Letter to the Editor: Minuteman – A Tale of Two Cars

By 3 Comments

Photo: A minivan.

To the editor:

I’m voting No on the Minuteman debt tomorrow even after DESE’s ruling. Here’s why.

Imagine you have a family of, say, six kids and you need a car to drive your little scholars to school each morning. Naturally, you buy a minivan. Then, for years, you take the kids to school, paying down the cost of the van, and of course paying all the operating expenses – gas, oil changes, repairs, etc. – as you go along.

After a while, some of your kids graduate, so you agree to take along some children from the neighborhood. You want to be a good neighbor. Besides, the van is big enough, so it’s no big deal.

While the neighbors pitch in a little for the gas, it is not as much as you do. It’s a little unfair, but you’re trying to be nice. It won’t be forever.

Are those neighbors poor? Not at all. They could pay the full fee if they had to. But it’s obviously cheaper for them to send their kids with you, so that’s what they do. You’re a bit irked, but you say okay.

Cut ahead a few years. Your minivan is crumbling, and it’s time to get a new car. Do you buy another van – or do you downsize? You only have three kids of your own to drive now, so it’s obvious: downsize.

But then you get a letter from the school. They say you have to buy another minivan – not downsize – because you have to keep driving the neighbor kids.

Say what? Those families never paid for the first minivan (you let them come with you because you had the room) and now you have to pay for another minivan? You are forced to perpetuate what had been an act of generosity on your part into an unending subsidy?

You’re understandably irritated. Now is the perfect time to change things to reflect the current reality, but it looks like you have to institutionalize a broken setup where you pay a lot and these neighbors don’t pay their fair share.

Then the school says, “Wait, we’ve thought about it, the neighbors can pitch in more or less equally to pay for the new car.” Well, maybe. You do want everyone to get to school, not just your kids.

But what about paying their fair share of the operating costs (gas, repairs, etc.). “Um, no, that you still have to subsidize.”

How is that fair?

You’re tired of all this. Why do you have to continue subsidizing these neighbors for 30 more years?

A right-sized vehicle (just your kids and no neighbors) would be okay. Or a large vehicle that is paid for fairly (everyone pays equally for both capital and operating costs) would also be OK.

But a large vehicle for which you’re still on the hook for the operating costs while the neighbors get a deep discount? That is simply unfair.

That’s the Minuteman district in a nutshell. A new building, though certainly needed, does not resolve the fundamental unfairness of the payment structure. While I’d love to get a new building, we can’t afford to be part of the district if it means paying an unfair share of the money for the next 30 years.

That’s why I’m voting No.

Lisa Gibalerio

TMM Precinct 4

Football: Jones Records Record Breaking Run in Home Opening Win [VIDEO]

By Leave a Comment

Photo: An exhausted Ben Jones at the end of a record-breaking effort vs. Medford.

Under the Friday Night Lights of Harris Field, Belmont High’s Senior Running Back Ben Jones scorched Medford as the running back ran for five touchdowns – four for more than 50 yards – as he piled up 334 yards in the Marauders’ biggest home opener victory in recent memory, 34-6, over the Mustangs Sept. 16 before a large crowd of residents and students.

Ben’s performance tops older brother Max’s game against Salem in 2014 in which the Belmont back ran for 261 yards and five TDs. 

“Ben had a great day off tackle,” said Belmont’s third-year Head Coach Yann Kumin. “He got to the holes and off he goes.” 

Jones’ 334 yards is an unofficial Marauders’ rushing record, breaking Makhi Johnson’s 280 yards set against Somerville last year. 

“To be honest, it wasn’t that hard to do because I wasn’t touched on most of those runs,” said Jones, crediting his offense line for creating “huge holes” in the Mustang defense. 

“All I needed to do was go straight. I was a track runner,” said Jones. 

