TOWN APPROVES FEASIBILITY STUDY
Gopal Shenoy
there were only 7 dissenting votes from about 1000 attendees.
SueZ
will now be a SPECIAL ELECTION FOR THE FEASIBILITY STUDY, which will
be a ballot vote requiring a simple majority. If this fails, there
will NOT be a Feasibility Study. It is important to understand this,
because as an example, the proposal for a new middle school 10 years
ago passed the Town Meeting, and then failed at the ballot election.
Watch the Grafton News for the date of the special election in June
and be prepared to vote!
Gopal Shenoy
people who
don't know either.
GEA should also send this out in their mailing so that everyone
involved knows
we are only half way there.
Gopal
carolin...@charter.net
come!!
EVERY VOTE WILL BE NEEDED!!
Caroline Alper
GEA
>
> - Show quoted text -
Registered_Voter
in vote last night. I think most people (with few exceptions) are in
favor of the study, it will give us, hopefully, a clear course of
action to move forward to solving a crowding issue we are faced with.
The building is only one part of the problem, we still are in a very
serious financial situation in Grafton. When the building (if it is a
new building) is built, where are we going to come up with the money
to operate this new building? Where are we going to get the money pay
for 50 teachers (1100 students @ 22 students per teacher), what about
all of the support staff? What about benefits for all this new
staff? It was stated last night what healthcare alone is costing the
town, and none of these costs seem to be going down, only up...
I get the sense that people are too fixated on a building and not
thinking systematically about the WHOLE issue. I would caution voters
to start thinking about the whole issue and not just getting a new
building. 2 hours were spent last night questioning what a lot of our
elected and volunteer officials spent many months on to ensure we have
a balanced budget.
Ultimately, the saddest part was right after article 20, I would guess
800 people vacated the building and did not stay for the rest of the
meeting. It is clear that there is an agenda focused only on schools;
we still need roads to get to the schools, we need fire and police
protection to ensure our children and ourselves are safe. We need to
be sure all the other services that people crave in town are going to
function.
I would again encourage voters to get involved in the process but not
just to satisfy their wants, think of the entire town, think of the
people and businesses in South Grafton whose safety is being
comprimized because of the pleasant street bridge, etc. Please think
of the entire picture, if we have great schools and everything is
sacrificed for that, it still hurts the value of our property and,
more importantly, our sense of community.
pankaj gupta
Financial conditions are bad now, but they will be good sooner or later.
We are working on to improve the schooling system, and the good schooling system would bring more value to the town.
We got passed first hurdle, many hurdles before dream will come true, so stay focused and do whatever you can do with positive attitude. We are doing it for our next generation, and they will always remember our contribution.
Good work team, keep it up. Please keep us informed, and let us know whatever help we can provide for this good cause.
Pankaj
--- On Tue, 5/13/08, Registered_Voter <mark...@gmail.com> wrote:
SueZ
operational costs for a new building, or an addition to existing
buildings, as the case may be. As for new teachers, books, etc, I do
believe that we will be looking at a 2 1/2 override in either or both
of the next 2 years, whether we build a new building or not.
(Modulars will also require teachers to staff them and desks/books to
fill them.) The fact is, without a commercial base of revenue, the 2
1/2 % ceiling is tough to maintain when the average cost of living
rises about 3 % per year. Virtually every community is guaranteed to
need a 2 1/2 override at some point, unless the housing market
suddenly turns around and housing values go up (which still increases
taxes, but does not require an override).
As for those who left after that vote, please keep in mind that most
of them were parents who moved mountains just to get to the meeting.
It is very difficult to find a babysitter on a school night who can
stay out until 12. It was certainly extremely late for my 13 year old
to be babysitting my other children, and she had MCAS testing today,
so my husband left early, although I did stay. Don't mistake it for
apathy. I think spending an hour talking about a police position that
we can't afford meant that most of those folks had already overstayed
their babysitters.
