By Dakota Antelman — [email protected]
The School Committee is moving ahead with its $1.85 million bathroom building proposal for Concord-Carlisle High School despite setbacks in its efforts to minimize the cost to taxpayers.
A year after the committee withdrew an earlier proposal, officials have delivered a cheaper option. But thanks to several rejections, the committee is still preparing to ask voters to foot the bathroom bill with no help from any other funding sources in Concord.
School Committee member Alexa Anderson said she is “optimistic” about public support even as financial leaders sound alarms about municipal spending.
Schools Superintendent Laurie Hunter told the Community Preservation Committee that if the measure fails, it’s unclear what will happen next.
“I don’t know what the options will be next year,” she said.
Alternative funding
The amenities building would be a concrete block structure near CCHS’ Memorial Field. It would replace three portable toilets that school leaders say don’t comply with state building codes or the Americans with Disabilities Act.
In a January 14 meeting with the CPC, CCHS School Committee chair Julie Viola said officials have heard “heartbreaking stories” about people who can’t get into the portables. She and others said they’re also worried the town could face a formal complaint and legal liability.
Besides bathrooms, the building could include storage space and a concession stand. (School Committee member Brian Waterson said officials must cut a proposed trainer’s room to qualify for Community Preservation Act funding, which is limited to certain uses.)
The School Committee approved funding the full cost of the project on February 4, moments after the CPC rejected a $750,000 funding request. The matter will next go before Town Meeting in Concord and Carlisle, where residents will weigh whether to shoulder the tax burden.
Deadline for dollars
The $1.85 million Town Meeting request represents the high end of the estimated cost. The low end is $1.55 million.
School leaders said they heard a mandate from town leaders last spring to shield taxpayers from some of the project’s impact.
At the January 14 CPC meeting, Viola said officials tried and failed to get money through the American Rescue Plan Act and Concord’s recreation fund. She said the School Committee also tried to work with the nonprofit Concord Carlisle At Play to fundraise, but “the runway was just too short.”
Due to conflicting information about eligibility for CPA funding, Concord school officials missed a key deadline. They then asked the CPC to accept an out-of-cycle application.
Officials in Carlisle filed a separate but smaller application and still hope to receive funding there.
Concord and Carlisle would share the amenities building costs under the terms of their regional school agreement. In an email to The Concord Bridge on February 5, Viola said officials were waiting to hear from experts on whether the agreement would allow them to apply Carlisle CPC money solely to Carlisle’s bill.
CPC push
On January 14, several Concord CPC members backed the project but noted concerns that it did not meet the committee’s criteria for accepting late requests. Making an exception, members argued, would set a precedent.
“We have rules for a reason,” member Sue Felshin said when the CPC reconvened on February 4.
Fellow member Diane Proctor was among those pushing back. In a town “reeling from heavy tax burdens,” she said she thought the committee had “a fiscal and emotional responsibility” to support the amenities building and lower costs at Town Meeting.
Several CPC members — those who opposed an out-of-cycle application but supported the amenities building — said the schools should delay construction and file for CPA money next year.
Policy change?
The final CPC decision was 5-4 against a motion from Proctor to accept the CCHS application and advance it to Town Meeting for final approval. Though his was a “no” vote, committee member John Cratsley said he might have voted differently if the committee had a policy allowing it to accept new applications when it has large amounts of unspent funds, as it does this year.
The money, he said, “shouldn’t sit here.”
Committee member Paul Boehm voted “yes” and said “it might be worth examining policies.”
Officials noted that the CPC was just the most recent organization to say “no” to CCHS. Undeterred by the rejections, Anderson said she was happy the School Committee stuck with its plan to send the amenities building to Town Meeting.
Before and after their vote, School Committee members previewed a public relations approach.
“This is not for our sports teams,” said committee member Tracey Marano. “This is for the community to use, and it really is a compliance issue.”
