Tomorrow night, Southborough voters are invited to make decisions on the 4 Articles in the Special Town Meeting Warrant. For each Town Meeting, the Advisory Committee is charged with writing a report to aid voters in making those decisions. The committee asked me to share their report for this meeting with readers.
The report shows that the committee unanimously supported Article 1 but while they also unanimously (in a straw poll) favored borrowing to replace Neary’s roof, they didn’t cast an official vote on Article 4 as written. That position was a bit more nuanced with members waiting to take an official position depending on the actual motion that is made tomorrow. (Their explanation is provided below.)
The votes for the other Articles were split. Only one member voted for Article 2, and three members voted to support Article 3 (vs the 4 that took the position of “not support”.)
The main section of the letter explains the majority positions. An attachment provides additional details that some members shared on their individual reasons for their votes. Those are from:
- Two of the members who voted No for Articles 2&3
- One member who voted Yes on Article 3, but No on 2
- and One member who supported Articles 2&3
(Again, all of them supported Article 1.)
You can read those on the last two pages of the full letter here.
Below, I’m sharing just the main section of the letter. I did get confirmation that the yes/no votes were all on the question of if they supported the Articles. The “not support” below is the result of the vote (not the motion voted on.)
The Advisory Committee Report to Special Town Meeting
March 2, 2026
Background for this report:
The Advisory Committee Bylaw Chapter 9, Section 13A of Town Code: It shall be the duty of the Committee to consider all matters included within the articles of any warrant for a Town Meeting hereafter issued, and the Committee shall, after due consideration of the subject matter in said articles, report thereon, in print or otherwise, such information and recommendations as it shall deem best.
Advisory Recommendation for Article 1
Voted 7-0-0 (Yes-No-Abstain) to support.
Summary: This article proposes to fund a feasibility study for renovation and building improvement options for the Margaret A. Neary Elementary School, with the goal of estimating the cost of these options. The target cost of $15,000,000 for Option 2 is inclusive of the cost of the roof and any ADA compliance that is being considered under Article 4.
- Article 1 was unanimously supported by all Advisory members.
- Study would examine both full renovation and a limited‑scope option which may be beneficial
- Option 1: Full renovation of Neary
- Option 2: Targeted upgrades to extend life of the school
- Article 1 likely provides the most viable and straightforward path forward and builds on past feasibility studies.
- Support Article 1 given the immediate need to replace the Neary roof and the necessity of Neary remaining open for some period of years even if the reconfiguration described in Article 2 or 3 was ultimately approved.
- Lowest cost study option not to exceed $175K.
- Also unanimously supported by Select Board & School Committee.
Advisory Recommendation for Article 2
Voted 1-6-0 (Yes-No-Abstain) to not support
Summary: This article proposes funding a feasibility study for the P. Brent Trottier Middle School and the Mary E Finn Elementary Schools to determine the feasibility of constructing additions to accommodate Grade 5 at Trottier and Grade 2 at Finn. This would result in the Margaret A Neary Elementary School no longer being used as a school. Phase One of the study will include building system capacity analyses. and land and wetland surveys, for both schools. If Phase One indicates feasibility, then Phase Two will include schematic design, architectural and engineering work, preliminary site development plans, and cost estimates. The estimated cost of Phase One is $260,000. and the estimated cost of Phase Two is $240,000.
- Committee did not support Article 2 and the concerns included:
- Highest cost option at $500K.
- Likelihood study would not lead to a feasible project
- Overlap with other studies makes this a less desirable option
- Possible site-specific challenges that include septic and traffic constraints at Trottier and Finn
Advisory Recommendation for Article 3
Voted 3-4-0 (Yes-No-Abstain) to not support.
Summary: This article proposes to fund a Feasibility Study for the Mary E. Finn Elementary School to evaluate renovation and expansion of the existing facility to accommodate grades PreK – 3, including schematic design, architectural and engineering work, preliminary site development plans, and cost estimates. This would result in the Margaret A Neary Elementary School no longer being used as a school.
- More members supported Article 3 than Article 2 but Advisory still did not support Article 3.
- Cost not to exceed $324K from free cash.
- Concerns included:
- Cost and site complexity
- Questionable feasibility of expanding Finn due to proximity to major highway and challenging environmental and site-specific obstacles that are known from past exploration.
Advisory Recommendation for Article 4
Vote at Special Town Meeting
Summary: This article proposes to fund costs associated with the replacement of the roof at the Margaret A. Neary Elementary School, and associated ADA upgrades.
NOTE: Formal vote on Article 4 is deferred to Special Town Meeting due to content and wording of article 4 which may be updated pending the outcome of vote on Article 1.
- Advisory strongly supports funding the Neary 30‑year roof replacement.
- Committee voted unanimously in a straw poll to support a revised Article 4 that:
- Clearly lists the roof amount as $4.5M
- Separates or removes ADA costs
- Clearly explains when ADA upgrades are triggered (30% “circuit‑breaker” rule) since Advisory recommends transparency to voters on potential ADA triggers and related costs.
Important information related to the funding of Article 1, 2, 3:
Voters may vote to study all options, no options, or a combination thereof. Voters should be aware that approving Articles 1, 2, or 3 will use funds from free cash as listed in the warrant. The amount of free cash spent on each study will not be available to offset costs in the 2027 budget cycle and will therefore have the direct impact of raising your FY27 taxes. Article 4 does not use free cash but authorizes borrowing to fund the roof replacement. Article 4 will also require a vote at the ballot if passed at the Special Town Meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
Marci Jones, Chair
Andrew Pfaff, Vice Chair
Timothy Martel
Howard Rose
Barry Rubenstein
Larry Samberg
Erik Glaser
Again, for more details on members’ votes (especially the minority positions), click here.
Reminder: The Meeting is scheduled to open at 6:00 pm on Monday at Trottier Middle School, 49 Parkerville Road.
You can find the Town’s page with information on attending the meeting, and other relevant handouts/presentations here. You can find my past stories (and letters to the editor) related to the meeting and Articles here.
