Those who wanted a better athletic facility should have gotten it worked into the original plan that the whole town supported with open arms. Period. It's OVER. Tell me this, when they say "community use" does that mean PUBLIC use? I've tried to walk the track at the football field but it's locked when not being used by a permitted group. Same thing with the beautiful track in Burlington. We'll pay for it (though hopefully NOT) and have no right to use it.

Continue fund raising? In the last year or so havent they raised only 15k of the estimated 1.5M? I'm looking forward to voting NO.

well, I am glad to see that they have not stopped their fund raising. If my math is correct they have a little more than $300,000 to this point? At that rate you (fotcac) can build your field of dreams in another ten years or so. there is no way that any tax payer money should go towards this. this comes from a parent of an 11 yr old who will most likely attend tmhs. I am sorry Brian but I just dont see this being "for all teams and community" We will have a first class school and I am sure that the fields that come with it will suit just fine. This is not Andover or Reading where six figure salaries are the norm, we got the school now enough is enough with taxes. one last thing Brian, where will the hockey arena be? and dont tell me that we already have BIC just because the high school plays there. BIC shafted TYSA and we could use a rink, so before you upgrade fields that are going to be there anyway..........

No and No.
I say take the $300k you raised and make improvements to this design. I will vote no to any increase in taxes to do this and no to eliminating open town meeting.

If this was worked into the original plan, it would have cost a bit more money, but in the grand scheme of the project, it wouldn't taste so bad in our mouths. It also presumably would have cost less being part of the original plan than it supposedly costs now. Lack of planning on your part, doesn't constitute an emergency on my part.

FOTAC is now responsible to its donors to use these funds according to donor intent. They either hold on to those funds indefinately, until they can be used according to that intent, or they return the funds to the donors. I'd love to see them be able to use that money to establish an endowment for a scholarship fund, sadly, that's not easy to do. They'd need to go through a lot of legal stuff, and get permisson from each donor to be able to do it.

Let's do it right. You need lights at an athletic facility. These enhancements will be utilized for many, many years. Let's not be short sighted. Take a look at Woburn & Lawrence HIgh Schools & Athletic complexes; absolutely beautiful.. We should also have a high school/athletic complex to be proud of. I understand economic times are not great, but this is the time it is being built so we have to take advantage of the opportunity. I am a parent whose sons lost out due to the lack of usable athletic facilites and am a parent whose children will not benefit from the new facility, but I support the students who will.

I really wanted this to happen....with private money, but I have enough trouble getting by week to week. I sadly will vote NO on this. Would have loved it to happen for the kids and town.

Economic times are "not great"? That's an understatement! Look at what Beacon Hill is doing: Spend Spend Spend. Look at what Capitol Hill is doing: Spend Spend Spend. I suppose we just want the town to follow suit. When there is no money, you STOP SPENDING. Are people blind, stupid, or just don't care? People have come to expect that their taxes go up every year due to inflation, but we apparently like to pile on additional expenses EVERY YEAR. Just the status quo. When are we going to smarten up????

I don't know where the $300,000 fundraised figure came from as I believe it was more like $14,000.....which is an even further cry from being privately funded. Doesn't this give anyone a clue? EVERYONE is strapped economically! Enough is enough. Plus now the lights are put back in out of concern for the donors who gave that as a contingency? I guess that's more of a priority than concern for the abutters whom I understand the committee hasn't met with since last summer. I'm tired of the old adage of "we need to do it for the kids".....our future generation should be taught to "live within their means" as well. They don't NEED this glorified athletic complex to succeed. I voted for a new HS which WAS needed. I'll be voting NO on this and hope others come to their senses and do the same.

Kudos to School Superintendent Dr. John O'Connor for stating his concern that we are going for a Prop. 2 1/2 override for athletics when there are many other academic related items, such as outdated technology and school buildings, that the school department and committee should be and might need to address with a Prop 2 1/2 override in the near future.