Lastly, short-term thinking in the past (I'm speaking specifically of
the defeat of the proposed middle school building 10 years ago) has
put us in the unfortunate position of our high school being on warning
at a very difficult financial time. Had we built that school, with
68% funding from the state, we may only be looking at a wing on the
high school now. But we have shortages from 6th grade up. Short term
planning has put us in a position where the school space issue can no
longer wait due to our accreditation suffering, and we can least
afford it.
Urb Dad
the tip of the iceberg. A feasibility study is one thing, but the
second this turns into a more significant tax increase (i.e. 2&1/2
override) its going to get infinitely more challenging, complicated,
and nasty. 1000 voters supporting the schools at yesterday's TM is
an awesome feel good moment, but I think its safe to say there are
1001 voters sitting at home ready to vote no without hesitation - the
second it comes to a legitimate tax increase. Just think of seniors
who are living on fixed incomes. They have very legitimate concerns
don't they?
I'll be the first in line to support a 2&1/2, but I am uber-
pessimistic. How many times have you heard of a successful 2&1/2
override?
SueZ
whatever it is, will not be easy to pass.
We are halfway to the Feasibility Study...the solution is a whole
other story. It will be a debt exclusion, not a 2 1/2 override, as it
will be temporary, but there will be a great deal of opposition,
whatever the solution turns out to be. There will need to be a lot of
education...for example, whatever the tax increase turns out to be,
the actual impact on overall property tax will in fact decrease over
time as other exclusions we are already paying for (eg. police
station) are ramping down and taken off the books at the same time.
I think a 2 1/2 override in the next couple of years for operational
expenses is a worst case scenario, but a real possibility. They do
pass, about 40% of the time, but are very difficult. I am not
generally for them. I just don't see where else we could cut, if we
have already cut significantly into areas like the police department
and the school department. I am losing patience with the "wants vs.
needs" argument. I don't believe "wanting" our kids to graduate from
an accredited high school is frivolous. We are already on warning,
BEFORE the cuts for next year.
I do sympathize with seniors on fixed incomes. I also sympathize with
families living paycheck to paycheck, now paying 200.00 to bus their
kids to school, and possibly facing future fees. I sympathize with
seniors who rent, and aren't subject to property taxes, who rely on
the senior center and other town services which may face cuts.
But I'm still optimistic! The economy will cycle around again. In
the meantime, I would love to see this town work through these things
as a community, and not an "us vs. them".
Gopal Shenoy
Doing nothing is not an option for the town. Unless we try, we will
fail.
We got to keep moving the process forward without the fear that this
may get defeated.
We get what we pay for - we cannot expect to keep taxes low and then
expect stellar services from the town. It is pure economics. All the
other
towns have the same population demographics as we have - seniors with
their own home, seniors renting, single parents, families with dual
income,
families with single income, unemployed, homeless etc. We are no
different.
Gopal
Registered_Voter
issue, I believe debt exclusion to pay for feasibility will pass
without any issues. I spoke with Amy Lanning from the MSBA yesterday
to get some clarification on what does come out of feasibility
studies. It does cover actual building costs and also putting
infrastructure in place (desks, boards, etc.), what is not covered
because they are such variables are: salaries, soft employment costs
(benefits, etc.), operational costs (lighting, HVAC), etc.
Those are the issues that may face greater scrutiny. Fortunately, we
will have a better sense of population once they study it again and
this, laid over building growth, will give us the ability to dial in
on these variable costs a little better.
Education on this matter is important, I must stress, that this
education should be unbiased and present everything to all voters, if
someone gets a feeling that there are personal agendas here, it will
divide the town even further.
carolin...@charter.net
night. And everyone's efforts to get there are much appreciated.
That said, of course it's a preliminary step and a much easier one
than what's to follow.
Historically debt exclusions fare better than overrides. For some
interesting data and information on this, the Mass. Teachers
Association has a guide for school funding. www.massteacher.org -
search for Better Funding, Better Schools.
