it seems, is trying to fix what the UMass university system and governing board have wrought. But no one seems to have the political will to do it. Which, to be clear, will involve Greater New Bedford, and its elected leaders, being very firm that they will no longer support the funding of the Massachusetts university system in any way until this abuse of its mission is addressed.
The Montigny statement was issued by Audra Riding, Montigny’s very sharp general counsel and legislative director. Riding, as much as anyone, has tried to bring light to what’s really going on with the state university system’s determination to abandon both its fine arts programs and the city of New Bedford.
First off, Montigny addressed Mayor Mitchell’s offer, announced on WBSM-AM this week, to have the city purchase the Star Store for a dollar and then have the state or the university pay for its maintenance.
The state senator as much as said that that’s an idea that’s going nowhere.
“The city had control of this property years ago but unfortunately gave it away to the developer for a buck,” Montigny’s statement said. “With property taxes at very high levels, city taxpayers simply cannot afford the capital necessary for Star Store.”
Montigny understandably doesn’t want city control of a building that the state is paying for, even if UMass remains recalcitrant. “The building must be transferred and if UMass is unwilling to accept direct responsibility, then we will direct another state entity,” his statement said.
To be fair to Mitchell, the mayor had made it clear he did not expect city taxpayers to absorb the cost of maintenance, the way that it does for the Zeiterion Performing Arts Center and the Art Museum buildings, which the city also owns. But even so, if the Star Store is going to return to being a public university downtown arts campus — which is really the primary goal here — then it should be a state building, and it should be the property of some arm of the state government. If the university is determined not to have an arts campus in New Bedford beyond anything but a token presence, then the state government should instruct the state to take the building by some other arm of state government, as Montigny said in his statement.
Informed of Montigny’s statement, Mitchell issued an “updated” version of his original press release blaming all the parties but himself for the removal of the New Bedford campus. He described the city ownership of the Star Store as a possible solution, where the maintenance would be funded by the state. He acknowledged that state ownership is preferable and like Montigny, again contended it’s all up to UMass.
Which it would be, if the university is independent of the state Legislature and governor in Massachusetts, which I don’t think it is. There is a small thing called annual funding, controlled by the state Legislature and whoever is governor.
Second off, Montigny addressed former Mayor Scott Lang’s terrific suggestion that solving this is simple: Get all the players, including the university officials and developer Paul Downey in the same room, and work out a deal. Even a deal that may involve paying Downey off if he insists he has a right to the building.
The statement from Montigny’s office argues that this would be inappropriate, given that Downey has conveyed to the state his opposition to the transfer of the Star Store building to the university. The senator seems to be implying that the developer and the state may wind up in court against each other. Montigny’s statement even goes so far as to say that dealing with Downey could endanger students, given his track record.
“It would be highly inappropriate to invite a private developer who has signaled an adversarial position regarding the building’s transfer into any meeting where state funding or other assets are to be discussed,” wrote the author of Montigny’s statement. “Further monies into those coffers without accountability for the horrible lack of maintenance would be irresponsible and potentially risk a literal ceiling collapse upon students and their studios.”
Wow.
This does not sound like Montigny is in the mood for a win-win with Downey.
The longtime state senator has contended that the developer failed to do the major maintenance that the building needed, despite being paid tens of millions of dollars over 20 years in leases for the building. UMass Dartmouth has contended that the $415,000 a year for maintenance taken out of the $2.3 to $2.7 million that Downey received from the state was short of the amount needed for “common maintenance,” never mind major building issues.
Fine. If Montigny does not want Downey to be privy to state officials’ discussions, then do the negotiations by way of shuttle diplomacy as Mitchell has said he is doing.
I get it that Montigny is trying to hold his own with the interests of the state. And it must be frustrating when others are negotiating through the press, but the fact is that Montigny up to now has said so little about the specifics of solutions, that everything is in freefall.
To me, that is exactly what the university wants. The more time goes by, the more difficult they think it will be for the state to move them back to the Star Store.
Thirdly, Montigny dismissed the published reports, including by this author, quoting state Rep. Tony Cabral’s Facebook announcement that Gov. Maura Healey has agreed to schedule a meeting with the New Bedford legislative delegation.
