Friday, October 9, 2009

Back to the drawing board

We got the news today, oh boy. Newburyport has been turned down in it's application for state assistance in making structural renovations to the Nock School. That application was submitted two years ago, and had been held in a sort of limbo by the state. A sort of waiting list. After two years, the Massachusetts School Building Administration has decided we aren't in their ballpark for funding. It took them two years to make that conclusion.

Newburyport's schools are getting a little long in the tooth, as educational facilities go. We recently renovated the high school, tearing down what was known as the "New Wing," which had been built in 1961. But once you get past the high school, things are looking a little frowzy.

The newest school built in Newburyport is the Nock Middle School, constructed when Richard Nixon was still president. That would be 1972. The Bresnahan School was built the same year that I was born, 1955, the Brown School was built in the 1920's. The original high school was built during the depression.

Two years ago, we retired a school building that was built in the 1870's.

Newburyport prides itself, justifiably, on it's native architecture and historical preservation. But years of infrastructure neglect, and trying to subsist on what amounts to a starvation diet for capital repair funding, have had a pretty damaging effect on the schools. With the hiring of Deidre Farrell over five years ago, the school system instituted a schedule for regular maintenance and repair to our schools; with a relentless commitment to squeezing every possible dollar we could out of systems upgrade- HVAC systems, windows, bulbs. Deidre's efforts at getting things done a shoestring and a rebate began to stem the tide of deterioration in the buildings.

But there are no coupons for reconverting the temporary classrooms that have been attached to the Bresnahan for more than 40 years into permanent classrooms. In fact, these temporaries are now in their second generation.

The reality is that our schools need both major repairs and significant makeovers to become efficient and functional educational settings.

The Nock has structural issues, and could benefit for ongoing electrical and other systems upgrade. Recently, thanks to the foresight and largesse of the NEF, the science labs were upgraded. As of last year, prior to work, they contained the same equipment and facilities from their initial construction, 1972. A lot of science has happened since then, and science curricula have undergone tremendous changes in that time.

During the 90's, the state was engaged in the business of supporting communities that needed to renovate or build schools. Through the Massachusetts School Building Administration, projects like Newburyport High School received a significant percentage of it's renovation funds through the state, lowering the local tax burden for local communities. But those days are long gone. The ability of the state to support communities in their capital needs around schools has taken a severe hit during this budget crisis. Frankly, the capacity for the state to help communities meet basic educational needs and requirements is also pretty porous these days.

Recently, Newburyport was informed that an application to renovate the Nock that was submitted two years ago and assigned a vague status by the MSBA somewhat akin to "waiting for more information" has finally been rejected. It took them two years, and two, possibly three site visits, to reject us.

The plan had been to get the Nock done, and then apply for the Bresnahan, which in the interim has become the only school serving 1-3 graders in the city. We'll still submit the required Statement(s) of Interest to the MSBA to get in line for consideration, but unless we can prove that the schools have overcrowding or "significant structural issues," we aren't likely to see any state funding to offset construction costs.

We have yet to see whether educating two generations of Newburyport students in temporary classrooms constitutes a significant structural issue in the eyes of the state.

Alongside the water treatment facilities and the sewage treatment plant, add the all three schools to list of critical infrastructure investments the city will need to make in the future. Probably the near future.

Hopefully, we will hear from this year's Mayoral candidates about how they intend to address these issues. We can run from them, but we can't hide forever.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

The Bresnahan has had mold and mildew problems for a long time; the air is not safe for children, and yet you and the school committee voted to put MORE young children into that run-down building. Guess that's one way of "leveling the playing field" in this school district! Now ALL Newburyport kids between ages 6 and 9 can be exposed to the poor environment there, not just 1/2 of them. There's no doubt those kids will get ill with breathing, sinus or vocal problems, either now or down the road - just take a listen to the school's absentee principal's "voice" to see what our kids are in for in the future.

Wilbur Duck said...

Thank you for your comment. Your reference to mold problems at the Bresnahan actually tracks back to the time prior to our replacing the old "temporary" classrooms with the new "temporary" classrooms. Those old classrooms did have a mold problem, among a lot of other problems. There is currently a protocol for addressing mold issues- it includes environmental testing not only if a complaint is filed, but on a regular basis. To date, regular testing has not turned up a current issue with the Bres around mold.

Shifting the burden for forcing children to deal with a problem that doesn't seem to be a problem right now, however, reinforces much of what I have been saying all along in this blog and in my public statements. Simply this- while the community and the School Committee have expressed a desire for neighborhood schools, the funding to operate them has not been forthcoming. Twice, the community has turned down ballot initiatives that would have provided support for a school system that might have included more actual buildings, and twice the community did not support those initiatives.

So rather than complaining anonymously about a problem that may not exist, how about going on the record and provide evidence of a mold problem, or ask us formally to investigate one.

Any clarification you might offer about what you mean by "absentee principal's voice" would be helpful.