Possible second wood chip bond discussed at forum

By NATHAN LAMB | Milton Independent Staff Writer
miltonreporter@yahoo.com

The aesthetic impact of 65-foot smokestacks took a backseat to financial concerns over converting the schools to wood chip heat at the School Board’s Nov. 5 forum.

The meeting was called to address both issues, but the majority of resident questions were about the increase in the local contribution for the project, which has risen from $240,000 to at least $540,830.

Since the smaller figure was assumed in a bond vote for the wood burners last fall, several of the 15 residents in attendance were curious if another vote would be needed this March.

Acting School Board Chairman Reg Godin indicated it was too early to tell; he said the conversion to burners was not a done deal, and that the board is still evaluating whether to pursue it. Since permits for the burners stipulate that any construction take place over the summer, a decision for this year is needed by early February, he said.

While Godin conceded the shortfall in local money would need to be made up if they proceed, he said the question of “how” is still under review. Providing answers to those questions figures to be a major focus in the near future, he said.

“We have a lot of things to evaluate in the next two or three months to provide better details to the community on where we are with the project,” he said.

The burners are under consideration as a way to save on fuel bills and bring stability to energy costs. Godin termed another bond vote “a possibility” after the meeting, but added the board hasn’t discussed it.

Most of the $2.4 million project is subject to a 90 percent state reimbursement, which was secured with the bond vote last fall. However, the local contribution has increased because parts of the project are ineligible for that rate; the district initially assumed the 90 percent across-the-board, but subsequent review indicated some components were eligible for only 30 percent at best.

School business manager Don Johnson said the lower rate covers parts of the project not directly related to building and operating the wood chip plants. That includes maintenance areas within the plants, paving the high school bus loop (which will also be used for chip delivery), and new piping within the schools.

While Johnson said the maintenance areas were added to the project because it was efficient to do so, that decision brought a complaint from Michael Boisjoli, who said the ancillary projects weren’t what voters approved. Overall, he accused the district of not doing its homework.

“I don’t have a problem with the woodchips,” he said. “It’s the ‘whoops, I forgot, we need more money’…it’s very disappointing.”

Board member Steve Rose responded that the district was working under a tight timeframe leading up to the vote last fall. The 90 percent reimbursement was a limited time offer, and missing it would have made the project more expensive, he said.

In a related matter, the district’s draft timeline for moving forward was listed as cause for concern by some residents. It showed the budget (and any bonding vote) taking place on March 4, while the bids for the work wouldn’t be awarded until nearly three weeks later. Resident Ron Hubert suggested they handle bidding earlier, so the total cost would be known when the budget vote takes place. If they don’t—and construction costs go up by six percent—they’d be facing a shortfall once again, he said.

That’s a good point, responded Godin, though he expressed doubt that construction costs would increase by that much in the current conditions.

A couple of residents were also concerned about how long the town would carry interest on the project while waiting for state reimbursement. Godin acknowledged the board likely wouldn’t have any indication from the legislature on that when a decision is made for this year, but added the project would not get into the queue for reimbursement until it’s done, which means Milton could run the risk of falling behind other districts if it waits.

Nonetheless, board member Jim Lyons said his approval would require a firm timeline on the state reimbursement.

On the other side, Godin, Rose, and member Darren Carner put more focus on determining if the plan were feasible or desirable from an operational standpoint. Providing an updated cost/benefit analysis that reflects the higher local contribution was one component of that cited by Godin.

“We’re not charging forward with this project without having some answers,” said Godin. “We’ll be wresting with this issue over the next two months.”

The discussion on aesthetics was much briefer, and centered on a series of photo illustrations from architect John Hemmelgarn who suggested the 65-foot smokestacks on the burning plants would not dominate the horizons from neighboring properties. The stack would be reddish-brown earth tone, which would not reflect light or require frequent maintenance, he said.

Permits for the project also stipulated that a screen of vegetation be provided for the neighbors, but Hemmelgarn did not have those illustration ready, saying he was waiting until the appeal period for that decision had passed before doing that work.

Johnson noted the cost of screening the burning plants was not included within the current cost estimates.