By Mickey Friedman
September 30, 2014
I left the most recent meetings about the Monument Mountain High School renovation with heightened respect for Principal Marianne Young and Superintendent Peter Dillon, yet feeling sad that the School Committee had asked these dedicated educators, their employees, to front their “informational sessions.” Their jobs are difficult enough, and it’s one thing to come to Town Meeting to explain the annual costs of learning but quite another to explain, let alone justify, the strategic choices of the School Committee. Didn’t the School Committee ask to represent us in matters of public education?
And, even after Great Barrington’s overwhelming 955 to 596 NO vote, it’s the School Committee asking us to vote for a $51.2 million renovation of Monument.
Last year, their project manager, hired for a pretty penny, and architect, hired for an even prettier penny, had done their due diligence to plan the 55.6 million dollar spiffy yet cost-effective 21st Century Monument Mountain we desperately needed. Certified by the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA), who would reimburse us 48.5 percent or 25.5 million dollars.
Our resounding NO triggered “listening sessions.” Many urged the School Committee to hire locally-respected independent consultants (not those part of the MSBA process) to prioritize the most necessary repairs. To phase in renovations over a longer period of time. To significantly reduce the tax burden.
Yet somehow the School Committee returned with a $51.2 million project.
And until the informational sessions I didn’t understand why.
They “had heard our concerns about the scope and cost,” but unbeknownst to us there was a limit to what they could hear. Because the MSBA told them they would accept no more than $4.1 million in cuts. More and no subsidy. And they would require a new application. When listening isn’t quite listening.
Just say NO and the essential 21st Century education now costs $51.2 million.
No $44,100 for granite curbs. Save $209,100 for skylights rather than clerestory roof monitors. No $116,000 clerestory windows for the gym. Save $186,900 deep-sixing the new conservatory addition because “the existing and new greenhouses will adequately serve the school’s program needs.” Save $183,800 using the existing Auditorium seats. Save $523,800 redesigning the HVAC design and controls. Take a mil from contingency. And my favorite, save $176,800 eliminating “granite-tiered seats along the athletic fields.”
Add some sleight-of-hand tax reductions. Increase the term of the financing from 20 years to 25 years, and our annual tax impact is reduced from between 18 percent and 30 percent. Technically accurate but slightly misleading. Yes, your “yearly” tax impact will be reduced, but the five extra years you’ll have to pay more reduces those savings over time from 18-30% down to 6-7%.
Information or persuasion? The slides of sad, long, lonely cafeteria tables vs. a bright new food court. But accentuating the negative feels oddly disingenuous. As Pastor Van pointed out, we’re talking about a high school that does a fine job. Well known for its independent study program and Project Sprout, the innovative gardening program born in the very greenhouse we are now told is inconveniently located. Should future farmers waste time outdoors, walking up and down a hill?
Their best argument: the mythological $38.6 million Accelerated Repair Option. Give the naysayers what they say they want. Abandon the great educational features we need, yet fix the basic problems of the building. Of course this option doesn’t really exist. They never submitted it to MSBA and we can’t vote on it.
Information or persuasion? Because somehow in this scenario, just fixing things costs us more. The $23.2 million MSBA subsidy that comes with the $51.2 million magically shrinks to $4.9 million for the Repair Only Option (45.31% down to 12.69%). So surprise surprise, GB taxpayers will now get less while spending more: $23.5 million for just repairs, instead of $18.2 million for all the bells and whistles.
Like the car salesman says: If fixing your used car costs more, you might as well buy the new one. Might as well vote YES.
Except this isn’t the whole truth. Because the MSBA has also has a Major Repair Program (http://www.massschoolbuildings.org/programs/repair_program) and school districts all over the state have received subsidies of 40 percent and more to make major repairs. Like Needham and Douglas and Littleton MA.
So it’s possible to reapply with a new MSBA major repair proposal and get far more than the $4.9 million subsidy of this straw-man proposal. And it’s possible to apply later for money for new labs. Westfield expects a 60 percent MSBA reimbursement for a new science wing.
So, over a longer period of time, we can help Principal Young and Superintendent Dillon provide a quality education, while we better protect our over-burdened taxpayers.
Because you can inspire students without an indoor greenhouse. And engage in critically-important learning activities without granite seats.
You can vote NO on November 4 then vote YES in the years to come.
________________________________________________________________________________
For more information:
http://www.massschoolbuildings.org/programs/repair_program
MSBA Repair Program
The MSBA Repair Program is intended for facilities in which the scope of a potential project is limited to the replacement or repair of a limited number of building systems. Repair projects are designed to materially extend the useful life of the school and preserve an asset that is otherwise capable of supporting the required educational program.
Education Laws and Regulations
603 CMR 38.00:
School Construction
603 CMR 38.00: School Construction – Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education