Letter: Says transferring money violates intent Reading Advocate, Thursday, September 11, 2003 It seems there is no end to the financial demands of the School Committee. The recent article in the Advocate covered their request for two articles for the November Town Meeting, both of which are money articles. I voted against the overrides, money for the RMHS and also voted against the 5th elementary school article. The overrides passed and they got their money. At least the taxpayers thought so. They only used $400,000 of the approved $450,000 [for schematics] and now want to role over the $50,000 into the $54 million [for construction]. If I remember correctly, the $54 million was all that they wanted/needed for the RMHS and said the job could be done. Mr. Dahl says this will not violate the intent of the voters. I beg to differ - this will violate taxpayers. He said they need this extra money "so the voters get what they asked for." We are about to get what we asked for in the form of a scam/rip off. This money should not be levied in taxes on the taxpayer. The taxpayer did not vote to move this unused money for construction funds. If the first scam/ rip off isn't enough, they want another unused amount of $800,000 transferred from the Dividence to the Barrows project. The new superintendent (not unlike the previous one) talks about deadlines. All the special elections (at extra expense) were to meet the deadlines. Dividence and Barrows are separate projects. Mr. Dahl and Mr. McFadden are about to give the taxpayer a lesson in how to deceive taxpayers and perpetrate the first and largest scam/rip off ever seen in Reading. These articles should not even appear on the warrant, and I fault the Selectmen for allowing this scam/rip off to be continued by Town Meeting. They should not have been approved for the warrant. Every taxpayer needs to call their Town Meeting member and insist they vote "no" on both articles, and also call their selectmen and voice their concerns about this scam/rip off being perpetrated by the School Committee. Enough is enough. Gerry MacDonald Town Meeting Precinct 3 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Letter: No reimbursement is yet guaranteed Reading Advocate, Thursday, September 11, 2003 We cannot proceed with the new $54.9 M high school, plus $48M interest totaling $103 million, unless we can be assured that we can pay the whole tab because of School Building Assistance reimbursement uncertainty. The School Committee has been spending money over the last few months on final designs with no reimbursement guarantee. Their recent vote "to proceed with construction" is based on an assumption that Reading taxpayers want the new high school so badly they are willing to pay 100 percent of the costs - without the 58 percent reimbursement they told us to expect. This was not the understanding, nor was this the information our public officials told the voters at early election in February. The decision about whether to move forward without any guarantee of timely reimbursement should be made by Reading taxpayers. Reading taxpayers should have the opportunity to have a say if they support moving the high school forward without any guarantee of reimbursement, financing 100 percent of the total $103 million costs for possibly 20 years or more in the chance SBA becomes solvent. The Department of Education cannot and will not, nor can our legislators guarantee, that there is going to be any money for reimbursement after the 17-20 year waiting period the Board Of Education is predicting. The state's debt for school building projects already exceeds $11 billion before our new high school, along with 35 other projects that may be added to the list. The new high school is not on any reimbursement list yet. The Department of Education has made it clear that being on a "reimbursement list does not guarantee any funding." (SBA Advisory 03-1) The commissioner stated we "need to decide whether we (each community) are able to proceed with the project without state financial assistance." (SBA Advisory 03-1) Those new projects currently on the reimbursement waiting list have not been funded for 2 years and are stalled indefinitely. SBA has reduced reimbursement payments for this year for schools already receiving reimbursement (J. Eaton, B. Meadow, Coolidge and Parker). Board of Ed Chairman Peyser warns in minutes of Feb. 26, 2002: "There is a huge backlog of projects that have been approved but for which there is no funding available - and for which there won't be funding available for the next 6, 7, 8 or more years. The state has a very significant liability rivaling the Big Dig. There is a disconnect between what's actually being funded and the way the state budget reflects that obligation." Our school officials and state representatives have known about the seriousness of the School Building situation for at least two years. According to Jeff Wulfson, associate commissioner, " We told districts last Fall ('01) "that unlike in the past, basically any project that met minimum requirements of the program was able to get on the waiting list. We