HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 2015-09-08.pdf FINAL
Approved 10.13.15
OPEN SESSION MINUTES
MINUTEMAN REGIONAL VOCATIONAL TECHNICAL SCHOOL DISTRICT
SPECIAL SCHOOL COMMITTEE MEETING
SEPTEMBER 8,2015 PM 6:00 PM
PAUL REVERE ROOM,MINUTEMAN HIGH SCHOOL
Present:
Jeff Stulin,Chair (Needham) Jennifer Leone(Lancaster)
Carrie Flood,Vice Chair(Concord) Sharon Antia(Lincoln)
David Horton, Secretary(Lexington) Jack Weis(Belmont)(arrived 6:25 PM)
Alice DeLuca(Stow) Mary Ellen Castagno(Wayland)
Ford Spalding(Dover) Pam Nourse(Acton)
Vince Amoroso(Boxborough)
Judy Taylor(Carlisle)
Dave Manjarrez(Sudbury)
David O'Connor(Bolton)
Absent: Sue Sheffler(Arlington);Doug Gillespie(Weston)
Also present: Ed Bouquillon,Kevin Mahoney,Jack Dillon,Elizabeth Rozan, Steve Sharek,Nancy Pierce,Adam
Marowski,Jason Potteiger,David Kanter,Len Simon,Dana Ham,Maryanne Ham,Caitlyn Kelliher, S.Roche,Rick
Manley
1. CALL TO ORDER: OPEN SESSION
The Chair called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM,and noted that the meeting was being recorded by Mr.Manjarrez.
2. CHAIR'S REPORT
The Chair explained the MSBA's unanimous August 6,2015 action to move the Minuteman Building Project to
Module 4, Schematic Design.He also noted that MSBA praised Minuteman's efforts,expressed its dedication to
vocational education,and strongly endorsed the proposed school size of 628 students,noting that it would not
support a school size smaller than 600,as this would not make sense financially or educationally. He noted
MSBA's agreement with the rationale put forth by the Administration and the School Committee in voting for the
628-student option. The Chair then pointed out that there are now two goals facing the School District,both
complicated and with time constraints:to secure the right to incur the debt required for the project and to submit the
Schematic Design,observing MSBA's protocol and process,that maximizes both the educational benefits for the
students and the value to the district towns. He further explained that because of the importance of these goals,the
beginning of the usual School Committee business will be postponed until next meeting, so that this entire meeting
can be dedicated to presenting information regarding these goals to School Committee members.
The Chair introduced a new School Committee member,Vincent Amoroso from Boxborough. He replaces Cheryl
Mahoney whose term has expired.
Additionally,he noted that communications will play a major role in pursuing the goals. Toward this end,he
explained that he and Ford Spalding will host three meetings with member town officials,primarily Selectmen and
Finance Committee members. Each meeting will cover the same material,and invitees can select the one most
convenient to them. The purpose of the meetings is to present information regarding the next steps in the building
project,and to give officials an opportunity to ask questions and express their concerns. These are not meant to be
School Committee meetings,but since they will be open to School Committee members and may attract a quorum of
members,they will be posted as School Committee meetings. He further explained that the meetings have been
scheduled for the following dates: September 21,2015 at 7:00 pm, September 28,2015 at 7:00 pm,and October 2,
2015 at 8:00 am. Kevin Mahoney will also be present to provide information.
3. SUPERINTENDENT'S REPORT
a. Update on Draft Project Prospectus
The Superintendent reported that he has received a draft prospectus document from the Education Alliance,whose
scope of service was originally presented at the 6.16.15 School Committee meeting. He explained that the
document is being finalized for discussion at the next School Committee meeting on the 15th. He referenced the
Table of Contents,and noted the document's value as an independent third party review.
b. Recruitment Video
The Superintendent explained the work behind the recruitment video,prepared by Andrew Mudge of Black Kettle
Films. The video was met with applause after it was viewed.
c. Stakeholder Engagement for Completing Schematic Design(Module 4)
The Superintendent referenced his August 26,2015 memo,included with the packet,in which he outlined the
process for Schematic Design,including the role of the Superintendent,the School Building Committee,the School
Committee,the Design Team,MSBA,and overall efforts for open public communication. He noted the series of
meetings he has scheduled with stakeholders who use the building to get input on the design.