Credit Dr. O'Connor with stating this obvious situation, even though the politics in the town are heavily influenced by the sports crowd.

Just remember, the FOTCAC's political influence is quite evident, as they proceed as a private group to use town resources to assist their private endeavor.

I think the opponents of the complex are failing to see what a great investment this complex will be. With the new outdoor field fees, the town will make substantial money from outside teams and leagues using the field. The high quality of the complex will attract groups like the MIAA to pay Tewksbury to host post-season neutral-site games for football, soccer (boys and girls), field hockey, lacrosse (boys and girls), track (boys and girls), and tennis. The town will make it's money back on this investment and then some.

If this had been incorprated into the original TMHS project, would we have received the 60% +/- reimbursement from the State?

This would be a beautiful facility but asking the taxpayers to pay 100% on the project when it could have been done for less than 1/2 does not sound like the right approach.

It would be a disaster if this became the next South Street Fire Station and we could not afford to keep it open due to the operation and maintenance costs.

StephFace: What does it cost, $500,000+/-, and who's going to pay to resurface the artificial turf in 10-14 years?

I'm not saying I'm against it- but can we have dollar amounts attached to this, for now and for the future? Maintenance, life expectancy and upkeep all increase as the usage increases.

Who is going to monitor the income and cash receipts for tickets at the door and the concession stand?

Will it be done by the sports booster clubs, the Redmen, athletic scholarship funds, the FOTCAC?

Does the 'town' ever see revenue come back from sporting events?

My understanding was that it went to the individual sports booster clubs, such as football, field hockey, and etc.

These are my questions- dare I ask.

Buying a $500,000 home you can't afford is also an investment, but something (I hope) you wouldn't do. Especially not with your neighbors' money! You don't buy what you can't afford. SORRY.

Shirley,
I don't believe those revenue's from the sporting events goes to the individual sports booster clubs. For instance at the TMHS home hockey games, everyone pay's to get in but that is NOT collected by the booster club it is collected by and kept by the school. I don't know about other sports though.

L C: How does the school department monitor the ticket sales at Breakaway Ice? Do they have staff at the place?

a couple of things I want to know before voting "no": What is the life expectancy of the turf and what would the replacement cost be? And what are the maintenance costs for a turf field vs a grass field?

Dirk,
At the Selectmen's meeting, Brian said the turf lasts 10-14 years.
Look at the website www.ftcac.org
In the presentation, it says that the turf costs $700,000

Brian, please not the mythical "average house"!! My taxes increased by $1700 this year. Enough is enough. Show me on paper what the fields at Lawrence or North Andover or any "enchanced field" in the area brought in in income for their town.Lets put our money toward education and safety before sports. I am very suprised at you and Dr O'Connor for throwing your support behind this when the Dewing, Heath Brook and North st schools are in terrible shape. I just don't understand this and my 2 votes from this household are NO

I am for great fields & athletic complex....not for turf....it wears out & needs replacement at great cost...also creates injuries (now being studied)....high school kids do not need turf...quick question: why would we put in grass fields without irrigation?? That is in the current plan....Why don't we take the two plans & meld them for the best result & cost??

Brian says this? "I'll remember that the next time I buy tickets to a fundraiser to support the schools or Big Bang Bash or when I go to the All Night Trivia event next week for the High School PAC. My private $ will be going back into the town's resources you reference. It’s like the Lion King’s circle of life."

Who do you think you are buddy? What do you think? You think you're the only one making donations to things???!!! I really misjudged you.

My take on the Selectmen and the School Committee was that they wanted to put the decision to the voters to decide- - - about supporting the project----not so much.

I am voting no just on the fact that I get nickled and dimed to death with taxes as it is. Anytime I can vote NO on a new tax....I will!

In the words of the late Jerry Williams,""They don't get it...We have no more money"

Ciampa, the south st fire station is always closed only because the the firemen wont do what is right for the town. They took an oath and now they leave the residence of south Tewksbury vulnerable. Great job ladies!

