Select Board to determine “next steps” on school buildings following failed Neary vote

Above: Though not as packed as Special Town Meeting, there was a lot of community interest in the Select Board’s “next steps” discussion for dealing with the Neary building. (image cropped from hybrid meeting video)

This week, the Select Board and the Neary Building Committee (NBC) had a follow up discussion on voters’ rejection of the big building project for a new 4 grade school to replace Neary School.

They agreed that more community input is needed on how to handle issues over Neary School building maintenance and safety issues, “housing” Southborough Public School PreK-8 students, and any potential maintenance investments, or building/renovation projects.

But there wasn’t agreement on the next steps needed. That included differences over how soon to start work and the pace for researching and communicating options to the public.

In the end, a decision on next steps was paused to give the board time to think before voting on a course of action. They will reconsider at their next regularly scheduled meeting on the evening of Tuesday, June 3rd.

Here are my highlights from Tuesday night’s discussion and the prior week’s Neary Building Committee meeting.

Move with Urgency or Hit Pause?

Select Board member Al Hamilton, who had publicly opposed the building project as too expensive for the Town, agreed that some kind of solution needs to be determined and that it won’t be “zero cost”. But he advocated for “a 30-day cooling off period” before deciding next steps.

The meeting was chaired by Kathy Cook, who also serves on the NBC.¹ Cook was among those who argued that now is the time to act, while the community is still actively paying attention.

Not everyone involved in the discussion weighed in on the timing. But of those that did, the majority appeared to favor capitalizing on “momentum” to keep the community more engaged. Those expressing some urgency for solving the Neary problem included the new Select Board Chair Andrew Dennington and Vice Chair Marguerite Landry.

And residents like Mary Tinti argued for the pressing need to address issues that had been raised through the process. She described parents as being “in limbo” worrying about their children headed towards being schooled in a “substandard building that is getting worse”.

During the discussion, the point was raised that the Mass School Building Authority’s (MSBA) approval to reimburse the Town $35M for the school building project expires if the Town doesn’t get voters’ approval by late August.

However, the Town could request an extension. In a meeting last week, Malinowski noted that many communities that had failed votes received extensions. (He didn’t specify how long those were granted for.)

The NBC is required to send a letter to the MSBA next week. In it they should note whether the project is being dropped, or dialogue is continuing. 

Time to Ditch Silo Thinking

In their May 15th meeting, Malinowski discussed the big takeaway from the Town Meeting and ballot vote was that voters were upset they weren’t presented with choices. 

Malinowski also acknowledged that they didn’t have the community’s pulse on the issue. He blamed part of the problem as caused by the committee composition (under MSBA rules) that put them on “an island”.

Last week, Advisory Committee member Marcy Jones argued that it wasn’t just the MSBA rules. She highlighted that by having the chairs of the Select Board, Advisory Committee, and Capital Planning Committee on the NBC, it gave the impression that there was no outside vetting of the project.

Everyone agreed that whatever form a new/revamped committee takes for researching alternatives, it should include “No voters”, and maybe even some new “yes” voters and parents.

During the meetings, NBC and Select Board members expressed that the vote was a humbling experience. And some members of the public commented that they were happy to hear the board’s humility and willingness to listen to the community.

But there was some frustration by members that the public waited so long to pay attention, ignoring public forums that they held during their planning period. (In fairness to voters, those forum invitations never stressed that feedback would impact future tax bills. And it was the sticker shock that got voters’ attention.)

The Select Board Needs to “Sharpen Pencils” and/or Step Back

Malinowski asked for the Select Board and Advisory Committee to start “sharpening pencils” on the Town’s budgets looming for future years. He pointed to the dire financial forecasts as having contributed to the No vote. He pointed out that those costs were outside of the NBC’s control.

The tough forecast was pointed to this week by Hamilton as a reason for the Select Board to “step back” from the school building project efforts.

Hamilton called the votes against the project a “rebuke” of the Select Board. He had been the only member to vote not to endorse the project. (Also worth noting, Tim Fling, the newest member of the board, was elected through the ballot after publicly stating that he was not in favor of the project. He received more votes than Cook and unseated Sam Stivers.)

Hamilton pointed to the likelihood that the Select Board will have to ask voters to pass a proposition 2½ override next year (just for Town operations/regular budget needs, not a building project). He asserted the board couldn’t afford to “antagonize” already angry voters.

In discussing the financial context around the vote at the NBC’s meeting last week, member and Advisory Chair Andrew Pfaff opined that Town Meeting voters need to better “understand what they are looking at”. He highlighted “selective” choice of voters to oppose the school building project after not opposing the over 7% tax increase approved at the Annual Town Meeting just the month prior. He referred to the police and fire department staff additions and their new collective bargaining agreement as 52% of “the cost of Neary”. He opined that if voters were going to hold Town Meeting budgets to the fire they should be consistent.² 

Committee to Explore Alternatives

At multiple times during the long discussion and the prior week’s NBC meeting, officials referred to the work needed to solicit 2/3 support and “get to a yes”. Some residents appeared to mistake that as a public plan to push through the failed project. But the “yes vote” referred to was repeatedly described as the support that would be needed for whatever path community feedback tells officials is the right one to take.

Last week, the committee discussed potential paths for exploring alternative projects, collecting feedback, and presenting the community with a full range of options before an extended timeline from MSBA expires. That way if the community decided that the original proposal was the best choice, they could still take advantage of it.

Malinowski reported that MSBA officials confirmed that the Town could potentially re-offer the original proposal to voters at the same meeting and on the same ballot as alternative projects are proposed.

