"Uncertainty is the refuge of hope"

It’s almost time for a few hundred (maybe more???) residents to pack into the Lincoln-Sudbury Regional High School auditorium, assume a seated position for a night or two (or three?), and fiddle with clickers legislate. Can you feel the excitement?

Here’s what we have for you this week:

1. Analyzing School Spending in Sudbury

2. SudburyWeekly.com News Roundup

3. Petition to Cut CPA Surcharge Broadly Opposed By Town Committees

4. MCRT Diamond Junction Takes Shape

5. Sheehan Just Keeps Settling Contracts Like An Absolute Boss

6. Atkinson Pool Article Comes Into Focus

7. LWV Sets Water District Candidates’ Forum

Let’s get into it!

Analyzing School Spending in Sudbury

By Kevin LaHaise

A recent report issued by the Town of Sudbury presented school spending in a manner that many residents don’t typically think of school spending. While “per pupil cost” is a common method of analyzing school spending, and the report included that (page 83), the report also laid out Sudbury’s “net school spending.”

The Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) explains “The Commonwealth's school finance statute, Chapter 70 of the General Laws, establishes an annual net school spending requirement for each Massachusetts school district. Failure to comply with this requirement may result in non-approval of a municipality's tax rate, enforcement action by the Attorney General, or loss of state aid.”

The formula to determine the spending requirement is a bit complicated, but the basic point is that there’s a formula used to determine the minimum each Massachusetts municipality needs to spend on their schools in a combination of State aid and local contributions. Think of it like shopping at Costco - you have to spend at least $300 every time you go there.

Sudbury is obviously exceeding the required spending. But the comparison to similar communities provides context. The most recent data from DESE is from Fiscal Year 2025. It shows Sudbury Public Schools at 179% of the net school spending requirement. Nearby Concord Public Schools, which is a PreK-8 district, is at 210%.

But what are the actuals? Sudbury’s net school spending is $53,271,512 in Fiscal Year 2025 to achieve 179% of net school spending, according to DESE. Concord Public Schools is spending $49,963,981 to achieve 210% net school spending. (Concord’s enrollment is smaller than Sudbury’s - by about 600 students according to DESE district profiles.)

If Sudbury were to match Concord at 210% of net school spending, that would be based on a Fiscal Year 2025 required spending amount of $29,786,643. Net school spending percentage-parity with Concord would require $62.5 million to be spent in Sudbury Public Schools. That’s nearly $10 million more than is currently being spent according to the DESE data. Nearby Lincoln was one of the four districts spending a higher percentage of net school spending than Sudbury. To match Lincoln, at 192%, Sudbury would need to spend an additional $4M this fiscal year.

As for academic performance, being one of the better funded districts hasn’t entirely insulated students from challenges since the Covid-19 pandemic. Concord and Sudbury have seen similar trends in recent Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) tests. However, both districts significantly outperform the state as a whole, and the MCAS tests are just one means of assessing academic performance.

Petition to Cut CPA Surcharge Broadly Opposed By Town Committees

By Kevin LaHaise

Article 54 at Sudbury’s Annual Town Meeting is a citizen petition to cut the Community Preservation Act surcharge from 3% to 1.5%. The petitioner presented to the Finance Committee in April, after which the committee voted not to support approval of the article.

Since then, a number of committees have voted to oppose the article. None of Sudbury’s elected or appointed committees have voted to support approval of the article. The committees that have voted to oppose the article include:

• Select Board

• Finance Committee

• Community Preservation Committee

• Conservation Commission

• Historic District Commission

• Historical Commission

• Park and Recreation Commission

• Sudbury Housing Trust

The Rail Trails Advisory Committee has scheduled a meeting on Monday, May 5, just before the start of Annual Town Meeting, and the agenda indicates it may take a position on the article as well. Community Preservation Act funding has been used multiple times for rail trail projects in Sudbury.

During the Thursday, May 1 meeting of the Park and Recreation Commission, the Director of the Sudbury’s Park and Recreation department, Dennis Mannone, said the cut would be “devastating” to Park and Recreation in Sudbury. He went on to explain that a Fields Needs Assessment was due to be presented to the community in June, followed by the initiation of an Open Space and Recreation Plan. He expressed that the recommended projects in those plans would likely pursue funding from Community Preservation Act funds over multiple years.

MCRT Diamond Junction Takes Shape

By Kevin LaHaise

Sudbury’s portion of the Mass Central Rail Trail (MCRT) will be paved in the coming months, and grading work appears to be moving along swiftly. But one of the more unique features of the trail is already taking shape.

The intersection of the MCRT and the Bruce Freeman Rail Trail in Sudbury is often referred to as the “diamond” or the “diamond junction.” It’s a unique historical site, but also a design feature for the two rail trails. As part of the development of the MCRT, a rotary will be installed, complete with interpretive signage. Sudbury Weekly is calling it the “Wittle Bitty Wotary” because it’s the most adorable thing ever.

On Thursday, May 1, construction workers began installation work for the rotary. These pictures are from the afternoon of May 1:

Sheehan Just Keeps Settling Contracts Like An Absolute Boss

By Kevin LaHaise

This fiscal year Sudbury Town Manager Andy Sheehan has been tasked with negotiating union contracts while the financial forecast for the Town shows difficult years ahead. Yet he has steadily settled contracts without drama. As previously reported, Sheehan has reached agreements with the Supervisory Association, the DPW Union, Sudbury Police Sergeants and Sudbury Police Lieutenants.