The kids and residents of this town deserve decent athletic complexes. I don't have children that will attend the high school nor will I probably use any indoor or outdoor track but as a former Tewksbury High athlete, I would have loved to have nice athletic facilities. People of this town are losing sight of what's important to the community. Investments into, new schools, new athletic facilities, parks are worthy causes for paying slightly more in taxes.

You're right, the kids do deserve "decent" fields, and they're going to get them with the already approved plans. Hell, they may "deserve" gillette stadium, but that doesn't mean it will happen. We all deserve jobs and raises too, but that doesn't mean we get them. NO MORE NEW SPENDING. I refuse to vote for anyone running in this town who thinks spending us into poverty is a good idea, because they certainly don't represent ME.

Sorry already given enough go find another group of chumps to built your field of dreams.

By the way you can have an irrigation as long as it has moisture Control sensors

You could add the control sensors, I agree it makes sense if grass is installed to save on water costs. A grass field is going to need water. Remember how dry fields and yards got with the droughts we have experienced over the last two years.

But from what I am told by members of the building committee, there is no irrigation that will be installed to save money on the overall project cost. Maybe someone from the building committee can add.

Moisture sensors & a well to supply the needed water...why irrigate with treated town water? This way the grass fields last longer and stand up to the punishment of use.....makes more sense than turf....

What a shame that a discussion forum like this leads to a condemnation of firefighters.They are not responsible for the town's finances. Individuals will decide whether they wish to support the agenda item (athletic complex) and (charter) and vote accordingly. That is how the process works. No need to be negative about any group.

Instead of raising taxes for athletics howvabout finding a way to lower water rates. Water bills are oppressively high. How did that happen.

If you don't attend TM, this will pass......just saying.

The debt exclusion for the athletic complex will have to pass at the ballot box FIRST, so be sure to vote on Town Election Day, April 14th to nip it in the bud right there. Otherwise it will go to Town Mtg. on Mon. May 7th. The Charter vote JUST goes to Special Town Mtg. on Tues. May 8th, hopefully voted on by secret ballot so no one feels intimidated. Either way, now is not the time to sit back and figure "someone else will do it"...if these matters are as important to people as they are making it seem....COME OUT AND VOTE NO ON BOTH ISSUES. One to keep money in your pocket and the other to keep Open Town Meeting and PRESERVE your right to a VOTE to say NO!

A meeting was held with abutting residents last summer and the opinion was pretty much unanimous that we have a lot of reservations about this complex. Brian and others stated at that meeting that all concerns would be looked at – and that another meeting would be held in a few weeks to see what could be done to alleviate residents concerns.

I’m still waiting for that meeting to take place. This field is located right next to abutting properties – and there is practically no buffer. And yes, my property is one of those impacted. Further, Paul Hibner stated in a recent news article that lights were removed from the proposal due to ‘concerns of the abutting neighbors’.
Well the lights are back. http://bit.ly/xMw2jO

So much for the abutting neighbors concerns.

It certainly makes me wonder whether this complex - with lights - was part of the plan from the beginning. And even if it was, I’m actually ok with that. BUT…if the complex is going to be there – common courtesy – not to mention logic would dictate that there needs to be a buffer between it and the abutting neighbors.

There is none.

The current baseball field has a buffer of trees. The previous track had a buffer of trees. Now you’re putting lights there and will basically be running nighttime football games in people’s back yards. Well there’s a cost for that and unfortunately you’re making the abutting neighborhood bear it.

I take it from your ‘full steam ahead’ approach that your group could care less about the neighbors who’ll have to live with this complex round the clock. Forget the property rights of people living in the area…this is all about building Tewksbury a first class facility.

I’m not necessarily against a complex and I’m definitely not against good athletic facilities, but you’re killing the property values of the abutting neighbors to get this.
And we get to pay for the privilege!

Sounds like a great deal to me…sign me up!

The selfishness and arrogance here to me is off the charts.

And that’s before we even get into matters like the fact that your group couldn’t come close to raising the private money you had planned on so now this is getting pushed off on the tax payers.

