I was originally going to give these remarks to the Lowell City Council tonight, however when they got to this item on the agenda, they decided to refer it to committee and table it until it’s time to do this.
Mayor Kennedy, City Councilors, thank you for the opportunity to speak to you tonight.
I’m here to speak against casting any vote tonight on the use of Eminent Domain in the development of a New LHS on the downtown site. Regardless where you stand on this issue, now is not the time to make this decision. I would politely request that you Table this motion until after we have the information we need to formally select the very best option, the downtown site and option 3. As it is, if this vote is taken to night it will be out of proper order. Since the site hasn’t even been selected, there is no actual reason for to acquire property.
Of course this isn’t really about Eminent Domain at all, this is a backdoor attempt to eliminate the best option for LHS and the city of Lowell.
This is about pushing away all other options to promote the choice of Cawley, a site which has far too many serious questions to move forward without other viable options ready. With all the Article 97 issues, with the costs of replicating fields, with the significant increase to bussing costs, with the required zoning changes to be able to build the required number of floors, with the concerns about space for parking, with the considerations required for the safety of students traveling in and out of the area, and the many other issues, Cawley is far from a perfect site and certainly not worthy to be the only option going forward. Most of all, we do not yet have the FULL costs of each option. As our State Senator Eileen Donoghue said today, we should wait until we have all information before any actions to eliminate options.
Keeping all of the options viable is even more important with the inevitable legal issues that would come with the selection of the Cawley site. Not only are there possible civil rights questions due to the radically reduced access to the facilities for the majority of minorities in the city, there are the environmental issues due to the destruction of open & green spaces directly contrary to the MSBA’s founding charter, and there are legal process questions due to the improper, irregular, and obviously poor process we used, ignoring the Board of Parks vote, skipping a required Conservation Board vote and the choice not to hold public hearings on these issues. There is a real possibility the EOEEA will reject the replication lands, or that the whole thing will end up in court and the Cawley site ruled out — and then having eliminated the possibility of eminent domain we will have gotten rid of what most believe is the best option. Even many (if not most) cawley supporters would agree option 3 is better than the other options and certainly better than nothing. With such very real risks of the Cawley site failing, ruling out an option now by eliminating the possibility of eminent domain risks hundreds of millions in funding.
Many on the Cawley side of this argument, wrongly and repeatedly compare this to the 1997 and 1980 renovations. Option 3, in particular, is nothing like them. The word ‘renovation’ is highly misleading as are the words, ‘we can’t just patch the roof and slap a coat of paint on it.’ Option 3 would tear down most of the existing structures and build entirely new buildings. The old building would be substantially gutted and rebuilt as well. We aren’t talking about patching a roof and putting on paint, we’re talking about investing hundreds of millions of dollars to have an entirely new complex. Talking about this like the 1997 or 1980 projects is highly disingenuous, and bringing up current problems within the current complex when discussing option 3 is as silly as bringing them up for the Cawley site. Whether it’s the significant costs of new science labs, or whether HVAC is required, or any of a hundred other legitimate features that need to be part the discussion and considered costs, these are NEW Building costs with either project and it’s not about renovation or refurbishment.
The City Council, and in fact the whole city, need to stop with the provably false rhetoric that ‘a new build is better.’ This is evidently false. Lowell has been reborn and is thriving in the bones of its old buildings. We are nationally renowned for our ability to see the vast potential to be new again and believing our history and our people make that investment worth doing.
Every single one of us needs to remember who we are: We are Lowell.
Look around this downtown area. Look around and see places like Perkins, LCHC, Boott Mills, Loft 27 and so many other places. Look at them and realize the high school is the same sort of opportunity and the same sort of new-build-old-bones project.
It is not acceptable to celebrate and cheerlead that history and all of those dozens upon dozens of amazing success stories when it suits you, and then when it doesn’t suit you, forget them entirely and talk about all the roadblocks to success. It’s not just wrong, it’s insulting to our many partnerships, the incredibly hard work we’ve done and all the resources we have invested to make this special city — this national treasure — a beacon of hope and preservation to other cities all around the country with it’s many stories of success.
So, please, table this distraction until the facts are in. There is absolutely no reason to vote on this until after the option is selected. In fact, ruling out options now risks the entire project and can only hurt the city. We must all do our best to mitigate the anger and resentment, and the first step is to realize that everyone truly wants what’s best for the city of Lowell.