 |
|
| Dedicated to Securing A Truly Perfect Location for Goffstown's Future Kindergarten & Elementary Schools | |
|
|
|
Voters Misled by Board of
Selectmen, School District
Numerous Instances of
Disinformation Well Documented
GOFFSTOWN, NH - "During the deliberative session, attempts to discuss the factual details were suppressed. Voters did not receive the proper technical information about the site, and instead were given inaccurate information such as 'there are no significant wetlands'." - Conservation Commission Report on the Glen Lake Kindergarten Site, July 13, 2005
The above quote pretty much says it all. Taxpayers in Goffstown, along with many others, have been told many lies and "non-truths" throughout the entire process of selecting a site for our kindergarten. In addition, much information was withheld and suppressed prior to the March 2005 town vote. The entire process by which the Glen Lake property was selected and presented to the voters - and to others - as the "perfect" location for our kindergarten has been fraught with deception, as seen below:
The following is a list of well-known, documented instances of false claims, misinformation and suppression of facts and events put forth by the School District and the Board of Selectmen. Also included are GRA's rebuttals and comments to those instances:
| 1. | The Board of Selectmen, Darryl Lockwood and school board member Scott Gross have all publicly claimed that construction of a kindergarten on the proposed site is consistent with, and recommended by, the 1997 Master Plan. |
| Rebuttal: | This statement is false. Read the relevant sections of the Master Plan by clicking here. |
| 2. | Prior to the March 2005 ballot, voters were misled when they were told the site was to include expansion to a future elementary school. Mr. Lockwood now denies this was ever the case. |
| Rebuttal: | Original concept plan proves otherwise. |
| 3. | "The law allows you to be present and to speak at the public hearing portion." - Letter to Abutters notifying them of Planning Board meeting of 14-Jul-05. |
| Rebuttal: | Planning Board Chairman Richard Georgantus opened the July 14th meeting by stating just the opposite. Read the relevant sections of the Planning Board meeting minutes by clicking here. |
| 4. | The voters approved the transfer of approximately 20 acres of Map 5, Lot 14 to the school district in Town Article 24 . |
| Rebuttal: | Voters were not told that an additional 6 acres has been added without voter approval or town ballot. The current site plan now calls for 26 acres, an increase of 30% over what the voters approved. |
| 5. | The parcel has 5 or more acres on which to build. |
| Rebuttal: | "The state's requirements for a school of 200 students call for a contiguous area of 7 buildable acres. The largest contiguous buildable area on the proposed site is only approximately 2.5 acres." - Conservation Commission Report of 7/13/05. Also see DPW Concept Plan. |
| 6. | "Proper protocol has been followed in transferring this land to the school district" - Selectman Robert Wheeler |
| Rebuttal: | From the Conservation Commission: "Proper protocol has not been followed to allow the transfer of this land by the Board of Selectmen. State statute RSA 41-14A prescribes that selectmen..." " By not following these procedures, the transfer warrant article was placed on the ballot without allowing the relevant facts to be discussed in a public forum. During the deliberative session, attempts to discuss the factual details were suppressed. Voters did not receive the proper technical information about the site, and instead were given inaccurate information such as 'there are no significant wetlands'." |
| 7. | "As far as we're concerned, we've done our due diligence" - Selectman Robert Wheeler, Town Deliberative Session |
| Rebuttal: | No wetlands impact studies, noise impact studies, traffic impact studies or wildlife impact studies had yet been done at the time of Mr. Wheeler's statement at town deliberative session. Indeed, a site survey on the property was not begun until April, well after the town ballot. |
| 8. | "...Lockwood read an email from state government, Mr. Murdeau, saying the school did not require a permit and could build right up to the wetlands buffer. The school said they do have to obtain a DES permit, but there are no state setbacks--only local setbacks, which the district is exempt from following..." - from the Minutes of the July 14, 2005 Planning Board meeting. |
| Rebuttal: | When the Department of Education rule Ed 321.03, (e)1 makes reference to setbacks, it is, by default, referencing local setbacks, since there are no state wetland setbacks. The school district is indeed permitted by the town of Goffstown to violate our local wetlands conservation overlay district (passed by the voters of Goffstown). But the State Department of Education told the GRA that when the building of a school is involved, the state will consider Goffstown's local setback regulations, and would have to grant a waiver to rule Ed 321.03, (e)1. In addition, voters were never told that the proposed school site would be a violation of that setback. "...instead [voters] were given inaccurate information such as 'there are no significant wetlands'." - Conservation Commission Report |
| 9. | Board of Selectmen claimed, in a letter to an abutter, that conveying the proposed site to the school district is consistent with, and recommended by, the 1997 Master Plan. |
| Rebuttal: | This statement is false. Read the relevant sections of the Master Plan by clicking here. |
Copyright©2005, Goffstown Residents Association. All Rights Reserved.
