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

letters to the editor

Letter to the editor: support conservation and option L3

To the editor:

The recent flurry of activity has flooded my inbox with schools-related information and commentary. Committees, individual residents, and town leaders have made notable and at times insightful observations on what is a path forward that will best serve the educational needs of future generations.

All of that is fine. But in the pursuit of a schools plan to carry to the next level of development, we seem to have become mired down in a discussion of “guiding principles” related to “educational programs” and “community.” I would have thought that an underlying value long held by the town—conservation of man-made and natural resources—would have found its way into the dialogue. Instead we dwell on vague notions of “optimizing connections” and “campus feel.”

Conservation has taken many forms in Lincoln. We have protected expanses of beautiful and sensitive landscapes from development. Colonial-era homes and their grounds have been protected and given new purpose; mid-century Modernist homes are being preserved and increasingly purchased by young families; and public buildings like Center School and Bemis Hall have been transformed, not through replacement but rather through carefully crafted renovations.

The Lincoln School campus should not be an exception. Rather than hauling half the existing school to landfills, we should instead be focused on the plans that transform existing valuable structures to meet educational goals. Years of deferred improvements have taken their toll and that has been unfortunate. When we walk though the Smith/Brooks building, we should stop pointing out all the problems—we’ve been doing that for a long time. Instead we should be focused on how an investment of possibly $90+ million can yield a revitalized and humanely scaled school that embraces a central campus green unlike any other public school system in Massachusetts.

I support SBC plan L3. The plan fulfills our town’s need for a quality educational environment while conserving the remarkable campus setting that has served us well for generations.

Sincerely,

Ken Bassett
37 Page Rd., Lincoln

Letter to the editor: what is a net zero building?

Editor’s note: This piece by Sue Klem of Lincoln’s Green Energy Committee is a companion to “What Makes a Sustainable School Project?” which she wrote for the School Building Committee website.

To the editor:

Traditional buildings use about 40 percent of the total fossil fuel energy in the U.S. Lincoln has an opportunity to build a low-energy school building. Let’s do it as an important step in decreasing Lincoln’s energy footprint and addressing climate change. The School Building Committee is leading the way!

By definition, a net zero (or zero energy) building produces at least as much renewable energy as it uses in a year. This is accomplished by constructing a highly efficient building enclosure, using high-performance energy-efficient systems and offsetting energy used by the building with solar and other renewable energy sources.

There are already net zero buildings in Lincoln, at least two homes and the new Environmental Learning Center at Drumlin Farm. The recently built Walden Pond Visitor Center on the Lincoln-Concord line is also a net zero building.

“Mass Audubon’s commitment to net zero construction has driven design decisions throughout the project, resulting in a building that works with instead of in opposition to its surrounding environment,” says Renata Pomponi, director of Drumlin Farm. “Beginning with solar shading analysis to determine exactly which existing trees could remain on the site without impacting the PV production, through details like the interior daylighting and materials selection and the attention paid to insulation and weather-stripping installation, sustainability has been a guiding factor. Drumlin Farm staff are thrilled that the end result is a building that not only is cost-effective to operate on our nonprofit budget, but also reflects the very work that we do in educating people about climate science and how their choices help to protect the nature of Massachusetts.”

Green characteristics that the Environmental Learning Center features are:

  • Net positive energy
  • A southern exposure maximizing solar access
  • No fossil fuel use
  • Highly efficient electric heating and cooling
  • LED lighting throughout the building
  • Occupancy sensors and daylight sensors
  • Energy recovery ventilators
  • Visible stormwater management
  • Native plantings
  • Triple-glazed dual low-e windows
  • Daylighting windows
  • A super-insulated and super-airtight building envelope
  • Materials selected with sustainability in mind
  • Low/no VOC [volatile organic compound] products
  • No products with added formaldehyde
  • Low maintenance and durable finishes
  • Workstations located for access to views and operable windows

Drumlin Farm anticipates receiving a Living Building Challenge Net Zero Energy certification. The grand opening is Saturday, June 9 from 1–3 p.m. You are welcome to go over and take a look (after Town Meeting, of course). As always, Drumlin Farm is free to Lincoln residents.

The Walden Pond Visitor Center is another example of a sustainable building. The Green Engineer provides this description: “The building structure is an all-electric, net zero energy consumption building and implements “passive house” principles. The building has no reliance on fossil fuels. In winter, high-performing triple-pane windows and super insulation keep the heat inside. In warmer weather, ample operable windows, ceiling fans and clerestories create natural ventilation and light, reducing the need for air conditioning and artificial lighting.

