In the last few weeks, there have been several significant positive developments in the Lexington High School Building Project. It is exciting to see progress being made toward a new LHS, accompanied by clear demonstrations of support in recent community forums and Town Meeting.
On November 12, the School Building Committee (SBC) unanimously voted to select the “Bloom” preliminary design, along with an addition/renovation to the Field House, as the preferred option for the LHS project. Bloom was chosen after a lengthy public process that evaluated 19 design concepts and sought feedback and input from a broad spectrum of stakeholders and residents.
We agree wholeheartedly with the SBC’s decision: Bloom is the most sensible and cost effective choice to meet Lexington’s educational and community needs for generations to come. Building a new school partially on the existing playing fields minimizes disruption to our students’ education, while allowing the project to be completed in the shortest period of time.
On November 13, Town Meeting overwhelmingly rejected Article 8, a citizen petition to delay the LHS construction project from its current schedule with the MSBA. This non-binding resolution sought Town Meeting support to ask the MSBA to consider funding a two stage project for LHS over many years. Town Meeting’s resounding vote made clear that there is strong support for moving forward with the LHS project now, to address extreme overcrowding, inadequate facilities, failing infrastructure, and undersized educational spaces as soon as possible.
The Yes for Lexington campaign supports the passage of a debt exclusion in December 2025 to fund a new Lexington High School based on the preferred Bloom design. Lexington takes pride in the quality education our public schools provide for our children, but our current high school facility compromises that quality more every year. As the project moves into the schematic design phase, we look forward to seeing the plans for a new LHS take shape as we work to build community and voter support for this much needed and long overdue project.
Please support Yes for Lexington, and help bring our high school into the 21st century for our students, our educators, and our community as a whole.
On behalf of Yes for Lexington,
Taylor Singh
Campaign Chair
Town Meeting’s resounding vote made clear that Town Meeting has not yet taken the temperature of their constituents on this issue.
Raising property taxes over 10% to fund the new high school will make Lexington less affordable, put the town’s finances at risk, and reduce the likelihood of success for future override votes that support teachers and staff.
Without a steep reduction in the proposed property tax increase, I will vote NO when this project comes to a town-wide vote, and I encourage my fellow citizens to do the same.
Hi Adam. Just a point to share as a TMM, I received 12 emails asking me to vote no on article 8 (the non binding resolution) and 1 in support. I voted no. Thanks!
Adam,
I’m a town meeting member from Precinct 2. I posted a pole to my neighborhood Google group. The residents sent a loud, clear message. Out of 50 responses, 48 recommended a no vote on Article 8.
I voted no.
I, too, received emails from residents opposing Article 8 at a ratio of about 4-to-1.
Bloom should be rejected. It is not the right way to renew Lexington’s High School. To build a gigantic 60’+ building in the middle of our center playroom would destroy one of Lexington’s great “jewels”. This recreation/openspace is only surpassed as a Community treasure by the Battlegreen itself. The connective of the fields is what makes them so special. Bloom destroys what is most beneficial to all citizens. It should not be sacrificed to the schools. They can adequately address their needs on their on campus. It would be like your neighbor asking you to give up your land so they could build a bigger house for themselves. The schools are being a “bully”!
There is a fiduciary responsibility of Town decision makers to see that tax dollars are spent wisely. We should build for a purpose. Not for a palace in the Park.
Bloom would be a monstrous structure with a “hole” in it built on land protected under article 97 of our State Constitution to say nothing of the fact that it’s a 50’ deep peat bog. Common sense tells you it’s crazy to destroy recreation land we’ve invested millions in over many years and then spend millions more to rebuild the fields after tearing down the entire present High School. I could go on and on.
We can do so much better for our Town. Join in a Community conversation to discuss and debate what is truly the best plan for LHS on December 18th 6:00-9:00 at the police station Community Room. Thx for listening. Peter Kelley
Peter, I encourage you and like minded residents to exercise your constitutionally guaranteed freedom of speech to continue your discussions, including so called “community conversations”. But I’m wondering what you are hoping to accomplish?
It’s clear that keeping the center recreation complex intact during construction is very important to you, but you have no basis to claim that your opinion is representative of most residents. My impression is that you believe there is a “silent majority” of residents who support your position. In fact, based on the responses that I and two other town meeting members have posted to this discussion, the opposite is true.
You took a shot with Article 8 and the article was overwhelmingly defeated by Town Meeting. I think it’s pretty clear that at this point, most of the town is ready to move on with the BLOOM design.
The connective of the fields? The football fields and baseball fields have little “connectedness” to the rest of the Center Fields. Families with kids playing little league use the port-o-lets versus trekking across the track to use the restroom facilities.
I disagree with your analogy – seems like the right analogy is I trade you park land, build you a brand new house because your current house is falling down and unsafe, and then when complete I make a better park next door. You’re welcome to use both the school and the park. And the town, which is a magnet for families because of its school system, has a new high school that’s been needed for a long time.
I will copy and paste another comment I made here: “Lexington High’s projected costs are consistent with the other High School projects in the 2021 MSBA cycle – Monument Mountain High School in the Berkshires is building a $160M school for 500 students. North Attleboro is building a $289M school for 1,025 students. Scale enrollments to Lexington’s 2,395 students and you’re at $766M and $675M. North Attleboro did an exhaustive examination of phased/renovation options and also came to the conclusion that new construction was the least expensive, delivered the best overall school, and impacted students the least. So did our SBC. Bloom is the best option.” Cost savings for staging/construction are significant building on the Fields vs renovation in place. That’s the only common sense here. Find responsible ways to reduce the time to completion, impact on students, and cost. Building on the fields seems to saves money, both short term and long term.
Bloom is not some extravagant palace. It’s a functional school designed for 2,395 students. Costs are entirely consistent with every other high school project being built under the 2021 MSBA cycle.