The Consequences

Of A ‘No’ Vote

To the Editor:

Typically, towns are required to seek voter approval for an entire project prior to the state legislators approving grant money. [Former School Superintendent] Dr Evan Pitkoff submitted a letter to the Board of Finance, dated April 11, 2007, requesting a special appropriation of $2,750,000 for architect fees for the proposed high school expansion. He followed up with another letter to the Board of Finance dated April 24, 2007, requesting that the $38 million for the expansion and renovation be approved for borrowing upfront (see BOF minutes 04/26/07). The Board of Education projected that the town could lose $558,865 in state grant reimbursement if the money was borrowed later due to the anticipated decrease in reimbursement from 32.86 percent to 31.43 percent. Newtown’s leaders, however, citing that they were uncomfortable with obligating debt service not yet in the budget, decided to seek a special waiver from the routine state approval process for the Newtown High School expansion. Newtown was the only town to seek this waiver, which resulted in voters approving the architectural phase in 2007, and the construction phase in 2008.

Aside from Newtown’s reimbursement rate for future school projects decreasing, thus increasing the burden on taxpayers, other changes have occurred in the State Legislature which will affect the cost of the NHS expansion. Recently, Connecticut State Legislators passed a new Green Buildings law which requires that school construction projects, such as the Newtown High School expansion, which are expected to receive $2 million or more in state funding on or after January 1, 2009, be compliant with the silver building rating of Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design’s (LEED) rating system. According to the architects, the LEED requirement will increase the project cost by 10–15 percent conservatively.

Since Newtown submitted the state grant application in June, after the April referendum, the state legislators are expected to vote on the grant money in 2009. Thus, Newtown would be required to comply with the new LEED legislation. However, Newtown is in a unique situation: the Bureau of School Facilities Unit of the State Department of Education has already approved the design and educational specifications of our expansion project prior to voter approval.

Currently, the state’s Office of Policy and Management has not established the guidelines for this legislation. This creates an opportunity for Newtown to request an exemption from the new LEED law. Senator John McKinney, who attended both the Legislative Council and Board of Selectmen meeting, plans to advocate for Newtown to receive an exemption and has suggested that going forward with the construction project now would help him build a stronger case.

Voting No will ultimately not save a penny. We will risk having to redesign the expansion to comply with LEED at a greater cost of 10–15 percent to taxpayers, we will continue to pay for inflation, and Newtown will lose any reimbursement for the architectural fees which we have already incurred. We need to support Senator McKinney’s request for a waiver by voting Yes on October 7. The consequences of not doing so are worse.

Gianine Crowell

26 Canterbury Lane, Sandy Hook                               October 1, 2008