Amesbury Additional: School Committee Responds to Public Forum

Amesbury Additional: Amesbury Elementary School:

On August 1st Amesbury held a public forum to hear comments critical of the project for a new Amesbury Elementary School. The current plan, passed in 2019, proposed a new AES building next to the current Cashman Elementary. Critics of the project wanted to rebuild or refurbish the current AES school instead.

On August 12th the School Committee responded to the public comments. On a live streaming meeting the seven committee members considered their options. Peter Hoyt, the only member who had been on the committee since the project began five years ago, expressed his support for the project. He reminded everyone that Amesbury needs a new school.

Next, Abigail Jurist Levy, elected to the committee in the past two weeks, commented that she signed the petition against the school project. She expressed her concern that the planning had been deceptive or flawed. She also admitted that maybe the whole project had been fine. Even if mistakes had been made, she said, the city still needed to move forward.

Mayor Gove asked the Chief Financial Officer of Amesbury, Angel Ann Willis, to take questions from the committee. Mel Webster asked a number of questions. How much had the city spent on the project: $2.9 million. How much was reimbursed: $1.5 million. Were the bonds, approved by the residents in last year's vote, only for a school at the Cashman site: possibly, but unsure. What happens to the bonds: they need to be repaid for twenty years, starting in December. Are there repercussions for backing out of contracts signed with companies to build the school: a full answer is needed from the city attorney, but it seems companies can seek full payment.

With no further questions, Mayor Gove asked Donna DiNisco, President of DiNisco Design, to explain their reasoning and how they arrived at the final decisions.

What follows are her explanations, which she accompanied with a power point presentation.

Amesbury applied to the MSBA as early as 2010, but wasn't accepted until 2016. In early 2018 the city chose their architect, and spent the year conducting a feasibility study to determine the location, design, and situation of the new school. The final plan was submitted to the MSBA in January of 2019. MSBA approved the project the following month. The vote in the fall of 2019 by the city residents to pay for the project, led the MSBA to ratify the entire project in August of 2019.

There were seven community forums, beginning in May 2018, and evenly spaced until September 2019, along with three community surveys.

DiNisco Design considered a number of goals when designing the school: equity across schools, learning, and flexibility. The city planned to move the 5th grade from middle school to elementary school. They considered six different grade configurations for the elementary school system, and narrowed it down to two choices, two K - 5 schools, or one K - 2 school and one 3 - 5 school. The city eventually decided on the latter option. The elementary system, with the new school, was designed to hold an estimated enrollment of 875 students.

In addition to the grade configuration DiNisco, the city, the seven community forums appraised multiple sites; AES, Woodsom Farm, Cashman, and private locations. The community vehemently rejected the Woodsom site so it was no longer considered.

The private sites were also quickly discarded as insufficient. While AES initially seemed good, DiNisco Design found the AES site suffered from expansive wetlands. The city's Conservation Commission also found similar issues with wetlands on the AES site. DiNisco had planned to build a separate building next to the old AES site, move the students into it, and then tearing down the old building. The wetlands meant, that at best, the new building would have to occupy the same space as the old building, making it impossible for students to stay on location during construction. Additional designs, created with the new wetlands in consideration, were found unsatisfactory as well. With private sites no good, Woodsom rejected, and AES covered in wetlands, Cashman remained the only viable site.

A review of the Cashman site found slightly more wetlands than initially thought, but nowhere comparable to the amount on the AES site. At the Cashman site a new road has to pass through a small portion of Woodsom Farm. The planned three story building includes community areas like a gym, and an isolated part for academics.

The construction was supposed to begin in June of 2020, ending in June of 2022. The current timeline assumes a finished project in November or December of 2022. DiNisco believes it might still be possible to finish on time, or the opening could be delayed until September 2023.

If the project is halted it may be at least five to twelve years before a new school is completed. Students will still be in the old AES building, which needs to be repaired. Costs to repair are about $34.5 million, to be paid entirely by Amesbury.

DiNisco insisted there was not a cheaper solution than the proposed project, and water flooding from storm water would not impact nearby areas. No part of the planned school is on Woodsom farm, only a 24 ft access road to cross a corner of the Farm. The police department, fire department, and public work department all approved the safety of the site.

DiNisco ended by expressing her belief that the new site would provide a modern site for learning, and fixed issues of poor conditions and overcrowding.

The Mayor said she wanted to be more transparent and engaging than past Mayor. She understood the concern of citizens dedicated to the old AES site. Most people on the Committee were not involved in the majority of the process.

Peter Hoyt thanked DiNisco Design for their work. He hoped the minority could accept the project.

The Mayor said the City Council declined to comment on the project, saying it was the issue of the School Committee.

Mel Webster accused the past Mayor of failing to form a consensus around the project. But Mel thought that the time to change the project had passed. It was approved by all the boards. It was approved by vote by the City residents. All the issues were seen and considered by multiple committees and citizens and they ratified it. Mel thought that once the project is finished some of the complaints will fade away as people came to appreciate their brand new school.

Mel thought there had to be a motion to address the petition: to either to approve or deny it.

Maryann Welch agreed with the need for the committee to vote.

Mel moved to deny the petition, and to continue the project as originally designed. Peter Hoyt seconded the motion.

Elaine Bucher agreed with Mel that the past Mayor was at fault for the divisiveness of the project. She asked for people to come together as a community. She asked for unity for the children of Amesbury.

Abigail Levy said she was still against the building, but would endorse the final vote, whatever it was.

Mel reminded the committee that the project still needed the approval of the Conservation Committee and Planning Board.

The school committee voted, with Yes affirming the project, and a No vote rejecting the school building. The result was six to continue to build the new school next to Cashman, and one against.
Abigail Levy – No
Maryann Welch - Yes
Mel Webster - Yes
Elaine Bucher – Yes
Kate Currie – Yes
Peter Hoyt – Yes
Mayor Gove – Yes

The entire discussion as described required roughly an hour. After the vote the committee proceeded with other issues, such as reopening during the coronavirus pandemic.


Relevant:

Comments