Andover voters reject funding of new high school

Nov. 21—ANDOVER — Residents voted overwhelmingly against continuing to fund design work for a new $450 million high school at a Special Town Meeting on Monday night.

The nearly 2,000 residents instead voted to use $500,000 to fund design work for a substantially less costly interim option, estimated at between $30 million and $50 million.

The meeting was called by residents looking to help seniors, improve town safety and make Town Meeting fairer. Each resident-petitioned article presented to voters received universal disapproval from boards and committees and all but one were rejected.

The meeting was also called by town officials seeking $1.3 million to continue work on the full-scale high school project. Residents voted 1,139 to 541 to not continue funding the work, putting the entire project in question.

While neither school option was up for a final decision, both votes served to gauge the community's position on the future of a new high school.

Proponents of the project say it is necessary to address overcrowding in an aging building, while others — including Finance Committee members — have warned that its cost is too high a price for taxpayers and it is not fiscally responsible.

The interim option includes the use of modular classrooms rather than the construction of an entire new school.

Now that design on the interim option has been approved the Permanent School Building Committee not the Andover High School Committee will be working on design.

Town Counsel Doug Heim believes the majority of the resident-petitioned articles cannot be enacted due to the limited powers of Town Meeting, including the one article that was approved.

Article 1 was adopted 1,181 to 692. The article's purpose was to add a ballot question during the spring election to gauge voters' opinions on Town Meeting as a form of government. The results would be nonbinding.

"How do we get to 20 to 70 times more people to participate?" asked Kathleen Grant, who proposed the article.

Grant added that Andover's Town Meeting would need a Fenway Park-sized location to hold a meeting attended by all registered voters.

Heim said the article would be advisory and not add the question to the ballot. Another legal avenue would be needed to add the ballot question for the next local election, he said.

In the explanation submitted by petitioners, they criticized the lack of participation at Town Meeting.

"Why not hear from us?" Grant said.

The Select Board voted to disapprove the article in part because members had said the subject had already been debated extensively and researched.

"It would shed no light on what form of government would serve the community better and why," board member Annie Gilbert said.

An article failed that would have exempted seniors from paying above an annual increase in property taxes of 2.5%. The article would have excluded seniors from paying for property tax increases resulting from costly investments such as the proposed high school.

Heim said the article is "not feasible under Massachusetts state law" due to requirements the town has to adhere to regarding state law. The goal, however, could be accomplished with a home rule petition. A home rule petition must also be approved by the state Legislature.

Another article failed that sought to provide parity in the percentage of how much current town employees and retired employees pay for health insurance premiums. The article would have mostly affected retirees under 65 who pay a higher percentage than town employees and do not see reduced prices as a result of Medicaid.

The article's goal was to reverse a change the Select Board made in 2016 that significantly increased how much town employees who retired before age 65 pay in health insurance premiums.

The town counsel said the article could serve as an "annual consideration in the discretion of the manager and Select Board."

Article 4, which also failed, sought to provide equal time for petitioners and town officials to speak at Town Meeting. The proposal called for placing a clock behind the town moderator.

"This Article will bring transparency and accountability to Andover town meetings," said the petitioner in the Finance Committee's report. "Current parliamentary procedures in Andover are not obligated to follow any established or universally recognized parliamentary law or guidelines."

"Fair debate requires equal time," said resident Steve Walther.

Article 5 also failed. The proposal sought to reduce speed limits in certain densely populated areas of town. The change would have followed numerous recent changes by the town to improve road safety after the tragic death of a young girl in Elm Square last spring.

The proposal would have reduced the speed to 25 mph on parts of Chandler Road, Dascomb Road, Harold Parker Road, Jenkins Road, Lovejoy Road, North Street, River Road and a section of Main Street, according to the warrant. Speed limits on those roads now range from 25 to 40 mph.

George Thorlin, petitioner of the article, said the speed limits have remained the same for decades. Thorlin said approval of the article would send a clear message to the Select Board.

"In the end, Andover residents will be safer," he said

The town counsel said the speed limit changes would need approval from the Select Board since its members serve as roadway commissioners for the town.

Deputy Town Manager Mike Lindstrom said the state Department of Transportation does not support reducing the speed limits. He said MassDOT supports other traffic-calming measures to decrease speeds.

Article 6 failed as well. The article would have created a committee to monitor traffic safety and measure the town's enforcement of safety regulations.

Petitioner George Thorlin said the committee would serve as a liaison between town officials. He added that other communities with lower population density have similar boards.

Jesse Jacobson, an advocate for the article, said there is not enough police enforcement of speed limits. He added that more data on traffic speeds should be collected.

Select Board member Chris Huntress said it would be beyond the authority of a created committee to direct how police resources are used.

For the first time in Town Meeting history, votes were taken and tallied electronically.