A majority of residents say they would support the construction of a new community and senior center to serve the Hopewell Valley community.
At a July 10 special meeting of the Hopewell Township Committee, Ken Zeldis of Zeldis Research Associates presented findings based on a survey that was taken by more than 500 respondents from the Hopewell Valley in the spring.
The goal of the survey was to gauge interest in a possible senior or community center. The survey report showed that 59 percent of respondents said they would be interested in seeing a new community center constructed. A further 28 percent said “maybe” they were interested. Twelve percent were not interested, according to the report.
A community center is of particular interest to the senior population of the Hopewell Valley. With the current facility on Reading Avenue in Pennington in need of costly repairs and due to close in December, older residents are concerned about continuity of services.
The Hopewell Township Senior Advisory Board, which was created partially to reach the goal of building a new senior center, is on record as opposing the survey because it was created without the advice of the board. The board had voted 5-0 to reject the survey on May 17, prior to the survey being sent out, because they weren’t involved in its development.
In an interview a few days after the July 10 meeting, Township Committee member and Senior Advisory Board liaison Kristen McLaughlin said the frustration of the seniors came from not only a survey that was made without their insight, but one that proposes a community center rather than a senior center.
“The Senior Advisory Board was formed to support senior activities in the valley and to work towards a senior center. The seniors, for years, have wanted a bigger space for their activities than their current space,” McLaughlin said.
The advisory board will be getting a special presentation explaining the results later this summer, she said.
In the survey, the conceptual community center that respondents were asked to give opinions on would include a dedicated area for seniors, with a separate senior entrance. They could also indicate a preference for a seniors-only facility.
Even among seniors, the results show greater support for a center to serve the entire community than one just for seniors. Fewer than one in four respondents ages 60 and over indicated a desire for a seniors-only facility to be built.
Preference for a senior facility over a community facility corresponded with the age of the respondents. While just 3 percent of people ages 30–59 would be interested in a seniors-only facility, that number went up to 35 percent for respondents 80 and older.
While the idea of a new senior center has long been under consideration, the planned December closure of the current senior center on Reading Avenue, used and funded by all three municipalities, has made this issue urgent. “The Pennington building is old and is need of some work. (In the meantime), the seniors definitely need a new space to continue the Mercer County Lunch Program, which provides nutritious meals to seniors everyday at the Pennington center.” McLaughlin said.
However, because of the Mercer at Play, program, in which the county offers $500,000 in matching grants to municipalities for the construction of areas of active recreation, the township included the idea of the community center, and not just a senior center, in the survey, McLaughlin said.
McLaughlin expects to have answers about how the senior lunch program will be administered by the end of the summer. “No one wants to see the nutrition program paused, as that’s critical to the health of some,” she said.
After the survey presentation on July 10, committee member Vanessa Sandom asked Zeldis how the survey results track with what he’s learned through other surveys. He replied that the Hopewell Valley results are quite similar to others in the region. Sandom said, “it seems to be across the ages that there is interest in a multi-facility community center. This is one tool that we’ll use to figure out what we want to do.”
Ryan Kennedy, president of the Board of Directors for the Hopewell Valley YMCA thanked “the committee for bringing up this issue to the forefront of discussion. Our data has shown again and again that Hopewell Valley seniors want some sort of senior center.”
While the Committee seemed to be in agreement that the results were conclusive, not everyone was quite satisfied. Former mayor Harvey Lester questioned the validity of the results based on the fact that only 508 people took the survey—less than 5 percent of the population of the three municipalities in the Hopewell Valley.
Zeldis said that Zeldis Research Associates used proven sampling techniques to account for the limitations to the respondent pool.
In addition to asking if they wanted to see a community center built, respondents were also asked if they would like the community center to have a pool. Among those ages 30–59 who showed interest in a community center, 70 percent said they would like to see a facility with a pool.
Older residents were less on board with the pool option. Forty-two percent of those ages 60 and up would be interested in a facility with a pool. That number dropped to 22 percent among respondents ages 80 and above.