The latest agreement was arguably one of the tougher ones. The Town has reached an agreement with the Sudbury Police Union. A recent town financial report indicated Sudbury was spending among the least per capita on police among peer communities.

According to the agreement, each step on the salary schedule will get a $3,000 increase as a market adjustment, which is effective 7/1/24. The market adjustment goes into effect before the negotiated annual percent increases agreed to in the contract. Those percent increases are 3%, 2% and 2% for the three years covered by the agreement.

The agreement also includes changes to extra paid detail compensation and calculations for base pay.

Atkinson Pool Article Comes Into Focus

By Kevin LaHaise

Article 34 at Sudbury’s Annual Town meeting calls for additional funding for a renovation and repair of the Atkinson Pool. The initial draft of the article had a placeholder number of $429,000. That would be added to the prior budget of $2,350,000. (Other articles in recent years have been approved for different components of the pool.)

This week, the Town presented the final number after rebidding the project, evaluating alternatives and conducting deeper analysis on the contingency funds needed for a project that seeks to, among many other things, resolve a leak that has proven to be rather evasive during prior attempts to fix it.

Prior bids on the project came in well over budget according to Combined Facilities Director Sandra Duran. She has cited cost escalation and tariffs/tariff threats as contributing factors to the high bids.

The total additional ask of Town Meeting is $959,000. A significant portion of that is a healthy contingency budget. Because there are many possible unknowns associated with the leak, including piping that is buried deep beneath concrete, the Town opted to beef up the contingency on the project so ensure they could deal with whatever they might uncover along the way.

The project is funded by debt, so it would require two-thirds of Town Meeting to vote in favor of it for it to pass.

The latest information was presented to the Park and Recreation Commission and the Finance Committee on Thursday, May 1. It was previously reported to the Select Board two days earlier, but the exact number was still being developed. Sudbury’s finance director, Victor Garofalo, presented the sources and uses of the funds:

During discussion in the Finance Committee meeting and the Park and Recreation Commission meeting, the leak in the pool was a focus area. The project, as currently conceived, would prioritize leak detection from the start, using a new team and new methods as needed. Prior efforts to detect the leak led to replacement of significant amounts of piping at the pool, but the leak persisted.

During the Park and Recreation Commission meeting, department staff explained that an Environment Protection Agency investigation of the leak was closed because the chlorine level in the pool is below even the maximum allowable level for drinking water. While that may put some environmental concerns at ease, the cost of filling the pool regularly is not an insignificant expense for the department according to comments from Park and Recreation Director Dennis Mannone in recent months. It’s also an operational disruption for staff, who need to fill the pool and maintain appropriate water quality.

With all of the information presented, the article received votes of support from the Finance Committee and Park and Recreation Commission. The Select Board opted to wait for the final number, and will likely take a vote at their Monday meeting just before the start of Town Meeting. If passed at Town Meeting, the work would be started sometime in August of this year, with completion targeted for November according to Combined Facilities Director, Sandra Duran.

LWV Sets Water District Candidates’ Forum

By The League of Women Voters of Sudbury

The League of Women Voters of Sudbury will record a Candidates’ Forum with the two people running for Sudbury Water District Commissioner in the Tuesday, May 20, Water District election.

Robert H. Sheldon, an incumbent, and Robert Crane are running for the three-year seat on the Sudbury Water District Commission.

Email questions for those candidates to [email protected]; the deadline for questions to be received is 5 p.m. Friday, May 9. Questions on the same topic may be combined. The identity of those asking a question will not be disclosed. Questions will be asked of all candidates, so questions specific to individuals will not be considered.

The forum will be recorded May 14 and be available on SudburyTV video-on-demand and cable channels shortly afterwards.

The election is Tuesday, May 20, from 3 to 7 p.m. at the water district headquarters, 199 Raymond Rd., before the district’s annual meeting, which starts at  7 p.m.  Information on voting and absentee ballots is here.  The annual meeting warrant and a specimen ballot are here.

Uncontested candidates in the water district election are Craig Blake for moderator;  Thomas Travers for treasurer; and Susan O’Connor for clerk.

Parting Thoughts

Open Town Meeting is often characterized as “direct Democracy.” The idea is that any registered voter can show up and vote on the articles. You decide, not an elected representative.

But maybe it’s more than that.

The fine folks at Merriam-Webster tell us that “hope” is defined as: “to cherish a desire with anticipation : to want something to happen or be true.” The archaic definition is simply “trust.”

The people of Sudbury are entrusted with 56, give or take, decisions next week. When they cast their votes, they express what they want to happen, and what they want to be true about their community.

In his December 12, 1814 letter to John Taylor, John Adams wrote “The History of all Ages Shews, that the Caprice, Cruelties, and horrors of Democracy, have soon disgusted alarmed and terrified themselves. They soon cry, “this will not do”! [“]We have gone too far![“] “We are all wrong.”! “We are none of Us safe.” “We must unite in some clever Fellow, who can protect Us all.” “Caesar, Bonaparte, who will”! Though “We distrust hate and abhor them all; Yet We must submit to one or another of them, stand by him, cry him Up to the Skies and Swear that he is the greatest, best and finest Man that ever lived.”!”

Perhaps the endurance of Open Town Meeting is today’s response to Mr. Adams: Not on our watch!

Here’s to hoping.

Onward!