I also think we must have great concern for any individuals/families
who can not afford a tax increase and consider ways to ease that
hardship. While I support the financial needs of the town and the
schools, I don't want to see anyone lose their home because of it.
It's all one step at a time.
Caroline
kako
things of Monday's meeting was the number of people who up and left
after article 20; And I understand the babysitting thing, I have 3
children, BUT part of the difficulty of this whole school issue is
the complete financial and overall needs of the town. You set up the
"us against them" mentality when you pick and choose what areas of the
town business you get involved with. It is imperative to understand
and be involved in the whole picture.
The school issue must be addressed, but so must all the pieces of the
pie. Health Insurance, as mentioned under a separate thread, is a
huge cost that will play into the current and future school needs.
Infrastructure, zoning, and planning will make a difference to
availability of pulling in business that would create revenue, and
understanding and respecting the issues of our senior will make or
break the possibility of funding down the road for all these
operational costs.
I guess my point is this; We are in desperate need of more space for
our children and keeping a great school system is desperately needed
for our town while facing some very difficult financial times. Lets
make sure we remember it all goes hand-in-hand as we move forward so
that we can keep everyone on board and balance all of the needs.
Kim
Sue D
I also think we must have great concern for any individuals/families
who can not afford a tax increase and consider ways to ease that
hardship. While I support the financial needs of the town and the
schools, I don't want to see anyone lose their home because of it.
It's all one step at a time.
Caroline
Sue
Urb Dad
unbiased and present everything to all voters". When Ms. Cotton
responded to the middle school spacing question at the TM a bit of
confusion surfaced in my mind. Her response (in my memory) was that
once something is done with the high school, the spacing solution
would trickle down. This only makes sense to me if our town first
creates a new school and then the middle school moves to the high
school...but up to this point we theoretically are keeping all the
options on the table. (I don't see how other options -mod class &
addition- would resolve lower level spacing problems but I'd love to
hear an explanation) In conversation with the guy next to me, I wasn't
the only one who felt Ms. Cotton's was kind of saying...wink wink, a
new high school is the only solution. I just want to emphasize that
this topic needs to be presented in a hyper-sensitive kind of way
which demonstrates & proves full disclosure every single step of the
way.
By the way, does anybody know if a debt-exclusion can be done in
graduated kind of way...such that the tax increase for seniors would
be subsidized in some way?
SueZ
others get relief, but then again, I can deduct my property taxes from
my federal. I cannot deduct user fees from anything. It is more of a
win-win. And I agree, Sue D., that it stretches across all
demographics. I am a member of St. James Outreach and we have over 30
Grafton families, most with children, that we provide food and
services for. And there are more that we have had to turn away,
because we just don't have the resources. There are people of all
ages struggling in Grafton, just as in other towns.
SueZ
state required the town to choose one priority. Originally, they had
asked for what the town school space needs were as a whole, but then
asked each district to pick one priority. According to the meetings I
attended, the committee chose the high school because of the
accreditation issue, and for the possibility that making space at the
high school could create space down the grades. We could not create
space at the high school level by making space at the middle school
level. Also, my understanding is that the state would look favorably
on projects that would prevent towns from coming back a year or two
later for more space needs.
All options are, in fact, on the table. The committee specifically
asked the state to look at all possibilities, including the municipal
center. But it is no secret that the previous school building
committee, using an independent educational building consulting firm,
determined that the most cost-effective solution was a new high
school. Their estimate for a new high school, a few years ago, was
$50 to $70M (before state reimbursement), whereas renovations to all
the overcrowded buildings would be over $100M, according to their
data, due to having to bring entire buildings up to present day code.
Then there is the cost of a new municipal center, NOT reimbursed by
the state, to consider if we use municipal space for education.
I don't know whether those figures will hold up in the state
Feasibility Study. I will vote for whatever solution the state agrees
to throw its money behind. But if the eventual recommendation is a
new high school, it will not be because there is some hidden agenda.