I’ll point out, by the way, that that Cabral letter to the governor was not signed by two of the five members of the New Bedford House delegation, state Reps. Chris Markey and Bill Straus. It is only penned by Cabral, and state Reps. Chris Hendricks and Paul Schmid.
How’s that for local unity on such an important issue?
Here’s the cold water that Montigny’s office poured on the idea that Healey is actively engaged with the delegation:
“Contrary to circulating reports, the Governor’s office informed us that there is no meeting scheduled with the delegation at this time although they have acknowledged the meeting requests from both the Senator as well as the House members.”
The statement goes on to state that Montigny remains in “constant communication” with Administration and Finance Secretary Matthew Gorzkowicz to help identify ways to “keep the CVPA presence at Star Store.”
Presence? That sounds like it might be signaling for something less than a full campus, but I digress.
You can see what the problem here is. There are still too many people with dug-in positions, and too few people trying to solve the problem. That is, unless the Legislature and governor really don’t want to solve the problem. Have they actually bought into the university’s argument that the state can’t afford an arts college in downtown New Bedford?
The legislative chess game is not all that is going on here.
A week after I reported that developer Downey’s Star Store Holdings LLC paid $90,000 in the last two years for lobbying, the only person or state entity that has acknowledged he was lobbied is state Rep. Markey. The rest of the key players in the delegation say they were not.
That leaves the state government bureaucracy — the Division of Capital Asset Management and Maintenance (DCAMM) and the UMass Building Authority (UMBA) — as the two likeliest targets of the Downey lobbying, in my opinion.
Neither of them has responded to my inquiry last week as to whether they were lobbied, or supplied information to my public records request as to whether they were lobbied. DCAMM oversees the destiny of all state buildings and UMBA, as its name implies, oversees university building and renovation projects.
It’s worth restating that Chancellor Fuller has identified both agencies as virtually forbidding the university from purchasing the Star Store for $1, as the Montigny-created legislation has called for. If you think UMBA is not paying attention to Meehan’s office even more than Fuller’s, then you don’t know how Massachusetts politics or the state university system works.
Something doesn’t add up here.
Prominent local figures have suggested to me that there needs to be an investigation or public hearings. Legislators, however, have already said they don’t have that power in Massachusetts.
It may be time for Attorney General Andrea Campbell or state Auditor Diane DiZoglio to get involved. There is a ballot question upcoming about whether DiZoglio has the right to audit the Legislature. She may or may not, but she certainly has the right to audit DCAMM and UMBA. In addition, Attorney General Campbell certainly has the right to investigate.
All of this is maddening.
When I first arrived in New Bedford as a reporter for The Standard-Times 24 years ago, local people told me that this was a forlorn part of the state, a place with a long depressed economy and a state government in Boston that had long ago abandoned it.
I remember thinking it sounded like so much defeatism. I had never lived in a place where the local population was so down on itself, so utterly convinced that there was no hope of progress.
But over the last 2½ decades, with good leadership by a succession of local state legislators, mayors and city councils, Greater New Bedford has made palpable progress. The College of Visual and Performing Arts was a major part of that progress.
Sure, there have been failures. The ill-fated casino, the Oceanarium, the delays and settling for the second-best route for passenger rail, and the delays in coming up with a dynamic plan for redeveloping the State Pier. But it always seemed that Greater New Bedford was on the right trajectory after decades in the doldrums. Until now.
This debacle with the UMass Dartmouth fine arts campus makes one wonder. Is local defeatism all just coming around again?
Email columnist Jack Spillane at jspillane@newbedfordlight.org.
All very interesting and very believable showing the poor inaction by the electeds. DCAMM does have clout but they also defer to electeds in many scenarios such as this. (Remember who controls agency annual budgets.) Been there, seen that. Mr. Spillane you could write a good story by speaking with the DCAMM leasing office about this.
The article sheds light on an important issue that needs to be addressed. It’s great to see people like the construction guy speaking up and advocating for the arts students. Their determination and resilience is admirable.
Thanks.
Thank you so much, Jack, for your extensive and heart-felt reporting on this whole situation.