“A 105-kW photovoltaic solar canopy provides shade over the parking lot and services all the energy needs of the building and state reservation. An electric charging station allows visitors to charge vehicles. The walls and floors of the building are from locally-sourced heat-treated maple, ash and red oak to withstand the New England weather. Framing and sheathing materials are FSC certified. Water-efficient plumbing fixtures and low/no-VOC paints and finishes were used throughout.”

These local buildings can help us realize that buildings now being built (or renovated) could (and should) aim to be super-energy-efficient, eliminate fossil fuel use, and employ renewable energy. In other words, a net zero building! Let’s work with the School Building Committee to create a sustainable school.

Sincerely,

Sue Klem
168 Trapelo Rd.

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 to the editor: invest in the future with option L3 or C

To the editor:

When my family and I moved to the area in 2012, we had not heard of Lincoln. During our lengthy home search, one town stood out for its natural beauty and open-minded people. That town was Lincoln. What started as a home search in many towns quickly became focused to Lincoln and we have now been living here happily for five years.

Our first impressions have only been strengthened. I have gotten to know the town more intimately, as our children have attended school and I have attended every town meeting and (almost) all special meetings. I have been struck by the discourse of the people: regardless of point of view, I have found our discussions thoughtful, and perhaps more importantly, to be coming from a deep love of our town.

The argument that I have heard most often made in these forums is that Lincoln is a special and unique place and we want to keep it so. Depending on the context, the person has referenced our progressive history, manifest in our town recognizing a woman’s right to vote decades before our nation, our town recognizing the architectural beauty in modern design by becoming the home of some of the greatest architects of the 20th century, or our town protecting our environment decades before this was commonplace. In all these cases, Lincolnites saw into the future and took courageous steps against conventional wisdom—in short when we as a town have been at our best, we have been ahead of our time.

I see our school discussion through this prism—my hope is that we continue to strive to be a unique and special place. To me this means that we must strive to create an educational experience for our children that is second to none. I believe that the C or L3 design would be best the way to achieve that, while still being affordable for the town. (I do not mean to presume that it is affordable for all, however.)

I also believe that how we engage with our neighbors is important. It is imperative that we engage in thoughtful and respectful conversation. I worry that we may be beginning to get frustrated with one another—I hope we can all take a step back and remember to be respectful to one another and also allow our opinions to change and be informed by data rather than hearsay or pre-conceptions. For example, it has been valuable to me to hear what educators in town say, rather than relying on my gut or my experience as a student many years ago.

Lastly, I hope as we go to the vote on June 9 that we all keep in the forefront of our minds not the day-to-day frustrations of this long school building discussion, but rather, that we are the current generation of Lincolnites that will pass the torch some day. It is our duty to continue to make this town a forward-thinking, progressive place, willing to invest in its future and remain ahead of its time.

Sincerely,

Hans Bitter
245 Tower Rd., Lincoln

Letter to the editor: vote for school option L3

Editor’s note: This letter originally appeared in LincolnTalk in response to a comment about the environmental impact of demolition.

To the editor:

As you may or may not know, since last fall, a community of local architects has been meeting on an ad hoc basis and have regularly attended the SBC meetings and their public forums. Over the course of this process, we have tried to share our combined expertise with suggestions to the SBC and their design team to create not only a financially viable project but to do so with a bonafide respect for our Lincoln heritage.

We have a gem of an actual campus for our students, and it is truly unique for a public school setting. It fits with Lincoln’s legacy of preserving land in its natural state, and it is an extraordinary experiential lesson for our children on a daily basis: namely, that this community values our open space to the degree that our buildings quietly inhabit the land rather than the opposite—a condition that is unfortunately so prevalent in our current culture.

For what it’s worth, nearly all of this group of local professionals with worldwide experience favor a version of the L3 scheme—partly because we believe we should first and foremost fulfill the educational mission as best we can, partly because we believe the L3 scheme can be achieved with less wasteful square footage and therefore less cost than as shown, and finally because we think we as a town would be making a terrible mistake in abandoning our unique campus layout.

Most of us also believe that demolishing so much of the existing structures and spending $95 million for an “Anywhere, USA” type school is NOT environmentally responsible. Among our concerns is that doing so will lead to locating parking lots closer to the building such that they (with solar panel arrays above) will become a defining feature of a once beautiful campus. Along these lines, I personally believe the SBC has not had the best advice or has been deaf to suggestions about the many negative site implications engendered by the compact C scheme as shown.

