Selectmen Balk At Hillcrest Neighbors Request on Private to Public Roads.

By 4 Comments

Photo: The roads in the Hillcrest neighborhood. 

While filing out of the Board of Selectmen’s meeting Monday night, May 23, the consensus among the majority of homeowners from Belmont’s Hillcrest neighborhood of transforming their private roads into public ways was fairly succinct.

“It’s back to the drawing board,” said David Hurley, a Birch Hill Road homeowner who is a leader of the effort to transfer several roads – including Crestview Road, Evergreen Way, Longmeadow Road, Spring Valley Road, Stony Brook Road, and Woodfall Road to name a few – on the northwestern end of Belmont from private to public stewardship.

While the homeowners who live on the streets located on Belmont Hill  and town officials agree that the increasingly worn and ragged roadways should come under local control – for safety and fairness reasons, said Hurley – a new impediment has been revealed which is a deal breaker for the town.

The potential of a big fat lawsuit.

In the opinion of the town’s legal representative, unless the group advocating the change can convince each of the approximate 180 property owners to go along with a deal, the threat of a renegade homeowner who feels cheated by the process could end up costing the town far more than any

“Anytime a government agency exercises the power of eminent domain, anyone who is dissatisfied with the amount … given for their property has a two-year period to file in Superior Court for a jury to determine the damages,” said George Hall, Belmont’s Town Counsel at the meeting that served as an update for an initial request from a neighborhood group back on March 14.

Hall said an aggrieved homeowner would not just be entitled to the fair market value of the property but also argue that the remaining land had been diminished in value. 

And the risk of litigation is real, said Selectmen Chair Mark Paolillo, recalling a few years back a “simple” taking of land on Trapelo Road resulted in the town occurring more cost than it ever expected.

“My point of view is to trying and find a way forward, but the town will need to be protected itself from future litigation,” he said,

To avoid the risk, Hall is advising the Selectmen only to move forward with the plan in which each of the 181 homeowners signs off on the town taking their property – the roadway in front of their homes to the centerline of the road – and for what cost.

But so far, the group leading the charge has received the backing of three-quarters of Hillcrest homeowners.

Currently, about 69 percent of homeowners approve the private-to-public transfer, 10 percent – 18 households in total – are opposed, and 30 have not yet been contacted to turn over the streets maintenance and ownership to the town, said Hurley.

“It would really be difficult for us to ask town meeting to accept these roads as public ways with the threat of litigation out there,” said Paolillo.

The mandate for 100 percent was hardly what the residents wanted to hear.

“You’re putting us back to square one,” said Al Murphy of Longmeadow Road, who with Hurley has been leading the neighborhood initiative. 

One solution broached by Selectman Jim Williams who suggested that some streets or stretches of roadways can be handed over to the town if those sections received unanimity for the overall plan.  

Both sides spoke on the merits of adding the seven private roads into the fold.

“It’s a safety and a fairness issue,” said Hurley, who said the town already plows and patches the streets which are accessed by vehicles and pedestrians. 

“If it were up to me there would be no private streets in town,” said Hurley, adding there are too many “gray areas” with private ways. 

While the town would like to foster the transfer of the collective roads, it will only take possession of the streets after each has been repaired and passes town muster.

Town Administrator David Kale outlined one of two ways the residents can bring the streets up to standard; either the homeowners fix the streets out of pocket or accept a betterment process – a tax assessed on owners.

According to Hall, the betterment approach has lost favor in the past three decades since the passage of Prop. 2 1/2 in the early 1980s as communities has found it harder to find a ready pot of money to pay for the upfront repairs. The Office of Community Development has estimated the total cost of upgrading the roadways at $2.1 million.

It would ultimately be a vote by Town Meeting whether the town accepts the transfer.

When Hurley asked the board’s position if the town would accept the roads if they were repaved and repaired, the selectmen suggested a willingness to present such a deal to Town Meeting, but with one very large caveat.

While in favor of such a deal, “you still need 100 percent so you’re still stuck wth that,” said Paolillo. 

 

Overnight Paving on Belmont Street to Cambridge Line Set for Mid-June

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Belmont Street, readied to be paved again. 

One of the last major components of the $17.1 million state-financed Trapelo Road/Belmont Street Reconstruction Project will get underway as the Board of Selectmen approved approximately a week of overnight paving of Belmont Street and a portion of Trapelo Road from Common Street in Cushing Square to Erickson Street on the Cambridge city line. 