Involvement from the community at large,MSBA's support for a Minuteman School of not less than 600 students,
the tight timeframe for completing the Module 4 steps,and the financing in Module 5 were discussed. Additionally,
the expertise of members of the School Building Committee,the Designers,the Owner's Project Manager(OPM),
the Superintendent,and the collective wisdom of the students were discussed. Anecdotes about the engagement,
intelligence,and energy of the students during recent design meetings with them were shared. It was pointed out
that a small group of advisors was established from the membership of the School Building Committee,and
included people with considerable experience and expertise with building projects.The Superintendent and the
School Building Committee Chair expressed full confidence in the team.
4.School Building Committee Report
a. MSBA August 6,2015
Mr. Spalding noted that there is value to repeating information,and he reviewed the MSBA's August 6,2015 vote,
included in the packet,that approved proceeding into Schematic Design(Module 4). He affirmed that MSBA likes
Minuteman,that Minuteman follows the rules,and that the effort of Minuteman is to preserve the 40%
reimbursement rate.
b. Skanska Process Flow Modules 2-5(8.10.15);MSBA Modules 4 and 5
Mr. Spalding referred to the Process Flow document prepared by the Owner's Project Manager,noting the tight
schedule of meetings to deliver the Schematic Design to MSBA by December 1 for its January 27 Board vote. He
explained the flow of Modules 4 and 5,the Superintendent's efforts on the Schematic Design,the informational
reach-out to the towns,how the design will align with the Education Program Plan,and the independent pricing
review that KBA and Skanska will undertake. He described Module 6,the use of the"C M(Construction Manager)
At-Risk"method of construction contracting,and emphasized that the focus is on"getting to yes"with all the towns
by June,2016,which will require ongoing communication with citizens,town,parents,legislators,alumni,all in an
effort to disseminate factual information.He explained that questions raised by particular towns would be brought
back to the full School Committee. He pointed out an email communication from the Sudbury representative(at the
table,from August 10-19,2015)and noted that the goal is to occupy a new building on or before September 2020,
five years from now. Regarding enrollment,he encouraged people not to complain,but to do something to increase
member-town enrollment. He also asked Kevin Mahoney to address the other concern raised in the email. Mr.
Mahoney explained the formula for debt service,the DESE guidelines,and pointed out that this will further be
addressed in the forthcoming project prospectus.
The Chair then opened the floor to questions,and Len Simon, Sudbury Board of Selectmen member,raised a
question about the process of incur debt vis-à-vis the Regional Agreement. The Superintendent affirmed that the
District is bound by the present Regional Agreement,The Chair also clarified that the School Committee has not yet
taken a vote on incurring debt,and that the current/in-force Agreement was noted.Mr. Spalding noted that he
personally thinks the School Committee should seek Town Meeting approval,that the School Committee has not
taken action yet,and the School Building Committee has not discussed the method.
Mr. Simon pointed out that the towns of Sudbury,Arlington,Belmont,and Wayland have expressed their preference
for the Town Meeting route(16(d)),as opposed to the District Wide Ballot route(16(n))for incurring debt. He
referenced documents from the July 7,2015 School Committee meeting that outlined the pros and cons of both,and
related Frequently Asked Questions(FAQs),which in his opinion seemed to favor the District Wide Ballot option.
The Chair emphasized that both options are legal,there has been lots of informational material circulated,as well as
many views and opinions that have been expressed. He noted that ultimately it will come down to what the School
Committee believes is best,based on evidence and independent judgment,for the District and for the current and
future students. However,he pointed out that action on this will not be in the near future,as he would like exact
information to be available.
In response to Mr. Spalding's inquiry,Mr. Simon noted that Sudbury welcomes future conversations relative to the
process.