After a disappointing 21-6 loss against Stoneham last week, this past Friday was the chance for the Marauders to prove it was capable of moving the ball against a Medford team coming off an emotional win over rival Revere, 30-28. It didn’t take long after the National Anthem for the Marauders to dominate on both sides of the ball. 

The Marauders bottled up Medford’s senior QB Ben Antoine who ran for 248-yards and three touchdowns against Revere, forcing the Mustangs to punt after running five plays. 

On its second offensive play, Belmont QB Cal Christofori (4-7, 54 yards) handed off to Jones who made a quick move through a gap on the left side of the line and ran 59 yards for the first of five trips into the end zone at the 6:12 mark.

After a Mustang three and out – facilitated by junior OLB Adam Deese forcing a seven-yard loss on first down – Belmont took over at their 46. The next time the ball was downed was again in the end zone after Jones took the ball 54 yards to the house at 2:14 in the first quarter, giving Belmont a 14-0 lead.

In the second quarter, Medford found themselves with a fourth down and 16 for the first down on Belmont’s 29. But Antoine showed poise facing the Belmont rushers to toss a TD to sophomore WR Nathan Brand to cut the lead to 14-6. 

“If that’s how they’re going to beat us, it’s going to be a good night for us,” Head Coach “Q,” told his team. 

The touchdown would be the last time Medford threatened as Belmont’s line and linebackers – led by Ryan Noone, Dennis Crowley, and Dylan Ferdinand

Just before the half, Christofori marched the team down the field with a minute remaining on the clock. With 26 remaining, Jones took the rock and scampered 23 yards for his third TD on of the half, giving Belmont a 21-6 lead.

In the third quarter, Jones struck again, going 56 yards for his fourth of the night. The senior who is a state track finalist in the 200 meters sprint, took off for 83 yards in the fourth, stumbling over the goal line with cramps as she equaled his brother’s five TDs in a game.

“That was the best offensive and defensive schemes” the team had for a game in his three years at the helm, said Kumin, praising his coaching staff in preparing the varsity for the game. 

“We are going to enjoy this for one night, then watch film and prepare for Arlington,” said Kumin.

To the Globe: Paolillo Responds to Columnist Minuteman Op-Ed

By 1 Comment

Photo:

[Editor’s note: The article below is a letter to the editor in the Boston Sunday Globe, Sept. 18]

DANTE RAMOS missed the point of Belmont’s opposition to the Minuteman High School referendum (“Oh, Belmont! Local control fetish hurts vocational schools,” Opinion, Sept. 11).

The Minuteman district is broken. A substantial percentage of the approximately 600 students come from nonmember towns.

The funding mechanism severely disadvantages member towns. Belmont has tried for years to fix the problem, as recently as this summer. But nonmember towns are not joining.

In 2017, Belmont will pay $30,602 per student, as compared with $19,702 by nonmember towns, and it will only get worse with the new, $144 million Minuteman debt. This is an unfair financial burden on member towns.

Ramos praises Dover for its willingness to overlook the unfairness. But let’s put that in context. Belmont spent $13,029 in 2015 per pupil in our public schools, as compared with $24,263 in Dover. Additionally, Dover sent only two students to Minuteman; Belmont sends an average of 30. The disadvantage of Minuteman membership does not significantly affect Dover; that is not true of Belmont.

Belmont has legitimate concerns. Without fixing the unfairness of the district, we should not approve an oversized school that will make it worse.

Mark Paolillo

Chairman, Board of Selectmen

Belmont

Letter to the Editor: Despite State’s Move on Capital Costs, ‘No’ Remains Best Course

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Michael Libenson

To the editor:

Last Monday [Sept. 12] I served as a panelist for the League of Women Voters information session on the Minuteman referendum. I explained why there is a clear and compelling financial case for a “no” vote on the Minuteman referendum.

A broad group of Belmont town leaders agree. The Board of Selectmen and School Committee have voted unanimously to recommend a “no” vote, as has our State Sen. Will Brownsberger. The Warrant Committee voted 13-1 to recommend a “no” vote.

