Update on Track and Field Project

Amherst Finance Committee (FC) discussed  replacement debt authorization for the Amherst Regional High School Track and Field renovation project (see also here, here, and here) at their meeting on February 20, 2024. While they took no action, their discussion revealed a possible timetable for the project as well as clarified what decision is before the FC and Town Council at this time.

The Regional School Committee (RSC) voted at their meeting of January 23, 2024 to rescind and replace the debt authorization to borrow $1.5 million to resurface the track and make it ADA accessible. Under the previous debt authorization, the RSC was only permitted to either replace the 6 lane track in situ or to install an artificial turf infield in a reoriented and expanded track. The replacement authorization allows the RSC to explore the full range of options for improving the track and field facility (including natural grass versus artificial turf for the interior field, east-west versus north-south orientation, inclusion of lighting, irrigation, etc).

Escalating costs, lagging fundraising, and growing concern about public health and environmental hazards of artificial turf have led some RSC members to consider a broader range of alternatives in order to expedite the repair of the track which is currently not suitable for use.

What Happens Next?
The FC has three possible options that it can recommend to the Town Council.

1.  The council should approve the replacement authorization.  If they do, this would allow the track and field project to proceed and would give the school committee permission to consider the widest range of options as noted above.
   
2. The council should reject the authorization. This would effectively kill the ongoing effort to make any improvements, including simply resurfacing the track, as it would deny the school committee necessary funds to continue.
   
3. The council should do nothing. The council has until mid March to act on the authorization. If it does not, the replacement motion would be adopted by default, which is sometimes referred to as pocket approval. The effect would be the same as approving the new authorization.

All four member towns of the regional school district face a similar choice. In Pelham, Shutesbury, and Leverett, the Select Boards will have to decide whether to call a special Town Meeting to allow a town-wide vote on the matter or to take no action and allow the “pocket approval”. All four towns must approve the authorization for it to be adopted; if any town votes against the authorization, it stops the project.

Interim Superintendent Doug Slaughter seemed to suggest the following timetable for the project.

The design firm SLR will complete a site assessment, including wetlands, stormwater, and the culverted Tan Brook in the next couple months. They will also provide the district with updates of the cost estimates provided by Weston Sampson for the four options they proposed in 2021.  Those estimates will also include the costs and scope of work for necessary site improvements. It is not clear whether it will include testing of materials and monitoring soil and water for contaminants if an artificial turf option is chosen.

After this work is completed, the RSC will choose which option to pursue. Slaughter indicated that the committee may not choose a project for which sufficient funding is not in hand. He noted that some of the funds are potentially only available for specific projects. For example, the Hurricane Boosters have ceased fundraising and asked their donors if they would like the money that they gave ($243,060) to continue to go toward the project even if it doesn’t include an artificial turf field. The CPA committees of Leverett and Pelham have indicated that they will only support a natural grass infield for the track and the application to the Shutesbury CPA committee was withdrawn by the district after similar objections from the public there. Those funds could total as much as $240,620. 

The RSC will decide on which option SLR will design after they have reviewed the updated cost and funding figures, likely near the end of the school year. The design team would then develop construction documents that are ready to go out to bid in the winter of 2024. Construction would likely take place in 2025.

Committee Discussion
Cathy Schoen pointed out that the funding numbers don’t seem to suggest that there would be enough money to do option 3, that is, an artificial turf infield. She also noted that Amherst’s CPA funding ($800,000) and Free Cash ($900,000) authorizations would likely need to be re-approved to be consistent with the new, flexible authorization from the RSC. 

Andy Steinberg voiced concern about whether the total needs for athletic fields for all sports for girls and boys is going to be met by this project. He asked what the maintenance costs are for the different options and if town staff or school staff will be responsible for that maintenance.

Slaughter responded that he hoped to see more details from the SLR estimates that would allow the district to calculate the total cost of ownership of the renovated track and field. Those costs might include equipment, upkeep, and, in the case of turf, costs for when the surface must be replaced every 8-10 years. He did not address who would be responsible for maintenance of the new facility. 

Hanneke raised concerns about ongoing vagueness of the proposal and doubts about the continued viability of the project.  She said “two and a half years ago we were told we needed to proceed urgently because costs were escalating and now two and a half years later we have rescinded that decision and now we’re being asked to reauthorize it again with the same unknowns – indeed greater unknowns and now we don’t have any cost estimates. What are we being asked to authorize and what kind of risk are we being asked to take for a borrowing that has so many unknowns? We’re not clear that the money that we are being asked to reauthorize will even pay for a track – that is the most basic proposal to finish the project in place. And we don’t have the numbers. And the wording requires that ‘sufficient  funding’ be received before a decision to reorient the track and I want to know what that means.  What is sufficient funding and what does ‘have received’ mean?”

Slaughter responded “We are going to know pretty quickly once the estimates come in from our designers, probably within a three month window and it’s the RSC that will make the decision (on which option to choose).” 

The FC will take up the discussion again at their next meeting on March 5.

The matter is unlikely to come up before the Town Council until their meeting of March 18.