Lastly, I personally believe the SBC is not fully attuned to how many people may balk at a $95 million price tag for the compact scheme when they figure out just how much their taxes will increase. The increase will be large no matter which way we vote, but I think folks should understand that there could be a “less large” alternative with a refined L3 scheme, and the benefit is that L3 both fulfills the educational mission and preserves the campus setting.

Please vote for the L3 scheme on June 9th!

Ken Hurd
21 Lexington Rd., Lincoln

Letter to the editor: school option C is best for sustainability

To the editor,

Mothers Out Front is a nonprofit organization with chapters around the United States committed to preserving a livable planet for future generations. Our Lincoln chapter has closely followed the School Building Committee process over the past year. We applaud the committee on their diligence in considering the educational goals for the project as well as critical planning for sustainability in design and operation of the school. These two values were cited as the two most important values in a survey of the Lincoln community at the beginning of the planning process.

The process is reaching an important milestone with the June 9 meeting, where the committee will ask the town to endorse a general building design for further development by the architects. Mothers Out Front sees this as a watershed moment which will influence the success of our school, our educators, and our students for the next 50 years. It is also an exciting opportunity for Lincoln to express its commitment to a stable and safe climate future, a commitment which has never been more critical.

We believe the design known as “Compact C” best meets Lincoln’s dual goals of a flexible, high-quality, and innovative school campus which can also operate on a net zero basis for energy consumption. “Net zero” refers to a building (home, school, or commercial) where the total amount of energy used by the building on an annual basis is roughly equivalent to the amount of renewable energy created on the building and its site. A net zero building eliminates the need to burn fossil fuels and thus eliminates carbon emissions (or purchase of energy generated in another state at unknown expense, freeing the town from future concerns of fluctuating energy prices).

The net zero goal is achieved through design features including compact design, improved insulation, a tight building envelope, natural light, and heating and cooling with highly efficient ventilation systems. Like Mass. Audubon’s new net zero education center, net zero at the Lincoln school would be achieved through the installation of solar photovoltaic (PV) panels on the building and adjacent to the building, to produce the energy for the school. The Lincoln campus has the space needed on roofs, parking lots, and adjacent lands (if needed) to accommodate the school’s energy needs. This plan would also be compliant with Article 40, the town’s Facilities Energy Performance Standard passed in 2011.   

The Compact C design has many advantages for the students, teachers, and campus as a whole, and is the preferred design by the majority of educators. The Compact C design eliminates wasted space in hallways and allows for more time in the classroom or time spent on educational activities versus navigating long hallways. The Compact C building footprint also allows for an additional playing field, which benefits the whole community. Compact C includes the most desirable educational spaces, including hub spaces for grades 3–8. And a compact building improves energy efficiency by reducing the ratio of building envelope to internal volume, an important feature to consider over the next 30 years of operations.

A very strong and compelling second choice is the L3 option. It includes the hub spaces and other important educational amenities, and can also include the net zero/solar panels design. The disadvantages of L3 are the loss of the additional playing field, longer transition times for students navigating the building, and a less energy-efficient design. 

While we believe the advantages of the net zero design are compelling from the point of view of reducing future catastrophic impacts from climate change, there are sound economic arguments as well. The energy markets of the future defy easy predictions in terms of cost escalation and volatility. A robust solar installation on the campus locks in stable, predictable energy costs for the next 30 years. Consider that the school spends approximately $220,000 currently on annual utility bills that cannot be spent for the core educational mission. Over the next 30 years, this expense will total at least $6.6 million. If a net zero design is built, the town will begin recovering the cost of the net zero elements on the first day the school is operational.

With the vote on June 9, we believe the town of Lincoln has an exciting opportunity to achieve 21st-century educational and sustainability goals with the design of the new school building. We feel that Compact C (our first choice) and L3 (our second choice) with net zero both advance the town’s educational goals and our town’s vision for a fossil-fuel free future. Please join us on June 9 to vote for a state-of-the-art teaching and learning environment for the next generation of Lincoln students. 

Sincerely,

Mothers Out Front Lincoln — Lincoln (Trish O’Hagan, Emily Haslett, Staci Montori, Robyn Bostrom, and Sheila Dennis

Letter to the editor: mulling Trump’s Nobel nomination

To the editor:

Recently, a group of conservative Republican Trump supporters from the House of Representatives sent a letter to the Norwegian Nobel Committee nominating Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize.

Notwithstanding the fact that nothing substantial has been accomplished yet, the intrinsic role of the President in the recent North Korea peace initiative is still unclear. Leaders from South Korea and North Korea have played more constructive roles. Based on previous examples, the ultimate result may take years to fulfill. 

