HANOVER – The Building Committee is advocating new construction, instead of renovating and adding on to South Shore Tech, the panel decided at its meeting on Thursday, Feb. 15. The Committee voted to remove the so-called add/reno option from consideration.
The new construction option the Committee favors is known as Option 2.0 –the district’s share would be $174 million if designed for 805 students or $176 million for 900 students – with the enrollment capacity to be further discussed at the Thursday, Feb, 22 meeting.
Broken down by towns for preliminary comparison only, Whitman taxpayers by Fiscal 2029 would see a cost of $559.53 on the average home each year for an 805-student school and $564.23 on a 900-student school. The monthy impact could be either $46.63 or $47.02. In Hanson, the fiscal 2029 taxpayer impact could be $399.90 or $404.90 per $1,000 depending on the building size – or between $33.33 and $33.74. The MSBA official reimbursement won’t be available until this August.
The estimates are based on a level principal payment (which is more costly up front) using 3.75 percent interest and do not include the share of the debt that Marshfield, which begins contributing in 2026, will take on over the life of the note. 
The school committee is developing a regional agreement amendment for Fall town meeting consideration that would make debt share adjustable over a four-year rolling average to reflect changes in student enrollment over time.
Option 2.0 would look no different than the current school building, but would be built behind it so instruction would not be interrupted.
Owner Project Manager Jen Carlson of Left Field attended remotely to update the committee on costs of the various design options.
“We were going to take a little closer look at the risk of the add/reno option and try to put a cost on two of the major factors that we think are a concern,” Carlson said of underslab plumbing and for modular classrooms as that work is done.
The work would bump the estimated cost to $272.5 million for the total project budget, with the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) reimbursement now estimated at $106.5 million and the district’s estimated share at $172 million for a school with 805 students.
The add/reno was rejected for two reasons – the high cost of modular construction at $20 million, which the MSBA does not reimburse and a 52-month construction window and the disruption it could cost to student instruction.  “[The Add/Reno] was seen by the building committee as very challenging to have an active construction zone, near an occupied school on a small site.” Superintendent-Director Dr. Thomas J. Hickey said this week.  “Also, the considerable amount of costs that are not reimbursable brought the costs very close to the new construction estimates.”
The MSBA does not reimburse for modular classrooms, so the total new budget cost of $81 million – for an estimated project budget of $110 million – would be the district’s responsibility.
Whitman Committee member Dan Salvucci said he did not favor an addition/renovation plan.
“I’ve seen that done in my town in the past and, for the amount of money we spend, you don’t get 50 years out of it,” he said. “When you do an add/reno and you have to [join] the old section with the new and you get them together, for some reason there’s always issues with water leaks and damage and mold.”
Hanson member Robert Mello voiced similar concerns.
“There’s a lot of unknown things that aren’t or may not be repaired,” he said. “I initially think of things like the plumbing system, whether it’s in the ground or in the walls that currently exist, that we don’t really have good access to and are 60 years old.”
Mello said that, for a little bit more money, they would have the “security of knowing we’re not going to have any major issues for some time.”
Cohasset member George Cooney added that the lack of MSBA funding and disruption caused by an add/reno to the school routine is concerning.
“If you could build a separate structure and everybody does business as usual [during construction], I think that’s a win,” he said. “Yes, money is always tight, but when you look at expenses and potential hidden ones, the add/reno could actually turn up being more money than going new.”
Principal Sandra Baldner said a new school would better enable the school to maintain a moslty regular function. She said it could rob an entire generation of SST students of the educational experience they deserve.
Chair Robert Mahoney also noted that, at a timeline of five years, the add/reno would take more time than new construction.
“It’s a bad idea,” said Norwell member Dustin Reardon of the add/reno plan. “We can’t do a disservice to these students who are fighting so hard to come here.”
“I haven’t heard one positive reason to go add/reno,” said Hanover member Robert Heywood.
Salvucci and Reardon both voiced concerns about enrollment capacity of a new school.
Citing the need to discuss it as a School Committee and to keep in mind that Marshfield is joining the district – and Pembroke is signaling and interest to do the same – Salvucci said he did not want to have to turn away Whitman students who might want to attend SST.
“I’m really split between 805 and 900,” he said. “I wouldn’t go any lower than that.”
Reardon agreed that enrollment is the biggest issue.