Some have asked me whether the subsequent Department of Elementary and Secondary Education ruling that allows Minuteman the option to charge non-member towns between 75 percent and 100 percent of the member town capital cost alters my perspective. It does not.

Belmont residents should vote “no” on Tuesday. It remains true that Belmont should save over $200,000 each year, and perhaps more, as a non-member town and yet still generate the same educational outcomes for our children.

The Minuteman district is broken and the recent DESE ruling doesn’t change that. The district is broken because nearly half the students come from non-member towns – including Watertown, Waltham, and Cambridge – and non-member towns are treated differently in the form of lower costs, most importantly with tuition, and secondarily with capital. 

The primary cost difference is due to non-member towns paying substantially less in tuition than member towns like Belmont. Belmont’s tuition cost this year will be $30,602 per student and Watertown will pay $19,702 per student on average. This large difference does not change and there is no clear path to change.

With 26 students at Minuteman, Belmont currently paying approximately $280,000 more than we would if Belmont were a non-member town like Watertown. This tuition disparity is the main reason no non-member town has joined the district in more than 30 years.

Tuition cost is also an important factor in why six of the sixteen towns have recently voted to leave the district.

Second, despite DESE’s recent ruling, capital costs remain unknown. The one thing we do know is that non-member towns will never pay more than member towns.

Minuteman now has to decide how much to charge non-member towns for capital. Imposing the full capital charge of $8,460 will likely cause non-member towns to explore sending some or all of their students to other schools that are substantially cheaper (as Minuteman is already the most expensive voc/ed school in the Commonwealth, even without any capital charge). Minuteman needs these non-district students to fill the school.

If a number of non-member students go elsewhere – or those towns even threaten to go elsewhere – Minuteman will have to choose between an underutilized school (and therefore even higher operating and capital costs borne by the remaining members) or a lower capital fee for non-members. For member towns, this means risk without reward and Belmont need not bear this risk.

Here is the bottom line: the reason why the current decision is so consequential is that a “yes” vote will lock Belmont into a bad deal for 30 or more years. We have an opportunity on Tuesday [Sept. 20] to avoid locking ourselves into a broken system for generations.

The financial case remains clear and compelling that Belmont should vote “no”.

Michael Libenson
Town Meeting Member, Precinct 1
Chair, Belmont Warrant Committee

Letter to the Editor: State Action Results in My Vote Changing From No to Yes

By 5 Comments

Photo: The site

To the editor:

A new Minuteman High School is essential for Belmont. We should vote YES in the Sept. 20 election.

I changed my mind on this vote because Belmont won a major victory this week. DESE, the state agency that oversees all public schools, finally did the right thing this past Thursday [Sept. 15] and set a capital charge that is fair for the member towns. This answers nearly all of the criticisms of the building project. With the capital charge resolved, it is time for Belmont to approve the debt for a new school and remain a member town.

The opponents of the debt argued through the spring and summer that the proposed new school is too large for the member towns and DESE could not be trusted to set a fair capital charge. This argument is no longer valid.

Belmont will pay the same capital charge even if we became a non-member town.  That is the outcome we demanded, an equal per-student amount for the cost of the new building.  DESE has accepted this principle with a small adjustment for non-member towns that already provide a significant level of vocational/tech programs.

In recent weeks the opponents of the debt have changed their focus. They now seem to be making the vote a referendum on the tuition charged to non-member towns for operating expenses. By leaving the district, they say Belmont will save money even with the fair capital charge because the non-member towns pay lower tuition.

The new regional agreement as discussed in Town Meeting allows a district to withdraw, subject to unanimous approval by the remaining members, to avoid the debt obligation.  Tuition was not the reason for this provision.

Non-member towns are a part of Minuteman.  This not ideal but it reflects circumstances unique to this district.  The practical difficulties in getting new towns to join as members may be solvable in the future.

