Our humble opinion on the school building debate…
Published on February 27th, 2002
STONEHAM, MA - After reviewing our print debate, The Independent recommends supporting the schools request to add $6 million to the debt exclusion to finish the elementary school building project.
Valid reasons exist to vote for and against Article 2 of the March 4 Special Town Meeting, but upon closer examination, the scale tips toward yes. The paper takes this position because the best reasons to vote against Article 2 are based not in the failings of the Article but in frustration with past actions or ongoing policies of the School Department.
Some people argue that voting down Article 2, regardless of its merits, is a necessary step toward bringing the School Department budget under control. These people think the school budget has been growing too rapidly, increasing taxes and encroaching on other town departments. Even if another $6 million won’t cost or impact much, these folks ask, “When will it stop?” And they answer, “Now.”
This argument makes sense, but it would carry more weight if Article 2 were a token request from the schools. But this article is about two schools, millions of dollars and generations of kids. Making a point, even a valid one, at the expense of the town’s best interests is not the answer. This opinion is offered, humbly, from someone with no children and no Stoneham property taxes.
I. Disagreeing with the no’s
The no arguments cite taxes, economic uncertainty and a perceived arrogance or mismanagement of the schools as reasons to vote no.
Taxes: The Finance and Advisory Board has recommended favorable action on the article. The Board says the most drastic effect on residential taxes will be an additional 28 cents per thousand dollars next year and eight more cents the next year, followed by a gradual decline in impact.
The schools project looks good because of its minimal effect on taxes — four new state of the art schools for less than 50 cents more per thousand dollars of property taxes. Good schools might very easily allow homeowners to recoup this difference many times over if they sell their homes in the future.
Economic uncertainty: Not taking the state money now means losing out on more than $5 million. Waiting to use the rest of the money approved by Town Meeting really kills the town because this money is borrowed, not in hand, and short term interest before construction is not reimbursable by the State. Long term interest after construction begins is reimbursable. The State has already started paying us back. Also, the reimbursement rate for new projects has already decreased, and if the State ever runs out of money and cuts towns off, common sense says this becomes more likely the further a community is down the list of projects.
Because the economic future of Massachusetts is uncertain Stoneham should take everything it can get from the State right now. The analogy to home finances that some people draw — spending less in uncertain times — is inaccurate because no one ever comes to your home offering money you’ll never have to pay back.
Attitude: A lot of folks think the schools have an arrogant disregard for taxpayers. These critics cite the higher annual cost of living adjustment increase for teachers than municipal employees, the separate articles for items like textbooks and computers that would traditionally be part of a department budget for all other municipal departments and the $190,000 of accrued vacation leave paid to school employees, again funded with a Town Meeting article outside the school budget.
But people should remember that teachers are required to take continuing education courses, and new teachers must earn their master’s degrees within five years. Teachers have to pay these costs out of pocket. Most municipal employees have no graduate school requirements.
The Education Reform Act has mandated a shift in curriculum in all subjects, changing some programs nine times before settling on a course of study. New curricula require new materials, but the state does not pay for them.
Town Meeting approved articles to buy back accrued vacation time from policemen and firefighters, and then the policy was changed so these employees cannot stockpile vacation days. The schools similarly changed their policy and are in the process of paying back the people who accrued the time before the policy change.
The schools are a gigantic department budget and the School Committee has always been vocal and passionate. But being big and loud does not mean you’re a bully, it just means you get a lot of attention.
Management: The Big Dig is a disgrace in large part because contractors have used change orders to radically increase project costs over bids. The two Stoneham schools built so far have been built less than one percent over the bids. The problem has been that bids came in above the architects estimates.
The Building Committee kept such close scrutiny of the schools project that the Central School, after change order credits, cost slightly less than the bid price.
And, finally, the decision by the Department of Revenue to allow Article 2 to stand without a second townwide vote indicates that the State agrees that the scope of the project has not changed from what Stoneham voters approved in 1997.
II. Agreeing with the yes’s
Most of the arguments made in support of Article 2 presented the points discussed above, but others added another dimension to the debate.
Arguments were made that it would be unfair not to complete the project and provide all Stoneham children with the same new state of the art elementary school experience.
The proponents of Article 2 focus on the minimal impact of the Article and the greater good, these people believe, the new schools will achieve — a better educated community with higher property values and a better quality of life.
III. Devil’s advocate
Stoneham doesn’t have to finish the schools. The town could return the remainder of funds borrowed under the original school project article. The economy is weak, but everything moves in cycles. This cycle Stoneham got a Senior Center, Police Station and two new schools. Five, 10, maybe 20 years from now, the town will get some more — a new fire station, a new DPW roof and more schools.
To maintain town jobs and services and to keep taxes steady, Stoneham must spend responsibly. To make sure no one department or special interest gains an undemocratic share of power, Town Meeting must be firm and fair...
But Stoneham may never have another opportunity to do so much good for so little money, and if State money offered to the schools is not used, down the road a share of town money that would otherwise go to the DPW or Fire Department could go to the schools.
The Independent says take the money, but the voters have the final say at Town Meeting on March 4 at 7:30 p.m. in the Town Hall Auditorium.
IV. Nuts and bolts
•Stoneham citizens who do not know what precinct they are in should call the Town Clerk’s Office at 781-279-2650. Remember a seventh precinct was added last year. Knowing your precinct will save time at the start of what promises to be a wild meeting.
•Article 2 requires a two-thirds majority vote to pass.
•Twenty-five voters standing can call for a secret ballot vote.
Subscribe and get Home Delivery of The Independent
Save 36% off the newstand price — that's like 18 FREE issues!