Questioning The Cost

Of The NHS Expansion

To The Editor:

I write to point out an error that was repeated twice in the opening of a page one article in the April 4 edition concerning the upcoming high school expansion referendum [“Budget, High School Going To Voters As Proposed]. Although a correction separately appeared within the April 11 edition, because the correction was not as prominently placed as were the errors, I wish to call the public’s attention to the same here in The Letter Hive this week.

Specifically, it was twice stated that the Legislative Council acted unanimously in approving the special appropriation for this project. As the body of the article made clear, however, the vote was not unanimous. Three members dissented: John Aurelia, Joe DiCandido, and myself.

While I will not attempt to speak for my two fellow council members, I voted against this project primarily because I feel, as others have stated, that it is not a question of whether this is the right size expansion (though I have continuing concerns about the inconsistencies in results and use of student population projections), but whether this is the right cost expansion. Moreover, because I am in favor of a high school expansion (as were my two fellow dissenters, support for a high school expansion of some substantial scale was the subject of a unanimous informal show of Legislative Council support earlier this year), my vote also reflected my estimation as to what would more likely gain voter approval — the project as presently proposed on first referendum or a less costly proposal on a subsequent referendum. I believe this project, with little, if any, changes, can be accomplished for significantly less money that what is presently proposed, which, in the current economic climate could be better justified.

I stress the above is my personal view. The Board of Education supported the special appropriation by a 4-2 vote, the Board of Finance 4-2, and the Legislative Council 9-3. The Board of Selectmen, while not reversing explicitly its earlier 2-1 vote against bonding the project, did more recently unanimously vote (3-0) to send the measure on to the voters. These bodies’ collective actions should be carefully considered by the voters. Ultimately, affordability versus need is an individual decision, and I urge all to make that decision by casting votes on April 22.

William F.L. Rodgers

Legislative Council, District 3

208 Hattertown Road                                                      April 11, 2008