Clearing up misconceptions about the Dec 10 Driscoll School vote

I will be voting YES on the December 10th ballot question to reconstruct the Driscoll School.

The proposed Driscoll project is an important step toward solving the current overcrowding in our schools, and it does so in a really smart way: it replaces an old, worn-out Driscoll with a bigger, fossil-fuel free school that supports modern teaching needs, it adds 150+ seats of capacity to help relieve the immense pressure of overcrowding in our schools, it adds green space...and it does all this for less than the cost of renovation.

For these reasons, the Driscoll project is supported by a unanimous School Committee, 4 of 5 Select Board members, all four of Brookline’s state reps, and over one hundred endorsers. The project funding passed Town Meeting last month by an overwhelming majority—203-13.

Now we need voters to approve funding—because if voters don’t approve, the project will not happen.

Some people in the community are trying to get people to vote no and spreading some misconceptions, which I’ve addressed below. Please don’t be misled—this project is well-planned, cost-comparable to similar school projects, and is the only school building project that will bring us any relief in the next five years. Approval of the Driscoll project is a critical step in upholding Brookline’s tradition of excellence and equity in education.

Please join me in voting YES on December 10th.

— C. Scott Ananian, Brookline Town Meeting Member precinct 10

Misconceptions about Driscoll

1. There is a "back-up" renovation plan that will be implemented for Driscoll if the override doesn't pass. FALSE. There is no fallback renovation waiting in the wings; renovation was considered by the Driscoll Building Committee and rejected for many reasons, among them:

renovation would reduce green space and play space, while rebuilding would increase it; (2) renovation would not allow us to expand capacity significantly to help the entire town by relieving overcrowding; (3) renovation would require relocating the whole school to a different site for two years, and there's no space for that; (4) rebuilding will get us a building that is fully up to code and that will last us for 70+ years.

2. Driscoll is more expensive than other school projects. FALSE. The Driscoll project cost increased by about 6% (the difference between the original $108.8m and the $115.3m just voted by Town Meeting) due to construction cost inflation, which is easily corroborated by multiple data sources. At $115.3m, it is still below the cost per square foot and cost per child of the FRR School, and below what Baldwin would have cost if approved. Driscoll's cost per square foot is solidly within the middle range of comparable school projects in the greater Boston area.

3. Driscoll shouldn’t move forward because it’s not part of a comprehensive plan. YES, IT IS.

The School Committee voted 9-0 to recommend moving ahead with Driscoll, as the first part of a Driscoll-Pierce-Third School plan to solve town-wide overcrowding. As with every other school project, we don't need to know every detail about all future projects in order to know what the right course is for a given school site.

4. This is a "snap election" intended to keep turnout low. FALSE. The failure of the bundle to pass in May created a ripple effect that resulted in an unconventional election date. December 10 was a compromise between the long process by which the SC and SB arrived at their recommendations after the May loss, and trying not to delay further the Driscoll move-in date. We're doing all we can to reach voters, spread the word about the election, and get people to the polls.