“That’s where we’re going to be deciding what makes financial sense,” he said.
The project has been carrying over $1 million in advance, but an a$3.5 million has been added to the carry-over for the renovation plan because of the need for plumbing under the slab.
“This is not just a cosmetic fix,” Carlson had said of the plumbing situation. “It’s a very invasive plumbing activity, it requires lot of planning to avoid undermining the footing of the existing building. … There’s a lot of risk involved with this work.”
When another closer look at logistics and things that needed to happen on-site and within the building for an add/reno would mean doubling the amount of modular classrooms needed to be brought onto the site.
“We had been carrying just under $10 million for that, so we added another $10 million,” she said. “Typically, to get into this level of detail, the construction manager, once we bring them on board, would be able to get into this level of detail, which is why this cost was not identified in the earlier estimates.”
Code concerns
Code updates for an add/reno project would also affect costs and could eat into the useable space already existing for teaching and learning.
The scope of this updates include: adding sprinklers to the original building; a full ADA accessibility upgrade; a major HVAC upgrade and replacement of all non-compliant plumbing and replacement of all electrical infrastructure. Not included are new finished beyond patching where electrical and plumbing work had to be done, nor for new furniture, technology or equipment. Site upgrades would likewise not be included.
“Because of the reuse of the existing building in this option, we really don’t think you could go much beyond 5-percent enrollment growth for the add/reno option,” Carlson said.
The add/reno budget estimate was calculated on the assumption that the district would be done on the same timeline as the add/reno.
The existing building is appraised at $26.4 million. Work over $8.7 million, or 30 percent of the appraised value – within a three-year timeframe would trigger the need to fully address ADA accessibility.
“There are other thresholds that do apply, depending on what work is being done, that may trigger the need for the full scope of the code upgrade to be done in one shot if this option becomes a reality,” Carlson said.
“There actually may be less space available,” Carl Franchesci of architectural firm DRA said in light of the fact that no future enrollment growth could be accommodates under an add/reno option. “Educational space could actually be reduced slightly.”
Hickey asked for a breakdown on the increased number of modular classrooms, seeking information on whether they are for classrooms or specialized space because certain shops might be included in the renovation.
“I think it really had to do with looking at the phasing,” Franchesci said. “The way that option wraps around the gym creates a construction zone, that at first we did not include the [five or six] science labs as part of the first phase.”
He said the phasing could have them consumed by the adjacent construction zone.

HANSON – A renewed effort at a Right-to-Farm Bylaw and the proper uses of remaining ARPA funds were the focus of Select Board discussion Tuesday, Feb. 6 as the board considers the articles they are advancing for the annual Town Meeting warrant.
The board voted to allocate the remaining $1,092,514 in ARPA funds for repairs to a culvert and the purchase of a new ambulance. Another reallocation of $150,000 in unused ARPA funds from the treasury was approved for the warrant to front an applicaton for another library grant as well as another $50,000 for pond maintenance article, both of which will go to Town Meeting in May.
A vote on a Right-to-Farm Bylaw – the town’s second attempt to adopt one, will come once the language is ironed out.
“Right-to-Farm is one of the articles,” Chair Laura FitzGerald-Kemmett said. “We’ve never discussed it in-depth, but I think everybody is pretty familiar with what it is.”
She noted that a resident approached the Select Board with a citizen’s petition.
“We [told them] you don’t really need a citizen’s petition,” FitzGerald-Kemmett said. “We’re more than glad to entertain, as a board, bringing it back to the town. It didn’t pass the first time, but I think really it got kind of torpedoed unnecessarily, and maybe there wasn’t good information about what that Right-to-Farm Bylaw would mean.”
She said the board hoped to glean some “good information and clarity” around what it really means, but that sometimes one or two people at Town Meeting who are very persuasive – and that’s what happened at that particular Town Meeting.
“They started using examples of some bad situations on farms, or around town, that had happened and sort of extrapolated that this would happen more often if we had the Right-to-Farm – which was actually not accurate,” FitzGerald-Kemmett said.
Town Administrator Lisa Green said her office is researching Right to Farm language in other communities for a proposed Select Board warrant article.
“It turns out that towns that have adopted Right-to-Farm have been able to add in some language that provides their own restrictions,” Green said. “We’re jus gathering some articles from other towns to see what information’s been put in each and then we’ll … put something together to present to the board as we get closer to looking at articles.”
