[Ed note: My Southborough accepts signed letters to the editor submitted by Southborough residents. Letters may be emailed to mysouthborough@gmail.com.
The following letter is from Beth Wittcoff.]
Letter to the editor and Southborough Voters,
I urge you this Monday night, March 2nd, to vote YES on Articles 1 and 4 and NO on Articles 2 and 3. In my opinion, renovating Neary (Articles 1 and 4) is the fiscally and educationally responsible path forward that allows us to take the necessary, proactive steps to protect our high quality education while securing the long-term stability of our Schools and our tax rate.
For those of you who recall I questioned why 5th grade could not be moved to Trottier at the May 2025 Town Meeting, my position may surprise you. At the time of Town Meeting, I was not convinced by the reasons given that this was not a viable option. It was the first time in my 43 years in Southborough that I voted against a school article. As an educator for over 40 years, and as someone who served our Town with sixteen years on the ARHS School Committee, and six years on the Southborough School Committee, it saddened me to make that vote as I am a staunch supporter of our Schools.
All of this led me to apply to and join the PreK-8 Building Committee. It is through our work on the Committee that I now have a better understanding of why moving 5th grade to Trottier and reconfiguring Finn are not my preferred choices.
From July to October 2025, I served as the Chairperson of the PreK-8 Committee whose charge was specifically to investigate additional options to the proposed new Neary building. Our Committee was tasked with a critical evaluation: could relocating the 5th grade to Trottier and reconfiguring Finn Elementary serve as viable alternatives to a new building?
We examined this through two lenses—educational integrity and physical capacity. Our research led to a definitive conclusion: these moves are not feasible. Neither building possesses the physical plant to support additional grade levels without sacrificing the specialized spaces essential to a high-quality education. For example, forcing these consolidations would necessitate losing science labs, music lessons and arts programming – fundamentally undermining the educational excellence of our District. I determined the trade-offs were unacceptable. The research proved to me that this is not a ‘no-cost’ alternative; shifting these grades would still require significant, expensive renovations or additions at both Finn and Trottier to manage the overflow. Rather than solving our Neary crisis, this plan merely creates different problems in the other buildings. Simply put, in my opinion, it is an inefficient and more costly way to achieve an inferior result for our students. All of this led to me understanding that Articles 2 and 3 are not my preferred choices.
For our students, our teachers, and our town’s future, please join me in voting YES on 1 and 4.
Sincerely,
Beth Wittcoff
3 Skylar Drive
