The Lincoln Squirrel – News, features and photos from Lincoln, Mass.

government

Letter from the moderator #4: voting procedures on Saturday

Editor’s note: This is the fourth in a series of pieces by Town Moderator Sarah Cannon Holden about preparations and procedures for the Special Town Meeting on June 9. The other letters are here:

To the editor:

First, let me remind everyone that you must be a registered voter in Lincoln in order to vote at the June 9 meeting. 

As has been publicized, three votes are planned for the June 9 Special Town Meeting:

Vote #1: Ballot vote — Voters will indicate their first choice among the five school concepts.  These votes will be recorded on a ballot and counted by our tabulation machines.  The top three concepts will move forward to the second vote.

Before we take the second vote, I will provide a warning of approximately 15 minutes with a time certain for the vote so that voters can get into their seats for the count. At the announced time, the doors will be closed and no one else will be permitted into the gym or the auditorium. We must do this to ensure an accurate vote count.

Vote #2: Standing vote — Voters will be asked to stand up for the concept they support. The two concepts with the most votes will move on to the third vote.

Vote #3: Standing vote — Voters will be asked to stand up for the concept they support of the two remaining. The concept that gets the majority is the one that the SBC will develop and bring to a bond vote in December.

Questions have been raised about what will happen if one concept gets a majority of the vote after vote #1. This is a Town Meeting, and as moderator, I believe that it is important for the town to proceed to Vote #2, no matter the outcome of the first vote. The nature and importance of this meeting require that we obtain the town’s clear preference; with that in mind, we will move to the second vote.

I have also been asked what will happen if, after Vote #2, one concept has a slim majority. As has been publicized, the School Building Committee will move forward with whichever concept gets the majority, and if one concept receives 51 percent or more, we must respect that outcome. However, I will use moderator’s discretion in the event that one concept gets between 50 percent and 51 percent in Vote #2. If that is the scenario, I believe that in the long run it will better for the town if we proceed to Vote #3 between the two most popular concepts. 

These votes will be carefully recorded and the results announced. By the very nature of voting in a democracy, there will always be some who are disappointed. The importance of open and respectful questions and comments are therefore all the more important. From my perspective, I hope that we can leave the meeting feeling good about the way we conducted ourselves. 

Sincerely,

Sarah Cannon Holden, Town Moderator
Weston Rad

Letter from the moderator #3: rules for Saturday’s Special Town Meeting

Editor’s note: This is the third in a series of pieces by Town Moderator Sarah Cannon Holden about preparations and procedures for the Special Town Meeting on June 9. The other letters appear here and here.

To the editor:

By now you should have received your Special Town Meeting Warrant with the two aBy now you should have received your Special Town Meeting Warrant with the two articles to be considered on June 9th. There is very important background information. Please read it carefully so you can come as prepared as possible for the discussion and voting on Saturday. It contains the meeting’s agenda as well as overview of what we will need as we delve further into the issues, choices and considerations before us. Also included in the mailing is an explanation of the voting process. Read it carefully and bring it with you to the meeting. Please note that while there will be a presentation and update regarding the community center, there will not be a vote.

Now let’s get into the rules of the meeting.

There will be presentations be several boards and committees. Discussion, questions and answers, votes and more votes will follow. The procedural rules and voting procedures will, hopefully, be the containers to hold it all together. Many will want to speak, so everyone must limit their time at the microphones to two minutes. Twenty-five people at two minutes each takes close to one hour, despite what the mathematical calculation tells you. I suspect that more than 25 people will want to speak.

General meeting rules

Motion to Amend—If you wish to amend something, you must first fill out the Amendment Form found on the table at the center of the auditorium and present it to town counsel, who will be seated on the stage with the moderator.

  • Once the wording has been settled upon, you may go to the line for the microphone, state you name and address, and make your amendment.
  • The motion requires a second.
  • We will then have discussion of the amendment and vote on it. I will ask for a voice vote. It requires a simple majority to pass.
  • If it passes, then we will discuss the main motion as amended; if it does not pass, we will go back to the main motion.

Move the question—If you wish to ask the meeting to go directly to a vote on the main motion, you must go to a microphone, state your name, and move the question.