Beginning Monday night, June 13, Newport Construction will be paving the main thoroughfare between 8 p.m. to 5 a.m. for six nights until June 18, said Glenn Clancy, town engineer and director of the Office of Community Development. 

Access to driveways along the work area may be restricted so residents should park on side streets away from Belmont Street if there is a need to access a vehicle overnight.

Residents with questions should contact the office of Community Development at 617-993-2665.

Belmont’s Second Gun Buy Back Set for June 11

By Leave a Comment

Photo: A gun buy back in Florida.

There is a perception that gun buyback programs should be concentrated in high crime areas, Belmont Assistant Police Chief James MacIsaac told the Belmont Board of Selectmen at its meeting Monday, May 23. 

“So it was bit surprising two years ago that we discovered there was a real need for this event in Belmont,” MacIsaac told the Belmontonian after the meeting. 

After a total of 62 guns were brought in 2014, Belmont Police Department and private religious groups have once again joined together to hold a second gun buyback event, this time in coordination with neighboring police departments.

The regional event will occur on Saturday, June 11, from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. at the Belmont DPW Yard, 37 C Street. 

Belmont Police is partnering with their colleagues in Arlington, Cambridge, Somerville, Watertown, the Middlesex County Sheriff’s Office, the Belmont Religious Council and individual houses of worship including co-sponsors:

  • All Saints’ Episcopal Church, 
  • Belmont-Watertown United Methodist Church,
  • Beth El Temple,
  • First Baptist Church of Belmont,
  • First Church Belmont, Unitarian Universalists,
  • Plymouth Congregational Church, and
  • New Roads Catholic Community.

The buy back allows residents a safe way to dispose of unwanted firearms and ammunition, no questions asked. All firearms turned in at the gun buyback were turned over to the Massachusetts State Police to be destroyed.

During the inaugural purchase in 2014, a variety of firearms were accepted including, rifles, shotguns, pistols and a sawed-off 12 gauge shotgun.

MacIsaac said in addition to peace of mind, safer house and community, participants will receive gift cards to local grocery stores – purchased by the religious organizations – when they drop off their unwanted firearms. The Belmont Police ask that firearms be transported inside vehicle trunks unloaded, safety engaged, inside a box, bag or case. There is no limit to the number of firearms that can be turned in. 

Belmont Police is asking that firearms be transported inside vehicle trunks unloaded, safety engaged, inside a box, bag or case. There is no limit to the number of firearms that can be turned in. Belmont police has set up the following special phone line to receive questions and/or requests for assistance in safely transporting firearms: 617-993-2529

The Belmont Police Department and Middlesex Sherriff’s Office will provide on-duty officers at the event to receive weapons for the safe storage, followed by destruction in accordance with state law. 
For more information go to www.belmontgunbuyback.org 

To make a tax-deductible donation, please make the check payable to: Belmont Religious Council (Belmont Gun Buy Back in the Memo line) and mail to 

BRC c/o David Alper

One Oak Avenue

Belmont, MA 02478  

New Cushing Square Traffic Light Pattern Set to Start May 31

By 1 Comment

Photo: The intersection at Cushing Square.

As of May 31, driving efficiency will be coming to Cushing Square, whether you’re ready or not.

While it was apparent that many residents were happy with the old pattern of traffic lights at the busy intersection of Trapelo Road and Common Street, one entity that wasn’t were the engineers from the Massachusetts Department of Transportation which has been working on the $17 million Trapelo Road/Belmont Street Corridor Reconstruction project for the past two years.

According to State Sen. Will Brownsberger in a note to his constituents, the engineers will introduce a new traffic light phasing that will allow a greater number of vehicles to move through the square than under the current system.

This is the state’s second attempt to alter the long-time pattern of red and green lights at the corner – last fall it tried unsuccessfully to change the light phasing only to go back to the pre-project configuration.

The current system allows vehicles on Common Street headed towards Watertown get a green light to either travel straight or take a left while cars headed down Common into Belmont have to stop at a red light. Then, that reverses happens.

“This is very inefficient because most of the traffic in both directions would like to go straight. One wants the two straight movements to share green time,” noted Brownsberger. “After a lot of debate, a new approach has emerged which should be clear for drivers and is more efficient than any of the previously attempted configurations.”

