Last year, Lexington PTA and PTO presidents toured the new Waltham High School, then visited Lexington High School (LHS). The difference was stark. LHS reminded many of us of the high schools we attended decades ago—but in worse shape. Our students deserve a building that supports learning with current education standards, proper space, safety, accessibility and temperature control.
For each of the last three decisions on school infrastructure projects, the Executive Boards of all nine public school PTA/Os and LexSEPTA have endorsed campaigns supporting these debt exclusions. Each building project—renovations and additions to Clarke and Diamond, and construction of Estabrook, Hastings and Lexington Children’s Place—has benefited all stakeholders. Students attending these schools, those at other schools with relieved capacity pressures, and students moving up through the system all experience these benefits. Teachers and staff enjoy improved working conditions and better-designed spaces.
Now we face a building project that will have a significant impact on our children’s education—and by “our children,” we mean those in our households, currently attending our schools, and all community children, present and future. The Town’s existing-conditions report details LHS’s numerous deficiencies: poor air quality, lack of temperature control, safety concerns, noise issues, overcrowding, poor disability access and outdated lab facilities. The proposed building, “Bloom,” will address these problems comprehensively.
As presidents of Lexington’s PTA and PTO groups, we meet monthly to discuss issues and share information across schools, ensuring all families receive similar levels of support and access. As we have in the past, our organizations will share information with parents across town throughout this fall supporting a YES vote on the December 8 debt exclusion. As 501(c)(3)s, this advocacy falls within our scope under Massachusetts law, as it’s not a substantial part of our activities by time or expenditure.
People across town have lamented the high school’s condition for decades. The time to build a school for today and years to come is now. This project will not only provide the learning environment our children deserve, but the new facilities will also be available for town-wide use. Supporting public education benefits us all!
Please join us as PTO/A leaders, members and advocates for the children we serve. Vote YES for a new high school on December 8.
Nicola Sykes, Emily Sayre, and Rebecca Fagan Gorospe
PTO/A President’s Council Co-chairs
I agree with all of the reasons given in the article to fund the new high school, but I would be voting yes on the debt exclusion just because of the safety issues with the current campus.
We must pass the debt exclusion to fund the new high school. Please vote YES.
We need a new High School, but not Bloom for 3 reasons:
(1) Bloom accommodates 2,395 students, fewer than we had last year, while Lexington’s population is likely to increase by 30% in 10 years due to some 4,000 new MBTA dwellings (1,150 known plus some 3,000 from 8-year MBTA zoning freezes).
(2) the SBC never studied a cheaper and larger true 2-phase design, a “box” replacing the LHS foreign languages building as Phase 1, with other structures on campus as Phase 2 once we know how large a High school we need; we heard at the Sept 18, 2025 SBC meeting that that’s because of “disruptions” that students on campus would suffer, but in the same meeting, a Turner representative stated (in answer to why build Bloom 15 feet from our most vulnerable students, our LABBB kids) that they know very well how to mitigate “disruptions” for students; our LHS buildings are further away than 15 feet from each other, so I question our SBC’s ability to think straight since none of its members pointed out the blaring inconsistency: we can mitigate disruptions 15 feet away from Bloom, but not for on-site construction further away than 15 feet from students!?!? Wow…
(3) Bloom at $660 million is too expensive because of its curves, the difficult land it would sit on and other features a “box” would not include.
To hide these 3 fatal flaws, the SBC is bombarding the public with many lies (listed at https://lexobserver.org/2025/08/18/letters-to-the-editor-some-facts-about-bloom), à la Trump. I expect lies from a guy who thinks drinking Lysol will protect you from Covid, but I expect far better from Lexington’s officials, especially our Select Board members.
For all these reasons, I will vote NO on a debt exclusion for Bloom, which 2 or more Select Board members should oppose so we don’t have to hold a town-wide referendum on a boondoggle of a project that, if built, will destroy our schools because once voters refuse to see their taxes rise further, operating overrides will fail and we won’t be able to afford what really makes schools great — teachers, not concrete and fancy architecture.
Retired seniors with a minimum annual household income are exempt from the Community Preservation tax add-on. But now you want to burden them with a much larger Debt Exclusion tax add-on, for something they will not directly benefit from
which will be a burden to such seniors?