School projects criticized by some officials
School projects criticized by some officials
By Zack Anchors
Staff writer
There is little disagreement amongst town officials that Scarborough needs to invest in a new intermediate school and make improvements to its middle school. What has stirred debate is how the town should go about that process, and specifically whether the proposals on this fall’s ballot are overly ambitious and costly or forward thinking and cost-effective.
In two separate questions focused on each of the schools, voters will decide whether to authorize the town to spend $55 million on the two projects – $38 million for a new intermediate school and $16 million for renovations and an addition at the middle school. While Superintendent David Doyle, School Board chair Robert Mitchell and many other town officials are endorsing the projects, some members of the Town Council and School Board are criticizing them.
Councilors Shawn Babine and Jeff Messer, who have both said they will vote against the projects, have each accused the town of disseminating misleading information to the public. They have criticized brochures and other marketing materials produced by the school that were intended to educate the public about the project.
One sentence of an introductory passage on one brochure has particularly concerned the councilors. It reads, “This plan has been unanimously approved by the School Board and Town Council.”
“I do not think that is true,” said Babine at the last council meeting, noting that he has consistently expressed reservations about the costs and scale of the projects.
Messer, who has also been critical of the projects, agreed.
“I don’t think that should be in there,” he said. “I think it’s misleading at best…I’m firmly on record as strongly opposed.”
But Doyle and Mitchell say the statement was not meant to suggest that the Town Council and School Board unanimously approved the projects themselves, but was instead meant to convey that the council and board had approved sending the projects to voters for their approval. Messer, Babine and the rest of the council and School Board did unanimously approve the questions to go to referendum.
Messer, through letters published in newspapers and packets distributed to the press, has launched a campaign against the projects to counter what he says is a massive marketing drive spearheaded by the school system. His criticisms focus on two main aspects of the projects – the cost impact of the projects on taxpayers and the size of the new buildings. Messer believes that the town’s estimates of the cost impact are “disingenuous” and that size of the schools, once the project is finished, would be far bigger than the town needs.
*These proposals are excessive under any standard of measurement,” said Messer. “I hate to categorize it in these terms, but it appears to be a conscious effort to mislead the public.”
Regarding the financial impact on the town, Messer takes issue with statistics distributed by the town that lay out how the projects would affect a taxpayer with a home assessed at the average valuation for Scarborough. Over the next five years, as the debt is paid off, the town projects that in the year with the highest impact, a homeowner would be paying around $70 in additional taxes. Messer calculates that the tax increase, as an average of the five years of highest impact, would be $462.41.
One reason for such a substantial discrepancy between the two calculations is the different figures Messer and the town are using as the average assessed valuation of a home in Scarborough. While the town uses $289,800 as the average, Messer begins with $371,600. According to Paul Lesperance, Scarborough’s assessor, the smaller average, which is from 2005, is based on all residential property except for mobile homes and “water-affected properties.” Lesperance said the town often removes the extremes – the very valuable and the least valuable properties – from the average when making estimates of financial impact. Superintendent Doyle said this approach was used to provide a more realistic reflection of how such a project would affect most citizens.
“The oceanfront properties skew the numbers,” Doyle said.
Messer’s much higher average, which is based on 2006, includes all residential property. He said that it would be unfair to owners of waterfront property to exclude their homes from the calculation.
“These people pay taxes too,“ he said. “I think you should average it all together.”
Mitchell said that financial information contained in the brochures was provided by the town. He said there are a number of different ways one could calculate the financial impact on the town.
“People can work numbers and interpret them how they want,” he said. “We just asked, ‘what’s the impact of this?” And the town came up with these numbers.”
On the issue of size, Messer questioned the statistics listed on brochures that describe the square-footage per student the finished buildings would provide. According to the town’s statistics, the middle school would provide 193 square feet per student, based on a student enrollment of 920. The intermediate school would provide 181 square-feet, based on a student enrollment of 968 students. Messer points to statistics that show the national average, the national median and the state minimum requirement of square-footage all as significantly lower than that of the proposed projects. He also argues that the brochures are misleading by also listing the square footage per student based on a student enrollment of 1,058 for the intermediate school and 1,100 for the middle school. Messer said that based on the school department’s own projections, neither school would reach nearly that level of enrollment. In a town document Messer refers to – taken from the town’s effort to update its comprehensive plan – the schools are estimated to peak at 794 students for grades three to five and 850 for grades six to eight.
“They’re planning to build at 150 students above their own projections and then they’re misleading people about it in the brochures,” said Messer.
Mitchell disagrees with Messer’s assessment of the projects scale.
“I’m not denying these are big,” Mitchell said, “But they are not off the chart in terms of what other schools in our geographical region are doing.”
Mitchell emphasizes that the project has already undergone a thorough review and has had certain elements eliminated or cut out to slim costs. He also said that even if the square footage were cut back, the cost savings would be minimal.
Messer argues that the projects should be cut back to a cost of around $25 million, which he says could be accomplished through lowering the square footage of the building.
Mitchell said he sees no way the plan could be reasonably cut back to $25 million.
“Could you could move some money around a bit? Sure,” he said. “Could you cut $25 million? No.”