How does Trump’s diplomatic stature compare to previous Nobel laureates and goals of the Peace Prize to justify his consideration? According to Alfred Nobel’s will, the Peace Prize shall be awarded to the person who “shall have done the most or the best work for the fraternity between nations, for the abolition of standing armies, and promotion of peace congresses.”

The Norwegian Nobel Committee specifically invites “qualified people” to submit nominations, and the Nobel Foundation specifies categories of nominating individuals. Examples of such nominators include international organizations for peace and justice; university professors of history, law and social sciences; directors of peace research and international affairs institutes; former recipients; and members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee and Norwegian Nobel Institute.  

I wonder how a few U.S. House of Representatives conservative members fit on that list, particularly those running for higher office this election year?

The 110 past international laureates include Malala Yousafzai, Mother Teresa, Nelson Mandela, Desmond Tutu, the Red Cross (1917, 1944 and 1963), and United Nations Commission for Refugees (1954 and 1981). The 21 past U.S. laureates include four Presidents and one Vice President, Martin Luther King Jr., Elie Wiesel (chair of the Holocaust Commission), Linus Pauling (author of No More War!), and Nicholas Murray Butler (Columbia University president and head of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace).

Taken as a whole, I wonder how the Nobel Committee, the Nobel Institute, and the 131 Nobel laureates might consider the overall fit of Trump’s “unique” style, attitude regarding norms of international respect and diplomacy, and political motivation and standing of his nominators as “qualified people.” 

Lastly, when it comes time to consider his nomination, I also wonder how Norwegians will remember Trump’s offensive comments on immigration last January following the visit of Norwegian Prime Minister Solberg. The Norwegians didn’t think his standing was so worthy at the time.

Sincerely,

Gary Davis
20R Indian Camp Lane, Lincoln

Letter to the editor: support new efforts on diversity and inclusion

To the editor:

In the wake of the Boston Globe article on METCO’s experience in Lincoln-Sudbury, a group of parents met to talk about their racial experiences in Lincoln. Many were past members of the METCO Coordinating Committee (MCC), some were parents of Lincoln children of color, and some from First Parish.

The group learned of a day when Lincoln demonstrated in support of the METCO program as it tackled racial disparities and created opportunities for our children to receive a diverse education. We learned of social events with Boston parents and a robust MCC that fostered relationships among Boston and Lincoln children. While some residents still hold these aspirations for our town and some provide unusual support for refugees, those days are not these days.

For over eight years, only three or four volunteers have carried out the work of the MCC. These parents labor with few resources, fewer chaperones, and limited funds to create healthy relationships for our school children. Challenges around communication, permission slips, scheduling, and transportation burden their social planning. They work creatively, but the number of social-educational opportunities is declining.

From the Lincoln parents of children of color, we heard heart-breaking stories of hate speech and hurt on the athletic fields, in classrooms, in Lincoln play spaces, and within our family organizations. Lincoln children have been put on “the Boston bus” because their race or ethnicity matched; classroom discussions of the Civil War have presented slaves as “the workers,” and playdates were offered to a white family but not to a parent of color who was equally new to town.

This group was welcomed by Lincoln school and town leaders who listened to and resonated with the need for a new generation of advocates to rebirth Lincoln’s investment in equity and inclusion. Dr. Darnisa Amante of the Disruptive Equity Education Project (DEEP) trains advocates to facilitate difficult conversations about diversity, and Superintendent of Schools Becky McFall is working with DEEP to train her leadership team through self-reflective small groups.

Welcome, inclusion, diversity and equity, of course, are not just school issues; they are town values. Our churches, athletic teams, recreation programs, social clubs, and town government should be places that ensure safety and offer discussions on difference.

Lincoln needs a new generation of social advocates to support its values of equity and inclusion. The DEEP website describes this work. A local foundation is interested in supporting such an endeavor, but it is looking for a financial investment from the Lincoln community. This note is to ask for your help to raise $12,000 to support this important work.

The METCO Coordinating Committee will sponsor these groups and can receive your donations. Please make checks payable to LINCOLN MCC and mark it for “The DEEP Project” (to distinguish it from their summer camp scholarship fundraising), and mail them to PO BOX 393, Lincoln, MA 01773.

Thank you for your investment in helping to create this important resource.

Sincerely,

Nick Covino (15 Mackintosh Lane, Lincoln) on behalf of Pilar Doughty, Moha Desai, Erica Gonella, Erin Muirhead, and 20 Lincoln neighbors

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.