Jeff Dieffenbach

for Wayland School Committee

Please support the High School and municipal Debt Exclusions By Jeff Dieffenbach Wayland Town Crier Thu Mar 26, 2009 WAYLAND – Few if any issues in Town history have been more skillfully and thoroughly studied than the critical facility needs at Wayland High School. Despite the rigor of this study, vocal critics raise unfounded objections that, left unaddressed, threaten to gain traction well beyond their merit. Based on my 14 years of experience in Wayland town government, I've compiled a series of questions and accompanying answers, including one that I've yet to see elsewhere, that confronts and overcomes these objections. Q: How bad are the facility conditions at Wayland High School? A: The deficiencies at WHS are severe enough to threaten accreditation, and potentially, the ability to keep the facility open at all. This conclusion is not just the opinion of a few in town: since 2002, three study groups made up of more than 200 residents have reached general agreement on this point. Moreover, this conclusion is shared by four disparate organizations beyond our borders: the Division of Occupational Safety (DOS), the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), the accrediting New England Association of Schools and Colleges (NEASC), and the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA). Q: What is the nature of these deficiencies? A: The deficiencies at WHS fall into three broad categories: poor and potentially dangerous conditions, overcrowding, and inability to deliver a contemporary educational program. Q: How can overcrowding be an issue in an era of declining enrollment? A: The current enrollment is on the order of 900 students, and is not expected to drop below 800 in the foreseeable future. Over the longer run of a 50-plus year facility life, the cyclical nature of Wayland's total and student population is likely to push the number back up again. Yet based on contemporary standards, the square footage of the current facility would be rated to hold only on the order of 650 students. Q: What happens if the school loses its accreditation and/or runs the risk of being closed? A: Rather than paying for a well-designed and cost-efficient facility funded with state reimbursement on the order of 40%, Wayland residents would be forced into an endless cycle of educationally stagnant, potentially costly, and non-reimbursed patchwork fixes. This is a critical point: doing nothing isn't an option, and going it alone will be expensive and educationally inferior. Q: What is the question at hand? A: At the polls via a Debt Exclusion ballot question on April 7, at Annual Town Meeting via a funding Warrant article beginning April 13, and at the Special Town Meeting via a procedural Warrant article on April 15, Wayland voters are being asked to approve and fund what promises to be the second to last project phase: feasibility study and schematic design. Q: What is the cost of this feasibility study and schematic design phase? A: The price of this phase, based on the MSBA requirements, will be no more than $1,026,000. Q: Will Wayland foot the entire bill for this work? A: No. This new borrowing won't be spent without the minimum 40% state reimbursement, or up to $410,400 on the $1,026,000 maximum. Of Wayland's $615,600 share, $300,000 has already been raised, resulting in a net new borrowing of $315,600. Q: How much will this new borrowing raise Wayland's overall debt? A: Because old debt is being retired, the total of this and other new debt will not increase the level of overall debt nor the portion of tax bill required to service this debt. Q: With the upcoming votes, are we committing to the entire project? A: No. We expect to come back to the Town within 6 to 12 months for a vote on the final phase--detailed design and facility construction--only upon project, timing, and cost approval of the MSBA, and only with their guarantee of reimbursement. Q: How long will we have to wait to see state reimbursement? A: Unlike in the past, when the state payment took years to materialize, future reimbursement will closely follow each payment made by Wayland. Q: Given the state of the economy, does it make sense to move forward now? A: Yes, for several reasons. First, the state has available funds now, but with a softening of sales tax revenue that provides for those funds, there is a real risk of running short. As one of only 19 projects in the state with current MSBA approval to proceed, Wayland's chances for going ahead are strong. With many more projects waiting in line, however, this window may only be open for a short time, such that delaying will seriously jeopardize the prospects for state reimbursement. Second, experts agree that construction prices won't be better in the foreseeable future. Third, the bulk of the expense will not be born by current residents in the current economy, but rather by facility users over a twenty to thirty year period. Q: The need is clear and the timing sounds right. But Wayland High School is of a historically significant and award-winning design--how can we propose what is likely to be a character-altering alternative? A: Times change. Just as we would not think of buying a new car or piece of computer equipment today built on the technology of half a century ago, nor should we necessarily base the education of tomorrow on the ideas of yesterday. Fifty years ago, it was perhaps appropriate to commission the award-winning likes of Walter Gropius' The Architect's Collaborative. Today, in the shadow of the cautionary lesson of Newton North High School and their hiring of another famous architect, Graham Gund, a more practical sensibility is in order. I have no doubt that Wayland High School will continue to win awards. As has been the case for years, however, these awards will not be given to the facility, but rather, be earned within it. Please join me in voting in favor of the High School Debt Exclusion at the polls on April 7, the funding Warrant Article at Annual Town Meeting beginning April 13, and the procedural Warrant at the Special Town Meeting on April 15 so that we may move the project along for MSBA approval and reimbursement in advance of a final vote on the project as a whole. Jeff Dieffenbach is a candidate for re-election to the School Committee. The views expressed here are his own and not necessarily those of the Committee as a whole. You may visit his web site at www.deepbrook.com/schools.

If you have any questions or comments, call me at 508-353-3175 or send me email at dieffenbach @ alum.mit.edu.