The engineer’s explanation of this new approach appears below (with some additions from me):

  • For vehicles traveling on Trapelo Road, there will be no change.
  • The south bound Common Street (towards Watertown) lights will have a left arrow and a green ball light that still turn green simultaneously.
  • But, the south-bound green arrow will turn to red while the south bound straight ball light remains green, allowing vehicles on Common Street heading toward Watertown to continue towards Watertown.  But vehicles in the left turn lane which are turning left onto Trapelo Road will have to stop.
  • When that south-bound left arrow goes red, the north-Belmont bound Common Street lights will go green for both north lanes.  For south bound vehicles on Common Street in the right lane and heading toward Watertown, they will find that, during the latter part of their green phase, traffic will start coming from the opposite direction of Common Street and some of that traffic will be wanting to turn left in front of them.
  • The North Belmont bound vehicles will see green balls only (no left arrow), as is common at many intersections around the state. There will be a “left-turn-yield-on-green ball” sign, again as is common at many intersections. For vehicles on Common Street coming from Watertown, they will now find that traffic will be coming from the opposite direction of Common Street when they have the green indication and the vehicles turning left into Trapelo Road toward Waverley Square will need to yield to traffic coming from the other direction of Common Street.

“The beauty of this approach is that (a) the signage will be simpler — the complicated signs with three-headed arrows will be less critical; and (b) if north-bound traffic makes the mistake that it tends to make — thinking that the straight move to continue on Common Street is a left turn, they will actually not conflict with the straight movement from the other direction,” said Brownsberger.

The only time they will need to think is when they are making the hard left onto Trapelo and on that movement, it is reasonable to expect the drivers will exercise the caution that they generally should on a left turn with no arrow, he noted.

Belmont DPW Recycling Event, Saturday, May 14

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Recycling event, Saturday, May 14.

Belmont is holding its annual town-wide Recycling Event this Saturday, May 14 from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. at the Department of Public Works Town Yard, 37 C St.

It will be a one-day drop off of the following items:

  • Rigid plastics
  • Textiles
  • Styrofoam
  • Paper shredding (with a secure mobile document shredding)

For more information: call 617-993-2689 or learn more online at: http://www.belmont-ma.gov/dpw-highway-division/pages/recycling-trash-information

BELMONT RESIDENTS ONLY: IDs REQUIRED.

Religion Or Business: Neighbors Say Church Traded God For Cell Money

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Plymouth Congregational Church on Pleasant Street.

Ron Creamer did not mince words.

In the view of the Pleasant Street resident, what occurs inside the historic Plymouth Congregation Church on Sundays no longer represents the main purpose of the long-time house of worship.

When told by the chair of the Belmont Historic District Commission that for federal oversight review to halt the placement of telecommunication equipment in the Pleasant Street church’s steeple,  opponents would need to show how an interior cellular tower would “change the character [of Plymouth Congregation] in a “fairly major” way, Cramer responded by declaring the congregation’s pursuit of thousands of dollars in rental fees from telecommunication giant Verizon Wireless is transforming the church “from a religious institution into a cell phone business.”

“It’s a significant change” of what church was initially built to be, Creamer told the commission, a statement the chair, Lauren Meier, deemed “subjective.” 

The rather strident proclamation – reiterated later by another leader of nearly 250 neighbors who currently oppose the plan on aesthetic and health reasons – came at the tail end of Tuesday night’s meeting which saw yet another barrier to Verizon’s plan to place an array of antennas in Plymouth Congregational’s white steeple fall to the wayside.

On Tuesday, Verizon’s attorney Mike Giaimo of Boston’s Robinson & Cole presented the six-member commission a set of new plans – approved by the Planning Board a fortnight before – which no longer required modifications to the exterior of the steeple. Earlier proposals called for removing wooden louvers and creating openings in the steeple. 

Since the purview of the Historic District Commission is to investigate and question exterior changes that can be seen from the public way, the commission determined it had no standing to question the revised plans and was left with little to do than simply sign off on the project using either a certificate of appropriateness or one of non-applicability.

Once the project has received the OK from all town bodies, a building permit could then be issued when requested, Glenn Clancy, director of the Office of Community Development, noted earlier this year.

While Verizon was seeking a quick resolution, the commission pondered whether to hold a public meeting in June before issuing the notice, which Giaimo was adamant was unnecessary and that the certificate be issued sooner-than-later.

