Editor’s Note: We have clarified Nicole’s statements regarding potential reimbursement to the town in the third paragraph. We regret fostering confusion. As of now, East Greenwich will continue to be eligible for a base reimbursement, which at present is 35 percent of RIDE-approved construction costs.
This is not a formal communication of the East Greenwich School Committee. – N.B.
East Greenwich prides itself on excellence. In this fall’s special referendum election, we have an opportunity to enhance that legacy. As a career educator, I will tell you that I’ve never before (and likely never will again) seen an opportunity like this one – to revitalize our aging school buildings into modern hubs of learning with the state reimbursing half the cost.
Our school buildings are overcrowded at the elementary level. This directly impacts the quality of education we offer, limiting our ability to meet diverse student needs and hindering innovative approaches due to space constraints. Additionally, decades of deferred maintenance have taken a toll on the structural integrity of five of the six school buildings in the East Greenwich School District. These issues are well documented and will need to be addressed at some point.
What makes this fall’s bond opportunity unique is the state’s commitment to reimburse up to 55 percent of the costs. This isn’t just an offer; it’s a lifeline. A lifeline offered to all Rhode Island communities with many taking advantage of it. With a base reimbursement of 35 percent and an additional 20 percent available through various bonus categories, this is an unprecedented chance for our community to modernize its school infrastructure sharing the financial burden with the state. The alternative? Delaying this investment means our community could bear the full cost in the future. Why shoulder most of the cost when we have the chance to invest with the state covering half?
Our superintendent, Brian Ricca, vividly painted a picture at this spring’s community forums. He asked that community members close their eyes and recall their first car – the cassette players, manual locks, and window crank. Then, he said, think about your car today. Or how about your first phone? Was it a rotary? Stationary on a wall or on a table? Again, how does that compare with the phone you have now in your pocket? Our school buildings, five of which are older than those nostalgic memories, are at best outdated and at worst approaching obsolescence. The world has moved forward, and we have an opportunity to do the same for our education system.
If you are concerned about your taxes, please enter your address in the Bond Financial Impact by Property webpage created by Dr. Eugene Quinn of the East Greenwich School Committee. You will see a transparent breakdown of the impact for years to come. Remember, though, if we don’t pass this bond – the needed repairs and updates to our buildings still remain to be addressed entirely on your local tax dollars. If you still have questions, attend the School Construction Bond Forum presented by EG News and the EG Chamber on Oct. 18, from 7 to 8 p.m. at New England Institute of Technology.
Please do not sit this election out. We cannot afford to let this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity slip through our fingers. It’s not just about updating facilities; it’s about investing in the future of our children and the prosperity of our community.
As we cast our votes this fall, please join me in our commitment to providing the best possible education for our children. Early voting begins on Oct. 18. Vote yes on the school bond, ensuring that East Greenwich continues to be a beacon of educational excellence for generations to come.
Nicole Bucka is vice chair of the EG School Committee
Subscribe
While staying neutral on the bond, the need, and the school district, neighboring residents have concerns regarding these development projects and impacts to neighborhoods/property values. Unlike other large scale developments, school redevelopments (which are on land zoned as public) are not subject to local zoning ordinances and are not reviewed by the Planning Board or Town Planning Staff. Although school redevelopments can be as impactful as a multi-family development or new commercial development abutting property owners are not afforded the same protects as other development types. There are no setback requirements, vegetative buffer requirements, drainage and stormwater requirements, or requirements for traffic studies. It is concerning that a redevelopment of this scale does not come before our Town’s experts and residents are not provided with a clear set of standards and guidelines on how to comment. I hope if this does pass, that the school building committee considers the concerns/comments of the neighboring residents.
Hard no until Eldredge remaining open is part of the plan. It’s the crown jewel of towns schools. I hope you all regret not voting for Pete.
A couple of clarifications for readers:
1) The 20% extra reimbursement doesn’t expire until June 2024, so there is still opportunity to revise the plan if this fails. My understanding is the 35% base reimbursement does not expire at that time, so the town would not be bearing 100% the cost even if delayed further.
