Northborough,
Massachusetts
SYNOPSIS
Synopsis of
KEY
COMMITTEES/EVENTS/DATES OVER PAST 5 YEARS
The Architect for the Feasibility Study Committee spent months mapping the existing facility, meeting with teachers, department heads and administrators, and eventually compiling a comprehensive analysis for the gross space needs of the growing student population. Throughout this analysis, the architect utilized the services of several consulting firms. Foley and Buhl Engineering was engaged to assess the structural needs of the facility, SAR Engineering was hired to analyze the mechanical, electrical, plumbing, fire safety and technological aspects of the facility, and Graves Engineering was retained to do an analysis of the septic system for the school. All of this information was then filtered back through the Feasibility Study Committee, who then spent another several months of analysis, paring down this gross square footage, by taking into consideration multiple uses and the sharing of spaces within the building. After much work and discussion, the FSC reported, the gross square footage required for an expanded 1500 student high school, to the Regional School Committee in December of 1997. In early January 1998, SBAB gave its preliminary approval for an addition/renovation for Algonquin.
It was at this time, that the Regional School Committee began to receive additional input back from the Town boards, in addition to the previous input of the members of the FSC. We were asked to validate our enrollment projections by hiring another firm and requesting multiple enrollment projection methodologies. We were asked to look at alternatives to a Renovation/Addition, such as total replacement of the existing building with a new building as well as the idea of separate schools for each community. A Building Planning Committee was formed in March of 1998.
The New England School Development Council was further retained to prepare a narrative report for the Building Planning Committee, comparing and contrasting the three alternatives that had been suggested for study, which was completed in August of 1998. Ropes and Gray, a legal firm out of Boston with a great deal of experience with Regional School Districts, provided input throughout the process. We also utilize their services as Bond Counsel to the District.
It was determined that a Request for Proposal be issued, advertising the need for Architectural Services of a broader scope than that for which we originally contracted. This included the requirement for three separate schematic plans; one for a Renovation/Addition, one for a New Build and one for two separate high schools. Keyes Associates as one of the respondents to the RFP, was selected as the Architectural firm to take us through this next phase of analysis. Keyes Associates also engaged the firm of D.G. Jones & Partners as the professionals to prepare the conceptual cost estimates.
H.C. Planning Consultants, out of Orange, CT, was hired to do the expanded enrollment study, utilizing multiple projection methodologies, as well as projecting the high school enrollments out 20 years, instead of 10 years.
The Building Planning Committee, took in all of this new information and, in turn compared and contrasted these options with both an eye to the educational value as well as the financial implications of each. Several other options were posed along the way and examined, but the viability of these three remained under the strongest consideration. Again, this Building Planning Committee had a broad-based membership consisting of a spectrum of people from the School District and from each town.
All Building Planning Committee meetings were televised, interim reports were made to both boards of selectmen and to the finance boards from each community, with informational presentations at all Town Meetings as well. Public hearings were held in January of 1999 and public input elicited. The large majority who attended these Public Hearings indicated a strong preference for a New Regional High School on additional land to be purchased from the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company. In this same approximate time frame, the Boards of Selectmen in both towns each formed their own High School Study committees to examine these options as well. In March of 1999, the BPC made its recommendations to the RSC. The recommendation was that the purchase of additional land and to build a New Regional High School was the optimal solution. The BPC also reported that a second option of a renovation/addition was also viable, but not preferable, and the reasons for both recommendations were presented as part of the BPC report to the RSC.
The RSC deliberated for 3 months over the information that had been presented to it by the BPC. It was the unanimous recommendation of the RSC in June of 1999, to recommend the purchase of the additional land and to build a new regional high school on the expanded site. It was also noted, that due to the information from the enrollment projection studies, the formula for sharing capital costs between the two communities would need to be revised to fairly reflect the differing growth rates of the two towns. A sub committee of the RSC was formed to examine this issue and make a recommendation for a new formula, which would be brought to the voters at the Town Meetings as well. In August of 1999, the SBAB gave its preliminary approval for the New Regional High School as well as the land purchase.
As negotiations for the land acquistion were continuing, we retained Brackett and Lucas as legal counsel for either purchase or eminent domain proceedings. We were given permission by the owner to do some site testing. Several consultants were utilized in this process, including Zoino-Hebert Engineers, Vanasse Hangen Brustlin (land development), SEA Consultants (Town of Southborough’s consulting engineers), Hygienetics Inc., GeoEnvironmental, Inc. and Horne and Hastings (appraisers).
The issues of the change in the cost sharing, the land acquisition and the design fees for a New Algonquin were brought to the voters in March and April of 2000. All three of these articles passed at the Northborough Town meeting. The land purchase and design fees passed at the Southborough Town meeting, but the new cost sharing formula did not. The Debt exclusion for the land passed in Northborough, but the debt exclusion for the design fees failed by a small margin. The Debt exclusions for the land and the design fees both passed in Southborough. There were 10 “yes” votes needed between the two towns, to move the entire project forward. 8 out of the 10 questions received “yes” votes. The cost sharing still needed to be resolved to Southborough’s satisfaction and the debt exclusion for design fees needed to be resolved to Northborough’s satisfaction. After issuing a Request for Proposal, the Regional District engaged the services of Fleet Financial Advisors to work with us through the financing of a major capital project.
In May of 2000, a cross-town working group was formed to discuss and negotiate a new cost sharing arrangement. It was hoped by the RSC that these new recommendations would not only answer the Southborough concerns regarding fairness of cost sharing, but also allay the fears of the Northborough voters with respect to the design fees for the new building.
New Town Meetings were called for September 11, 2000, with a debt exclusion ballot the following day in Northborough. Southborough chose not to re-vote the design fees that had previously passed both at Town Meeting and at the ballot, so the only question pertinent to the Algonquin project on the Southborough warrant, was the approval of the new cost sharing. It passed at the Southborough Town meeting. Northborough had on its Town Meeting Warrant both the new cost sharing as well as the design fees for the new building. Both passed at the Northborough Town meeting. However, again, the debt exclusion for the design fees failed at the Northborough ballot the next day by a small margin. So this time, we needed 4 additional “yes” votes to move the total project forward, and we were successful in 3 out the 4.
The RSC held several public meetings following the September 11 & 12 votes, to hear concerns about the proposal. The major concerns were itemized and examined. An action plan to address those was developed. On October 18, the RSC took a vote to bring a modified proposal to the voters of both towns through a Regional Vote on November 18.