A suggestion was made to hold an informational session,similar to past Municipal Breakfasts to engage in
discussion after the schematic designs are determined,but before the School Committee vote,to get stakeholders
engaged in the Module 4 process. Mr. Spalding emphasized that the time was now to involve people. Another
suggestion was to televise any meetings held in the towns to ensure a wider audience. The question of fiduciary
responsibility was raised,and MASC's interpretation of the School Committee member's role as representing the
interests of the District and the students was noted. It was also pointed out that this responsibility can have a wide
interpretation.
5.RESEARCH SURVEY RESULTS
Steve Sharek introduced Adam Marowski,Research Associate,and Jason Potteiger, Senior Research Associate,of
DAPA Research,Inc.presenting the research survey results for David Paleologos,who was indisposed for the
evening. They described the survey methodology,demographics,and District area breakdown. They showed the
questions asked and the results for categories such as:positive attitudes,voc-tech high schools academic programs
and safety standards,awareness and shared cost for a new Minuteman High School,Minuteman High School
accreditation,the decision to build a new high school,support or opposition for construction with the state paying at
least 40%. They reviewed results for levels of support and opposition for a new Minuteman High School,the most
important impact factor,and greatest concern. They emphasized that the results showed widespread support for a
new high school. The survey results displayed the levels of support by gender,age,income level,area,political
party affiliation,as well as among Minuteman families,modes of decision-making,most important factors,and
greatest concerns. They outlined their conclusions as follows:
Positive feelings about Minuteman High School and its programs;
Voc-tech should meet academic and building standards;
Overwhelming support for new construction;
Intensity of support higher than intensity of opposition,and
Vote keys are impact on students,tax bill,condition of building.
Discussion followed the presentation. The Chair commended the involvement of the Carlisle member,Judy Taylor
in helping to formulate the questions,which were finalized by the State Office of Campaign and Political Finance.
The Wayland member asked for specific breakdowns on her town. The researchers agreed to get back with some
breakdown. .The researchers also clarified that the methodology was designed to ask the questions without further
explanation,and she expressed her appreciation for the limits,but that people may not have understood fully the
questions. The ratio of 10/1 in getting 400 respondents was noted. Possible skews in the data because of time of day
the calls were made,or time of year were pointed out,as was eligible vs.registered voters, selection bias,validity,
and getting the same results the next day vs. 6 months from now. The researchers pointed out that survey work is
both an art and a science. The art is interpretive,but the science lies in the methodology and the data received. That
the people surveyed seemed open to conversation about the issues,and displayed a general warm reception to the
inquiry were points noted. There was an agreement that the results showed helpful information,but that
communication is still critically important. Members asked that a PDF of the presentation be sent to them. The
presentation can be found as Attachment A.
6. DISCUSSION: SCHOOL COMMITTEE OPTIONS FOR INCURRING DEBT
The Superintendent introduced Rick Manley,Jr. of Locke Lord,LLC,and pointed out that at the table was an
updated opinion letter dated 9.2.15 from Ed Lenox of Murphy,Hesse,Toomey&Lehane,LLP(Attachment B).
Attorney Manley pointed out that professionally,he can describe the process for the Ch. 71 16(d)and 16(n)
options,but cannot tell the School Committee what to do.He then described the traditional approach,of authorizing
debt,namely that the School Committee takes a majority vote,notifies the towns,who then have 60 days to take
action.Alternatively,the School Committee could agree by a 2/3 vote to authorize a District Wide Ballot to incur
debt. In this case,the District would consult with the Town Clerks and the Selectmen on how to do it,and on
preparation and delivery of ballots. The election would be by the District,with a warrant article and a specific day
when all 16 towns could hold it. He explained that the polls would be open from 4-8 hours,and that absentee ballots
would be allowed. Consideration of Town Meeting schedules,expense of a Special Town Meeting,and conditions
that could be included in the warrant article were discussed. Additionally,the political impact and need to explain
the options to the voters,the timing of the MSBA process restrictions for funding approval,timelines for working
with Town Clerks,and vote tally for 16(d)and 16(n)were discussed. Attorney Manley pointed out that the 16(n)
option of a District Wide Ballot has been in place since 1995. He also noted that the Regional Agreement is subject
to the laws,and even if these two options for incurring debt are not outlined in the Agreement,they are outlined in
the law.He noted,in response to a question,that he has not heard of setting up both options in parallel.He also
noted,in response to a question,that there is scant information on the rationale for the development of these options.