have told districts this year (fall '02), that because of the size of the waiting list, because of the Commonwealth's fiscal situation, we expect to only put the most urgent and top priority projects on the list" (Board of Ed. Minutes Feb. 22, page 42). If Reading's new high school makes the reimbursement list (yet to be funded), we will be number 383 out of 391 projects. This could explain why Reading's new high school was rejected at the preliminary evaluation stage and was denied the opportunity to submit an application. Special legislation had to be filed to force SBA to accept Reading's application for possible reimbursement list placement. Why do I believe what I am saying is credible? We have a very real recent example with the situation of the town center upgrade. Reading was on the state's reimbursement list for $3.5 million for the center upgrade. We were fully anticipating reimbursement for years. Yet, we were removed from the list without any warning. That promise of money was cancelled completely. What is the realistic likelihood that we will see any money for the $54.9 million new high school? Town Meeting supported the new high school without a guarantee of any reimbursement. The voters, however, fully expected that reimbursement was imminent and guaranteed. The School Building Committee stated "SBA never has failed to meet their financial obligations". SBA gets their funding from the legislature and the legislature hasn't been fully funding SBA because of other state priorities. Before the Special Election, the School Committee voted not to proceed with the new high school without reimbursement. Predictably, that is just what they are doing. How does that set with you? Linda Phillips Town Meeting Member Precinct 6 |
Letter: Says Voters did not have all the facts Reading Advocate, Thursday, September 11, 2003 As Reading further commits to the $54.9 million (+ $48 million in interest) "renovation" of Reading Memorial High School, keep a few facts in mind. 1.Upon completion of this proposed RMHS project, the high school's capacity will have been reduced from 2000+ students to roughly 1400 students. 2. The "renovation" actually comprises the complete demolition of the original, structurally sound 1953 high school. This includes the cafeteria, 1100 seat auditorium, gymnasium, locker rooms, enough classrooms to teach 1,200 students, plus some of the 1970s addition (the Industrial Arts wing, an additional dining commons and connectors). The existing 1970s library space will be gutted along with the entire Math and Science wing (including recently upgraded science labs and the RISE Preschool area) and the Field House. A four-story addition will recreate those science and math classrooms and build smaller core facilities. 3. The 1953 Reading Memorial High School was built to honor World War II veterans and represents the later architectural work of Adden, Parker, Clinch and Crimp, known across the state for school and public building design. Several members of this Boston firm were Reading residents. Prominent examples of their work are Reading Town Hall and the American Mutual Building on Wakefield's Lake Quannapowitt. 4. Despite this significance, the Reading Historical Commission wrote in a May 2003 letter, as part of the project reimbursement submission to SBA: " We are not presently aware of any historical or culturally significant features of RMHS that would preclude the additions or renovations for this project as approved by Town Meeting. Therefore we approve the site for the high school additions and renovations as presented to and approved by Town Meeting " 5. The proposed major demolition is not even mentioned in the Historical Commission's letter. As with the Parker Middle School "renovation" in which the entire building was demolished except the auditorium, the Reading Historical Commission continues to "look the other way." The Massachusetts Historical Commission is aware of the demolition but just repeats what is determined at the local level. Voters approved the $54.9 million at the February 2003 Special Election based on sketches and promises, unaware of any historic significance. The actual RMHS project plans, created by the fourth architect involved in the high school to date - Design Partnership of Cambridge, were revealed only recently and represent the first concrete design information released to the public. The voting public was misled by a feverish pitch to "do it for the children," unaware of the history, viable alternatives, true costs and extensive demolition. Reading has requested from the Legislature permission to stretch payments over 30 years. If SBA reimbursement is delayed 20 years (or does not occur at all), Reading taxpayers will pay the full $103 million for this RMHS project. Our children's children could be paying for future repairs and renovations on the new "renovated" RMHS while still paying off the 30 year debt. Reading will have lost yet another solid public building of historic significance and paid many times over what it should have cost to renovate the high school. How sad. Kendra Cooper Covey Hill Road. |