Glenn Herosian, one of leaders of the opposition and who lives across Pleasant Street from the church, sought answers to the Verizon design changes. Herosian said he was concerned the removal of an air condition unit to cool the equipment could possibly do long-term damage to the structure, which then could affect the overall integrity of the steeple.

But Verizon’s Giaimo would not take the bait, saying he would only speak on the items on the Historic Commission’s agenda, despite Meier’s pleas that it would be “polite” if he or the Verizon representatives would speak on the neighbors’ worries.

In the end, Meier said the committee would work with Community Development on the necessity for a public meeting. 

Tuesday was also an opportunity for Verizon to proceed with a Section 106 review mandated in the requires consideration of historic preservation in the multitude of projects with federal involvement, such as the Federal Communications Commission which licenses telecommunication operations. 

While usually a fairly standard appraisal – Meier said she had done “hundreds” in her 30-year career – Creamer took the opportunity to fire questions at the employee of EBI Consulting, which manages the Section 106 processes for Verizon, resulting in a rhetorical exercise of competing interpretations of the review.

Creamer soon directed the commission’s attention to the section of the review that specified how a project could be altered that would diminish the integrity of the property, approaching Meier to show a screen on his cell phone asking if she agreed that “change in the character of the property’s use or setting” would trigger federal involvement and a lengthy public process of gathering information and actions. 

After contending the church should not be viewed as a structure of worship but of commerce, Creamer noted that the religious component for the church is “only a few hours a week” while the cell tower transmits continuously. 

For the opponents of the project, any means of delaying the installation of the equipment is seen as beneficial to their cause as the number of process roadblocks has dwindled to nearly zero.

The neighbors are now pinning their hopes of halting the interior cell tower with a favorable Special Town Meeting. Initiated via a citizen’s petition, the opponents are seeking a change to zoning bylaws to require telecommunication firms to obtain a Special Permit to install an interior cell tower throughout most of Belmont.

The opponents believe forcing an application before the Zoning Board of Appeals – which has been highly suspected of high profile businesses entering Belmont – will effectively add months to the process as the neighbors, according to Herosian, are prepared to present a significant amount of technical and scientific data before the ZBA, challenging existing federal standards on radiofrequency levels.

In addition, Herosian said the neighbors will ask the Belmont Board of Selectmen to hire a technical expert to determine the adverse effects of cellular transmission in a densely populated residential area. 

Herosian said since the church initially broached the idea of placing mobile communication equipment in the steeple, the neighbors have been eager to help the church secure funds to allow it to continue its social ministry and discussed partnering the church leaders to approach the town to use Community Reinvestment Committee grants to repair and upgrade the building.

“But they never came back to us with an answer,” Herosian told the Belmontonian after the meeting.

“They’ve turned their backs to their neighbors and our real concerns.” 

Belmont Goes Solar Program Extended Until June 30

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Rebecca McNeill with her daughter was the first homeowner to sign up for solar panels in the Belmont Goes Solar campaign. 

Due to popular demand, the Belmont Goes Solar community-run program is being extended until June 30, according to a news release from Belmont Goes Solar, the ad hoc group supported by the Board of Selectmen, and formed by members of the Belmont Energy Committee, Mothers Out Front, Sustainable Belmont and Belmont Light.

Since its kickoff in January, more than 175 Belmont homeowners have signed up for a rooftop solar system, more sign-ups over a four-month period than any other community in the state that has run a solar campaign. And those 175 solar systems will produce 1,000+ kW of pollution-free electric capacity. This is the same carbon reducing effect as planting 780,000 trees or taking 200 cars off the road for 30 years.

The town will also benefit as the program’s selected installer, Direct Energy Solar, has committed to installing a free solar system valued at $25,000 on a town school or municipal building due to selling 100 solar arrays in Belmont. If 200 solar systems are sold in Belmont by June 30, Direct Energy Solar will contribute towards an electric car and a charging station for the town.

The average cost of a rooftop solar system is about $15,000 but financial incentives significantly offset that cost. The Belmont Goes Solar negotiated discount pricing, combined with a thirty percent federal tax credit and a state rebate up to $1,000 reduces the cost significantly. 