To the issue of a town needing to include a debt exclusion vote as well,he pointed out that the District provides the
wording to the towns,and debt exclusion can be incorporated as a condition. He also noted the nuance that the
entire amount of the debt must be outlined in the vote,despite the anticipated reimbursement rate. It was noted that
voter education is necessary.
The Chair noted that it is important to understand the specific requirements of the vote tally,and asked Attorney
Manley to clarify what exactly is meant by the words"majority"or"two-thirds"in the context of M.G.L.Chapter
71, Sections 16(d)and 16(n). Attorney Manley agreed to provide this information.
7. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Elizabeth Rozan David Horton
District Assistant Secretary
ATTACHMENTS TO THE MINUTES OF 9.8.15
A. Power Point of Research Survey Results
B. Ed Lenox Opinion Letter dated 9.2.15
MINUTEMAN REGIONAL
HIGH SCHOOL ISSUES
AUGUST 2015
A,4f1A RESEARCH INC . /
dr? MINUTEMAN
A REVOLUTION IN LEARNING
SURVEY METHODOLOGY
400 total respondents
AII voters within the Minuteman High School
district
r D , 2015
MarginField of Erroates : r: +/August- 425. 9-28percentage points
SURVEY DEMOGRAPHICS
Gender: 48% Male ; 52% Female
► Party Registration : 33% Democrat; 11 %
Republican ; 55% Independent/Unenrolled
15% of respondents had students, graduates, or
close family friends who attended Minuteman High
School
0. 53% of respondents know someone who has
attended Minuteman High School
d4fIA Research Inc.--August 2015
CITIES AND TOWNS IN MINUTEMAN DISTRICT
ACTON (AREA 1 ) LANCASTER (AREA 1 )
ARLINGTON (AREA 3) LEXINGTON (AREA 2)
BELMONT (AREA 3) LINCOLN (AREA 2)
► BOLTON (AREA 1 ) NEEDHAM (AREA 2)
BOXBOROUGH (AREA 1 ) STOW (AREA 1 )
► CARLISLE (AREA 1 ) SUDBURY (AREA 2)
CONCORD (AREA 1 ) WAYLAND (AREA 2)
DOVER (AREA 1 ) WESTON (AREA 2)
4AfIA Research Inc.--August 2015
MINUTEMAN HS : POSITIVE ATTITUDES
■Very Positive Positive Neutral • Negative ■Very Negative Undecided
0
M
icr0
o M
U,
M
0o
N
CO
oto
M
0
ti
I 0
N c N c
_ O O
WHAT ARE YOUR GENERAL FEELINGS ON WHAT ARE YOUR GENERAL FEELINGS ABOUT
MINUTEMAN HS? THE QUALITY OF VOC-TECH PROGRAMS AT
MINUTEMAN HS?
AAf1A Research Inc.--August 2015
Voc-TEcH HIGH SCHOOLS : ACADEMIC
PROGRAMS & SAFETY STANDARDS
•Yes ■ No Undecided
',1 ,
C)
0
N
Ps.
ZO c
CSIPI
F
o
DO YOU BELIEVE THAT ACADEMIC PROGRAMS DO YOU BELIEVE THAT VOC-TECH SCHOOL
OFFERED IN VOC-TECH SCHOOLS SHOULD MEET BUILDINGS SHOULD MEET THE SAME SAFETY AND
THE SAME STANDARDS AS IN OTHER SCHOOLS? ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS AS IN OTHER
SCHOOL BUILDINGS?
