Amesbury Additional: Public Forum on the Amesbury Elementary School



Amesbury Additional: Amesbury Elementary School:

On August 1st 2020, the Amesbury city council and school committee hosted a public forum on the construction of the new Amesbury Elementary School (AES). Last fall Amesbury voted 1,354 to 1,235 to approve a financial plan to build a new elementary school. The plan would move the current AES to a new site next to the other elementary school, Cashman Elementary. The vote also changed the two neighborhood elementary schools, into a K - 2nd grade and a 3rd - 5th grade grade school.

But a coalition dedicated to rebuilding AES at its current location, and retaining the neighborhood K - 4th grade school, recorded at least 350 written and 650 online signatures. These numbers necessitated a hearing under Amesbury law.

The forum was held at the Amesbury Middle School Landry Stadium at 10am on Saturday. The council and committee sat in a row of chairs situated in the middle of the field, facing one side of the stadium. The public, numbering between 50 to 100, sat in the stands facing the council. The event was broadcast on local TV for those who could not attend. Residents who wanted to comment on the plan, but could not be at the event, were able to email their comments to the town.

The public asked questions or expressed opinions, but the council and committee were not allowed to respond. The event was merely for public comments. It was not a debate or discussion.

The rules were as follows:

There were two microphones and people wishing to speak could line up to use them.
Five people could be in line for each microphone at a time.
Each questioner needed to wear a mask
They needed to state their name and address
Each person was supposed to not spend more than three minutes.
They were supposed to be polite.

After a brief introduction, the forum began with one of the council aides reading public comments emailed in advance. Over thirty minutes, the opinions of fourteenth people were read aloud. Of these, five favored the project and nine were against. After this the people in attendance stepped up the microphone and shared their opinions. They were overwhelmingly against the project for the new AES. This turnout wasn't surprising, considering the forum was created by and for dissenters.

While people did share their names, I don't intend to assign opinions to individuals. This article will summarize the opinions, and include those of both the emailers and public speakers.

Those in favor of reconsidering the project were worried about using land on Woodsom Farm. Woodsom Farm is a 370 acre area purchased in 1989 to prevent it from being turned into housing. It's a popular place for hiking, sports, and other outdoor recreation. A significant minority of residents are resistant to building anything on the farm. Another resident claimed that the amount of Woodsom Farm land being used for the project is less than 1% of the total farm area. The new AES plan also requires removing the baseball fields on the Woodsom Farm property. Critics want to preserve the baseball fields and worried about the cost of building new ones.

Another criticism was that the new project includes an overly expansive basketball court. A different resident replied that Amesbury currently doesn't have enough courts to meet demand.

Dissenters also thought that the planned school was too large and therefore too expensive. Others expressed an opinion that it was too fancy for little kids. They said elementary students didn't need the modern technology and devices planned for the library and classroom to learn.

Plenty of speakers were against the plan to eliminate a neighborhood school system. One woman delivered a charismatic speech infused with nostalgia, because she wanted children and grandchildren to be able to walk to school. Another person strangely implied that AES is a location, not a school.

Some people claimed that other people didn't know what they were voting for. They claimed that the public was deceived. According to these people, who were not themselves deceived, the Yes to AES signs implied that the vote was for a refurbished building at the current location. People also said that some people might not have know about the vote in the first place, as it was scheduled a week before the mayoral vote.

One or two people worried about what would happen to the old AES lot if it was abandoned. They demanded to know whether it remain an eye sore, be converted into expensive condominiums, be used for low income housing, or some other project.

Citizens worried about the impact on wetlands. According to the city council, one of the issues with rebuilding the school on the current site is wetlands. Since the original school had been built, wetlands had expanded on the property, up to and around the current building. It would be nearly impossible to construct a new building under current law, because of the wetlands. Many protesters expressed a sense of conspiracy, as if those who determined the extent of the wetlands were lying (they expressed a similar disbelief about the costs of refurbishing the current AES building, which they thought was intentionally inflated).