Additionally, a solar system will create solar renewable energy certificates that can be sold to utilities to provide another revenue stream in ten years, reducing the cost further. In total, these financial incentives mean that the typical Belmont homeowner will recoup the cost of purchasing their solar system in just five to seven years. After that, they will have free electricity for the 25-year life of the system. If financing is needed, many homeowners tap a home equity line of credit; Direct Energy Solar and the state (through its Mass Solar Loan program) also offer low-interest loans.

With all the benefits for homeowners and the Belmont community, now is the time to consider solar. 

For a free, no-obligation solar evaluation of your Belmont home or business, call 800-903-6130 or visit www.BelmontGoesSolar.org.

Belmont Facilities Dept. Has Summer Temp Work

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Facilities Department seeking summer workers.

The Belmont Facilities Department at 19 Moore St., is seeking residents who are interested in applying for temporary summer positions working within the department.

The anticipated salary for the jobs is minimum wage. 

The Facilities Department maintains town and school buildings including the restored historic buildings of the Town Hall Complex; T0wn Hall and the Homer Municipal Building. The department also services various other town buildings including the Police Station, the two fire stations, the Beech Street Senior Center, the former Municipal Light Department Building on Concord Avenue, and the buildings located at the Town Yard.

The department is responsible for maintenance and repairs at the town’s six school buildings and the School Administration Building on Pleasant Street.               

For more information/application send email to Fred Domenici, supervisor of building maintenance at: adomenici@belmont-ma.gov

Triple ‘A’ Play: Belmont Again Receives Highest Credit Rating

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Town Treasurer Floyd Carman

On April 14, Belmont once again received the coveted Triple A (Aaa) credit rating from Moody’s Investors Service.

Belmont joins some select company, being one of only 14 Bay State municipalities (out of approximately 350 communities) with a triple-A ranking, including Bedford, Boston, Cambridge, Lexington, Wayland and Winchester.

The reason Belmont continues – now in its second decade holding a Aaa rate – to secure the gold standard of credit ratings is relatively straightforward, according to the official in charge of Belmont’s fiscal health.

“Hard work and solid prudent disciplined financial management is the recipe” for earning the top ranking, said Floyd Carman, the town’s treasurer and tax collector.

In Moody’s view, the rate derived from the town’s strong fiscal foundation.

 “The Aaa rating reflects the town’s healthy financial operations and reserve position, a moderately-sized tax base with strong wealth levels and close proximity to New England’s largest employment center, and manageable debt burden. The rating also incorporates aggressive funding of its moderate pension liability,” Moody’s wrote in April.

A municipal bond rating is a measure of the creditworthiness of a town or state, similar to credit ratings for individuals. The better the bond rating, the lower the interest rate.

For Belmont residents, maintaining the top rating will be crucial as the town moves closer to renovate and building new construction at Belmont High School and other debt-heavy capital projects in the near future.

“Maintaining this rating through the [High School] financing timeline of fiscal                                                                                                            2019-2021 is important,” said Carman. 

“The financial benefits depend on the interest rates and reoffering premium payments could save the town $2 million over 30 years.”

While Moody’s forecasts Belmont’s fiscal future as being “stable” over the near term, it points out factors that could lead to a downgrade including:

  • Multi-year trend of operating deficits resulting in reserve declines,
  • Substantial growth in the debt burden, and 
  • Failure to address long-term liabilities.

Belmont Town Meeting Rejects $144 Million Minuteman Funding Proposal

By 1 Comment

Photo: The vote at Town Meeting.

With many members expressing a great amount of frustration with the process and the school’s administration, Belmont Special Town Meeting voted down the $144 million bond issuance plan for a new Minuteman Career and Technical High School building, 141-81, Wednesday night, May 4.

The overwhelming rejection of the project now places the future of the 628 student school in jeopardy as Belmont appear likely to be the only one of 10 communities in the Minuteman School District to vote against the plan.

“[T]his is the wrong school at the wrong time,” said Belmont Board of Selectmen’s Chair Mark Paolillo, who spoke against the plan which would have saddled Belmont with an annual bill of $350,000 to $500,000 to pay for its portion of the nearly $100 million to build the school.

Paolillo said approving a new school among the ten communities would end any meaningful incentive for cities and towns, including Watertown, Waltham, Medford, and Everett, outside the district that sends nearly 45 percent of the student population to join the district and help pay for the building.