AAf1A Research Inc.--August 2015
A NEW MINUTEMAN HIGH SCHOOL :
AWARENESS & SHARED COSTS
•Yes ■ No Undecided
0
r '
co
0
o U,
11,
0
U)
0
inM
ARE YOU AWARE THAT THE MINUTEMAN IF A NEW MINUTEMAN HS IS BUILT, SHOULD
SCHOOL COMMITTEE IS LOOKING TO BUILD A THE STATE PAY A PORTION OF THE
NEW MINUTEMAN HS NEXT TO THE EXISTING CONSTRUCTION COSTS?
SCHOOL ON LAND OWNED BY THE SCHOOL?
AAf1A Research Inc.--August 2015
HOW IMPORTANT IS IT TO
MAINTAIN THE SCHOOL'S
ACCREDITATION ?
0
MINUTEMAN H S r
ACCREDITATION
Are you aware that Minuteman
High School is currently
accredited by the New England
Association of Schools and
Colleges?
YES — 49%
r
NO — 49%
M c
N
•
VERY SOMEWHAT NOT VERY NOT AT ALL
IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT IMPORTANT
AAf1A Research Inc.--August 2015
CD
\o
0
O)
M
BUILDING A NEW
HIGH SCHOOL
Some people say that the decision
to build a new high school should
be made by the individual town
meetings in each of the 16 member
towns.
Others say that the decision to build
a new school should be made by
voters during a district-wide election
held on the same day. DECISION DECISION UNDECIDED
MADE BY EACH MADE BY
OF THE 16 DISTRICT-WIDE
Which of these options do you TOWN VOTE ON SAME
prefer? MEETINGS. DAY.
AAf1A Research Inc.--August 2015
If you had to vote, would you support or oppose the
construction of a new Minuteman HS if the state pays at
least 40% of the eligible costs?
23% Yes: 274
Undecided No: 34
Undecided: 92
8.5% No,
would not
support 68.5% Yes,
would
support 1
AAf1A Research Inc.--August 2015
LEVELS OF SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION FOR A
NEW MINUTEMAN HS
- 1 - Lowest ■2 ■3 ■4 ■5E-6 ■7 ■8 ■9 ■ 10 - Highest 1 - Lowest ■2 ■3 ■4 ■5 6 .7 .8 .9 . 10 - Highest
0
O 0
o
M Cr)
N
Mean: 7.72 Mean: 6.26
0
O
0
N
r o 0
Lf) L()
o T o
N N
iC°
o C)
CO
I o
:30
C
CD tC
1111M M
� _ _ _ ■
ON A SCALE OF 1 -10 HOW WOULD YOU ON A SCALE OF 1 -10 HOW WOULD YOU
DESCRIBE YOUR LEVEL OF SUPPORT? (274 DESCRIBE YOUR LEVEL OF OPPOSITION? -
RESPONDENTS) RESPONDENTS)
AAf1A Research Inc.--August 2015
Thinking about your vote, which of the
following is most important to you?
31%
- - 22%
16%
7% 6%
5%
Impact on Impact on tax bill Condition of Personal feelings Town officials' Impact on jobs
students current building about opinions on
school/programs project
AAf1A Research Inc.--August 2015
What is your greatest concern about plans to
build a new high school?
40%
17%
13% 11%
6% III
My taxes will go up I don't really have My own town My town doesn't The school will be
any concerns needs to build a have enough say too big for us to fill
new school on the Regional with students
School Committee
AAf1A Research Inc.--August 2015
WIDESPREAD SUPPORT FOR NEW HS
SUPPORT IS STRONG THROUGH ALL DEMOGRAPHICS. . .
