The other day setheman asked
I caught the tail end of the [Selectmen's] meeting on TV and heard Bill K. mention among other things that the town did not receive a grant that they applied for for the SMA land and building and that we are now $500K short on getting that work done. Did we not approriate the funds for the work when we voted to increase our taxes? I was under the impression the grant money would have been gravy to the project for the proverbial "nice to haves".
Our Town Administrator did say that the other night, and it turns out there are two reasons why we are short. First of all, the Norfolk County engineers gave us a bad estimate on what it cost to develop the property. Secondly, in the two and one half years since the voters approved the debt exclusion, prices for everything have gone up.
It was the Selectmen who sponsored the article originally. Look at what Mrs. Kehoe, then the Chairman of the Board, told us at the time:
Our purchase price is $2,900,000 with a fiscal note of $850,000 for further development. ... It will cost no more than the fiscal note attached.
As bad as that sounds, it isn't even close to the only promise made at that Meeting not fulfilled. |
| Mrs Kehoe also promised us four fields on the property: two little league fields, a soccer field, and a fourth field that had not yet been drawn on the plan but would "possibly be used for girls stick ball." She then told Town Meeting that "the property will be ready to go probably late next fall or early next spring." For those of you paying attention that is the fall of 2006 or spring of 2007.
She wasn't the only one to say this. JuJu Muccaccio, Director of Parks and Recreation, got up to the mike a little later and said if the property is purchased "We'd have two fields up there next year." He then said that girls softball would move there and, if you remember, girls softball had recently been displaced because tar came bubbling up at Churchill Park and ruined the field. He later got up a second time repeated his pledge: "[Y]ou've got two places to put two ball fields that could be ready for next year."
We're not done yet. Three promises is not enough, so Parks and Recreation Commissioner Jim Maher approached the microphone and also pledged that the bond would "provide the money to develop those fields." He continued a moment later and said
It has field locations which are ready made for at least two fields right off the bat and developed, which is going to elevate [Brian's note: I think he meant ease] the burden on the fields that we have now for Little League, girls softball, lacrosse, soccer, and a majority of the high school sports.
Those of you at this Meeting will remember that comparisons were made to the Striar property, in the sense that we purchased it a few years back but it still sat, unused. (At their last meeting the Parks and Rec Commission did give preliminary approval to a plan that would give vehicular access to the site so we could begin developing it. This is by way of an easement the Town Meeting accepted over a year ago, and it still isn't finalized.)
Don't compare this to Striar, we were told. They are entirely different. JuJu went so far as to call the comparisons "a bit ridiculous." It's true that the Striar vote did not include money for development. However, the concerns then were that a couple years down the line we would find ourselves in the same situation, i.e., all this money spent and no fields to show for it.
Mrs Kehoe also told the Meeting that
There are wetlands on the property. However, Don Yonika, the agent for the Dedham Conservation Commission, has assured us that given the intended use of the fields there should be no issue. ... Bill Keegan and Charlie Sanchez, David Field, our engineer, and I met on the site with two engineers representing the Army Corps of Engineers [who own the riverbank]. Subsequent to that meeting Bill Keegan received a call from the agency advising us that they did not have an issue with our intended use.
Fast forward. When the Recreation Department finally got a plan that would work for the site (which was now down to two fields, and not enough parking to use them both at the same time) they brought it to the Conservation Commission. The ConCom issued a long list of conditions for using the site, including installing a mutli-surface field instead of a regular dirt one. This would be a wise move for practical reasons beyond simply ecological ones, but it also comes with a considerable additional expense, one not budgeted for in the original vote.
So, we are left with two options for how this could have happened. Either Mrs. Kehoe lied to us, or our Conservation Agent didn't do a full analysis of the property. In either case it is clear that the Selectmen did not consult with the ConCom first to see what they would have to say.
This is what was told to Town Meeting, and this is what was told to the voters. The SMA Recreation Team (SMART), the committee which advocated for the purchase of the land, sent out letters and "Dear Friend" cards before the special election telling voters that
[T]own meeting approved the purchase of this land for $2.9 million and an additional $875,000 for improvements to make it ready for immediate use.
They also distributed palm cards that said a yes vote would bring two "ball fields," one soccer field and "space for future playing fields." Notice the use of the plural at the end there. It seems to imply that that we would eventually end up with 5 or more fields. By my reading it also says that we'd get the two baseball diamonds and a soccer field right away, with these additional fields some time down the line. Perhaps by 2008.
To be fair I was an advocate for purchasing this land at the time, and I still feel it was a good investment for the Town's future. However I feel I was misled and ill served by those I trusted to give me the relevant facts on which I based my opinion and, more importantly, my vote. You will remember that this debt exclusion passed by a mere 4 votes, and only then because Precinct One voters came out for it in uncharacteristic numbers.
That is all the past, as ugly as it is. Now we are stuck with this mess, so where do we go from here? We are unlikely to get the grant anytime in the future as we are not an urban enough community for the grant giver's tastes. The project is going to go out to bid again, and hopefully the price will come down. It is currently bid out at $1.2 million, or $350,000 more than was originally appropriated for the purpose. If you take out the money that was already spent on things like making the building handicapped accessible and replacing the heating system, and add in things like the multi-surface field, you have a gap of over a half million dollars that needs to be made up.
I highly doubt that, as hungry as people are for work in this economic climate, the bids will come down that much. If this is to happen we will have to take money out of either the Mitigation Funds account, or free cash, or both. This is money that could be used for other things such as, oh, I don't know, perhaps making sure students have books in the classroom.
Or, I suppose, we could always borrow the money. Why not? We are paying interest on the original bond right now with nothing in the way of new fields to show for it. Tonight the School Building/ Rehabilitation Committee is meeting to discuss progress made on the new Avery School. When it comes time to vote for an override on that project will people be asking what ever happened to the money we voted for the SMA? Given the way the Senior Center override went down I'm willing to bet it will be in the minds of some. Who knows, it could sway the votes of 4 people. |