If Belmont pays less in tuition, the remaining member towns have to pay more.  It is a zero sum game at that point and I do not support shifting costs to our neighbors in this way.  The amount at stake is something we can afford.  In a perfect world of equalized tuition, Belmont might save $150,000 when our total town budget is over $100 million.

In addition, leaving the district is not automatic even if Town Meeting votes to withdraw.  The remaining member towns also have to vote unanimous approval for Belmont’s exit.  Reduced to a naked economic calculation, they have an incentive to deny a request to leave.

A member of Arlington’s Finance Committee has already signaled that Belmont can expect opposition to an exit request. Withdrawal is probably not the windfall that some have intimated.

There should be a thorough debate over tuition for non-member towns but it should not be used to avoid approving the debt.  If Belmont withdraws, our economic incentive will be to free-ride on a flawed tuition policy.  Instead, the right course is to remain in the district and help lead that debate.  That debate should also include how to make sure Minuteman is run efficiently and controls its operating costs.

Belmont won the big battle over the capital charge.  I urge you to vote yes on Sept. 20.

Roy Epstein

Cushing Ave.

Letter to the Editor: Putting the Minuteman Vote in Context

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Norman Rockwell “The Watchmaker”

To the editor:

My father was a watchmaker; my son graduated from culinary school; my father-in-law was a tool and die maker. I respect the education and training provided by vocational-technical schools. I also understand the hopes of those who want to make the Minuteman School District work.

After almost three decades of working with Minuteman (on the Warrant Committee, School Committee, and Board of Selectmen), I think that efforts to reform Minuteman are unrealistic. Senator Brownsberger’s thoughtful analysis is persuasive. The Minuteman District is a broken system, and the State Department of Elementary and Secondary Education is not going to fix it.

If we vote “yes” on the Minuteman debt on September 20, we are committing ourselves to paying at least $10 million and probably closer to $14 million over the next 30 years. That decision, once made, is irrevocable.

We can save between $200,000 and $400,000 each year by becoming a non-member town, and still get a great Minuteman education for our students filling the approximately 300 non-member seats. Those savings can be spent on teachers for our growing school population; miles of paved sidewalks; debt service on a long list of capital projects.

Everyone who has devoted years of service trying to reform the Minuteman District agrees that we should vote “no” on September 20. The School Committee recommends “no” by a vote of 6-0. The Selectmen recommend “no” by a vote of 3-0. The Warrant Committee recommends “no” by a vote of 13-1.

Voting “no” on the Minuteman Debt is a better plan for Belmont.

Ralph T. Jones

Summit Road

Jones is a former Chair of the Board of Selectmen and former member of the School Committee and Warrant Committee.

Business: Top RE Broker Joins New RE/MAX Office in Belmont [VIDEO]

By 4 Comments

Photo: Anne Mahon.

Anne Mahon, a top producing real estate agent in her hometown of Belmont has joined RE/MAX Leading Edge in the franchise’s new location at 84 Leonard St in Belmont Center.

“When I heard RE/MAX Leading Edge was expanding its footprint in Belmont and Cambridge, I knew I had found my new home,” said Mahon. 

Recently Century 21’s leading broker in Massachusetts, Anne brings experience, knowledge and passion to RE/MAX Leading Edge.

“Anne Mahon and I have been friends for many years,” said Linda O’Koniewski, CEO of RE/MAX Leading Edge.

“I knew the first moment I met her, we were soul mates. Anne puts her clients first. Whether she is working with buyers or sellers, every decision she makes is based on what’s best for her client. She puts our philosophy in practice with every transaction and because of that we are thrilled to have Anne in our organization,” said O’Koniewski.

Having worked in the real estate brokerage for only five years, Anne has experienced tremendous success in her short tenure. During her time with Century 21 Adams Arlington, Anne was awarded the top agent in New England, top nine in the U.S. and one of the most influential real estate agents in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. In addition, Anne is an international speaker and trainer on how to reach success and perform customer service at the highest level.  She has been recognized by the Boston Globe as one of the top real estate professionals in Greater Boston.