I’ve heard a lot of reasons to be cynical about athletics, politicians and others who help run this town. The way this whole episode has come together just adds to that cynicism.

We do not need to pay more taxes in this Town! I say do the things that are necessary for public health & safety. We also need to fix all of our roads in Tewksbury so that we make it safe for our cars & school buses. We have more potholes then hot air in this Town. I think Mr. Dick has a definite agenda. Is this anything like Mr. Wilson's agenda with the Town Counsel form of government?

I'm going to ask everyone to take a deep breath and ease back on the name-calling. It doesn't serve to further your respective positions and it doesn't serve as a good example to the young people of the community, who will be using the new high school and the athletic complex. There are clearly benefits to the type of athletic complex being proposed. The real question seems to be, are residents willing to pay for it. When i was a kid and I felt bad asking my older sister to borrow money, she said, "I won't get upset about you asking for money if you don't get upset that sometimes I will say No." My big sister is a wise lady.

Please check for yourself
http://www.charities.ago.state.ma.us/charities/index.asp

Type in tewksbury in the Charity Name box
Then to the right use the pull down menu to select "Contains the word"
Then Click in the box Submit Charity Search

Look in to the IRS filings for the town wide sports programs:
A total Capital Account Balance across a total of six town wide sports
organizations in the 2010 year
shows >$600k

Maybe you could pull all of this together to complete the Athletic Complex?

Excerpt from the Town Crier from the School Superintendent:

http://homenewshere.com/tewksbury_town_crier/news/article_5e8d0a80-6488-11e1-8fb9-001871e3ce6c.html

"Superintendent John O’Connor found some aspects of the project “troubling.”

“I’m troubled by the fact that I haven’t been able to talk about bringing an override to the community,” he said. “I’m a little troubled that [the complex] is the priority.”

Tewksbury elementary schools are aging and the School Committee just recently convened a subcommittee with a mission to look at the long-range plans for elementary schools in town.

These projects had been put off, said O’Connor.

“We’ve put them off, and quite honestly, it’s coming due,” he said. “I just want to make sure we are keeping our eye on the horizon.”

He did say that he supports the project, however."

Rich,
These are all separate youth organizations that run their own programs...Tewksbury Youth Football for instance takes care of their own fields, lights, equipment, buildings, snack shack, porta-potties etc....the town does not support this program at all....it is self funded.....the high school football coach runs a football camp every summer but that is separate from the youth football program.....
Now....my question....why would the youth football program hand over money to fund this athletic facility???
They have their own set of priorities like replacing helmuts, maintaining their facilities, replacing worn out uniforms & pads....etc
You are talking apples & oranges......

my suggestion is if this, if a good faith true complex supported by the community for an investment and potential benefit for our students and athletes that will in fact use the facility, then a by-in from the youth programs to donate say 25% would be about 175k. This would then show true community backing and support. Before going to a ballot question, the committee really should have done their homework. If they could convince the youth programs that this is truly a complex for them and their future, then they may have been able to demonstarte to the entire community that "yes, in fact we do truly have support of the athletic programs, youths, and parents in town" instead of trying to convince us that individual contribution is the gauge or standard that they believe will help pass this ballot. if this were a business proposal in the real world, they would be laughed out of the board room. It is unfortunate, that this complex, which I would love to see and have access too, is in the hands of the incompetent. I'm quite sure this will fail. It is not bad timing, it is bad marketing and flawed strategy. Two key ingredients to a succesful campaign.