Thanks once,again Jack for straight reporting and following the money and stench of local state politics. UMASS local and state pols have destroyed CVPA STAR STORE dumpsters parked outside their final goodbye of disrespect. When I came back to Nb from NYC in 90s empty Star Store w falling Terra cotta sign of Dtowns decline..Star Store where my aunt had worked for years creating beautifully wrapped gifts was a mess..then resurrection w CVPA w its creative energy..Mayor Mitchell called Union st Nbs porch..well Mayor they just ripped it apart..what now? Will they take Langs sugg put on their big boy and girl pants and work it out or just let Nb slide back to the days
of dysfunction decline and loss of hope.Mitchell once Said “Every great city has to have a great dtown”They just put a nail in the coffin of Nbs ..can they pull it out? So much for saving a Gateway city! As for Umass I’m all SET w them!
.
We need to get back to using actual facts? What was the total rent paid from the lease? I remember $40m… what’s the total cost of the maintenance backlog? I remember $30m… UMD, with declining enrollment, is in no position to absorb a building with
We need to get back to using actual facts, and not emotional nostalgia, so that we have a common basis from which to analyze this. What was the total rent paid from the lease? I remember $40m… what’s the total cost of the maintenance backlog? I remember $30m… ? UMD, with declining enrollment, is in no position to absorb a building with $30m in immediate needs, and then annual costs of X, particularly when the U has to take into account how many students in those majors, and how many were actually using the space. What was the traffic count? I remember it being said that it was down to 60 or so students, and that wasn’t even daily use. There’s no way the Univ. can afford this. As far as the UMass system being funded by the state — that shipped has sailed, over 20 years ago. This is true nationally. Mass was late to the game on public-private partnerships and instead raised tuition and fees to make up for the shortfall, leading to it being one of the highest cost in-state tuitions in the country. Meehan made Lowell a major university because he saw this and used his connections to get local employers (often major defense contractors) to fund buildings, chairs, etc, as was being done around the country. UMD never did that, and with this region’s economy it was never going to be easy. Even in MA, the private university system is a major industry and the private sector had their universities to pick from in whom they wanted to partner with (See Emmanuel and Merck, and the health care systems in the Longwood area.) I wish we could have a symposium where all this could be flushed out (but the days of meaningful dialogue seem to be gone.) But we need to separate the outdated idea that the University is an economic engine, and it’s presence downtown can spur the economic development with artsy students and their vibe, leading to studios, tourism, eclectic restaurants, etc. That may have been the case, but it’s no longer true – and the Univ needs to put itself on a sustainable path and this bldg is jetsam that must be discarded to prevent the ship itself from sinking. This is a harsh reality that cannot be avoided. Consider this: UMD has declining enrollment while UMass Amherst is bursting – and more competitive than ever. Their rejected applicants are not turning to UMD. That’s a failure, especially when private tuitions are totally out of reach for so many. UMD needs to put together a plan for majors for the future: allied health, cannabis, entrepreneurship to take over small, older family businesses, agriculture, tourism, etc. It desperately needs new ideas to climb out of its downward trajectory and that’s why they evacuated Star Store, like it was Saigon in April of ’75.
$30 million in immediate needs? Says who, the Chancellor? (And I think they said $50 million) Where’s the list and who prepared it and is it accurate? If you think that building is falling apart, there’s a bridge down the street I’d like to sell you. Walking around downtown in 2000 was totally unlike downtown today. Residences, shops, nightlife, restaurants and eateries, building values, traffic to and from the waterfront…you may not think the art school had anything to do with it. That’s a minority opinion among everyone who’s in the downtown. You’re right about UMD being clueless about its future. Maybe Meehan has to tackle UMD’s future by adding rather than retracting. It seems to me that the traditional arts, combined with the burgeoning field of electronic arts is a pretty strong combo if promoted properly and placed downtown. (Maybe with a minor in canibbis.)UMD can’t afford the building? What’s been spent has been spent, with the desired downtown impacts largely achieved. UMD didn’t “go under” during that time and it won’t now. Going forward, UMD would pay $1 for a building that’s in sound condition. Again, where is the detailed and accurate list of deficiencies organized in a timeframe? No one has seen it. It’s an excuse, a good tag line. Saigon ‘75 was one of the lowest points in American foreign policy. The ruthless, cut throat abandonment of the building and its students, stealth-like days before the start of the semester is one of UMD’s lowest points in history.