  • The motion requires a second.
  • You may not speak or ask a question before you make the motion.
  • Such a motion is not debatable.
  • I will ask for a voice vote. It requires a two-thirds vote to pass.
  • Results of votes in both the gym and the auditorium will be calculated. If it passes we will go directly to a vote on the main motion.

The moderator has the discretion to deny the motion to move the question if she feels that there has not been sufficient discussion. For example, if someone were to rise after 10 minutes of discussion, the moderator is likely to find that this is too soon for such a motion.

Point of order—If you wish to challenge some perceived procedural error, you may rise without being recognized by the moderator and announce a “point of order.”

  • Give your name and street address.
  • State your point.
  • The moderator will consider your point and rule on it.

On Wednesday, I will send out the voting guidelines for the votes we will be taking on June 9.

Reminder: You may check in starting at 8:15 a.m. We will start the meeting promptly at 9:30.

Sincerely,

Sarah Cannon Holden, town moderator
Weston Road.

Committees recommend school options L3 and C; selectmen also include L2

The School Committee, School Building Committee and Board of Selectmen recommended that voters approve school project Option L3 or Option C at the June 9 Special Town Meeting, while selectmen also included Option L2.

Options R, L1 and L2 do not provide the hubs for grades 3–8 that educators have deemed crucial for effective and flexible teaching and learning today, although L2 offers two “flex spaces.” Cost estimates put the L-shaped Option L3 at $93.9 million and Option C, the compact design, at $97 million.

More information:

    • Drawings of the six school options along with costs and tax impacts for each
    • A chart comparing the features and costs of the options
    • The Finance Committee’s updated tax impact projections and comparisons to other area towns

[tcpaccordion id=”17948″]

In a paper poll at its meeting on May 30, concepts L3 and C were recommended by all 16 SBC members and liaisons in attendance (plus member Peter Sugar, who submitted a written response due to his planned absence). Five of the 16 additionally voted for concept L2 as a third recommendation, and one member/liaison voted to recommend all five concepts.

There was little discussion of the reasons for members’ choices except to say that they reflected the guiding principles they adopted last fall after receiving input from the public, other town officials and educators. SBC members had the option of including written comments on their ballots, but those comments were not made public.

Selectmen reject two of the concepts

The Board of Selectmen recommended against Option R as not meeting the town’s needs. “The repair-only option does not seem to me to meet the core mission of what we need to accomplish as a town with this school project,” Selectman James Craig said at the board’s May 21 meeting. “I think we’re well beyond just a repair option, and this does not meet our educational values or our environmental values. I just can’t support the expenditure of $49 million to get us to a spot in time where we’re just treading water.”

Selectmen Jennifer Glass and James Dwyer agreed. “There is nil academic value [in the repair-only option]. I don’t think it’s a good use of money because it doesn’t give you the [return on investment] you want,” Dwyer said.

Option L1 “does not, in our judgment, provide sufficient long-term educational, environmental or financial value,” members said in a May 23 statement. “We believe that the remaining school building concepts (L2, L3 and C) are all reasonable and viable plans that will support, to differing degrees, the long-range needs of our school and community.”

Selectmen also strongly supported the Finance Committee’s recommendation to stay within the town’s statutory debt limit and worried about the substantial tax increase that residents will see.

“I worry about how this tax burden is going to change our community—who sticks around and who leaves,” Dwyer said. “Do we become a ‘graduate and evacuate’ like some of our other towns, where they move in for schools that are awesome and then they leave? The community deteriorates and people are not here for the right reasons. They’re not here for Lincoln values; they’re just here to cash in and cash out on the schools.”

The town’s debt stabilization fund may provide some cushioning, and there are some tax relief programs available to qualifying residents, “but we should look to see if there are any other ways to soften what’s going to be a dramatic tax impact, whatever options gets voted on,” Craig said.

“We want to assure the town that the board is mindful of the magnitude of the financial investment the town is considering,” selectmen said in their joint statement. “Each individual will need to consider and answer the questions of personal affordability and up-front cost vs. long-term value.”

