What’s next for Next?

At the February 10 meeting of the Birmingham City Commission, I spoke in opposition to a proposed special election seeking taxpayer approval for a $30 million bond to construct a “Community Center” at 400 East Lincoln. The new facility would primarily serve as a permanent home for NEXT, the nonprofit serving senior citizens in Beverly Hills, Birmingham, Bingham Farms and Franklin.

I had three messages for the city staff and commissioners: The bond request had zero chance of passing; stop telling NEXT they’re getting a $30 million home, essentially rent-free forever; and instruct your ad hoc committee to explore alternative options.

My testimony ended with this warning: “If you don’t change course, the biggest loser will be Next.”

Eight months later, the commission voted 5-2 not to place a bond request on the November general election ballot. What wasn’t determined was what options are being explored. There’s concern that city officials are crafting a lease with Next for 400 East Lincoln that would evict the YMCA and transfer to Next all operational and maintenance obligations.

Any lease between the City of Birmingham and Next should mirror the city’s current lease with the YMCA, clearly stating that 100 percent of the operational costs for the building are the responsibility of the tenant (Next). This would include, but not be limited to, utilities (water, sewer, electricity, and natural gas), roof and wall maintenance, HVAC maintenance and/or replacement, property and liability insurance, janitorial services, landscape maintenance, snow and ice removal, and pool maintenance.

What would that cost Next? It’s estimated that the YMCA is currently spending between $500,000 to $600,000 annually to cover operating expenses. At a recent meeting of the Ad Hoc Senior/ Recreation Committee, a $260,000 number was casually discussed with no detail to support that figure.

Proposals to shift some city offices to the building and shut down whole floors would offer insignificant savings. Without the YMCA, which has made it clear they’re no longer interested in being a co-tenant, Next would shoulder the cost of maintaining the swimming pool, which cannot be “mothballed” as has been suggested, without destroying it. How ironic that the one feature of the building Birmingham taxpayers said they wanted was the pool, which would be the very feature denied them.

Fortunately, the MOU, crafted carefully by the city, took the possibility of insurmountable difficulties and better options into consideration. It states: If for some reason a mutually agreeable lease arrangement between the City of Birmingham and Next fails to be achieved, then in a showing of good faith, the city will return the Five Hundred Thousand ($500,000) contribution from Next toward the purchase price of the property.”

The city should cut Next a check and start from scratch.

Commissioners made the right decision to keep the bond request off the November ballot. They now need, with open minds, to ask two questions: What opportunities and sources of financial support for Next are available in Birmingham as well as Bingham Farms, Beverly Hills and Franklin? And is the YMCA committed to staying in Birmingham long term?

Until these questions are answered, commissioners should not even look at a lease.

I end with the warning I gave to the city and commission back in February: “If you don’t change course, the biggest loser will be Next.”

Paul Reagan

Birmingham