It will be just be a validation of the original committee's findings.
carolin...@charter.net
solution is an addition/renovation to the high school, the grades
could be re-configured such that the high school may be grades 8-12 or
7-12. (Of course, we can debate the merits of putting these age
groups together, but this may have to be one of the compromises).
Then the other buildings could be reconfigured grade-wise,
accordingly.
Part of the problem with giving an exact answer is that we really
don't know what the state will end up proposing as our solution. We
can speculate based on our own findings as to how things might work
depending on the solution, but we can't know for sure. For all we
know, the state might recommend adding on to the high school AND
renovating the municipal center.
As SueZ mentioned, preliminary cost data showed a new building, while
expensive, is still cheaper than additions/renovations to all the
other buildings combined. So that is why some view a new building as
the best solution - not because it can be a Taj Mahal, but because it
may be the least expensive, most educationally sound option. However,
my support is behind whatever will solve the space needs - not
necessarily a new building.
I would also emphasize that all options are on the table because that
is the state process. In the past, towns specifically asked for the
state to fund a certain solution. Under the current process, towns
have to identify the problem but cannot ask for a specific solution -
the state identifies the solution.
Finally, I hope to bring this issue to the Selectmen of exemptions and
sliding scales for those citizens who cannot afford some or all of a
tax increase.
crog...@gmail.com
I think this discussion is both healthy and important to help us all think through these issues.
I will say that I am of the mind that a new high school is the only real solution that will make any sense. I interpreted Mary Ann's response about the trickle down effect of the space solution was a diplomatic way of saying that a district wide re-shuffling would occur once a new high school is built. In my mind, this is the only way to address the entire district's space needs.
My wife and I recently made time to tour both the middle school and the high school. I would encourage anyone to do so, if possible, while school is still in session. Having toured these buildings, it is crystal clear to me that we need a new high school and I would be shocked if the feasibility study returns any other conclusion. Modular classrooms are actually nice spaces, but they do not solve the space issues that exist right now within the rest of the middle school and high school. Modulars or new additions to the HS or MS will not change the fact that spaces that were once one 30 x 30 single classroom have now been divided into two smaller classrooms and a small office. Modulars and new additions will not allow the middle school to gain back the use of their stage which is now the guidance office. Modulars will only add classroom space - they do not address the needs of both schools for office space, cafeteria space, library space, computer labs, etc. Don't even get me started about a proposal to use the Municipal Building as an extension of the HS....
I also need to comment on the disappointment that has been expressed with the large number of people that left TM the other night. Let's not forget that those people cared enough to be there in the first place. (My wife had to leave the meeting to get our sitter home by 11pm on a school night.) I stayed until the end of the meeting and saw the meeting fly through the remaining, mostly routine 28 articles in about 40 minutes. Let's be honest - there were not any critical decisions made after article 20 and this was completely intentional on the part of whomever wrote the warrant. Do not jump to the conclusion that the people that left do not care about Grafton - if they did not care about their town - they never would have showed up at TM in the first place.
It has also been said that people showed up to TM to further a personal agenda. I believe that this is true. Further, I believe that this is an essential part of the town meeting system. I will readily admit that I was there primarily to support a critical decision affecting the future of my children's education. I was there in support of my family's personal agenda! But, let's be real - isn't that why anyone attends a town meeting?? Wasn't Charles Bolack advocating for his personal agenda when he spoke in support of adding another police officer? Wasn't Chief Gauthier advocating for his own personal interests when he spoke in support of the Article 14? To criticize someone for supporting a personal agenda is ridiculous. Town meeting is a intended to be a gathering of personal agendas. As a collective body, the majority (or, in some cases a 2/3 majority) will guide the decisions of the town. I would be doing the process a disservice if I did not vote according to my own interests and I would expect nothing less of any other Grafton resident.