Other committees weigh in

“Options R and L1 do not provide value for money,” the School Committee said in a short May 24 statement. “Options L3 and C are critical for providing 21st-century education, and the School Committee is most excited about the educational value from Option C.”

Earlier last month, the Capital Planning Committee also recommended either Option L3 or C, as did the Lincoln School Foundation this week. The Finance Committee stopped short of advocating any particular option, though members recommended against Option FPC (which is no longer on the table) because it would require borrowing more than the town is allowed to under state statute without a special exemption.

Letter to the editor: LSF supports options L3 and C

To the editor:

The Lincoln School Foundation urges Lincoln residents to vote for L3 or C at the Special Town Meeting on June 9.

The LSF has a 30-year history of funding innovation at the Lincoln Schools. In that time, we have awarded more than 500 grants worth well over a million dollars. Each grant provided resources not available in the school budget to allow teachers and administrators to do more within our schools. The grants have been funded in large part by thousands of donations from the residents of Lincoln. A commitment to excellence in education and innovative practices is, as these individual donations demonstrate, a collective enterprise that is deeply embedded in the values of this community.

In this moment, on the cusp of a major school building project, Lincoln residents have the opportunity to demonstrate again that we value education. Education has evolved in the last half-century. The traditional model of self-contained classrooms, which was born from the single-room schoolhouses of a century ago and then adapted to provide a work force for factory labor, does not fully allow for the education that our students need for 21st-century life.

Educational research shows that children of today—the adults of tomorrow—need to be collaborators, critical thinkers, and problem solvers. The teachers and administrators at Lincoln School know this and practice this daily.

However, the teaching and learning at Lincoln School is constrained by the outdated structure. Best practices in education insist on flexibility and small groups—arranging and rearranging students throughout the day to allow for project-based learning, differentiation, and meeting each student’s individual needs. Isolated classrooms placed in a row hinder this work.

School building options L3 and C both offer a fundamental reimagining of the interior spaces within Lincoln School. “Hubs” offer extra flexible space to better allow for small groups, collaboration, and effective differentiation. Additionally, the major investment of L3 or C gives us the opportunity during the upcoming design phase to specify features that further educational best practices, such as visually permeable walls and inviting and configurable furniture.

Lincoln has been on the forefront of conservation and environmentalism. Lincoln has been on the forefront of progressive social values and thoughtful affordable housing. And Lincoln can be on the forefront of transformative 21st century education.

The LSF endorses L3 and C design concepts as those that best support the district’s vision for education by providing an environment in which students and teachers can more fully engage with collaborative, deep, and authentic learning practices. Space matters: it can catalyze, facilitate, and nurture innovation.

This is an opportunity for us to come together as a community around a shared value and a vision for the future of education. On June 9, we hope you will join us in selecting an educationally transformative school building project, L3 or C.

Sincerely,

Trustees of the Lincoln School Foundation: DJ Mitchell (chair), Ginger Reiner (treasurer), Gabrielle Berberian, Cathie Bitter, Juliana Delahunty, Lis Herbert, Jen Holleran, Audrey Kalmus, Tareef Kawaf, Lucy Maulsby, Aldis Russell, Tricia Thornton-Wells, and Nick Whitman

Letter to the editor: option C offers the most benefits

To the editor:

I’m voting for C on June 9th and I wanted to share my process of elimination of the other four options using SBC’s taxonomy:

Minimum requirements (R and L1): R is essentially opening the hood and starts at $49 million, but doesn’t even address some basic utility issues. Similarly, L1 at $73 million doesn’t take care of 2030 energy requirements. If we’re taking out a 30-year bond, I can’t imagine we would build something with a known compliance issue and kick the can a few years down the road for other repairs/upgrades. As the name suggests, this the “minimum requirements” option set and they are there more for completeness sake.

Upgrading current model (L2): This may be seen as the fiscally responsible, middle-of-the-road option at $8 million, saving 10–15% over the next set of options that offer tangible educational benefits. Yet, this is essentially succumbing to the Goldilocks fallacy when we need to make a capital decision with a 50-year+ horizon—much longer than the bond term. It’s hard for me to imagine spending this kind of money without some tangible educational upside.