Residents that live near the site of the proposed project worried about increased traffic, and the possibility of water runoff and flooding.

One speaker implied that the project for the new AES was like the Covid pandemic, though they didn't coherently explain the simile. Another explained that the economic downturn prohibited the creation of a new school. Some even thought that a new school might be unnecessary because of the coronavirus.

Almost all people against the project expressed their support for a new school, but only if it was in the current AES spot.

While speakers were generally polite, and able to control their emotions, one or two leveled serious accusations against the authorities. One man accused the councils of intentionally dividing the community with the project. Another man lambasted the councils as stubborn and intransigent. He implied that the vote was like being held at gunpoint. There was a lot of clapping for that statement.

Clapping seemed to be entirely reserved for one side. The people who spoke against the project received overwhelming enthusiasm, while the few who spoke for the new AES received no applause.

People in favor of the project said that the vote was fair, and the community couldn't continually re-litigate it over a minority opinion. It would be impossible to please everyone, and the project should still go forward. Others said that they liked the project, and they trusted that the agencies involved (MSBA, local and state environmental agencies) had searched for the best possible solution.

For everyone attending, the town provided a pamphlet explaining why the project had been designed in the new location. This five page document credited the expansive wetlands as one of the key reasons for not using the old site. It also cited the difficulty of teaching the students during the rebuilding of the old school, a lack of parking for staff, and extensive construction which would impact abutting buildings.

They reiterated that the seven planning meetings, which were open to the public, considered seven possible locations, and the majority involved found the chosen site the best. The document reiterated the age of the current AES and the need for a new building. It mentioned that if the project did not go forward there were costs merely to repair the old building. The paper also stated that if the project was canceled the Massachusetts School Building Authority, a private-public agency dedicated to assisting towns build affordable schools, would withdraw its $25 million funding. Even with a new plan, which would take at a few years, Amesbury might not be able to reclaim that funding later. On top of that, the City would owe the MSBA $2 million in spent costs for the planning.

The pamphlet also included a letter to the current Mayor, Kassandra Gove, expressing MSBA's support for the project, but explaining that canceling the project would put the city back at the beginning, applying for a grant. The MSBA only approved 23 of 93 grants the year Amesbury applied.

One of the features of the public forum was the lack of a unified dissent. While the online petition urges, “our elected officials to reconsider using the existing Amesbury Elementary School location at 24 South Hampton Rd for the new/renovated AES,” the public forum wasn't as coherent. The solutions expressed included; a second vote to confirm the project, cancel the project but do nothing, pause the project indefinitely, repair the current AES, or rebuild the current AES.

As a resident of Amesbury I voted for the project. I accept that it is not perfect. Any project will encounter difficulties regardless of the location. I don't believe the proposed site is as deficient as the petitioners imply. I attended a K-2nd and 3rd - 6th grade school system, and I don't believe it a less effective structure. It also seems more equitable to build a new school that all students will attend, rather than a school only half the town will use.  As additional information, I have two sons, one of whom would attend the new AES if it is built according to schedule.

It's clear the town needs as new AES. It was built in the 1960's. It's old and unsuitable for education. If the current project is canceled it could be a decade before students see a new school. Meanwhile the old one must be maintained. Perhaps the oddest idea is that the coronavirus should prevent or pause the building of the school. Economic conditions are tough for many, but optimistically students will be back in school full time by the start of the 2021/2022 school year. This project shouldn't be delayed because students will not be in the building for a year. Schools are not built in a day, or even a year with all the planning involved.  Unless one believes students will never return to schools, the coronavirus isn't a reason to reconsider.

Amesbury needs a new school. It may not be the one everyone wants, but it seems like an acceptable plan. I trust the people who designed it and stand by it. I can't believe this, but as someone who wrote an article or two pleading with people (at least in solid blue states) not to vote for Biden, don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

A follow up article will be posted after the School Committee and Town Council discuss the opinions expressed by the public at a future meeting.

Recent:

Relevant:

Comments