schools

At Town Meeting in March, residents will have yet another chance to chart a course for a multimillion-dollar school project—going it alone, or seeking partial state funding for the fifth time. But barring a major crisis at the Lincoln School, state funding is looking increasingly unlikely as the competition for grants gets fiercer by the year.

Lincoln won a $21 million grant from the Massachusetts School Building Authority in 2009, contingent on a two-thirds majority approval from residents at Town Meeting—but that eventual 2012 vote fell short. The town has reapplied three times since then and been turned down each time. Just before Christmas, officials learned that the town was again denied entry into the state school funding pipeline.

As Lincoln officials are now realizing, the 2009 MSBA approval was at least partly a matter of luck because the MSBA as a funding entity had been created only the year before, and Lincoln was ready to pounce because it had recently done a facilities study and thus happened to have its “ducks in a row” more than many competing towns, School Committee Chair Jennifer Glass said at the January 9 Board of Selectmen meeting.

Glass and other Lincoln officials learned through recent conversations with the MSBA that nowadays, there is a “very high bar” for getting state funding approval. Most schools that were invited into the funding pipeline last year have a major structural deficiency to the extent that the building is uninhabitable (for example, a collapsed roof or flooding in the entire building), severe overcrowding, or a threatened loss of accreditation. This is something that usually happens only to high schools, Glass noted, and it was a significant factor in Minuteman High School getting its $44 million state pledge last year.

Each year, the MSBA evaluates a new set of applications; there is no waiting list or preference for schools like Lincoln’s that have previously won approval. “It’s a clean slate every year,” Glass said. “Our applications are very through and they understand our needs… we haven’t done anything wrong since [2009].”

Glass asked the selectmen to hold spots for two Town Meeting warrant questions: whether to reapply for MSBA funding, and whether to begin pursuing a town-funded project by spending $750,000 appropriated by voters in 2015 on a feasibility study. Theoretically, the town could do both; “we’re welcome to spend $750,000 of our own money and reapply [to the MSBA, but] if we were invited in, that feasibility study would be put on the shelf and we would start again,” since the state would require a newer one, Glass said.

Performing the feasibility study “does not commit us to any certain project or dollar amount,” Glass said. The final study would have to focus on one design for the school, but this time, there could be the “missing step [where we] narrow the choice down with a lot of public input,” Selectmen Peter Braun said. One reason cited for the 2012 defeat is that residents did not have enough say about the proposed project’s building and campus design, and many objected to the proposal for compromising the circular central ballfield.

“We need to put all the choices out there and let the people tell us,” Brain said.

Beginning with a multi-board meeting on Monday, Jan. 30, there will be a series of public conversations to consider the town’s options and to understand the choices in the context of Lincoln’s priorities and finances. These conversations will be ongoing; everyone’s input and questions are needed, and residents are encouraged to attend as many sessions as possible.

The schedule is as follows:

• January 30 — Multi-board meeting, 7 p.m., Brooks Gym. This will be a joint meeting of the School Committee, Board of Selectmen, Finance Committee and Capital Planning Committee.
• February 10 — Council on Aging public forum, , 12:30 p.m., Bemis Hall. Superintendent Becky McFall and School Committee Chair Jennifer Glass will discuss the Town Meeting warrant articles related to a building project, and give an overview of the FY18 school operating budget. In addition, Town Administrator Tim Higgins will give an overview of the FY18 town budget.
• March 8 — Multi-board public forum, 7 p.m., location TBD — Hosted by the School Committee, Board of Selectmen, Finance Committee and Capital Planning Committee.
• March 17 — Council on Aging public forum, 12:30 p.m., Bemis Hall. Superintendent Becky McFall and School Committee Chair Jennifer Glass will discuss the Town Meeting warrant articles related to a building project.

The state agency overseeing school project funding informed Lincoln today that the town would not be invited into the funding pipeline for a school project in 2017. This third rejection means residents must once again decide whether to wait and reapply next year, or proceed with an entirely town-funded school project.

Lincoln submitted was among the 89 school districts that submitted statements of interest to the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) this year, according to a letter from School Committee chair Jennifer Glass and Selectman Peter Braun. It was unclear how many of those proposals made the first cut. In 2015, there were 97 applications to the MSBA’s core program (the segment dealing with substantial renovation or reconstruction of schools); 26 were chosen for further consideration and eight were invited into the funding pipeline.

“From previous conversations with the MSBA, we know that there is a very high bar in evaluating applications, and that structural deficiencies, overcrowding and threatened loss of accreditation hold significant weight in the process. Lincoln does not qualify based on the second and third criteria, and interpreted literally, the structure of the building is not in danger of failure,” Glass and Braun said. “However, in the next couple of weeks, we will be in communication with the MSBA to try to learn whether the Lincoln School’s significant infrastructure and systems deficiencies might qualify us for invitation by the MSBA in the near future.”

Four years earlier, the MSBA offered to pay $21 million toward a new school costing $49 million if residents agreed by a two-thirds majority to fund their share. But the margin at a Special Town Meeting in November 2012 was 370-321 votes (54 percent to 45 percent), so the funding offer was withdrawn and the town had to begin the process all over again. The MSBA also declined to offer funding in 2013 and 2015. At Town Meeting in March 2016, residents overwhelmingly approved the latest application to the MSBA.

In 2014, consultants Dore and Whittier determined that the school needed immediate work costing $8.4 million including a new roof for the entire building, a new exterior wall for the Reed Gym, and a new boiler room and pumping equipment for the Smith building. However, even if residents approved funding for that work, the town would have to spend several million dollars more, because by state law, when school renovation costs exceed a certain percentage of the building’s assessed value, the building must also be brought up to current code for handicapped accessibility. For the Lincoln School, the trigger point in 2014 was about $6.5 million.

Meeting only the immediate and near-term facilities needs of the school with no educational improvements or cafeteria would cost more than $27 million, the consultants said, while a comprehensive project meeting all facilities and educational needs would cost almost $60 million.

The School Committee, Board of Selectmen, Finance Committee and Capital Planning Committee will hold a multi-board meeting on January 30 at 7 p.m. in the Hartwell multipurpose room to discuss any additional information received from the MSBA and to chart a path forward. “This will be the first of several public outreach sessions before any potential school building-related warrants are voted on at Town Meeting, and we hope that all members of the community will lend their voices to the process,” Glass and Braun said.