Rich,
I agree but you have to understand that this is a high school athletic facility that is being proposed....not an all encompassing town sports facility including youth programs....plus there would be too many schedule conflicts if the youth programs were included....also, why would the youth programs in town give up what they have built just for an outside chance of being able to play in "Gillette" Tewksbury stadium?? Let's give some $ towards the facility...maybe they might let us play there....Doesn't make sense or good business strategy on the part of the youth programs......Still apples & oranges....

if true then this truly is a bad investment. Utilaztion then would only be during school year? So, 10 out of 12 months or 83% utilization minus the days in which the high scholl teams are playing at their opponents home field. I was thinking if this was such a good thing to promote the student athlete that the capital rich programs would be willing to support such a venue for their next generation stars. If the parents who support the youth organizations, elect to have their respective organizations approve a contribution, then I may be convinced that their is town wide support. That is what i was suggesting. I was thinking that maybe the committee should have first addressed these organizations, before trying to get additional tax revenue as a means of support. Then they may have had the necessary support behind them. In business this is called "Influence". The ability to present a clear and understandable position to gain additional support and membership approval that leaves no holes, questions, or concerns exposed. This was not very well planned, presented, or demonstrated -- truly unfortunate.

I believe the utilization rate will be much higher but for the high school sports....for example we start youth soccer & lacrosse in one month....you have baseball, track football etc....football practice usually starts in August so it is just the winter months that an outdoor facility of this type would not be used...just remember it is geared to the high school....they may attract other users who would want to rent the facility....that is a potential revenue stream....
Please also remember that it is the youth sports with the support ($) from the parents that feed the athletes to the high school programs....
All of these sports cost money...we pay user fees to the town....not all of the equipment is included so extra cost.....
Now when you bring up "influence" what is in it for the youth sports programs?
Let's fork over operating capital that has been raised through fundraisers, donations, advertising sales, volunteer work (like the snack shack at the football field), parents signup fees etc.....it just does not make any sense....

Well my mind is still made up...that would be a NO!

Good info BusyMom...I am not supporting additional $ for the upgraded facilities....I also do not think that this deserved a special overide vote ahead of the needed repairs for our existing schools, expanding or offering educational programs....we also need sidewalks....fire hydrants need to be replaced....the water department put a burlap bag over the hydrant in front of my house three years ago to signify that it does not work.....burlap bag broke down & wore away....hydrant never replaced....
I think we need to address these types of issues before funding elaborate turf athletic facilies....

Outstanding dialogues, much better than when an individual tried to compare the funding to buying a can of beer. I am impressed by the research that private citizens do on their own. I do believe that the voters will vote responsibly, regardless of the way one votes.

I agree with many posters that this would be great to have if privately funded. I have a range of feelings about what has transpired since the high school vote and since the private funding has not met its timeline. As I recall, the public was told that if we came in under budget when building the HS, the costs to taxpayers would be less. Yippee! if that is the case when we are done. The taxpayers should pay only for the HS as it was presented and voted upon, not as some would wish it to be. How ironic that the most recent Town Crier featured one story about a ballot vote seeking money for this proposal right next to another headline screaming "sewer rate hikes expected." Clearly increased financial burdens remain. As a poster stated, a facilities planning committee for our elementary schools has been formed recently. Potential requests to fund these projects will be forthcoming. How can having a "better" stadium be considered an essential need in light of all of this? I imagine the FTAC has put in a lot of time on this. Yet I am infuriated that a tax exemption effort is being undertaken now (and supported by town boards) for what I consider a luxury. If money is sought, couldn't it be better spent? On safety? On reducing class sizes, hiring an art teacher and/or world language teacher for about 10 years to cover the tremendous gap in these programs at the Wynn? Even a pool could arguably be an added town resource vs. a "better stadium." More next post - sorry...

In frustration about what seemed to be lack of critical data on the funding for this project, I started looking yesterday first at the FTAC site. Found what seemed to be a dearth of hard facts, multiple reports, actual numbers from multiple resources. Read through it all. Interestingly, the abutters presentation had more detail than the recent BOS one. Looking further into the grants listed, I found a lot of data that I am hopeful FTAC can explain here or elsewhere. Regarding the largest grant they list (PARC grant for 500K) here's what I found: FY12 cycle closed.Some key qualifications for potential applicants:
•should have a population >35000 (smaller communities may qualify “small town” provisions?)
•must have an authorized Recreation Dept. Ours is “closed indefinitely.” (per town website)
•must seek to develop land that is under the jurisdiction of the Parks Commission.
•should have median income & highest educational level below state average. We are above.
•Also per the application: “PARC program is a reimbursement program. Grant recipients are reimbursed after invoices have been paid. The total project cost must be raised or appropriated by the municipality shortly after project approval if it has not already been appropriated. Costs incurred prior to grant approval and contract execution are ineligible, including design costs. Force account labor, volunteer hours, and donations are also ineligible." Will share a little more next post.

