WATERBORO — An ambitious project to upgrade the entire athletic complex at Massabesic High School was defeated in all six Regional School Unit 57 communities in Tuesday’s election.
The $4.9 million bond package was defeated by more than a 2-1 margin, with 7,964 votes against it and 3,990 votes in favor of it.
The 15-year bond was designed to pay the lion’s share ”“ $4.9 million ”“ of a $6.8 million overhaul of the athletic complex on the grounds of Massabesic High School. While the bond was designed to pay for roughly two-thirds of the cost of the project, the remainder of the money was to come from a mix of grants, donations and corporate sponsorships, along with money from the capital reserve, which is part of the annual budget funded by taxpayers.
The project included resurfacing the track; widening the field surface to accommodate soccer, field hockey, lacrosse and other field sports; installing a synthetic surface on the field, adding bleachers, upgrading softball and baseball fields to allow for home games; constructing new tennis courts for high school competition and public use; adding bathroom facilities (portable toilets are now in use), storage facilities, parking and a new maintenance facility; and replacing fencing to improve security and, proponents say, control access to the fields more efficiently.
But taxpayers were thinking about their wallets in Tuesday’s vote. Based on a home value of $150,000, a taxpayer in Alfred would pay an additional $26.82 per year in taxes for the next 15 years; Limerick taxpayers would pay an extra $29.16, Lyman $24.56, Newfield and Shapleigh $20.88 and Waterboro $30.96.
— Senior Staff Writer Tammy Wells can be contacted at 324-4444 (local call in Sanford) or 282-1535, ext. 327 or [email protected].
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less