Price for preservation too high

Voters in Gray will be asked Nov. 4 to decide on a possible future for the Pennell Institute by approving a $2.4 million, 30-year bond to convert the building into town offices. Approval ensures the building would remain a town landmark, but the cost of the bond is too steep.

Estimates for renovating the building are approximately $1.9 million, less than the estimated $2.08 million needed for new town offices. The sale of other town-owned buildings such as the Village Fire Station could offset the bond principal, but included in the bond is an extra $500,000 to cover potential increases in construction and renovation costs, while also funding office equipment and computers.

Last month, Peter Gellerson, chairman of the Gray Town Council, said it was better to ask for more bond money now than later, but the propensity for spending in Gray government should make voters wary.

Town officials used $833,000 in reserve funds to pay for the majority of this year’s budget, which increased spending by 18 percent. Only 2.5 percent of that increase was added to property tax rates this year.

So while paying an additional $500,000 to renovate Pennell Institute, residents will likely face future tax increases to replace spent surplus funds. Even with increased material costs and complications that could occur in renovating a 132-year-old building, is giving the town a blank check for 20 percent over the current cost estimate a sound financial idea?

Setting money aside for a rainy day is one matter. Asking Gray taxpayers to pay for a monsoon is insupportable.

Requiring that proceeds from the sale of town property be used to reduce debt on the bond is a good idea, but one that may prove impractical in the current real estate market.

Letter writers David Knudsen and Dick Walls oppose the bond for fear of what renovations would do to the rooms inside Pennell Institute. They worry planners have not adequately explained how the historic features of building, dating to 1876, would be preserved.

Gray voters on the whole should worry about the cost of good intentions when considering the bond and vote against it Nov. 4.

Turning 6

It is fitting to have John Balentine summarize the history and evolution of the Lakes Region Weekly as it celebrates five years as a Current Publishing newspaper.

In the more than three years I have edited and reported for three Current Publishing papers, I have depended on John for his expertise, counsel and humor, knowing his assessments are sound and his editorial eye is sharp.

Balentine helped lay the foundation of this paper, based on fundamentals practiced throughout the company that ensure compelling stories are aggressively and accurately reported from the perspective of those most affected. Those stories are strengthened by the superb work of staff photographer Harmony Motter and our graphics department.

It is an immense pleasure and no small task to carry on Balentine’s efforts, and readers should know the principles that guided the paper five years ago remain in focus as it begins its sixth year.

David Harry, editor

Price for preservation too high

Voters in Gray will be asked Nov. 4 to decide on a possible future for the Pennell Institute by approving a $2.4 million, 30-year bond to convert the building into town offices. Approval ensures the building would remain a town landmark, but the cost of the bond is too steep.

Estimates for renovating the building are approximately $1.9 million, less than the estimated $2.08 million needed for new town offices. The sale of other town-owned buildings such as the Village Fire Station could offset the bond principal, but included in the bond is an extra $500,000 to cover potential increases in construction and renovation costs, while also funding office equipment and computers.

Last month, Peter Gellerson, chairman of the Gray Town Council, said it was better to ask for more bond money now than later, but the propensity for spending in Gray government should make voters wary.

Town officials used $833,000 in reserve funds to pay for the majority of this year’s budget, which increased spending by 18 percent. Only 2.5 percent of that increase was added to property tax rates this year.

So while paying an additional $500,000 to renovate Pennell Institute, residents will likely face future tax increases to replace spent surplus funds. Even with increased material costs and complications that could occur in renovating a 132-year-old building, is giving the town a blank check for 20 percent over the current cost estimate a sound financial idea?

Setting money aside for a rainy day is one matter. Asking Gray taxpayers to pay for a monsoon is insupportable.

Requiring that proceeds from the sale of town property be used to reduce debt on the bond is a good idea, but one that may prove impractical in the current real estate market.

Letter writers David Knudsen and Dick Walls oppose the bond for fear of what renovations would do to the rooms inside Pennell Institute. They worry planners have not adequately explained how the historic features of building, dating to 1876, would be preserved.

Gray voters on the whole should worry about the cost of good intentions when considering the bond and vote against it Nov. 4.

Turning 6

It is fitting to have John Balentine summarize the history and evolution of the Lakes Region Weekly as it celebrates five years as a Current Publishing newspaper.

In the more than three years I have edited and reported for three Current Publishing papers, I have depended on John for his expertise, counsel and humor, knowing his assessments are sound and his editorial eye is sharp.

Balentine helped lay the foundation of this paper, based on fundamentals practiced throughout the company that ensure compelling stories are aggressively and accurately reported from the perspective of those most affected. Those stories are strengthened by the superb work of staff photographer Harmony Motter and our graphics department.

It is an immense pleasure and no small task to carry on Balentine’s efforts, and readers should know the principles that guided the paper five years ago remain in focus as it begins its sixth year.

David Harry, editor