ext_110931 ([identity profile] rmd.livejournal.com) wrote in [community profile] davis_square2016-10-04 07:26 am
Entry tags:

Somerville-specific referendum questions?

I haven't seen anything about it except for a couple of yard signs, but I gather there's a question on the ballot about construction of a new High School. I didn't see a link to it on the city elections department page, and I haven't seen it discussed here. Anyone have info or opinions?

we don't have a tag for 'elections' or 'politics'? I'm surprised.

[identity profile] mem-winterhill.livejournal.com 2016-10-17 05:07 pm (UTC)(link)
[continued from previous comment]

If the new SHS is to be built, the voters of Somerville will need to approve it. The City plans to borrow (sell bonds to raise) $130 million. State law requires a vote to override the Proposition 2½ debt limit, called a “debt exclusion.” On July 14th, the Board of Aldermen voted unanimously for this “debt exclusion” question to be on the ballot on November 8th.

The question on the ballot is a little difficult to understand. The exact wording is required by state law. It will read: “Shall the City of Somerville be allowed to exempt from the provisions of proposition two and one-half, so called, the amounts required to pay for the bond(s) issued in order to design, engineer, construct, and equip the new Somerville High School?”

I urge you to vote “Yes,” and to encourage your friends, families and neighbors to do so as well. Somerville needs this new school and our kids and families deserve it. Education is expensive – actually, priceless in my opinion -- and there is nothing more important in a community than good schools for our kids. I am happy to discuss with you further why the price tag is so high; don't hesitate to call or email me with your questions or concerns.

Mark Niedergang, Ward 5 Alderman

[identity profile] zachinaround.livejournal.com 2016-10-17 05:43 pm (UTC)(link)
Thanks!

I guess my confusion is that in either result, the City still needs about $130m to repair the building. Is that accounted for in the general budget, now? If not, what is the City's recourse? I guess I'm missing that part of the narrative.

Still leaning on voting Yes (strongly), but as said, just looking to get perspective from both sides.