1986-04-BOS-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

"s -4- Massachusetts Avenue on the easterly side approximately 10' southerly of the southerly intersection of Maple Street northerly then easterly to the intersection of Maple Street and on Maple Street on the southerly side at the intersection of Massachusetts Avenue easterly approximately SS feet of conduit to existing pole 6111. SCHOOL MODERNIZATION PROGRAM The Chairman recapped the April 26th, 8:00 a. m. meeting at which the Selectmen, School Committee, Finance Committees and Permanent Building Committee discussed the School Renovations Program and methods of financing it. He reported that Mr. Dailey is not in favor of an override of the limits of Proposition 2 1/2 by referendum and asked for the Board's consideration of alternative funding procedures. Chairman Clough and Mrs. W i k of the School Committee were present. Mr. Marshall felt that the School Committee's program should be supported under O p t i o n 43 and that a one time override, a provision by the originators of Propost i on 2 1/2 which is intended to be implemented for such situations, was appropriate. Mr. Eddi son felt that there was adequate justification for going outside the limits of 2 1/2 to avoid impingement on other programs. He did, however, feel that modernization of the School Administration Building should not be included in the override at this time. MT. McSweeney agreed on the need for renovation and modernization of the school buildings, but based on his conversations with citizens, saw no need to override 2 1/28 Mrs. Smith agreed with Mr. Marshall and Mr. Edd i so n that override procedures were designed for such programs as repairs to the capital plant and felt it prudent to proceed. Mr. Dailey reiterated his position statement made on April 26th in opposition to a referendum. He felt that procedure would impact basic services and said he had seen no effort, since the start of 2 1/25 to cut dawn on electives such as LE PRESS, Conservation acquisitions, and recreation expenditures. He felt it unfair to fund such projects at the expense of basic services . He agreed that the school program is necessary but felt that with a little work it can be implemented and funded without an override. Motion was made by Mr. E dd i so n , seconded by Mrs. Smith, that the Selectmen would seep to place befo r e the Town by referendum a proposal t o place outside the limits of Proposition 2 1/2, the funding of the School Modernization Program. Mr. Clough stated that the School C o m m i t t e e has had a consistent record of taking no position which would impact the operation of the Town and its budget and expressed his support of a referendum in this case. Motion hawing been mane and seconded, it was voted S - 2 with Mr. Dailey and Mr. McSweeney voting in the negative, to approve the referendum process on a proposed override of Proposition 2 112 for the funding of the School Modernization Program. (The motion failed since it did not receive the required two thirds vote.) WMI0