2) Eugene’s bond impact estimator is well thought out and reasonable, but it’s worth noting it compares to an unapproved plan B that has increased spend in non-bond line items relative to historical averages. If the town made an official plan B public we could have a more meaningful discussion on relative impact between two options, but they have not yet. Some major investment will be required either way.
Kurt, I reached out to RIDE to ask them if a revised bond could be submitted if this one fails while still qualifying for the bonus incentives of 20%. I was told no. However, you are correct about the 35% not expiring. Unless the legislature votes to defund “Housing Aid,” it will remain. It is unfortunate that a school committee member is giving the public false information.
Thanks Catherine! If the bonuses don’t expire until June, did they give a reason why there is not enough time for revision? I’m not sure everyone with the town is even aware of that reading between the lines of conversations I’ve had.
The reason why we cannot revise the bond before the bonus incentives expire is that there won’t be enough time. I’d like to see the state extend this additional aid for districts whose bonds fail or who need more time to submit their proposals to RIDE.
From the Vice Chair of the EG School Committee we should expect her to ask us to vote NO? They can dream up hundreds, thousands, of reasons to approve this bond issue. I can think of one really good reason not to: we ain’t got the money!!!
Is there a sunset on the 35% base reimbursement for EG? I see it stated twice in this piece that EG would would be responsible for all building costs if we don’t act now on the 55% reimbursement opportunity. I have seen this stated by other town officials. When does the 35% minimum expire?
I can’t find any expiration listed on the base 35% in the following, but it might be buried in there:
https://ride.ri.gov/funding-finance/school-building-authority/housing-aid
If you’d like to hear from our Superintendent, School Committee members, and Building Committee members, click here https://vimeo.com/873334704?share=copy . If you’d like to hear from our students, click here https://vimeo.com/873025768?share=copy . I would have included them in the opinion piece, but I just got them today.
Please vote!!
Hi Nicole, is https://egbondreferendum.com/ the site that was developed as part of the town’s $25,000 media campaign? It has a number of bugs / broken image links, just FYI.
Here is yet one more instance of one of our elected officials spreading disinformation. Maybe if they had been open, honest, and transparent with the town about the process for selecting the goals of the entire building project; listened to concerned and knowledgeable residents who raised concerns or proposed alternatives; or encouraged community involvement as vigorously as they did when deciding on locations for pickleball courts, then this LTE wouldn’t have been necessary. But, rather than doing all of those things over a year before voting on the bond (as they should have) and relying on the strength of their argument to persuade residents, they are waiting until the month prior to the vote and using the fear of losing out on a “once-in-a-lifetime opportunity” to coerce voters and avoid answering tough questions or making compromises. Several of the above comments have already pointed it out over the last 3 or 4 days, but the town will NOT have to pay 100% of the cost if the bond issue fails. We will be back to the 35% reimbursement from the state that we were at before the additional “bonuses” were added several years ago and which will sunset next spring/summer. That will cost the town approximately $30M in state assistance; a lot to be sure, but not the full $150M Ms. Bucka says the town will have to pay.
It is also very disappointing, but not unexpected, that the publisher of this news source failed to uphold the most basic of journalistic standards by not publishing, or at least pointing out, such blatant disinformation. In the past, the publisher has had absolutely no problem “fact checking”, editorializing on, or outright altering LTEs written by those who do not share her views. But pieces written by her political associates are passed along without comment or scrutiny regardless how many inaccuracies they include. That is unacceptable behavior and EG residents deserve better from our “newspaper of record.”
I hope that every voter in town will dig into the details of the project, review Mr. Quinn’s website to find the financial impacts to their family, attend the upcoming discussion on the bond issue, and most importantly ask questions and demand answers. Hold our elected officials accountable and make them persuade you, not scare you, into making decisions which are in your family’s best interest.
If this issue truly is only going to come up once in our lifetimes, it sure would have been nice for Ms. Bucka and the publisher of this website to take the time and effort to get their facts straight.
The below statement from this piece is false…
“Remember, though, if we don’t pass this bond – the needed repairs and updates to our buildings still remain to be addressed entirely on your local tax dollars.”
When will the Vice Chair of the School Cmte, or EG News, or both, correct it?