Last post. Re: the other grants listed. Most are either expired, unrelated or we may be ineligible:
Gatorade – GoGirlGo program w/Women’s Sports Foundation. Grants only in PA in 2011. ? 2012.
•PowerAde –A sweepstakes that expired last summer.
•Sprite Sparks Park – A sweepstakes not open now. Requires Coke My Reward #’s to win.
•Let's Move – (Mrs. Obama) Appeared to have $ available early on particularly for farmers. ? any money now. Focus is on food and nutrition in connection with Healthier US Schools program.
•US Lacrosse –No grants related to upgrading fields but some money for equipment, getting an AED machine, or starting up lacrosse teams.
•USTA –No grants to build new/upgrade facilities. Various grants for U10 equipment, lining tennis courts, or developing new teams. New team resources appear to be beginner "kits" of sorts.
*Liberty Mutual –Part of Responsible Sports community grant program. Can earn up to $5000 if get a lot of people to take an online course. Deadline May 31. < 2 people signed up now.
I am honestly not trying to be a jerk here. Want to be an informed voter. I have personally raised money for sports in Tewksbury. Just don't believe a tax exemption is the way to go here and/or now and am hoping the FTAC can help me understand better why they think it is.

Brian, I was not suggesting the construction of an ice rink, certainly not with tax payer money I was making the point that your complex would not be for "all" teams. you need to remove that from your pitch

We all need to come out to the polls to vote no on this but also now more than ever, we need to vote the right people into town office. A drop in the bucket for some, may be a waterfall for others. If a selectman or school committee member has money, they tend to assume that we all do and that it should be no problem to just keep spending

Ok, so KNOWING full well that we NEED at least 2 new elementary schools in the next 3 years that will REQUIRE an override or a debt exclusion or something of that nature, we're going to spend money NOW on a LUXURY item? When we can hold on to that money for the next year or so, keeping residents content, and in a better place to ask for that money to improve the schools when the time comes?

I'm sorry, there is no way in hell that this measure can be justified.

I also question the whole way this and the charter vote is being placed into Town Meeting. Good luck getting droves of people to turn out THREE nights in a row. Or is low turn out or "pick and choose which measure to vote on" what they're hoping for?

Nice Melissa, Luxury item is my thought and sums this all up perfectly. An override and tax increase were difficult to swallow for the new school, but I saw it as a need. That school needed to be done. Super stadium/Field of dreams would be a luxury item.
If all of the schools were in tip top shape, all fire houses were open and the town had money to burn then I would say go for it. Its just not the case

The first step to better times is to imagine them.

Renee,
really, it is great to see the comments and ideas from someone fresh out of school and the athletic system, but this is about a town that is strapped for cash and people just trying to get by. unfortunately it is also about agenda and town politics.I believe the majority of people living here tapped and living week to week or month to month. hopefully you will never experience that, but if you do then you will understand some of the opposition here

I have a question. What is our exact 'tab' for the new school right now as home owners? Is it roughly $200 a year for 20 years?

I would suggest a domed stadium but I think they can play inside the closed fire station if it rains too hard.

Those sound like the numbers that I remember

Just to clarify a little of the history on the High School.

The Building Committee was always cautious and conservative in our planning, we were never extravagant, that's why we were thrilled to be considered for the MSBA's model school program. Right off the bat this:

1. saved us millions of dollars in architectural fees; and
2. gave us five extra reimbursement points saving us additional
millions on the total project cost.

