Council Approves Fees For 5/6 School Architect

By Steve Bigham

& Jeff White

The Legislative Council Wednesday night voted in favor of spending $1.6 million in architect fees to begin work on the Board of Education’s proposed 5/6 school. The approval was met by a rousing applause from the large contingent of school supporters who turned out for the meeting at the Middle School auditorium.

This week’s vote helps to set in motion the building of the long-awaited school, which is looking more and more like it will be constructed at the site of Watertown Hall along Wasserman Way. Taxpayers must still approve the architectural fees at a town meeting later this winter. Pending approval, the architect firm of Jeter, Cook and Jepson of Hartford will begin drawings in the coming month with the hope that the school, with an estimated price of $32 million, will be ready to open by September of 2002.

A final site for the school has not yet been determined. According to Superintendent of Schools John R. Reed the architects could perform their work without being site-specific for the first 30 to 60 days. After that, however, site design work would begin and an actual site would need to be determined. It is all part of the school board’s “fast-tracking” efforts to allow many facets of the projects to be worked on at overlapping times. Construction would commence by October if all approvals are met.

The council’s 9-2 decision came on the heels of Tuesday night’s finance subcommittee meeting. Parents crowded Town Hall South to capacity to voice their support for the school and urge the council to cease delaying a decision. The committee, led by Chairman John Kortze, recommended that the fees should be approved despite the town’s rising debt as a percentage of the town’s total budget.

Prior to Wednesday’s vote, council chairman Pierre Rochman suggested the board table the issue until the town decides whether or not it wants to buy Fairfield Hills. The idea irked the crowd, which hooted and hollered.

“The timing is what bothers me. We’re not going to have any final decisions on Fairfield Hills within the next 60 days,” he said. “If we say ‘yes’ today, we’re saying ‘yes’ to Watertown Hall.”

Mr Rochman was concerned that the council was being asked to spend the $1.6 million just one day before the Board of Education budget is unveiled. “And a little birdie told me if the school budget was in the 14, 15, 16 percent increase range,” Mr Rochman said. “No money will ever be enough.”

Mr Rochman called it “unrealistic” to rush this vote through, predicting the project will be delayed due to normal construction problems.

The chairman’s words were not well received by the assembled crowd. Fellow council member Doug Brennan asked that the next resident to speak out of turn be removed from the auditorium. Mr Rochman said he needed to speak for the so-called silent majority – those residents who “don’t have the nerve” to show up at these meetings – the elderly who are on social security and can not afford budget increases brought on by big school projects and budgets.

Melissa Pilchard joined Mr Rochman in voting against the plan. “We’re contemplating $10 million a year in debt over the next five years,” she said. “We need to weigh the results of what we do now down the road.”

Nevertheless, council members went along with Mr Kortze and the finance committee.

During public participation, longtime Newtown resident Robert Hall urged the council to take action now, and not to wait until after a decision is made on Fairfield Hills. But he also urged parents to support the town’s municipal space needs, in addition to the 5/6 school.

“It’s not either or. I say it’s both,” he said.

Several parents spoke at Wednesday’s meeting, echoing their comments from the night before. The message: we are willing to weather a tax increase to get the school in place by the fall of 2002. “We want you to act on retaining the architect and get the ball rolling,” exhorted Gene Vetrano, of Camelot Crest. “If it means digging deeper, I’m willing to dig deeper.”

Cheryl Clark, a mother of three, echoed Mr Vetrano’s sentiments to the subcommittee: “I am prepared to dig deeper in my pocket to provide an adequate education [for my children].”

Parents also warned the subcommittee about the fiscal dangers of waiting any longer. Longtime schools advocate Joe Hemmingway of Overlook Knoll defended the school board’s position that the project will only grow more expensive the longer it takes the council to make a decision.

The issue has been riddled with tension between the parents of students crammed into overcrowded classrooms and decision-makers whom some parents Tuesday night did not feel understood the urgency for the new school. “You’ve seen this coming, and nothing has been done about it,” said a flustered Laura Biatore, of Arlyn Ridge Road.

A particularly tense exchange between the subcommittee and the audience followed comments from Mrs Pilchard, who rebutted accusations that the town’s finance committee has all but ignored the need for the new school. “We haven’t ignored [the school],” Mrs Pilchard said. “We have been spending and spending,” she added, listing numerous school system projects from the high school’s addition to Middle Gate’s new roof.

“I know exactly how to stop the influx [of students]. Go to double sessions,” Mrs Pilchard continued, commenting that prospective residents would not move to Newtown if they saw a school system utilizing double sessions.

After explaining that Mrs Pilchard’s comments did not speak for the council at large, Mr Kortze and the rest of the subcommittee heard testimony from Finance Director Ben Spragg and school officials on their way to deciding to recommend to support for the architect funds to the Legislative Council.

“It would be very hard to say that the school issue is not the most pressing and important thing,” Mr Kortze said. “I would be in favor of recommending to the council that we go ahead with the architect fees, very much so.”