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

schools

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: 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 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.

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

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