I am writing to express my wholehearted support for the new Lexington High School building project. This isn’t just a “nice to have” improvement; it is a necessary, forward-thinking investment in our community, our students, and our town’s future.
My family experiences the current building’s shortcomings firsthand. My daughter attends activities at the high school most weekends, and navigating the sprawling, disconnected campus is a challenge. The current flow is confusing, and the fact that students and visitors must frequently go outside to get from one building to another is a serious practical and safety issue, especially during our harsh New England winters.
A new, unified building will solve this, but the benefits go far beyond logistics. The current facilities are, as the state has acknowledged, failing to meet modern educational needs. Our students deserve 21st-century learning environments. I am particularly excited about the prospect of new, properly-equipped science labs and updated athletic facilities, which will provide all students with the tools they need to thrive.
Furthermore, this project is a model of fiscal and environmental responsibility. The “net-zero” design, which includes hybrid ground-source heat pumps, extensive solar panels and battery storage, is brilliant. This green technology will drastically cut carbon emissions and, just as importantly, will save our town millions of dollars in energy and maintenance costs for decades to come. This is exactly the kind of smart, sustainable investment Lexington should be making — one that benefits both the planet and our taxpayers in the long run.
The current LHS building has served our town well, but its time has passed. It is overcrowded, inefficient and outdated. We have a chance to build a safe, sustainable and inspiring new school that will serve generations of Lexington students. I urge all residents to learn the facts about this project and join me in supporting this vital step forward for our town.
Kalpesh:
We all agree we need a new High School. In hindsight, since construction costs rise annually by about 5% on average, we should not have waited the 12 years or so that the MSBA’s procedures have meant to get just 18% of Bloom’s 2028 $660 million total cost from the MSBA — simply because 1.05^12 is 1.80: had we built a new High School 12 years ago, with no (meagre, 18%) funding from the MSBA but also without its bureaucratic 12-year delays, that new High School would have cost us $660 million/1.8, or $368 million only 7-8 years ago. I knew nothing about the MSBA 12 years ago, but our Town leaders should have known, and should have made this simple calculation. If they had, we would have had a new High School operating now for 5-6 years already instead of a controversial, overly expensive and too small design, Bloom that may not even be built on its site in the fields because of environmental issues (wetlands, etc).
Bottom line, we all agree that we need a new High School — we needed it in fact years ago.
But your “this project [Bloom] is a model of fiscal and environmental responsibility” is half correct, on the environmental and energy use side.
But it is completely wrong on the fiscal side because Bloom costs per square foot 30% more than the new Watertown High school (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1PcH2CCi7DjPlKq10Q0ZhS41RU4VY6D9O/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=116971253884586510151&rtpof=true&sd=true) with EXACTLY the same environmental and energy conservation features as Bloom (geothermal wells, heat pumps, LEED platinum design, etc).
Bloom costs also per square foot 30% more than Sharon’s new High School (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1S4muEecriSwk8tiwzPEfahpxvfCxWg0a/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=116971253884586510151&rtpof=true&sd=true), 9% more than Wakefield’s (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1H2L2fA4KbKJWgpLajBvFxT7Q9tqMw7vi/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=116971253884586510151&rtpof=true&sd=true) and per the SBC’s own calculations at https://drive.google.com/file/d/1u2umuhbcHG43JgRG0Y19BM1lPVDyW2en/view?usp=sharing, 25% more than Belmont’s and 14% more than Arlington’s.
In short, Bloom is too expensive. That’s the 2nd reason why I will vote NO on December 8. The 1st reason is that Bloom, at 2,395 students capacity, today’s LHS enrollment, is far too small given the 5,000+ new MBTA dwellings likely to be built in the next decade in Lexington which will result in many new students, while the SBC has ignored a phased, on-campus design of new (not renovated) boxes which can accommodate that likely influx of new students.
A NO vote on December 8 will finally force the SBC to design and cost estimate that better, faster than Bloom (in its phase 1) solution, with or without the MSBA which to me appears to be a mechanism that in fact costs us money, instead of helping us.
My goodness Patrick, is it your full time job to post a rebuttal for every single post, letter or statement written in support of this project? I wish I had the time you have to dedicate to oppose this project! I hope maybe someday we can work on the same side of a cause as I admire your dedication for sure. But wishing the town did this years ago doesn’t help us today. You say it is too expensive and too small. Which is it?
This project will be expensive because that is what it costs to build a big school to support the excellent programing we need, and we have one of the largest high school populations in the state. This is just a fact. And it is a huge bummer! I agree. I am very concerned about the cost of living here in Lexington, but I actually intend to do something about that. I plan to work with Town Meeting Members, the Select Board and the Town manager to find ways we can spend less and be more efficient in our town government. And I think we will face some difficult choices in the days ahead, sometimes trade-offs must be made to lower taxes for residents. But we need this high school project now more than ever.
I know you know well that this process took many years and was open and welcoming to questions, concerns and options. After an extensive process, the best plan was selected. I appreciate that whatever plan you preferred wasn’t selected and that must be very frustrating, however we are now at a “go/no go” situation. If this doesn’t pass, there is NO good alternative. There is NO lower cost alternative. I wish there were, but whatever comes next will be far more costly. If this does not pass, our school system will suffer, our town’s reputation and desirability will suffer (impacting home values) and most of all our students will suffer.
I will be enthusiastically voting YES on December 8th. We need this project to move forward. Thank you.
Mr. Mehr, I’ll say one thing for you, you are persistent. You’ve been recycling the same opinions and ideas in the Observer and other forums ever since Bloom was selected as the preferred design for the new high school. This, despite your “facts and data” being debunked over and over again by many residents. Along the way you have questioned the competence and intentions of anyone who disagrees with you, including the members of the School Building Committee.
I look forward with relief to the vote on December 8th. I believe the town will approve the debt exclusion, and we will move on to the next phase of implementing Bloom. In a way, the vote will be a forum on how the residents have assessed the validity of Mr. Mehr’s many critiques of the Bloom design and process.