Committee could vote on field lighting at next meeting

Date: 11/4/2011

Oct. 31, 2011

By Chris Maza

Reminder Assistant Editor

EAST LONGMEADOW — The School Committee hopes to have enough information at its next meeting to vote on how to proceed with the lighting improvement project for East Longmeadow High School’s main athletic facility.

At the Oct. 24 meeting, Superintendent Gordon Smith outlined three potential avenues for the committee to pursue in order to complete the lighting project, which would allow both large- and small-ball sports to be played at night.

“We are in the process of getting more information in order to understand what the best direction is,” Smith told Reminder Publications. “We are going to have as much information as we can to make sure we make a responsible and educated decision. If the committee feels it has enough information to move forward, there could be a vote, but if there are still questions, no vote will happen until those questions are answered.”

The initial proposal of a Proposition 2 1/2 override for the athletics upgrade project, which included improved lighting, permanent striping and a midfield logo on the new synthetic turf athletic field, resurfacing of the track, the purchase of new track and field equipment, a new 500-seat bleacher for visitors, a new four-foot high fence around the track and the installation of three water cannons to wet the field, was voted down at a special election after passing at special town meeting.

Since then, however, the School Committee has funded four of the nine total items — the lined playing surface, the track, complete with a Plexitrac surface, new track and field equipment and the new fence — by using surplus funds that would have otherwise been returned to the town, while the boosters donated the cash to have the Spartans’ logo painted on the field.

However, once that project was completed, Musco Sports Lighting LLC determined that because light poles had been moved back, the lighting on the field was below industry standards and Smith ultimately decided that no night games would be played on the field until a lighting upgrade was completed.

In addition to the options of petitioning a special town meeting with a warrant article asking for the town to approve funding for the project or going though the traditional process required for capital planning projects, Smith said the school could finance the lights through Musco for three years.

Given a total estimated cost of the lights from Musco and installation through an independent contractor of roughly $96,000, the lease would require an annual payment of $38,000 over the next three fiscal years.

Through this agreement, after the lease is completely paid off, the lighting equipment would become town property and come with it a 25-year warrantee, which would cover everything, including light bulb replacement.

Smith said that if the lease is three years or less, the School Committee has the authority to allow it without needing town approval.

The Dennis-Yarmouth Regional School District in South Yarmouth recently entered into a similar agreement and Smith said that discussions with that district have been a major part of the educational process.

School Committee member Joseph Cabrera said at the meeting he felt the proposed upgrades should to go a Special Town Meeting route, which requires the petitioning of signatures. He stated that especially if the children who most directly benefit from the upgrades collect the signatures and explain the need for the improvements, it is likely residents would get behind the project.

School Committee member Richard Freccero disagreed, saying he believed the leasing option was the best one, and asserted that it was the fastest option and ensured that the project could be completed.

School Committee member William Fonseca concurred, saying that taking the matter before a town meeting was “rolling the dice” with a legislative body that has already voted against the project once.

Addressing concerns that the School Committee is attempting to circumvent voters’ wishes, the members acknowledged that the vote eliminated the possibility of an override, not the project in its entirety.

“The voters, when presented with the full package with nine items, voted against the increase in their taxes and we respect that process,” Smith said. “Now as we move forward, we need to decide how we are going to complete the project in small stages, acting in the interest of the safety of our athletes while being fiscally responsible at the same time.”