“Now that I am part of an organization that has 13 locations, I have the advantage of meeting my clients anywhere and anytime. Part of my rationale for joining this particular office was that I saw a team of tremendous agents that transact more than real estate; they give back in a big way to our community here in Belmont. We are more than just real estate agents, we are ambassadors of our beautiful Belmont community,” said Mahon.

Anne is an active member of the Belmont community and feels passionate about ensuring everyone has an opportunity to succeed. She’s was recently elected to the town’s Housing Authority, is a Town Meeting Member and has led the Butler Elementary’s PTA. She works with the Belmont Boosters, the  Foundation for Belmont Education, Belmont Food Pantry, is a supporter of the construction of a community Bike Path and currently chair of the Belmont Democratic Committee.  

For more information about Anne, visit www.annemahon.com or call at 617-990-7660.

Founded in 2001, RE/MAX Leading Edge has grown to more than 200 sales professionals and serves the communities of Arlington, Back Bay, Belmont, Cambridge, Lexington, Lynnfield, Melrose, Newton, Reading, Somerville, Wakefield, Watertown and Winchester. The Company is the highest-producing RE/MAX office in New England and fourth largest real estate firm in Massachusetts.

Letter to the Editor: Forcing DESE’s Hand By Voting No on Minuteman Plan

By Leave a Comment

Photo:

To the editor:

A new Minuteman High School is essential for Belmont. That’s why I am voting no in the Sept. 20 election.

A majority NO vote in town is a requirement for Belmont to have the option to withdraw from the Minuteman District. We need this option.

As a member of Town Meeting and the Warrant Committee, I have been studying this issue for months. The biggest problem right now is the failure of DESE, the state agency that oversees all school districts, to make public the “capital charge” it will approve for the Minuteman project.  The capital charge is the amount per student Minuteman will be allowed to charge non-member towns to help pay for the debt to build the new school.  About half of the Minuteman enrollment in the future will come from non-member towns, so this issue is critical.

The conclusion of all reasonable analyses is that a fair capital charge is approximately $8,400 per student.  But there are well-founded fears that DESE will only approve a much lower amount, perhaps around $2,000.  This would place an unfair burden on member towns to subsidize non-members when all benefit equally from the new building.  

Voting NO accomplishes two goals. It tells DESE that it is time to decide on the capital charge. They have been analyzing this issue since the spring and there no reason to prolong this process. Second, by voting no Belmont will have the option through Town Meeting to request leaving the Minuteman district. A special Town Meeting would be held in mid-October for this purpose.

Assuming a majority no vote, my recommendation for Town Meeting will depend on DESE. If they do not make a decision by then or set an unfairly low capital charge, I would support leaving the district.  But if DESE does the right thing and sets a fair capital charge in the neighborhood of $8,400, I would strongly urge Town Meeting to remain in the district.

There are other financial and strategic considerations about Minuteman that have been discussed in town. The Warrant Committee will continue to discuss them and be prepared, if necessary, to explain them to Town Meeting in October.  

But the first step is the election on Sept. 20. The wise course is to turn out and vote no. Then for October we should wait and see how DESE acts.

Roy Epstein

Cushing Avenue

Sports: After Two Games, Field Hockey Has That Scoring Touch

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Morgan Chase scoring vs. Stoneham.

One hope of Belmont High School Field Hockey Head Coach Jessica Smith’s for the 2016 campaign was the team could be as proficient in scoring as last year’s squad which totaled 91 goals.

After the first two games of the season, Smith can probably check off that box.

Against Melrose and Stoneham, this year’s team has scored a total of 17 goals while giving up just one. And in almost any sport, that’s a darn good ratio.

To be fair, the Marauders’ initial competition comes from the smaller school division of the Middlesex League and haven’t had successful programs for some years (although Stoneham did draw 1-1 in the season opener with Winchester  – a team which defeated Belmont last year and placed second to the Marauders for the division championship) so the numbers may appear gaudy this early in the season.