Why would any resident not do everything in their power to insure they get the most out of their tax payments?
CJR
-----Original Message-----
From: grafton...@googlegroups.com [mailto:grafton...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Urb Dad
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 9:50 AM
To: Grafton Schools
Subject: Re: TOWN APPROVES FEASIBILITY STUDY
kako
everyone who may need assistance, no only as we face possible tax
increases down the road, but in general to assure all our residents
are supported.
I completely agree with CJR that part of the process of town democracy
is the advocating for and hearing out individual interests and agendas
- often what feels personal can end up being the majority. Town
meeting is often the only place to hear these issues.
I did not mean to imply that the people who left did not care, I spoke
to the impression it may have left. There is often a big divide in
town politics that create the "us against them" and when only one
issue appears to be important, it looks as if those people are not
interested in the whole picture. Obviously there are time pressures
and logistics that effect all residents, and our family had to make
the decision for only one of us to attend b/c of a lack of sitter
completely.
All of this discussion is great and I think that with luck, it will
continue as we move forward, and more voices will be added to the mix.
Kim
>
> read more »
Mary Ann Cotton
1. The Feasibility Study will determine a system-wide, financially
responsible, educationally sound solution to the space needs problem
identified at the high school level. Whatever that solution is - add-
ons, renovation, new contruction - will be arrived at independently
and presented to the Town for its consideration and approval.
Whatever the solution is will be a long-term solution that provides
long-term relief - because that is what the State of Massachusetts is
interested in funding. The solution will provide space for 1000-1200
students. When that space is developed and made available, existing
space at the high school complex becomes available - even if we are
just doing an addition/renovation. This new space creates
opportunities for grade reconfiguration - maybe a combined JR/SR high
school - maybe moving 7th/8th grade - maybe moving 5th/6th into the
middle school. I don't know today (nor does anyone) what kind of
movement the solution will dictate.
2. Especially given the current economic challenges we face, securing
State money to fund part of the solution is the financially-
responsible approach. Failing to participate in this process and
failure to fund the solution this way will simply lead to more short-
term, ill-planned, temporary fixes that ultimately will cost the town
more. That said, we have an obligation to assess the impacts of this
financial burden on the entire community. Certainly those on lower/
fixed incomes (senior or not) will bear less of the burden.
Additionally, there is legislation anticipated/pending that would
exempt the senior population from school-based overrides. While I
don't support that specific measure, I would support exemptions for
people on lower/fixed incomes that meet established financial
criteria.
3. Yes, it is likely that we will be deliberating an operating
override in the near future - when your expenses increase at 51/2%-6%/
year and your income only increases 21/2% (simply put) there is not
enough money to fund all the services. And, yes, operating costs with
additional school space will increase. Those costs will be evaluated
through the study so the Town has some sense of the exposure. But,
this year; next year; and the following year we have to do a better
job of evaluating and prioritizing services and offerings. We have to
evaluate energy consumption, recycling, centralized bulk purchasing,
coordinated facilities management, etc...We have to continue to
identify revenue opportunities. The idea that we pursue private
funding for this school project is a good one. In fact, based on how
much money we raise through private funding, the reimbursement rate
for the school increases - its not much, but anything helps. I would
encourage this group to look for and provide information on these
funding mechanisms and share them with the School Building Committee.
4. At the end of the day noone can be criticized for being informed
and taking proactive steps to ensure the vitality and longevity of the
community. Chris is right - we all enter this discussion with the
well-being of our families and children in mind - that's legitimate.
As a Selectman, my obligation extends beyond my own family to include,
consider and be responsive to the needs of the entire community. I
would encourage you all to stay involved in this and the many other
discussions taking place around Town. The School Building Committee
meets tonight at 7:30 pm in Conference Room A of the municipal
center. This committee meets regularly on the 3rd Thursday of the
month. The Board of Selectmen meetings, along with other key
committee meetings are posted on the Town website under Calendar. As
we heard at Town Meeting this is where the discussion takes place, the
decisions made and the future is determined - consider being a part of
it.
