From what little bit of the story I could read, they did report our potential 92 million dollar obligation. Theyeven reported that DR. LATHAM felt that the vote was critical.
How can they expect people to pay for day before yesterday's news? They have ITEM.LIVE.I don'y feel sorry anymore for being a print dinosaur.
The council members are sheep for not asking any questions. Baaaa baaa
ReplyDeleteIf you thought your schools were void of political games, guess again.
ReplyDeletelynnwikileaks.blogspot.com/2013/08/marshall-middle-school-playing-chip.html
Smoking gun!
DeletePerhaps I am missing something, but I am not understanding your point regarding the email from Mr. Caron. According to the particular portion of the email you and others keep posting, the taking of the site solved a difficult political and legal problem. It does not state the site was chosen and taken to solve these problems, which is what I believe you keep insinuating?
ReplyDeleteLori smart. Denial = bliss
DeleteLori,
DeleteIs this more readable?
"The takings eliminated these problems by providing a property use that was politically more acceptable to City officials and neighbors."
LWL
No, and it still doesn't state the site was chosen to eliminate these problems, which again is what is being insinuate, but thank you.
DeleteWhat? It is clearly written, and the fact that city officials find the poor less politically acceptable.
DeleteDear Lori,
DeleteLets ask the citizens of Lynn how they read this admission?
LWL
You of course are more than welcome to ask anyone you would like what their interpretation of this email is. I am sure you will find different interpretations and opinions by those you do ask. What is still unclear to me, is your point. Are you saying voters shouldn't approve the bond because you and perhaps others do not approve of what you believe is the reason the site for the new school was chosen? Again, the bond vote really isn't about whether the school will be built or not. It is about how much the city and taxpayers are willing to pay for the new school to be built. The options are 20% of the eligible costs (which we know is roughly 40% of the actual costs) or 100% of the total cost, which is estimated to be $92 million. Regardless of my feelings and opinions on all the decisions that were made during this entire project, my vote will be for the city and taxpayers to pay the lesser amount. This, and the fact that this city and the children who attend school in it, are in dire need of this new school.
DeleteLori,
DeleteAfter the lies and lack of transparency you continue to believe those city officials of course, that say "there is no other way"?
How do we know what that lesser amount is? Surprise, that MSBA money is all OUR money. If we let them keep ir, SHAME ON US! Who can you trust?
DeleteHas the decision already been made that the new Marshall will be built regardless of the outcome of the bond vote? Can the city legally build this new school without the approval of the voters? If the answer to both these questions is yes, then where will this $92 million come from? My guess is the taxpayers and residents of Lynn will be the ones paying for it.
DeleteThey could reapply with a better scope or request the MSBA to consider the least expensive option, after the bond for $92 million looses.
DeleteUp until this point, it has been my understanding of what has been told to the public, that the new school would be built regardless of outcome of vote and that if the bond was not approved by voters then the city and taxpayers would be responsible for and would be paying the total $92 or so million. However, I have just discovered this may not be the case and if the bond is not approved by voters, then a new school will not be built, but the city will be out the millions they already have put into the project, plus will have to put more money into repairing the old school than the $37 million or so taxpayers would have been responsible for if the bond was approved. So I guess I have been misunderstanding this bond process and project all along?
DeleteAnd it will cost less to make repairs because you bet they would open to competitive bid where as before it was closed to one vendor. The pocket book will be closely watched.
DeleteIt is my understanding that switching sites is not an option. I wish it were but no. There are too many procedural steps to go through to get it done that quickly. So here is the predicament, we either approve the bond and have to LIVE with the consequences of our less than honest, translucent acquisition and deal with a less than ideal, maybe even dangerous location or don't pass it and deal with trying again. If we let the MSBA dictate the the terms, they probably will delay as much as they can.
DeleteHere's the thing though if we take a deal just to get one and it's a bad one in the end we end up paying more. Only have to point to CLASSICAL for an example. We are held hostage to that decision. It's not just about needing the space if it or any school built by MSBA funds doesn't last 50 years you end up paying them BACK, no matter your reimbursement rate.
I only urge caution.
Everyone should write to MSBA now and tell them we don't want Brookline site near the tracks. It is the most dangerous option.
DeleteThat is an option. I am sure many people will tell you about snowballs and slim chances....
DeleteBUT....
No Child Left BehinD used to be the law of theland until we got a waiver. Always when there is a will, there is a way.....