While voicing its disappointment with the vote, leaders of the Minuteman administration contend they will move forward with the project and will push for the final two towns – Arlington and Needham – whose Town Meetings vote on Monday, May 9, “to stay the course” and approve the funding proposal, said Dr. Edward Bouquillon, Minuteman’s superintendent.

The Town Meeting vote – coming after two hours of presentations and debate – indicated that Minuteman could not close the deal with Belmont voters, as it was already starting behind the 8-Ball after the Board of Selectmen (unanimously), the Warrant Committee (8-6) and Capital Budget Committee (6-1) recommended “unfavorable action” in the article. 

Jack Weis, a Town Meeting Member from Precinct 1 and Belmont’s representative to the Minuteman School Committee, presented the case for accepting the plan for replacing the deteriorating existing facility that has aged since it was built in 1974.

Since 2010, the school has been conducting a feasibility study that resulted in the administration would not support building a school for less than 600 students as it would limit the number of fields of study which they contend is critical to attracting students to fill the building. Weis told the assembly that building a school for about 400 students would cost about $120 million, which is not much savings. 

While Weis admitted he believes the building is too big, “I get tripped up” when asking himself “will be better off if we vote ‘no?’” With nothing on the horizon in alternatives for Belmont students now and in the future, the better path, said Weis, was to seek approval of the new school funding.

Paolillo countered Weis and Minuteman, saying while he was prepared to vote ‘yes’ for a facility that met the needs and demands of the ten member districts, a 628-student building proposal was far too big for the municipalities who would be backing the bonds to fund the structure.

“I just can’t get to yes with a $144 million building,” said Paolillo, noting that the funding would need to be paid for via a debt exclusion vote, likely on the same ballot in 2018 as the possible $100 million debt exclusion for the renovation and new construction of Belmont High School. 

Paolillo did not believe a “no” vote would kill a new building, just allow communities to continue negotiations.

“Maybe I’m an optimist, but I think that we can strike a new deal,” he said, rejecting the call by some that Belmont leaves the district and find an alternative school or program to educate the 26 students currently attending Minuteman.

When the floor was opened to residents, most speakers spoke of a frustration born of wishing to support vocational and technical education yet being unable to back the only project placed before them.

Bob McLaughlin, of Precinct 2 who with Paolillo and Weis worked on Belmont’s task force to the district, hammered the deal accusing the Minuteman administration of building a “Cadillac” school – it would become the most expensive vocational school in the Commonwealth if built – which could cost Belmont as much as $36,000 per student tuition but only if the school reaches the 628 maximum. 

Long a critic of a larger high school building, McLaughlin said assertions by the Minuteman administration that out-of-district communities would pay their fair share of the capital expenses with a surcharge or by joining the district will not occur after the funding is OK’d.

“We are going to repeat history. The non-member towns are going to get a free load or a much cheaper load on the backs of the member towns,” he said.

Some members defended the proposal for the sake of all the students “who want more than doing college prep courses,” said 

Roy Epstein, Pct. 6, and Warrant Committee member (who was one of the six “yes” votes) said there is no contingency plan [if it leaves the district] and we will have 60 days to decide to leave and then to do what? No one knows.”

Epstein said the town should take the risk that out-of-town communities will want to secure student spots in a brand new school by joining the system, “and build a new school.” 

Carolyn Bishop, Pct. 1, said she had not heard any options for Minuteman. “What do we do with the students we can’t send because we didn’t approve a new school?”

“How can we meet the needs that Minuteman currently provides?” Bishop said, adding that she would “rather see something too large, we never erred on the side of too large. There are always ways to fill the spaces.”

But it soon became apparent that even members who were inclined to back the building plan due to the numerous questions that could not be answered.

Some pointed to the declining enrollment at Minuteman – a steady fall from 1,200 district students in the late 1970s to only 331 today – while other technical schools around the state are filled. Others focused on the non-member communities and their lack of cooperation in paying for the school. 

“It’s starting to feel like this whole concept of member towns is totally ludicrous,” said Suzanne Robotham, Precinct 2, suggesting the town leaves the district and send the 26 students at the reduced rate. 

Then there was the concern of which school the town should

“We may have only one realistic opportunity to go to the till of Belmont voters and ask for money, and my laser focus is on the 1,200 than the 26,” said Peter Whitmer from Precinct 6.

In the end, the combination of what many believed to be an oversized school without the assurances that it could be filled sent the proposal to a crushing 60 vote defeat.