As we went throughthe schematic design phase in the fall of 2009 we put in the project the following six "add alternates"

1. green roof
2. synthetic turf field
3. storage/concession stand
4. lights
5. tennis courts
6. bleachers (500 expandable to 1000)

These were estimated to cost $2.1 million and were not eligible for any reimbursement.

Our first and overriding concern was to always insure that the project came in under budget, so we were always looking at the costs and the project estimates completed by our estimators. After further deliberation in February 2010 we voted to remove the turf field, lights, green roof and tennis courts from the project. We kept in the bleachers and concession stands because the existing High School had those features.

Finally when the bids were opened in Oct. 2010 and the low bid was 15 million dollars under budget the HSBC and the community was very pleased.

cont

continued:

Given that we are:

1. saving millions in architectural fees
2. saving millions due to added reimbursement points
3. saving 15 million due to the very low bid
4. will receive a credit from the contractor (though small) if we add the turf/tennis courts now
5. won't incur additional costs if we do it later and have to rip out the grass field and change the drainage
6. we have a state of the art new High School with a state of the art auditorium/rehersal area for the drama program
7 we have state of the art music facilities for the music program

isn't it reasonable that we have state of the art athletic fields as well.

Speaking for myself only and not the building committee, I think the synthetic turf field and tennis courts, etc. will be a big plus for the whole town and urge a yes vote

on another topic I totally support town meeting and am against any charter change. Thanks

What I'm hearing here is that since we're saving millions of dollars, let's just spend that savings! Woo hoo!

NOT.

It's still BORROWED money. Money we don't NEED, nor can afford to borrow. If we come in under budget, HURRAY that we don't NEED to take out a bigger loan.

There are people in this town who have to choose between food and medication, between rent/mortgage vs. heat. They're struggling to supply their own NEEDS. And we have a special interest group trying to FORCE us to spend our money on this frivolity because what has already been approved isn't good enough in their eyes. Because we didn't voluntarily foot the bill "privately". They want it ALL at whatever the cost. People will start moving out, leaving the burden on a smaller number of residents who remain. If people aren't alarmed by this, they should be. NO NEW SPENDING.

First of all, let's calm down a bit. No point in yelling at each other if we want to make the best decision for the town in the end.

I understand what FOTAC is trying to do, and I don't fault them. They're doing what they think is best for the students of Tewksbury, and I commend them for trying to make a positive improvement in the community. It took a lot of work to put together the proposal, so the group deserves credit. However, given what's down the road in terms of needed improvements, the financial situation we're in, and all of the previous other overrides that have been approved, I just think that the money could be best used elsewhere. It would be better suited for a rainy day fund in the school district, given that there are some improvements that are needed down the road.

Like some other posters said, I wish I could vote for this. I have no problem with FOTAC's proposal, and if came during a better financial situation, I would gladly approve it. Sadly, I will probably have vote "No". Although, and I would be curious, and would like to hear from someone with the group, would the new complex save more money in the long run than the current field?

I am somewhat surprised that Mr. Cutelis, who is going to be on the school committee is supporting the synthetic fields and complex knowing that the elementary schools are in such dire need. My concern is that I like the school committee members to be able to look "at the whole picture" and have some foresight. In fairness I do not know Mr. Cutelis as opposed to knowing that Mr. Dick has been active in the Redmen organization and youth sports thus is following the platform that he ran on.

Jo

I served on the master plan committee that evaluated all the schools, elementary as well as the high school, that led to the high school project. I also served on the planning committee to build the Ryan school and reconstruct the Wynn school. I agree we will probably need at least two new elementary schools in the near future.

It will probably take at least two possibly three years of planning, permitting, MSBA submittals and approval before construction could begin on a new elem. school and then two years of construction. So you are looking at approx. 2018 befor we start paying for the bonds for the new elem. school, which isn't too bad from a financial planning perspective, because the bonds for the Ryan school will be paid in full in 2019, and the Wynn will be paid in full in 2022. So adding those two new elem schools should be close to revenue neutral. I hope that helps.

