By Alice Waugh
Town officials have released amended wording for a school project measure at Town Meeting that more closely ties a $750,000 feasibility study with Lincoln’s acceptance into the state funding process.
Article 30 for Saturday’s Town Meeting asks voters if they will appropriate $750,000 for a feasibility study that will form the basis of a comprehensive repair and renovation project on the Lincoln School. The town’s share of such a project—even if it received funding from the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA)—would be at least $30 million. If Article 30 passes, voters will then be asked in Article 31 if they support applying for MSBA funding.
But officials expressed concern this week that the article’s motion wording did not explicitly link the feasibility study money with the town’s participation on the MSBA process, which would delay the project and increase its cost by about 3 percent compared to an exclusively Lincoln-funded project (although the added cost would be more than offset by an MSBA grant, which would cover about 40 percent of the total project cost). The Boards of Selectmen and Finance support a comprehensive project that is partially funded by the MSBA, rather than a town-only project.
The revised motion says that the town may spend the $750,000 on a feasibility study only if it’s invited to participate in the MSBA funding process. For this to happen, the town must submit a statement of interest in April and then be invited to continue. Like the original motion, it also stipulates that Lincoln voters must also approve the appropriation via a Proposition 2½ exclusion at the polls on March 30.
If the town passes Article 30 but later finds out it’s not invited into the MSBA funding process, the $750,000 will go into a reserve fund that could be used “for any legitimate legal purpose,” whether school-related or not, such as a exclusively town-funded school project feasibility study, the debt stabilization fund, etc., said Town Administrator Tim Higgins. However, residents must eventually approve the decision on exactly how to spend money at a future annual or special Town Meeting, he added.
The motion couldn’t be changed to make the appropriation contingent on the MSBA because Lincoln must know how much total money is appropriated in the town budget before it can set its tax rate in July—months before an MSBA decision could be expected. The new wording includes the MSBA but differentiates between “appropriation” and “expenditure,” Higgins noted.
The revised motion was developed by a working group consisting of Higgins and representatives of the School Committee, Finance Committee and Board of Selectmen with help from town counsel. Votes by those three groups will take place before Saturday. The School Committee will meet on Thursday night at 7 p.m. in the Hartwell multipurpose room and the selectmen (possibly joined by the Finance Committee) will meet on Friday morning at 8 a.m. in the Town Office Building.
The motions under Articles 31 and 32 are unchanged. Article 32, which will be voted on only if Article 30 fails, asks if voters will support a feasibility study to develop repair-only project choices. This type of project would not be eligible for MSBA funding, and the cost to the town would be $12 million to $29 million.
The revised motion for Article 30 is as follows (the added language is in boldface):
“Moved: That the town raise and appropriate $750,000 by taxation, for the purpose of conducting a feasibility study to develop building project renovation choices for the Lincoln School, located at Ballfield Road, including all costs incidental and related thereto, to meet long-range facilities needs, include educational enhancements, and respect the current campus configuration, and further, noting that pursuing these project goals will likely require a minimum town contribution of $30 million; provided, however, that the vote taken hereunder shall be made contingent upon the approval by the voters of the Town at an election of a “capital outlay exclusion” in accordance with the provisions of Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 59, Section 21C (i ½), otherwise known as Proposition 2½, so-called. Provided further, however, that the funds appropriated hereunder may only be expended by appropriate town officials in the event the town is invited to participate in the Massachusetts School Building Authority Grant Program, and then only in a manner consistent with the town’s submission to the MSBA for such purposes, which program, the town acknowledges, is a non-entitlement, discretionary program based on need, as determined by the MSBA, and any costs the town incurs in excess of a grant approved and received from the MSBA, if any, shall be the sole responsibility of the town, and further, that notwithstanding the above characterization of the feasibility study and its goals, the study shall be defined in a manner consistent with any requirements imposed by the MSBA.”