Also, people may think that if we go above this amount, we may not fund other capital investments such as the community center because we hit our debt ceiling defined as 5% of Lincoln property assessments. With the upcoming higher property assessment, this is not the case. We can and should treat community center and other projects independently.

Transforming educational spaces (C and L3): Compared to L3, C offers more educational space with less square footage, as the two-story building doesn’t waste space on long hallways etc.; it’s faster to build (32 months vs. 36); creates room for another ballfield; and the compact footprint minimizes walk times, saves time, and improves interactivity. I am also happy with the aesthetics of C and don’t have any nostalgic tie to the L shape. Given the $3.9 million difference (C at $98.7 million vs. L3 at $93.4 million), I can’t see a good reason to go with L3 over C.

I want to thank SBC for taking the time to compile and thoughtfully communicate a ton of information. It made it much easier for me to converge.

Sincerely,

Fuat Koro
1 Sweet Bay Lane

Letter to the editor: do school repairs over a period of time

To the editor:

The upcoming Town Meeting in June will be crowded, long and tense. And many will not/cannot be there. It may be democratic, but it will not be accessible to all.    

Why end a school campus that is beautiful, has provided excellent education (as I am sure most would agree) and exchange it for a very expensive new structure that “might” produce “better” education? Engineers have said the current school buildings are structurally sound (else they would not still be in use) but in need of repair/maintenance. Wouldn’t it be more reasonable and less disruptive to all in town to budget repairs over a longer period of time? Wouldn’t it be more equitable, more Lincoln-like, to avoid debt that will decrease economic diversity in town and drive people out of town?

Is the process to eliminate what works sustainable? It was said that any demolition would be recycled. Recycling is growing more “expensive” now that China no longer takes our trash. And some recycling might not even be doable, except at great cost in dollars and to the environment.  

My taxes would increase $3,000+ per year with the $100 million option. Although I can afford it, I would much rather donate the money to people and organizations addressing the tragic results of the massive income inequality (that hasn’t existed since the pharaohs of Egypt, to quote economist Richard Wolff) that is causing massive inequity, corruption, and environmental degradation that affects even Lincoln. 

Sincerely,

Jean Palmer
247 Tower Rd., Lincoln

Letter from the moderator #2: general procedures for June 9 meeting

Editor’s note: This is the second in a series of pieces by Town Moderator Sarah Cannon Holden about preparations and procedures for the Special Town Meeting on June 9. The first letter appears here.

To the editor:

Today is the day to review some general procedural rules related to presentations and speaking. I will open the meeting with some general introductory comments and the following information and rules.

  • The boards making presentations have agreed with me on time limits. I will do my best to hold them to it.
  • After the boards and committees have made their presentations, the meeting will be opened up for questions and comments.
  • If you are in the Reed Gym where there is overflow seating, you will have to come to the main auditorium to speak. There is a live feed to the gym but not from the gym. An assistant moderator will be in the gym.
  • When you rise to speak, please go to one of the two microphones in the middle of the auditorium where you may stand in line. If your point is made by someone ahead of you, I urge you to resist making it again!
  • If getting to the microphone is difficult (not just inconvenient), someone will bring you a roving microphone. Please have your thoughts organized so that you can be succinct. At the start, I will permit no more than two minutes at most per comment. We need time for everyone who wants to speak. At some point I may reduce the time to one minute.
  • When it is your turn to speak, please state your name and street address.
  • Members of the boards and committees may or may not respond to you specifically. That is left to their judgment.
  • We all should make the effort to listen to the speakers ahead of us so we can decide if we actually have something further to offer to the discussion.
Reminders:
  • Check-in begins at 8:15 a.m. The meeting will begin at 9:30 and we will be entering into the presentations immediately. Please be in your seats by 9:30 so you are not disruptive to others in the hall.
  • You have until Wednesday, May 30 to register to vote at this meeting.

Sincerely,

Sarah Cannon Holden, Town Moderator
Weston Rd.

School project updates: construction phasing, Town Meeting child care

A new overview of the six school options (click to enlarge).