By Zack Anchors
Staff writer
There is little disagreement amongst town officials that Scarborough needs to invest in a new intermediate school and make improvements to its middle school. What has stirred debate is how the town should go about that process, and specifically whether the proposals on this fall’s ballot are overly ambitious and costly or forward thinking and cost-effective.
In two separate questions focused on each of the schools, voters will decide whether to authorize the town to spend $55 million on the two projects – $38 million for a new intermediate school and $16 million for renovations and an addition at the middle school. While Superintendent David Doyle, School Board chair Robert Mitchell and many other town officials are endorsing the projects, some members of the Town Council and School Board are criticizing them.
Councilors Shawn Babine and Jeff Messer, who have both said they will vote against the projects, have each accused the town of disseminating misleading information to the public. They have criticized brochures and other marketing materials produced by the school that were intended to educate the public about the project.
One sentence of an introductory passage on one brochure has particularly concerned the councilors. It reads, “This plan has been unanimously approved by the School Board and Town Council.”
“I do not think that is true,” said Babine at the last council meeting, noting that he has consistently expressed reservations about the costs and scale of the projects.
Messer, who has also been critical of the projects, agreed.
“I don’t think that should be in there,” he said. “I think it’s misleading at best…I’m firmly on record as strongly opposed.”
But Doyle and Mitchell say the statement was not meant to suggest that the Town Council and School Board unanimously approved the projects themselves, but was instead meant to convey that the council and board had approved sending the projects to voters for their approval. Messer, Babine and the rest of the council and School Board did unanimously approve the questions to go to referendum.
Messer, through letters published in newspapers and packets distributed to the press, has launched a campaign against the projects to counter what he says is a massive marketing drive spearheaded by the school system. His criticisms focus on two main aspects of the projects – the cost impact of the projects on taxpayers and the size of the new buildings. Messer believes that the town’s estimates of the cost impact are “disingenuous” and that size of the schools, once the project is finished, would be far bigger than the town needs.
*These proposals are excessive under any standard of measurement,” said Messer. “I hate to categorize it in these terms, but it appears to be a conscious effort to mislead the public.”
Regarding the financial impact on the town, Messer takes issue with statistics distributed by the town that lay out how the projects would affect a taxpayer with a home assessed at the average valuation for Scarborough. Over the next five years, as the debt is paid off, the town projects that in the year with the highest impact, a homeowner would be paying around $70 in additional taxes. Messer calculates that the tax increase, as an average of the five years of highest impact, would be $462.41.
One reason for such a substantial discrepancy between the two calculations is the different figures Messer and the town are using as the average assessed valuation of a home in Scarborough. While the town uses $289,800 as the average, Messer begins with $371,600. According to Paul Lesperance, Scarborough’s assessor, the smaller average, which is from 2005, is based on all residential property except for mobile homes and “water-affected properties.” Lesperance said the town often removes the extremes – the very valuable and the least valuable properties – from the average when making estimates of financial impact. Superintendent Doyle said this approach was used to provide a more realistic reflection of how such a project would affect most citizens.
“The oceanfront properties skew the numbers,” Doyle said.
Messer’s much higher average, which is based on 2006, includes all residential property. He said that it would be unfair to owners of waterfront property to exclude their homes from the calculation.
“These people pay taxes too,“ he said. “I think you should average it all together.”
Mitchell said that financial information contained in the brochures was provided by the town. He said there are a number of different ways one could calculate the financial impact on the town.
“People can work numbers and interpret them how they want,” he said. “We just asked, ‘what’s the impact of this?” And the town came up with these numbers.”
On the issue of size, Messer questioned the statistics listed on brochures that describe the square-footage per student the finished buildings would provide. According to the town’s statistics, the middle school would provide 193 square feet per student, based on a student enrollment of 920. The intermediate school would provide 181 square-feet, based on a student enrollment of 968 students. Messer points to statistics that show the national average, the national median and the state minimum requirement of square-footage all as significantly lower than that of the proposed projects. He also argues that the brochures are misleading by also listing the square footage per student based on a student enrollment of 1,058 for the intermediate school and 1,100 for the middle school. Messer said that based on the school department’s own projections, neither school would reach nearly that level of enrollment. In a town document Messer refers to – taken from the town’s effort to update its comprehensive plan – the schools are estimated to peak at 794 students for grades three to five and 850 for grades six to eight.
“They’re planning to build at 150 students above their own projections and then they’re misleading people about it in the brochures,” said Messer.
Mitchell disagrees with Messer’s assessment of the projects scale.
“I’m not denying these are big,” Mitchell said, “But they are not off the chart in terms of what other schools in our geographical region are doing.”
Mitchell emphasizes that the project has already undergone a thorough review and has had certain elements eliminated or cut out to slim costs. He also said that even if the square footage were cut back, the cost savings would be minimal.
Messer argues that the projects should be cut back to a cost of around $25 million, which he says could be accomplished through lowering the square footage of the building.
Mitchell said he sees no way the plan could be reasonably cut back to $25 million.
“Could you could move some money around a bit? Sure,” he said. “Could you cut $25 million? No.”
Comments