Residents of Hopewell Valley over the age of 30 were able to take the online survey between May 9 and June 6. Four hundred eighty-six residents filled out the survey online on the township website, while 22 had write-in interviews, for a total of 508 participants. Zeldis Research Associates used these responses as a basis for statistical sampling of the Hopewell Valley population. For the majority of the report, the findings were based on those who expressed at least some level of interest in a new center.
A survey regarding the possibility of a senior center conducted in 2009 provided similar results. But Mercer County rules required a more recent survey with regard to the Mercer at Play program.
“The survey was (re)done because it was the first step that all three municipalities were required to take in order to apply for a Mercer County grant. The grant offers $500,000 in matching per municipality,” McLaughlin said. With three municipalities involved, this could offer $1.5 million in grants, which would be matched by another $1.5 million by the municipalities, all towards a new center.
Sixty-eight percent of respondents said they would like a new facility to be built within two years. Proposed locations included Route 31 near the ShopRite and Scotch Road. Overall there was no preference shown on the location, although older respondents did prefer the Scotch Road proposal.
More than half of those interested in a center want a per-use fee, while a quarter want a monthly membership format. A majority of respondents are also willing to pay a $.01 levy per $100 to support a new center.
For those who wanted a multi-use facility, the general interest lay in fitness and education programs. For respondents over 60, the most interest was in educational services, followed by special events and intergenerational programs.
* * *
Along with hosting the lunch program, the current senior center also holds Explorations, an “education program for seniors. I think the program now has to go outside of that Pennington building, because there’s just not enough space,” McLaughlin said.
The next step for Hopewell in building a center will be to create a “financial model of what we want to do. We’re investigating different funding models, such as public-private, public only, et cetera, to make it financially stable and secure. Once we have that, we can start talking about figuring out a location,” McLaughlin said.
Hopewell Township put $10,000 into its budget to start the design process for the senior center, she added.
In the meantime, McLaughlin suggests that all Hopewell Valley residents look at the survey results, available at haveyoursayhopewelltwp.org. There is an area of the website where community members can make comments and ask questions about the possible new center.
“I think, with the survey results in hand, and the grants available, now is the time for us to finally make a home for the seniors and include the broader community. Now we just have to get to work, pull all the pieces together, and make something happen,” McLaughlin said.
McLaughlin does not believe that residents should expect a sudden change. “Getting all the players on the same page takes effort and time. Nothing in government moves quickly, and nor should it, because you come to a more thoughtful result when you take your time developing your ideas,” she said.
However, the township will be focusing on the issue in the coming months. “What’s clear from these results is that the residents want us to take action,” Hopewell Township mayor Kevin Kuchinski said at the meeting.
The next Township Committee meeting will be on Aug. 28.
* * *
At the same meeting, the township Environmental Commission introduced a resolution urging Congress to place some form of tax on companies for carbon emissions. Michael Aucott of the commission described the resolution and the idea as “something that has bipartisan support. It would be a way of cutting carbon emissions, and the Environmental Commission urges you to vote yes.”
Committee member John Hart opposed the resolution. “There’s no scientific research that carbon is the cause of global warming, and it looks like there’s going to be a tax on companies that produce carbon. I’m not ready to jump on the global warming bandwagon,” Hart said.
Deputy mayor Julia Blake provided an opposite view, stating that “not only am I willing to jump on the bandwagon, I’m willing to push it.”
Aucott compared this bill to a “kind of fire insurance. The risk of not having it is huge compared to the cost of having it.”
Nora Sirbaugh, chairman of the Environmental Commission, gave a few thoughts before the vote. “We are driven by decisions by the fact that there are people behaving badly, selfishly, or with a myopic view,” she said. “We’re in this together, we care about our kids, our families, our futures. This carbon tax probably mitigates the government interference, because it’s structured to give back. This is meant to improve people’s behavior.
The resolution was then passed 4-1, with Hart opposed.
The current senior facility on Reading Avenue in Pennington is in need of costly repairs and is due to close in December. (Staff photo by Joe Emanski.),