Jamey cutelis

looking a tight fiscal budget for years to come and facing some daunting expenses some yet unaccountable as of yet - Roco dump clean up,retiree health insurance fund , storm drain mgt, Central st firehouse ,North st firehouse , elementary schools and town hall - escalating operating cost, health care , retirement enterprise funds and equipment replacemnent taxpayers wallets will be hit with financial tsunami .
2m with interest can be put to better use. If we were Wilmington sitting on 10M reserve it might be a different story.

@ Stephface : I did not accuse Mr .Gilman of taking sides but a line in his quote is very questionable about how he states the young people WILL be using this facility . That certainly doesn't sound very impartial to me !!!! Mr .Gilman , you have to look at the very real issue here that people are fed up of certain groups with their agendas trying to force everything down our throats ! People are not happy about the fiscal mismanagement this town seems to replicate over and over and over . When are people in town going to wake up and take a good look at the bigger picture around them ? We have had it !!!

oh, and FWIW, you can't SAVE what you don't OWN. Borrowed money can't be saved.

I think that if this does pass, and I hope it does not. I will hold Brian Dick to his word. This will be for the community. As soon as the field opens, I will take my 56 degree wedge and a bucket of balls and stand on the 40 yrd line and chip golf balls through the up rights

My husband reminded me of who Mr. Cutelis. I forgot that he was on the Under 25 group with Mr. Francis and others. This groups wanted class sizes to be under 25. I thought that was a great idea, but the group and movement disapeared. I will guarantee that a debt exclusion to support that cause would not happen.

Oh come on Jo, who cares about u25, lets build a football stadium!! We cant afford to pay more teachers or firemen or fix 35 yr old elementary schools. We need a football stadium.

Bill, thanks so much for providing this forum for those that both agree and disagree with this proposal. This is a great place to be able to read input from those that are involved and informed and also those that are really passionate on both sides. I think it's great that we've heard from my fellow residents but also from Brian Dick and Jamey Cutelis. I appreciate Brian balancing the impact of athletics with academics in his role as a school committee member. I have also been to High School Building Committee meetings and know the endless hours that Jamey and the committee have invested. His input is very much appreciated as well as it gives us all a different perspective.

Thanks Bob, I did not know heatbrook was that old. I thought it was early 70's. either way we still cant afford to fix it. We have selectman whose kids will need a nice football field and school committee members who have more money than god and could care less what their tax bill is

Why do it now?
1) Less expensive to do now during current construction
2) Credits available that will reduce the current cost of new high school
3) More cost efficient to maintain than grass
4) No risk of damaging the approved track
5) Minimum disruption to high sports teams

Who benefits?
1) Town saves 12k/year by hosting TMHS graduation
2) High School use - 14 teams
3) Youth programs and community summer camps
4) Adult and senior programs and leagues

Do other schools in the area have similar complexes?
Yes, schools like North Reading, Woburn, Haverhill, Lowell, Lawrence currently have similar athletic complexes. In addition, Wilmington High School and Shawsheen Regional Technical High School are planning to install all-purpose athletic fields with existing lighting.

Why weren't you upfront with the neighbors from the beginning about the plans for this expanded athletic complex? The neighbors should write letters to the editor, the Selectmen and the School Committee about this- then maybe someone will listen. Its a shame that people have to come onto a blog like this to get heard.

Shirley, I have to correct you regarding calling Tewksbury Patch a blog. While we do have blogs on our site, we are not a blog ourselves. Rather, Patch is a comprehensive source for news, information and the exchange of ideas. :)

Okay-
Why weren't they upfront with the neighbors from the beginning about the plans for this expanded athletic complex? The neighbors should write letters to the editor, the Selectmen and the School Committee about this- then maybe someone will listen.

Its a shame that people have to come onto an internet "comprehensive source for news, information and the exchange of ideas" like this to get heard.