Some updates on the June 9 Special Town Meeting on the school project:

A new view of the options

The image at right shows the five design concepts showing their estimated price tags and the incremental educational and physical features of each.

Construction phasing

If one of the “L” concepts is chosen, construction will take place in two 18-month phases. In the first phase, half the children will move into temporary classrooms while renovation occurs in one part of the building,. In the second phase, they will trade with the the other half of the student body while the rest of the building is renovated.
 
If Option C is chosen, only grades 4–8 will be in temporary classrooms while the Brooks portion of the school is worked on, and grades K-3 will remain in Smith. The project will take place over 24 months, with another eight to nine months for demolition of 73,000 square feet and construction of the second smaller gym in the Smith portion.

Understanding hubs

Watch this video of Hanscom Middle School faculty talking about the impact of grade-level hubs (or breakout spaces, as they’re called at Hanscom) and the difference they’ve made for teaching and learning in the building that opened in 2016.

Child care available during meeting

LEAP has generously offered to provide child care to the community on Saturday, June 9 so parents can attend the Special Town Meeting on the school building design vote that begins at 9:30 a.m. The LEAP coverage will be from 9 a.m.–3 p.m. The cost per child is $20, payable in cash on June 9. Children must be at least kindergarten age. Parents need to pack a lunch for their children; LEAP will provide snacks.

Please fill out this online registration form with your child’s name, age, and parent contact information as well as any allergies. LEAP has maximum capacity for 100 children and will fill up on a first-come, first-served basis, so please register in advance. LEAP will publish a schedule of the day’s activities ahead of time.Questions? Email leap0615@gmail.com.

Last public meetings before the vote

  • The last School Building Committee meeting before June 9 will be on Wednesday, May 30 at 7 p.m. in the Hartwell multipurpose room.
  • There will be community forums on Thursday, May 24 at 11 a.m. at The Commons and Friday, June 1 at 8:15 a.m in the Lincoln School story room.

Voter registration

The deadline to register to vote at the Special Town Meeting is Wednesday, May 30. Check your registration status here. Register online or in person in the Town Clerk’s office from 8:30 a.m.–4:30 p.m.

Letter from the moderator #1: checking in at the June 9 Town Meeting

To the editor,

I know that many of us have spent many hours planning for and learning about the issues we will be discussing at the Special Town Meeting on June 9. My hope is that in the next several weeks (hopefully on Monday mornings) I can explain some of the procedures we will follow at the meeting. For those not familiar with Town Meeting, I am hopeful that this information will be useful. Please share this information with others and, by all means, discuss the issues and the procedures between and among yourselves.  

Today is the day to review the checking-in process for June 9:

  • Come to the lobby of the Donaldson Auditorium in the Brooks School on Ballfield Road. Parking is always tight so walking, biking or carpooling is encouraged.  
  • Please arrive between 9:00 and 9:15 to check in so you’ll be ready when the gavel falls at 9:30. 
  • Check in with the tellers if you are a registered voter and be sure to get your hand stamped. See below if you are not a registered voter.
  • Collect various documents on the tables inside the auditorium offered by the town boards and committees.  
  • If need be, there will be overflow space in the Reed Gym.
  • Find your seat and get comfortable. We have a full day ahead of us.

You have until Wednesday, May 30 to register to vote at the June 9 meeting. If you are not a registered voter, you may attend the meeting, but you must ask for permission from the meeting to speak and may not vote. You must sit at the side of the auditorium.

If you have any questions, please send them my way and I will do my best to provide answers.

Sincerely,

Sarah Cannon Holden, Lincoln town moderator
Weston Road
sarahcannonholden@gmail.com

Committees offer guidelines in advance of June 9 school vote

The Finance and Capital Planning Committees made some recommendations about a school project at the last public forum before the June 9 Special Town Meeting vote, but neither one endorsed a specific design option.

The FinCom recommended that the town stay within its state-mandated 5% debt cap, which would limit new borrowing to about $97 million. This eliminates the most expensive school concept—Option FPC at $109 million.

More information:

[tcpaccordion id=”17948″]

At the May 15 forum, chair Jim Hutchinson repeated the other guidelines that members agreed on at their May 3 meeting. Members recommend that the town not wait until construction costs are more favorable, and judged that the estimates for square footage per student and construction cost per square foot re in line with those from other Massachusetts Schools.