Resident Michael Flemming said the problem proponents had the last time was that the Right-to-Farm language was really written for larger dairy farms, and there are not a lot of those in Hanson. Relating it to smaller properties opened the door to other issues.
“If you’re looking into language that’s going to be added, I don’t know what can be added to include smaller home farms,” he said. The previous bylaw would have required five acres, of which the house could take up an acre.
“Ultimately, it would only affect three places in town,” Flemming said, noting that making it clear it is trying to help out people who want to have a backyard farm, might remove some of the stigma of what transpired the last time the issue came up.
“It’s why they moved here in the first place,” he said. “This town is a farming community.”
Select Board member Ann Rein, who had been active in the effort to pass a Right-to-Farm Bylaw and in the work to establish an Agricultural Commission at the time, said it is really a matter of educating people.
She had been called to deal with compaints about roosters, and when she explained to the homeowners with too many of them about the problem, they were cooperative when they realized it – and then took care of the situation.
“There are people who get mad about the roosters, and then there are people who love hearing the roosters,” she said. “It’s funny.”
She advocated for a return of the Agricultural Commission to facilitate proper animal husbandry.
“I don’t know you can do much with a bylaw that’s going to fix that,” Rein said, adding that real estate values had been another concern. “People have actually found that a Right-to-Farm bylaws in a town actually bring real estate values up.”
Determining which articles could be funded with Plymouth County ARPA money, which must be spent by Dec. 31, 2016, was also discussed.
A culvert repair on Pratt Place, an ambulance, pond management and a library project are all seeking part of the $1.9 million remaining.
Green noted that the $1.542 million in Plymouth County-administered ARPA funds are very restrictive as to how it can be used. The Pratt Place culvert and ambulance are two projects that are eligible for that money, Green said.
In 2021, the town had received a quote of $1.25 million for the culvert repair or replacement. A $450,000 pricetag [leaving $1,092,514 for the culvert project] is the way lot of towns are using their last remaining ARPA funds to purchase ambulances.
Green “highly suggested” the funds be used for the culvert.
A memo on how the town wants to use the ARPA funds would be due to Plymouth County by March 1 and a timeline by April 1 Green said.
“Right now Highway is using some metal plates to make that road passable,” she said. “That culvert is in dire condition and, since I’ve been here, people have been saying that it is in dire condition and could collapse.”
When FitzGerald-Kemmett noted that approving both projects could put the town over what is available, Green said there is a possibility that the county could be approached for more funds, but they would have to obtain Town Meeting backing before asking Plymouth County for additional funds.
“We are also chasing some grant funds that could potentially help us with Pratt Place,” she said, but she cautioned that, when the town has applied for grants in the past it has been turned down every single time. “The culvert’s either too long, too short, not wide enough – there’s always been something that disqualifies that culvert frombeing eligible for grants.”
While there are only four houses on Pratt Place, Green noted that, should the road collapse, there would be no way for those residens to access Winter Street.
“I understand that it’s a safety issue, but what I’m struggling with is we’re never again going to have this type of money to move the needle on other things,” FitzGerald-Kemmett said. “The grant funding is not a sure thing.”
“I think we’ve done a lot of marvelous stuff with ARPA money,” Rein said, noting that waiting for other funds while risking a road collapse was risky. “I think this is a worthy thing to spend it on.”
Vice Chair Joe Weeks said he is confident Green has done the due dilligence on the Pratt Place culvert and the restrictions on the remaining ARPA funds.
The library’s article for $200,000 in ARPA funds for an HVAC system was approved at October Town Meeting, but maintenance work has since been done on it to gain three more years of operation, freeing up the $200,000 for other projects, Green said. The library is applying for a grant due in May, meanwhile, that would require the town to front the funding.
“If we don’t get the grant, we won’t spend the money,” Library Director Karen Stolfer said, noting the grant notification would not be issued until October 2025. The $150,000 needs to be authorized, but need not be sitting in a separate account for the application to go forward. That would leave $50,000 from the October Town Meeting to apply to the pond management project.
“If you want to know if you’ve got support for a new library, I think you nee to do it as a free cash item,” FitzGerald-Kemmett said. She feared people would not pay attention to it again if it comes out of ARPA funds.