City Hall Annexation Proposal
On Tuesday, June 2, 2026, the City Commission will consider purchasing the former LJWorld building (609 New Hampshire St and 603 Mass St) for the City Hall Annexation. City Hall needs more and better space for offices, large meetings, and other public spaces. A 2024 report about the City Hall renovation needs states that the "City Hall building supports 120 employees from multiple departments,” and that it needs, "extensive alterations to bring the current City Hall to code and modern standards. Additionally, the current building comprises 35,500 square feet while our space needs exceed 50,000 square feet to accommodate current needs and future growth." (For more details about City Hall’s needs, see slides 16-23.)
The June 2026 report states that “Multistudio and City staff evaluated all submissions using a comprehensive set of criteria” that included downtown location, total building size, “flexibility to accommodate large departments and future growth”, structural conditions, parking, and total cost. Of three buildings shortlisted, “The World Building at 609 New Hampshire Street and 603 Massachusetts scored highest across all categories, providing the best combination of size, condition, and location while supporting the City Commission’s direction to remain downtown.” “Should the City Commission vote to approve the purchase, staff will move to close the transaction by July 20, 2026.”
This purchase may be the appropriate choice for the City, but the City should first ask these questions about this project:
Does the City actually need as much space as the old LJWorld buildings provide? If not, could they use a creative renovation that would allow them to generate revenue from the unneeded portion of the building?
Could the City use some existing municipal spaces to reduce the amount of space needed in an annexation?
Can the City afford a $23M annexation, especially given the City’s current debt load?
Considerations
Our coalition advocates for staff to provide transparent and comprehensive information about issues before the Commission to guarantee they will have all data needed to make the best decisions for our community. I believe that our community and the Commission would benefit from more information about this proposal to determine if it is the appropriate solution to the City’s needs, and these are some details of this proposal and related issues that I believe deserve continued examination.
Finances - Purchasing this annex would initially cost $2.1M, but the report indicates that this decision would commit the City to a project totaling $23M.The CIty’s Capital Improvement Plan does not currently include this proposed expense, and our coalition’s research about the City debt raises concerns about adding more, substantial debt-financed projects to the City’s budget.
I believe this allocation would be in addition to the $12.5M that the Commission has approved for City Hall renovations. The report says that the initial $2.1M to buy these new buildings would be taken from this $12.5 allocated for City Hall, but I assume the City also needs the full $12.5M for City Hall.
If the City were to spend $23M for the annex and $12.5M for City Hall, they would invest $35.5M in a space that currently houses 120 people, and also serves a public meeting space for the community. This would equal about $300,000 for each employee in these spaces. If staffing increases as projected in the 2024 report (slide 14), the cost per employee would approach $180,000.
Plans - We cannot find any reports outlining the City Hall renovation plans, so it is unclear what needs will be met by the $12.5M City Hall renovation versus this $23M annex. We believe this information should be provided in evaluating whether this purchase necessary and appropriate.
Needs - Future staff growth is a primary justification for the annexation. The 10-year growth analysis chart from the consultants’ initial report says that the City anticipates adding 46 more employees into City Hall, including 19 more in Planning and Development (slide 14). According to the chart, this is an expected 30% increase in employees in 10 years. However, the City's population is not increasing, and the City is currently reducing staff to align with budget constraints. This implies that the space planned for a new annex should be adjusted to align with current staffing estimates.
Total Space - The June 2, 2026 report says the City would use 40,200 of the old LJWorld building for the City Hall annex. If all of the existing City Hall space is also used, the City would have 75,700 square feet of space – 22,700 more than the 53,000 square feet this report says they need.
Other Options for Space - Coalition members are curious if there are any other existing buildings that could serve some of the City’s needs, which could reduce the scale of the anticipated annexation renovations and their costs.
MSO Campus - The City has just invested $130M in their new MSO campus. Our coalition has found limited information about this facility’s space and accommodations, and we would like to know if any spaces in this campus could support any of City Hall’s expansion needs. It would be valuable for the City to share more details about this campus as part of this discussion.
Riverfront Property - The City is set to acquire the riverfront property next April, which is currently operating as a hotel. While we are aware that parts of the building have serious structural issues that require demolition, we are curious if any parts of this existing building could be retained and renovated.
County Commission Chambers - The County recently renovated their Commission chambers, making them larger than the current City Commission chambers, with improved acoustics and technology. Our coalition advocates for collaboration between our local governments, and some members have wondered if the City Commission could share the County Commission’s chambers, rather than completely remodeling theirs. (The current City Commission chambers could continue to be used for many meetings, especially if the City improved the acoustics and audio-visual equipment.)
The Carnegie Building - One of the City’s needs is for larger meeting spaces. The City owns the Carnegie Building, but, as those of us who attended last week’s City Manager candidate Meet and Greet experienced, this building has terrible acoustics for large groups. Could the City make use of this existing, beautiful, and historic space by improving the acoustics and audio-visual equipment, rather than building a new large meeting space?