But it’s not just how many goals Belmont is scoring or how they are scoring them. In the season opener against Melrose, the Marauders as a team were showing end-of-the-season like form in their passing, dribbling and ball placement skills as they topped the Red Raiders 8-0. 

In the game, the playmaking and scoring were not just coming from the two senior all-stars on the team, AnnMarie Habelow, and Julia Chase. In fact, Habelow, a Boston Globe All-Scholastic who will compete for a spot on the US National Under-19 team in November, is not atop the team’s scoring table. That honor currently goes to a freshman, forward Katie Guden, who has tallied five goals to Habelow’s three.

The scoring prowess is a result of some precise ball movement from around the field. At times, Habelow will drive “long balls” – where the player sends the ball nearly the length of the field (about 80 meters) – to a teammate who is racing onto it. But Belmont is as adept moving the ball via passes and dribbling, using their speed on the wings – via sophomore Morgan Chase and Bridget Gardiner – to open room near the goal mouth for attacking players. Also showing great prowess on the ball have been Jordan Letticer and youngster Mia Kalend who has shown great use of her endurance and athleticism in the midfield.

Against Stoneham, Belmont scored from in-close where Guden and junior Alexa Sabatino are deadly accurate and from the 19-yard limit (goals can only be scored from within the attacking semi-circle) which has become Habelow’s bread and butter with the field hockey equivalent of the ice hockey slap shot. Belmont scored eight times in the first half to walk away with a 9-1 win. 

While a good defense is a great offense, Belmont has a great deal of experience on the backline starting with Chase who is committed to UNH next year and Molly Goldberg starting in front of the second-year goalie, Chrissy McLeod.

Letter to the Editor: Let’s Stand by Our Word – Vote “Yes” on Minuteman

By Leave a Comment

Photo: The new Minuteman Tech High School

To the editor:

In the spring Belmont town meeting voted overwhelmingly to adopt the new Minuteman Regional Agreement and remain in the district. Now that it comes to paying our fair share for a new school building, the same people want to “chicken out” and reverse course to withdraw from the district. They call it “rent” instead of “buy,” which is a bit cheaper in the short term, but also means a lot less control and future access for our students.

Sure, we might save some money by leaving the district. Michael Libenson calculated that amount as anywhere between $200,000-$400,000 per year. This is money that would need to be picked up by the towns remainng in the district (most people would call this free-loading). But in my opinion, Michael’s savings calculation is flawed. It assumes that out-of-district towns will continue to pay lower operating fees and lower or no capital charges for a new building. The Massachusetts Department for Education (DESE) has already committed to charging out-of-district towns the capital fee (exactly how much is still open). In addition to lower operating fees non-member towns have to pay about $4,500 for each student on an IEP (roughly 50 percent of students at Minuteman) and about $1,000 per student for transportation.

Figuring these additional costs into the calculation makes the difference between in-district and out-of-district students shrink to a much smaller number than is widely presented. Common sense implies that over time the differences in fees will disappear or be based on some formula of what each town can afford. By staying in the district, we can work with the state and school towards this goal.

The Selectman and Warrant Committee also claim that we need a debt exclusion vote to be able to afford the extra costs for the new Minuteman school. I have a hard time believing this. Our annual school budget is about $50 million. The additional $200,000-$400,000 expenses that Libenson calculated to stay in the district and pay for the new school would represent less than 1 percent of our school budget. This is a relatively small number, and I believe we could pay this out of the operating budget until we have to do a debt override for a new high school or police station.

The downside of voting No and withdrawing from the district is big: we give up the guaranteed access for our children to a quality vocational education close to town, we give up oversight and control over Minuteman’s management and future direction, and we freeload on our neighboring towns. If this discussion was about Belmont High School, I believe no one would be voting against it to save a few dollars, but it is apparently different for a vocational school.

Martin Plass

Stanley Road, TMM Precinct 3