To the editor:
As you think about the upcoming votes on the school, here are a few thoughts from someone has been involved in the process for the last six years, first as a School Building Advisory Committee member and now as a School Building Committee (SBC) member. Not surprisingly, I believe the project is important for our school and our town. I would like to share with you some of the reasons behind my thinking.
The town, not the SBC or town leadership, chose this project
It is important to remember that it was the town’s residents, not the SBC or town leadership, who chose the option to be voted on December 1 and December 3. This was done at the June 9, 2018 Special Town Meeting (STM), which was attended by almost 650 people. At that time, the SBC presented five options. The options ranged in cost from $49 million to $98 million. The STM overwhelming chose the option that is the subject of the December bonding votes. This option, whose budget is $93.9 million, received 74 percent of the vote. The more expensive option received 17 percent of the vote. The least expensive option, the “repair only” option, received 4.3 percent of the vote in the first round and was eliminated from contention at that time.
I recognize and respect that some would prefer the cost to be less. I also acknowledge that many people in town do not attend town meetings, although I believe a turnout of about 650 people is pretty high for one in Lincoln. Town Meeting has been an integral part of how our town democracy has worked for a long time. It is also a fair and open process, as was the one followed by the SBC before the June 9 vote. In my opinion, we need to be cautious about attempting to re-litigate matters that were decided at a town meeting if we want the town to move forward and avoid a debilitating gridlock.
A “no” vote could depress property values
Understandably, taxes are what people focus on. However, another relevant consideration is property values. In my opinion, there is a risk that, if Lincoln votes down a school building project for a second time in the last six years, property values in town may decline because the town may get the reputation that it does not support its schools. This could drive young families to other towns—those that have a reputation for supporting their schools. If this occurs, there is a risk, particularly for those who do not plan to remain in town long-term, that the financial “hit” they will sustain, on account of a decrease in their property values, could exceed (in some cases substantially) the amount of additional taxes they will have to pay over the period of time they remain in town on account of the school building project. Even a small decrease of only 3 percent in one’s property value could have a significant negative impact on the homeowner.
The tax increase
The June 9 vote indicated that the voters believed it would be irresponsible and shortsighted to simply bring the building up to code for $49 million but provide no educational enhancements to it. Since we recognize that the school needs more than $49 million worth of work, the question becomes: what are we getting for the incremental $44.9 million ($49 million + $44.9 million = $93.9 million) in order to achieve educational enhancements? This question, in turn, leads to the critical question for the taxpayers: how much more in taxes will we be required to pay on account of this $44.9 million? Excluding the $5.4 million of “cash in hand,” an $88.5 million bond that carries an interest rate of either 4 percent or 5 percent will add $2,415 or $2,717 to the median taxpayer’s annual tax bill. However, the incremental amount of $44.9 million for the educational enhancements only adds about $1,225 or $1,435. The ultimate question for many taxpayers becomes whether this incremental amount is a fair amount to pay in order to realize the educational enhancements that the school project offers.
Tax assistance programs
I realize that some people in town may have trouble paying either the full or incremental amount of the tax increase. Those in this position should investigate the town’s programs for helping people with their property taxes. Depending on the program and whether a person qualifies for it, taxes can be deferred or the benefits can amount to as much as $1,000, $1,500, or $2000, annually. Whether the median tax increase is $2,415 or $2,717 for the full project or $1,225 or $1,435 for the incremental portion of the project, this type of assistance could substantially soften the tax impact of the project. See pages 9-12 of the FAQ document.
The educational enhancements to the school
The educators will explain the educational enhancements the project brings to the school and the students. I will only make a few observations. In my view, the space in which teachers and students teach and learn can have an impact on the breath and depth of educational programming. Instead of continuing with the single classroom model (i.e., each teacher has her/his own box to teach from), the renovated school will combine “distinct classrooms and multi-use spaces that can adapt to changing educational needs over time.” The “neighborhood” model in grades 3-8 features classrooms clustered around a shared common space (“hub”) that supports a curriculum based on the ability to flexibly group students and teachers together and to foster age-appropriate independence.
The new center of the school will include a “learning commons” that can accommodate large-scale programming and a “dining commons” that can be used as flexible educational space during non-dining hours. The addition of the flexible spaces throughout the building provides spaces that can handle different-sized groups for different educational purposes. In my opinion, this flexibility model, which combines traditional separate classrooms with different-sized flexible spaces, is not an educational fad. It is also not a return to the discredited “open classroom” model. It represents common sense because education is not a one-size-fits-all experience for students or teachers.
The cost of the project is in line with comparable school projects
The cost of the school project is not excessive when it is compared with the cost of other school projects in our area. The SBC, working with its owner’s project manager, Daedalus Projects, whose business is the school public construction market in Massachusetts, investigated this issue and concluded that the cost of the Lincoln project is not out of line, when adjustments are made for when the projects were undertaken and the size of the other projects. See the SBC post titled “Construction Costs and Other Matters” and SBC member Craig Nicholson’s November 20, 2018 post on LincolnTalk. The FinCom also investigated this issue and reached the same conclusion (see points 3 and 4 in its May 22, 2018 recommendations).
The costs of public and home construction projects are not comparable
Based on what the SBC has learned from Daedalus and an SBC member who works in the construction industry, this type of comparison is not valid. A public construction project in Massachusetts is governed by a panoply of statutes and regulations that do not apply to home construction, such as earthquake resistance and additional fire resistance. Wage rates for workers on such projects are determined by the Commonwealth, which ensures a middle-class income level for the skilled tradesmen who will build the school. The market for the public construction of a school is separate and distinct from that for home construction. See page 4 of “Construction Costs and Other Matters.”
I hope this letter has helped you prepare for the very important votes you will cast on December 1 and December 3. In my opinion, they will have a significant impact on the future of the school and our town. For the above reasons, and many more, I think that future is best secured by a “yes” vote.
Sincerely,
Steven P. Perlmutter
90 Todd Pond Road
Letters to the editor must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to lincolnsquirrelnews@gmail.com. Letters will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Letters containing personal attacks, errors of fact or other inappropriate material will not be published.