LEADERS LEAD
If the bond does not get approval by the voters, there will be consequences that will greatly impact this city and the children who attend school in it. The MSBA could make the city submit another statement of interest and begin the process over again. Keep in mind, I believe it has been about 5 years since we submitted the current statement of interest and we are only at the voting point with years still left before the school would even be completed. Due to the way the MSBA operates, the fate of our other schools is also dependent upon the approval of this bond. The MSBA could decide the city had its chance and blew it with this project and not approve us to receive any more money. The result of this would be the city and taxpayers losing the millions already spent on this project and having to put millions more into repairing the existing extremely old dilapidated building and who knows how long those repairs will last before more money and repairs are needed. I have seen the pictures of the current Marshall and that building isn't fit to hold prisoners, never mind our children! In fact, we have jails/prisons in much better condition than this and many of our schools. I understand the concerns people have about this project and the potential risks and costs involved IF it ended up being another "Classical project" But I think this city, the taxpayers and the children face greater risks if this bond is not approved by the voters.
DeleteWould you expect a student to be unprepared to test?
DeleteThe city should retake the test and do this right from the beginning.
Take 1-5 years of study to purchase land around existing Marshall.
@ Test time the city is prepared to face MSBA and land ready. Too much?
Why wasn't Cahill at council for the bond vote?
DeleteIf you have not already done so, I would urge you to take a tour through Marshall and then decide if you would want your children attending the school in just a couple of weeks, never mind in a decade from now.
DeleteDid you know this will be the swing school for Pickering, and will not be torn down in an urgent hurry. Set snooze a little longer.
DeleteI had always heard that but then the Item comes out with a story where Mike Donovan says it is going to be torn doen in 3-16. Did they get it wrong or did somebody forget to tell Mike?
DeleteThe school committee forgot to tell Mike.
DeleteHow the Marshall ballot question will read:
ReplyDelete“Shall the vote of the Lynn City Council dated May 28, 2013, wherein it was voted to approve the borrowing of the sum of $92 million for the purpose of the design, construction and completion of a new Thurgood Marshall School at 92 and 118-120 Brookline St in Lynn, be approved contingent upon 80 percent state reimbursement for **eligible costs** as approved by the Massachusetts School Building Authority?”
**Eligible costs
Sign on the dotted line please.
Other fishy fact: City takes large site by eminent domain for $1.3 million back in April (one month after memo), yet doesn't find it necessary to do the same to the two smaller residential lots until after the bond vote in September. Motive?
ReplyDeleteWho is in charge in this city?
Oh what a curious web we weave,
Deletewhen first we practice to deceive.
(I can't take credit for writing that but I would like to.)
To all those above who are opposed to the bond approval and building of the new school....What is your alternative? Have you seen the inside and outside of the existing building? Do you think these are acceptable conditions for children to be attending school in? Would you want to spend 6 hours a day, 5 days a week in this building? Do you think this building will go another decade (because if this bond doesn't approved and a new school built now, this is how long it will be before a new one will)without requiring substantial repairs?
ReplyDeleteOne of the consultants in my Boston St. office was telling me the ITEM says that developer who had planned to build apartments on the BROOKLINE site is suing I think for 6.4 million. I am sure CARON'S e mail will be an exhibit.
ReplyDeleteTHERE GOES THE CONTINGENCY FUND! I HOPE IF THE BOND PASSES THEY DON'T HAVE ANY COST OVERRUNS. AND THEY HAVEN'T EVEN TOOK THE TWO RESIDENCES YET,YIKES!
Everyone knows about the lawsuit. It is not a secret, nor is it a surprise to the city or planners on the project. Furthermore, he is suing because he doesn't think the city gave him fair market value for the property. Caron's email is irrelevant.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.itemlive.com/news/developer-sues-lynn-over-land/article_02cfa438-0166-11e3-8002-0019bb2963f4.html
You haven't answered any of the questions above, nor has anyone else. Why is that?
A FOOL AND HIS MONEY SOON PART
ReplyDeleteIF you are to be on the school committee, you will have to do more than just slander people and their ideas and decisions or use foolish quotes and statements as a way to deflect from actually offering any real solutions or providing any real answers to questions posed to you. Until you can do this, you will never be taken seriously, and all you will have is this blog. Which may be all you really want anyways. Just a word of advice, I wouldn't get too excited about the number of hits you have or get, most people only read your blog for entertainment purposes only and not for real information or dare I say it, knowledge.
ReplyDeleteYou are right, pageviews won't necessarily translate into votes. I may lose, surely I have offended enough people. There may have been times I have crossed the line. Without a doubt this BLOG is irreverent. So often times is the truth because people would rather stay in the dark than see the light. A lot of things I have said that people have said will never be turned out to be true. An equal number of things I have warned about never happened I believe because warnings were given of their impending arrival. As for serious answers and ideas, I challenge you to point out anyone who has offered more plausible than me. Give me numbers. As for foolish quotes, most of them have been from people in charge.
Delete