Headline: Jack Spillane needs to get out more often.
Jack states that “Greater New Bedford was on the right trajectory after decades in the doldrums,” as though the rest of the state hasn’t been shooting for the moon and beyond.
New Bedford is the official gutter of Massachusetts.
Crap rolls down hill to settle here. The surrounding “suburbs” are all suffering from being depressed by New Bedford’s consistent failure to perform at the trajectory of the rest of the state. Pick almost any other community at random in Massachusetts and see what they have accomplished, built and attracted to their community over the last 25 years and you’ll see why New Bedford, under ever single administration including the current one is an embarrassment. Even the fancy new wind farm terminal isn’t benefiting more than a handful of New Bedford residents. Stop kidding yourself and get out of the area a bit more to smell the bouquet of roses that the rest of the state enjoys while we hold one wilted blossom down here and keep listening to washed-out cheerleading online columnist say: “It just needs some water and a nice vase”.
Maybe I missed something about those “suffering” suburbs that have grown quite rapidly over the last 50 years. Have they suffered from New Bedford? Not so much. The City provides water and sewage to some. It educates high school students from the surrounding towns both at the high school and Voke. The city’s downtown, however, was ravaged by a suburban mall. The city has long ago met its legal obligation, (and has exceeded it) for low income/affordable housing. Only Dartmouth has done so. The suburbs have no trouble leaving that regional burden to New Bedford. New Bedford assists Dartmouth in the expensive task of solid waste disposal. In the process of extending roadways to Crapo Hill, the City helped open large tracts in Dartmouth for industrial develpment. The city led the campaign for rail extension, an important means of opening access for job opportunities in Boston. While the stations are in New Bedford there is no doubt suburbanites will avail themselves of those trains. The city met its legal obligation to clean the river and bay of sewage and pollution to the benefit of Acushnet, Fairhaven and Dartmouth.
New Bedford surely has its share of persistent problems but Spillane is quite correct about its upward trajectory these past few decades. Not to acknowledge progress while bemoaning the problems is unfair and inaccurate.
Boy was Jack Spillane spot on about New Bedfords pied pipers of negative doom and gloom coming out of the,woodwork on the,Star,Store discussion aka Oliveras “Jetsom” and Simpsons ” NB is just a,gutter”.Wow do these folks hate the city..wonder why they stay here? Firstly to Olivera’s $ fact or the 30 million dollar maintenance ? Why did UMASS defer, maintenance on CVPA when they had 20 yrs to seek it and,were given a totally renovated bldg.Fact David ..Umass spent 20million$ on renov Carelton college of business, 134 million on construction of new dorms in Dartmouth and been given 70 million $ to renovate LIberal arts bldg..whats that 200 million and they can’t afford to fix Star store..talk about fuzzy math..NO TRUTH IS Umass D doesn’t want an Artsy college or artsy kids because it isn’t profitable enuf for them..never mind that it spun off ENTREPRENEURIAL small business DTown ..Did Umass CVPA need to think outside the box..expand into digital graphic art..the business of Art..most definitely as Kat Knutson has suggested..most definitely partner w local companies like Titilist or Joseph Abboud as the,successful models of,Maine college of design in Portland and Savanah Art college has done w Lacoste in France ABSOLUTELY 💯 but to throw the baby out w the bathwater has just lowered the flag for UMASS in the south coast and finally as far,as,Amherst bursting at the,seams its where Meehan and the state has sunk all of its money and resources in a PUBLIC univ which is one of the most expensive in the country draws many international students who pay higher tuitions,to make it competitive w the Harvards Mits BU’s and Tufts.Finally William Rotch Benjamin Rodman James Arnold these were entrepreneurs who invested in New Bedford and kept their capital here..Paul Downey and the Umass system are just carpetbaggers looking for a,quick fix abandoning the city on a dime!