Harvard’s capital planning committee wrapped up its evaluation of 11 fiscal 2022 capital spending requests last Thursday afternoon, recommending money be spent for nine, which includes a contribution to the debt service due next year on the new elementary school. The total cost to the town will be $1.4 million, most of which would be paid for with money taken from the town’s capital fund. (For a complete list of projects, amounts, and sources, see the table below.)
For the second year in a row, however, members voted 3-2 against a nearly $1 million request by the Select Board to replace the old library roof. They also voted to delay a Fire Department request to purchase a cell tower repeater to reach poorly covered areas of town until the location of a new cell tower has been resolved. (See story on page 1.)
The five-member Capital Planning and Investment Committee has the job each fall of reviewing any project whose cost exceeds $20,000 and that has a useful life greater than five years. The committee also recommends the use of money in the town’s Capital Stabilization and Investment Fund, or capital fund, which is refreshed each year with deposits of free cash, unforeseen income, and money left unspent by the town the previous year. According to a report prepared by the Finance Department, the capital fund had a balance of approximately $3.7 million as of mid-October.
Money cannot be withdrawn from the capital fund for any expenditure, however, without a two-thirds vote of town meeting, so the capital committee’s recommendations are only the first step in a review that wends its way first to the Finance Committee and then to the Select Board, which has ultimate responsibility for presenting a fiscal 2022 budget to the town. Either board may disagree with the CPIC’s recommendations and offer its own. And there were already rumblings of resistance this week, especially with regard to CPIC’s rejection of funding to replace the old library roof, gutters, and upper course of masonry.
CPIC’s vote against the project last week was 3-2, a split that was identical to last year’s vote on a largely identical proposal. Committee members Alice von Loesecke and Nate Finch voted in favor of the project this year and last; Chair John Seeley and members SusanMary Redinger and Teresa Jardon voted against. The for-and-against rationale was largely the same as well. Opponents voiced concern that there were too many other projects on the horizon to spend capital funds or take on debt to repair a building for which the town has not established a clear need. They were also concerned that other pressing maintenance could raise the total cost of properly upgrading the building to $2 million over the next couple of years.
Proponents argued that regardless of the building’s future, it is a town asset and the roof repairs were essential to seal its envelope against further deterioration. The only difference between this year’s debate and last? An increase in the amount of the request, from $921,360 last year to $966,000.
When Seeley reported the actions of the committee to the Select Board at its regular biweekly meeting on Tuesday, it was clear its members were not ready to abandon their request, raising questions not only about the library roof project but other items as well, such as the Planning Board’s request for a $300,000 study of the commercial district and the replacement of school lockers, both of which CPIC had approved.
Defending CPIC’s recommendation not to fund repairs to the library roof, Seeley said it was a question voters need to decide. He argued that the old library was clearly a historical building, “but not being fully used in any official town function.” It’s leased, he added, to an organization [Fivesparks] that’s providing valuable activities for the town, “but not generating significant income.”
Select Board member Lucy Wallace objected to Seeley’s reasoning. “I don’t know any other town asset where we critique the value of investing in it based on the money we’re going to earn from it,” she said. “We do not look at purchasing conservation land that way. We do not look at the schools that way. … [To ask] what’s the income you’re going to earn from it if you fix it is just a very unfair metric.”
Board member Stu Sklar said he wanted the project “moved up” in the ratings. “It’s absurd to me that we’re going to punt … that can down the road. … And really? $300,000 for that commercial district study? I’m sorry, I don’t see it. Not $300,000.” Sklar also had words for the schools’ reluctance to tap more of the Devens fund to pay for capital projects. He understood, he said, the desire to keep a cushion of $500,000 in the fund, a goal set by the School Committee. “But I’d like to have wings to fly,” he said. “It’s an interesting, unique time we’re in right now. And you don’t always get what you want.”
The capital committee’s recommendations will be presented next to the Finance Committee, which will make a recommendation of its own. Last year FinCom agreed with CPIC and recommended against repairing the old library roof. The Select Board voted to fund the work with debt and added it to the Spring Town Meeting warrant, but voters rejected the proposal at Town Election.