Hutchinson also presented updated borrowing impact information and comparisons to neighboring towns (Bedford, Carlisle, Concord, Lexington, Sudbury, Wayland, and Weston), with ranges depending on which school option is chosen and whether the bond interest rate is 4% or 5%. Those figures include:

  • Tax increase — On a home valued at $997,500, taxes would go up by $1,329–$2,983 in the first year.
  • Average tax bill — At $15,185, Lincoln now has the second-highest average single-family fax bill after Weston at $19,380, and it would remain that position. The average bill would climb to $16,300–$18,014.
  • Tax rate — Lincoln currently has the second-lowest tax rate; it would go up to the fourth- or fifth-lowest.
Capital Planning Committee weighs in

Capital Planning Committee Audrey Kalmus presented her group’s recommendations:

  1. The town should consider designs that are easily scalable in case school enrollment rises faster than projected.
  2. To meet its “current basic needs,” the school should have a full kitchen as almost all other schools now do (this would eliminate the $49 million repair-only Option R).
  3. The building should be capable of achieving net-zero energy use (this eliminated Options R and L1).
  4. To “maximize the school’s value for teaching and learning,” it should include the educational enhancements as recommended by the School Committee and administration, such as “hubs” for each grade if possible.

The only options that meet all four of the CapComm criteria are L3 and C.

A group of Lincoln architects presented a proposal to the School Building Committee meeting on May 2 for a revised Option L2 that they said would meet most of the educational objectives of Option L3 (including hubs for grades 3–8) but at a lower cost. “L2 is really a substandard scheme, not well developed like the other schemes,” Ken Hurd, one of the architects, said at the forum.

“The SBC appreciates the efforts of our town design professionals,” SBC Vice Chair Kim Bodnar said this week. “In addition to their memos that have stimulated thinking in the SBC and within the design teams at SMMA and EwingCole, Ken Bassett, Peter Sugar and Doug Adams volunteered to be on our SBC Design Team Subcommittee last summer.  Their engagement has been extensive and appreciated.”

At the SBC’s request, SMMA Architects also presented on May 2 a compact option costing $85 million (about halfway between L2 and L3 in price). However, with that constraint, the plan would not include the auditorium, which best meets the legal requirement for a Town Meeting assembly site within the town’s borders.

The May 13 blog post by the SBC outlines the committee’s reaction to the idea, as well as some of the differences between options L2, L3, and C. Superintendent of Schools Becky McFall noted that the June 9 vote will establish only the building’s footprint and cost limit, so through SMMA’s work in the summer and fall on the chosen concept, “we can design more efficient spaces in the building” and rearrange things internally to some extent.

Town Meeting format

“We’re expecting near-record turnout” on June 9, so registered voters can check in starting at 8:15 a.m. and go into either the auditorium or the Reed Gym. More than 700 people packed into the auditorium and lecture hall for the 2012 school project, and a few had to be turned away at the door due to fire safety concerns. (The vote was 370-321 in favor of the project, or 54%–45%, which did not meet the required two-thirds majority).

The first vote via voting machine will ask which of the six school concepts they prefer, and a second standing vote will ask then to express a preference for one of the two top finishers in vote #1. The winning concept will then go into the schematic design phase in preparation for a bonding vote at a Special Town Meeting on December 1 (which requires a two-thirds majority) and a town election on December 3, which requires a simple majority.

After Selectman Jennifer Glass outlined the procedure for June 9, several resident had questions and suggestions. One wondered what would happen if the town approved a plan that did not meet the town’s 2030 bylaw on energy efficiency; another asked why residents would be voting on both building shape and price rather than just cost.

“We often hear ‘How can you design something without a budget?’ but it’s hard to name an amount of money if you don’t know what you get for it,” School Committee Chair Tim Christenfeld said.

Between the June 9 vote and the Special Town Meeting in December, there will be more forums and surveys as the SBC continues to meet and the architects present details on the building’s design and cost. “The conversation is going to continue,” he added.