Only the original proposal would be co-funded by the MSBA. (And officials confirmed that any changes to the site, grades, etc would result in losing that funding.) The alternatives would need to be fully Town funded, and the MSBA’s legal counsel would need to approve the language in the Articles/Ballot Questions.

Malinowski noted that alternatives could include a two grade school and they might end up learning the community wants to go with the “status quo” or a “band aid” approach to building issues. He advocated for soliciting community feedback, starting with whether the community was opposed to any project on the Neary School site. (That refers to the environmental concerns some residents raised about the school being downhill from an old landfill.)

Select Board members agreed this week that multiple options need to be explored. They didn’t vote on what that list would be.

Fling “screen shared” a draft spreadsheet itemizing the options he would like a committee to research and report on. Those included versions for closing Neary and using other schools to house students, replacing the school, or fixing it:

• Trottier 3-6/Woodward 7-8
• Finn PreK-2/Woodward 3-4/Trottier 5-8
• Neary-Minimal Renovation “deferred maintenance”
• Finn-4-Grade Renovation
• Neary – Full ADA & Code-Compliant Reno
• Neary-New 4-Grade School

For each of the options, he wanted info researched to cover:

• Estimated Cost
• Summary of Costs
• Estimated State/Federal Reimbursement
• Neary Site Demolition & Remediation Cost
• Operational Savings or Added Costs (e.g additional busing, reduced staffing, etc.)
• Operational Savings or Added Cost Summary
• Net Town Cost
• Expected Renovation or Build Timeframe
• Expected Future Renovation Timeframe (yrs)
• Safety Considerations
• Educational Considerations
• Domino Effects (Reuse/Sale of Other Town Properties)
• Tax Base Impact (e.g., sale of land)

Embrace Expertise or Oust Untrusted Officials?

A major point of disagreement on Tuesday was whether NBC members should take part in the next steps. Some argued that their involvement would be a poison pill for whatever findings or recommendations come out of the work.

Hamilton pushed for the need to form an entirely new committee. Many, including Cook and Select Board member Marguerite Landry countered that the amount of time the NBC spent over the last few years gave them valuable expertise to contribute. Kelly Conkline argued that dismissing them would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Betsy Rosenbloom said the idea of the NBC working over the summer while “the rest of us are on vacation” made her “nervous”. As a “trained advocate” she believed their involvement would lead to lack of public faith in the process. Andrea Hamilton agreed that there was a trust issue, admitting that her initial reaction to the NBC’s proposed next steps was “not a particularly generous interpretation”.

Joanne Pearson demonstrated her reservations with the committee by highlighting that Malinowski had also chaired a prior committee for the Public Safety Building and noting:

I think we also have to look from the perspective of, “How grandiose do these buildings have to be to perform their functions?”

There was consensus among most that the committee at the very least needs a revised charge, expanded membership, and probably a new name.

Lower the Temperature or Not?

During the discussion, there was a lot of sentiment that heated rhetoric “from both sides” needed to be toned down. NBC Chair Jason Malinowski encouraged everyone involved to “take a deep breath” to focus on finding the best solution for school children. Many echoed the need to “breath”, or cool down. Resident Jenna Lin called for collectively letting go of “Yes and No side” thinking, and come together on finding a solution.

Yet, public comments were also peppered with passionate statements from some residents either upset at a perception that No votes weren’t really being “heard” or instead angered at the town being painted into a corner by “No Voters”.

Is Better Communication the Simpler Answer?

A few public commenters who supported the Neary Building Project appeared to believe that it failed mainly due to lack of community knowledge and understanding.

At their meeting last week, NBC members expressed dismay at the large number of registered voters who didn’t participate. They also discussed surprise they felt at the vehement opposition to the project that popped up as the Special Town Meeting was approaching, since they had very little community response to their outreach and engagement efforts for the year leading up to the vote.

But they also opined that simply communicating more with the public and scheduling new votes wouldn’t work. (The 26% participation of ballot voters was low compared to state elections but very high for a Town election.)

On Tuesday, NSBORO Superintendent Gregory Martineau argued against trying to convince the community to embrace the “clear result” of the failed project:

I don’t think for the community a solution where there are people who lose and win is healthy for the town in the short term and the long term. I think we need to identify the problem, which I think we’re fairly clear about, identify potential solutions where people can support 2/3, and then move a project forward that we all feel is in the best interest of the town not only in the short term but the long term

Referring to issues beyond Southborough’s borders, he called for project supporters to “recognize” the impact of “the moment we’re in”:

I think if you look back on history many years from now, I think the moment we’re in is very unique. And I think every project and timing of the project has a context and appropriate time. I think this project wasn’t the right time for this community. And I’m committed to working with the Neary Building Committee, the School Committee, and identifying solutions that the town can get behind.

But whatever the next steps and action plan are, there appeared to be agreement that more public outreach and communications will be needed. 

1. Cook was the Select Board Chair until the end of the May 20th meeting, when the board held its annual election of officers. Vice Chair Andrew Dennington was promoted to Chair (3-2 over Al Hamilton), and Marguerite Landry was elected the new Vice Chair (4-1).
2. It’s worth noting that the public safety cost increases weren’t bundled together and presented to voters as a big tax increase. Instead they were split in separate budgets and Articles for police budgets, fire budget, benefits, and CBAs. Some costs were “phased in” by having new job start times begin partway through the year so full tax increases aren’t felt until the next year. It also wasn’t highlighted as a concern in Advisory’s letter to Town Meeting. And there was no report clarifying to voters the impact that approving Collective Bargaining Agreements would have on their future year’s taxes.