74°
GRAFTON, Mass. – The Board of Selectmen is seeking support from the School Committee for a proposed $4.5 million overhaul of the Municipal Center, a project that would be paid in part by surplus funds and energy savings from the new Grafton High School.
If the proposal sounds familiar, that's no accident: the plan is a more tightly focused version of the Honeywell energy savings project that failed at a special town meeting earlier this year.
"I'm almost glad it didn't pass," Selectman John Dowling told the School Committee Monday night. "It gave us the opportunity to look at the issue a little closer."
Specifically, it allowed the town to complete a structural study of the Municipal Center, which served as Grafton's high school in 1950 and converted to town offices in 1983. The study, completed in May by MVA Engineering Company of Shrewsbury, determined the building is structurally sound but in need extensive repairs to its heating/cooling system, leaking windows and roof and brickwork.
"We're pushing for this project because we don't want a larger liability later on," Dowling said.
The project would also include about $1.7 million in repairs to school boilers, bringing the total project to just under $5.3 million.
Replacing the building entirely would cost about $11 million. What Town Administrator Tim McInerney is proposing is a project that he said will repair the existing structure without raising the tax rate using:
- $1 million in surplus funds from the $73 million Grafton High School construction;
- $1 million in stabilization funds plus $50,000 through a town meeting warrant article;
- $219,000 from a utility rebate from the new high school;
- $111,395 from a utility rebate;
- Savings and credits of $75,000 from the Follette Street solar project and $268,679 in utility reductions.
"This is no longer an energy project," Selectman Chairperson David Ross said. "This is a capital project."
Selectmen will hold three public forums before town meeting to educate voters about the proposal. The School Committee agreed to add discussion about the project to its upcoming meetings.
Comments (9)
Where the heck are we finding all this money all of a sudden??? I feel the "excess" monies should stay with the school for a few years to make sure they can operate within their budget. This new school has a "punch list" of over 1000 items one of them most notable the water stain on the ceiling in the common area. Really a brand new multimillion dollar building and they can't get the roof to not leak? I think the money should stay with the school until everything is done and they have operated for a couple years. Just my opinion.
It's the same bottom line dollars as before, but the T.A. and the Selectmen have uped almost all the input funds from before. The bottom line last time is that Honeywell was going to make $1.6 million to oversee a $3.7 million repair/replacment project.
This proposal should be scruntinized by all, because as I said before, the last proposal hurt the schools' operating budget by over $200k per year. While at town meeting the Selectmen would only say that it would not raise your taxes next year.
If I was so wrong back then, then why have the $ inputs been jacked up accordingly.
I'm a man of money, and when the money becomes funny, I back away. Especially when the first "honest" presentation was such a dog for the community.
Trust me, this proposal can be brocken down into simpler parts, that can be performed over a period of time.
I find it intriguing that the Selectman must ask the School Committee for their cooperation in this savings program. My tax dollars go to the TOWN, not just to one department or another. So, if there is a program that can wisely save the town some money, individual departments should do what is best for the TOWN, not just for their little fiefdom. Using energy savings to enhance town-owned properties is the smart thing to do. The School Committee should stop treating their precious school buildings as some separate nation-state. Those school buildings belong to the TOWN.
Hey...I know where we can find another $91,000...stop playing around with that external grid thing on the new high school.
Mr. Scully,
Town Meeting voted for the construction of a new Grafton High School. The plans were shown at TM to remove the park. Even in your letter to the editor of this website in July you recognize the park was in disrepair, blocked off and not accessible to all children, is that what you want these groups to replace? The park needed to be replaced as everyone knew. So what did they "break"? You certainly can look to use the "left over" money but from watching other groups you better get in line, others want it as you point out.
Your statement "they alone should be responsible for replacing Super Park" is insulting and incorrect. The RESIDENTS of GRAFTON voted for the new school knowing the park would need to be replaced at a later time and place. That is why the Super Park Committee was formed. So please stop whining and crying and do your job as chairman of that committee.
@SHTF: Clearly missed my point or misinterpreted it.
Just because plans showed tennis courts where the original SuperPark was does not implicitly mean that those who wanted & voted for a school also wanted to displace SuperPark.
The state of the original SuperPark does not change the fact that it was displaced plain and simple. They should have planned ahead for and allocated some amount of funds to replace the park they displaced. They did not - that was my point.
My statement "they alone should be responsible for replacing SuperPark" --- how is it in any way insulting or incorrect? The key word is "replacing" which means something at least equal to what they displaced, I did not say upgrading, improving or making accessible.
Your quote "The Residents of Grafton voted for the new school knowing the park would need to be replaced" is what is incorrect. Many of the residents of Grafton that I serve on the committee with are on the committee because they want to replace what was taken. In fact, the committee was actually formed because residents of Grafton argued my exact point that the replacement should have been planned for in advance. It was not until those residents pushed the Board of Selectman that a committee was actually formed. The committee was formed to plan for a future SuperPark.
We may disagree on the source of funding or even who is responsible but to claim I am somehow whining and crying and not doing my job is absolutely ridiculous. I am proudly doing my job, serving the town and my fellow residents of Grafton on the SuperPark Committee: working hard to rebuild & replace what was torn down with amodern and accessible recreational opportunity for all the children of Grafton. We welcome your constructive feedback but please keep baseless & unsigned accusations to your self.
Before any "surplus funds from the $73 million Grafton High School construction" are spent, the High School Building Committee, the School Committee and the Town should replace what they destroyed.
The new Grafton High School displaced, multiple recreation opportunities for the children of Grafton and they did so without forward thinking or planning for the replacement of these areas. I was raised to believe "when you break it, you bought it" - so in this case, the new Grafton High School not only "broke" it, they eliminated the Grafton SuperPark and they alone should be responsible for at least replacing SuperPark.
Why should the SuperPark Committee have to approach the town to appropriate funds to replace something the new High School construction project destroyed? I would think it is common sense that any left over funds from the School Project should be used to rebuild SuperPark first before using them for other projects.
Grafton High School Building Committee & Grafton School Committee: You removed recreational opportunities from the town of Grafton, displaced SuperPark, Skate Park and Basketball courts, please do the responsible thing and replace them!
Mike Scully
Chairman
Grafton SuperPark Committee
www.GraftonSuperPark.com
What a joke, Haha those fools at the Highway Garage are getting left out again. I go to the Municipal Center quite often for certain business and I go to the Highway Garage for my recycling and grass clippings and I cannot believe that this town would put another penny into anything without addressing that mess of a building. Does the Municipal Center have Water pour in when it Rains? Is the ceiling collapsing in different areas at the Municipal Center? Does the Plumbing leak and drain all over the floors at the municipal Center? Are there Wires exposed at the Municipal Center? Are the walls covered with soot and exhaust film at the municipal Center? Is the Mortar and Bricks falling off the walls at the Municipal Center? I could go on and on. Anyone here can go to either building and see whats worse. This is outright shameful on the towns part. How about the Town administrator and the Board of Selectmen Start working out of the Highway Barn and then see how long it takes for something to be done at that place.
I'm not sure why would invest $4.5 million into a building this old when it could be replaced for $11 million. I'm certain there will be more necessary repairs in the not too distant future. Please re-think allocating these funds!
Where is the high school building committee? Are they not the controllers of the funds (73m$)? I don't think the school committee has control of the funds.