Mary Ann
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
Urb Dad
Thanks for the clarification.
Given that divisiveness (and lots of unity too) is such a part of
Grafton right now on so many levels, it will be interesting to see how
reality and the perception of reality pan out.
Registered_Voter
the point I was trying to make. I did not say that the people that
left didn't care about Grafton, they cared enough to stay until they
got to the article that was most important. this was emphasized by
the thundering applause and the rush to the doors. It was interesting
that when Sheila Ide (former selectman) stood up and questioned the
vote, people stopped in their tracks and came rushing back, and left
again once the vote was recast.
I also stated that I completely understand the issue with child care,
not everyone has the flexibility to stay as late as they did for this
vote; but time after time, it is the same 200 or so people who show up
to vote on items such as, town budget. To say that the remaining
items in the warrant are not important, I don't get where you are
coming from. Are there some routine things that appear on the
warrant? Yes, they have to. But to say they arent important...
Was Mr. Bolack furthering a personal agenda? I didnt see it that way,
he cares about the safety and security of the town and its residents.
Was Chief Gauthier furthering a personal agenda? I didnt see it that
way either, if we dont have the volunteers that we do, we go to a full
service fire department and that would put our budget so far into the
red...
Bear in mind, you may not have a say in the use of the municipal
building as part of the high school campus. The study could come back
and say refurb of this building is the option that the state will
support. I also dont see why modular office spaces cant be used at
the middle school, especially to solve the immediate space issues.
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
crog...@gmail.com
not important, I wrote "there were not any critical decisions made after
article 20 and this was completely intentional on the part of whomever wrote
people would show for article 20 and then exit the meeting, so they left the
routine items for last. They were indeed routine items - in that they don't
require much discussion or feedback from residents. I did not say they were
not important.
As for the personal agendas, we can agree to disagree on that point.
As for your last point, I will certainly not have a say in the use of the
municipal building, as the MSBA is the entity with the funds. My point
about the municipal center is that - after touring both schools and seeing
the problems first-hand - I can't imagine how the MSBA would consider the
municipal building a valid solution. Yes, this is a "potential" result of
the study - but it's not a realistic one and our $550K would have been
completely wasted if that's the best answer they come back with.
As for modulars, the middle is going to need modular classrooms regardless
of the outcome of the feasibility study. Principal Lind expects to have
modular classrooms for the opening of the 2009-2010 school year. This is a
short term band-aid - not a long term solution. Installing 3 modular
classrooms in the back of the school does not make the existing media
center/library bigger, it does not allow partition walls in existing
classrooms to be removed, it does not add field space so that sports teams
can have a large enough field for home games, it does not provide the
teachers with prep space. Modulars at the high school will not give science
classes quality lab space, they will not allow art classes to be able to
move out of the boiler room, they will not make the cafeteria bigger, and
they will not provide an auditorium space where the entire school can
gather. (By the way, not having a ample-sized cafeteria is a big issue at
the high school, since if it remains the same size in 4-5 years, Principal
Pignataro anticipates having to add more lunch periods so every student gets
a chance to eat lunch. Adding another lunch period would take away from
valuable class time - a factor that could further be detrimental to the HS
accreditation status.)
I hope it's clear from my note that I am well-informed on this issue. I do
not know everything and I am not an arrogant person. But this issue is
important to me and I want to help make sure everyone has the facts. After
touring the schools and talking with Principals Lind and Pignataro, I have
gained new perspective on the problems and that has led to my strong belief
that a proper long-term solution is a new high school (a place for learning
- not a palace like they chose to build in Newton). I don't want my taxes
to go up any more than they have to - but Mary Ann is correct that it would
be fiscally irresponsible of the town to not investigate all avenues of
funding so that we can take some of the burden off of the taxpayers.
Chris Rogers (CJR)