ri 4AfIA Research Inc.--August 2015
WIDESPREAD SUPPORT: BY GENDER
a
N-
0
Co
co
c*"
M
CC
TOTAL MEN WOMEN
AAf1A Research Inc.--August 2015
WIDESPREAD SUPPORT: BY AGE
ti
f o o I ti
00o MCCD O (0
M CO M
CO CO
F
TOTAL 18 -35 36 -45 46-55 56-65 66-75 75+
AAf1A Research Inc.--August 2015
WIDESPREAD SUPPORT: BY INCOME LEVEL
N-
N-
0
c c ti
LCA 0
00
I
CO
TOTAL UNDER UNDER UNDER OVER
50K 100K 200K 200K
AAf1A Research Inc.--August 2015
WIDESPREAD SUPPORT: BY AREA
ft)
M
ti
o
0'
co O1
to
TOTAL AREA 1 AREA 2 AREA 3
AAf1A Research Inc.--August 2015
WIDESPREAD SUPPORT: BY POLITICAL PARTY
AFFILIATION
oz. (:
L N
Co 1` CO
CO :'
CO
0
Lf)
TOTAL DEMOCRATS REPUBLICANS INDEPENDE
AAf1A Research Inc.--August 2015
SUPPORT LEVELS AMONG MINUTEMAN
FAMILIES
CoCo N.
Co c'
co coco
LO
TOTAL FAMILY NON-FAMILY KNOW DON'T KNOW
GRADUATE GRADUATE GRADUATE GRADUATE
AAf1A Research Inc.--August 2015
SUPPORT LEVELS AMONG MODES OF
DECISION-MAKING
aDI
06CO
0
Mc
co Cfl
TOTAL DISTRICT-WIDE TOWN MEETINGS NOT SURE
VOTE
AAf1A Research Inc.--August 2015
SUPPORT LEVELS AMONG MOST IMPORTANT
FACTORS
0
co
co
0
0
COten
w 0
ti M
00 ti
CD
0
ti
TOTAL STUDENTS PERSONAL JOBS BUILDING TOWN TAX BILL
FEELINGS CONDITION OFFICIALS
AAf1A Research Inc.--August 2015
SUPPORT LEVELS AMONG GREATEST
CONCERNS
0
C
0
Lco
r
CO N. 4 o
CO CMO
TOTAL NO CONCERN SCHOOL IN SCHOOL TOO TAXES MORE SAY
MY TOWN BIG
AAf1A Research Inc.--August 2015
CONCLUSIONS
Positive Feelings about Minuteman HS and its
programs
► Voc-tech should meet academic and building
standards
► Overwhelming support for new construction
► Intensity of support higher than intensity of opposition
Vote keys are impact on students, tax bill , condition of
building
AAf1A Research Inc.--August 2015
MURPHY, HESSE, TOOMEY & LEHANE, LLP
Attorneys At Law
Arthur P.Murphy Doris R.MacKenzie Ehrens
CROWN COLONY PLAZA James A.Toomey Clifford R.Rhodes,Jr.
300 CROWN COLONY DRIVE Katherine A.Hesse Karis L.North
SUITE 410 Michael C.Lehane Bryan R.Le Blanc
QUINCY, MA 02169 John P.Flynn Brandon II.Moss
Regina Williams Tate Michael J.Maccaro
Edward F.Lenox,Jr. Kevin F.Bresnahan
75-101 FEDERAL STREET Mary Ellen Sowyrda Kathleen Y.Ciampoli
BOSTON, MA 02110 David A.DeLuca Brian P.Fox
Donald L.Graham Lauren C.Galvin
ONE MONARCH PLACE Andrew J.Waugh Tami L.Fay
SUITE 131 OR Geoffrey P.Wermuth Kier B.Wachterhauser
SPRINGFIELD, MA 01 144 Robert S.Mangiaratti Sarah A.Catignani
Kathryn M.Murphy Lena-Kate Ahern
Alisia St.Florian Felicia S.Vasudevan
TEL: 617-479-5000 FAX:617-479-6469 Thomas W.Colomb
TOLL FREE: 888-841-4850 Ann M.O'Neill,Senior Counsel
www.mhtl.com
Please respond to Quincy
September 2, 2015
Dr. Edward Bouquillon
Superintendent
Minuteman Regional School District
758 Marrett Road
Lexington, MA 02421
Re: Incurring of debt for school project
Dear Ed:
On June 15, 2015 I sent you a letter presenting an overview of the methods by means of
which a regional school committee can gain approval for the incurring of debt, and also
concerning some of the practical ramifications of the methods that can be chosen. I ask that you
regard this letter as superseding my June 15 letter.
