To the Editor:

The vote on Tuesday, Oct. 8, is about more than just a school. This goes further than simply a building. A place of foundational importance, one of first impressions on the meaning of community as it relates to youth, is on the ballot this October.

It has been asked in another letter to the editor: "How does a set of new walls and updated amenities, perhaps some additional, innovative services guarantee that our students will benefit directly from this project?" This quote, casually throwing away the phrase "innovative services," minimizes the entire goal of this project. This is not just a set of new walls and meaningless platitudes. Enough evidence shows that quality school infrastructure investments raise test scores, increase student productivity, improve attendance rates, and positively impact economically disadvantaged communities. This is a fact. But this minimization — these misleads — of what this city can achieve through the Greylock School Project seems to be what those on the "Vote No" side keep deferring to.

It was subsequently written very eloquently, albeit plainly misinformed, that "If the MSBA's concerns about our student population proved to hold true — the Berkshire Regional Planning Commission also believes it will sharply decline — we eventually could have all pre-K through 6th grade students in Colegrove, built in 2016." This is one projection, one source, that is being referred to, and it is important that we pull from a variety of sources in an effort to maximize and strengthen our data.

An enrollment projection was put together utilizing the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, the Department of Public Health, the U.S. Census, and UMASS Donahue Institute. The study, through the MSBA, found that North Adams Public Schools will have a projected enrollment of 625 students in K-6 by 2030. With an additional projection of 91 Pre-K students, that puts us at 716 students. The New England School Development Council presented to the School Committee relaying the building capacity of Brayton at 449 students and Colegrove for 420 students. Neither school seems, based on either study (the comprehensive MSBA projection and the equally comprehensive BRPC projection), large enough to hold our pre-K to 6 population in 10 years.

To suggest that there is a "disturbing drop [in the student] population" is grossly misrepresenting the reality. Different studies lead to different results, and it feels rather short-sighted to suggest that a single source of data could be justification for the eventual demise of another school in North Adams. It is fear-mongering by the aforementioned author, plain and simple. We are a dwindling population, absolutely. But that suggestion that we should anticipate the closure of Brayton 10 years from now, a school that the opposition would tell you needs to be "saved" because of its 30-year youngness, underscores the argument being made, and highlights the futility and pessimism that is being promoted in dissent to progress in North Adams.

Finally, the costs between a "Yes" vote and a "No" vote should be examined, as it was written that "A vote for a $65 million school is a vote for higher taxes for a district with a declining school-age population." And this is true! Your taxes are going to go up, but they are going to go up whichever way you vote. Comparing the two options, the "Yes" side can tout the largest grant ever awarded to North Adams. History was made in the preliminary stages of this project: $42 million which will ease the burden on our taxpayers, resulting in an approximate $20 million figure.

This is not a small price tag. But the opposition is going to try and tell you that the roughly $45 million figure attached to the Brayton renovation alternative is going to be easier to swallow. It is a figure that is determined by the timely infrastructure needs making up more than 30 percent of Brayton’s assessed value, triggering 521 CMR 3 compliance requirements, turning what could represent "minor" repairs into major expenses. Between these two options, it is clear which will ease the taxpayers wallet, and have a greater return on investment.

And it’s true — I’m cherry picking here! These are all short quotations from some very outspoken "No" voters. These are people with passion, and deep ties to the community, and I don't want anyone to think that I am downplaying that. But I encourage you to read their letters for yourself. In them you will find an assortment of reasons why we cannot pursue this grant-funded, educationally stimulating, spacious early elementary that our students deserve. Instead, you will see the opposition leaders try to convince you that it is in YOUR best interest to halt this school, and fund a pricier, short-sighted renovation on your dime.

Please vote Yes on Oct. 8. North Adams won't have another opportunity like this one.

Joshua Vallieres
North Adams, Mass. 

• Most Read

• Most Comments

• All News

• Blogroll

• Photos