The process for the incurring of debt by regional school districts in Massachusetts is
controlled by G.L. Chapter 71, Section 16, and there are two subsections of Section 16 (i.e.,
subsections (d) and (n)) that are relevant.
If Chapter 71, Section 16, subsection (d) is utilized, the process is as follows. First, the
regional school committee would vote to incur the debt (because the current Regional Agreement
does not create a higher standard, the vote would be a simple majority vote), and would then vote
(again, by a simple majority vote) to use subsection (d). I recommend that these be two separate
votes. Within 7 calendar days of the vote, subsection (d) requires that the District provide
MURPHY, HESSE, TOOMEY & LEHANE, LLP
Attorneys At Law
Dr. Edward Bouquillon
September 2, 2015
Page 2
written notice to each of the Boards of Selectmen of the member towns, identifying the amount
of the proposed debt and a general description for the purpose for the debt. It is then up to each
Board of Selectmen to decide whether or not to call a town meeting for the purpose of approving
or not approving the proposed debt. Unless one or more of the member towns holds a town
meeting within 60 calendar days of the regional school committee's vote and votes to disapprove
the incurring of the debt, the incurring of debt will be deemed to have been approved upon the
expiration of the 60 days. In other words, under subsection (d) any one of the member towns can
defeat the incurring of debt by holding a town meeting within 60 days and voting to disapprove
the debt, but if a town fails to call a town meeting within 60 days, or fails to vote to disapprove
the incurring of the debt, that town will be taken to have approved the incurring of the debt.'
The process under Section 16, subsection (n) is entirely different. The School Committee
is free to select this process, even if the process under subsection (d) has not been attempted.
However, because the regional agreement contains no provision for the utilization of subsection
(n), the language of G.L. Chapter 71, Section 14D creates a requirement that two-thirds of all of
the members of the School Committee must vote to utilize subsection (n) in order for this method
to be pursued. If the School Committee, by majority vote, votes to incur the debt, and if two-
thirds of all of the members of the Committee vote to utilize subsection (n) in order to gain
approval of the debt, the District then would schedule a district-wide ballot vote consistent with
the rather specific requirements contained in subsection (n). This election would occur on the
same date throughout the District, with uniform voting hours throughout the District, using
ballots and ballot language prepared by the District, and with the District bearing the expense of
the election. The votes are then aggregated, District-wide, with the majority prevailing. The fact
that the voters in certain of the towns may vote to disapprove the debt will be irrelevant if the
overall vote District-wide is to approve the debt. The assessments needed to pay the debt will
proceed consistent with the apportionment language in Section IV (D) of the regional agreement,
even in regard to those member towns in which the voters in the subsection (n) election have
voted to disapprove the debt. This last point deserves emphasis. Even if a majority of the voters
in a particular member town were to vote against the incurring of the debt in a subsection (n)
election, that member town will still be liable to pay its eventual assessments for that debt if a
majority of the voters, District-wide, vote to approve the incurring of the debt in a subsection (n)
election.
There is a second paragraph in subsection (d)which is potentially relevant to vocational school districts. However,
the opening sentence of this paragraph reads as follows: "In the case of a vocational regional school district, if the
district agreement so provides or is amended to so provide,such debt may also be incurred if two thirds of the
member towns do not vote disapproval within said sixty day period..."(underlining supplied). Because the current
Minuteman Agreement is silent as to the process for incurring debt,this second paragraph of subsection (d) is not
relevant to Minuteman.
MURPHY,HESSE, TOOMEY & LEHANE, LLP
Attorneys At Law
Dr. Edward Bouquillon
September 2, 2015
Page 3
As an aside, I should mention that if the School Committee votes to utilize subsection(n)
for the approval of the debt, the wording of the eventual ballot question should be approved by
"bond counsel" ahead of time.
Please let me know if you have additional questions.
Very truly yours,
---A-1----7t-
%;"77--(`- `-7
Edward F. Lenox, Jr.
EFL/dlp
cc: Kevin Mahoney
870753v1