Raul Nunez, pictured above at a Board of Selectmen meeting. TheDailyGrafton.com accepts signed letters to the editor. Letters may be emailed to jpaluzzi@mainstreetconnect.us.
Photo credit: Jeremy Rice (file photo)

GRAFTON, Mass. - TheDailyGrafton.com accepts signed letters to the editor. Letters may be emailed to jpaluzzi@mainstreetconnect.us.

To the Editor,

We've all heard much talk about the benefits of the Honeywell Energy Projects, but most people probably haven’t heard all the information. 

In the warrant, we’re being given only one option for the project, take it or leave it.  But, the Honeywell Project really is not all-or-nothing.  It is a conglomeration of 26 separate projects, and most are independent of the rest. During the Feb. 13 Town Meeting, we’ll have the opportunity to review the scope of the Warrant before we vote. We should be given choices other than yes or no. A significant portion of the Honeywell Project is necessary and fiscally beneficial, but is all of it justified when compared to other issues like budget reductions and layoffs at our schools, or other operating needs, or even other capital needs?

We have been told that the project “pays for itself.”  Well, it's not that simple. The full scope of the Honeywell Energy Project costs approximately $7 Million, produces an annual savings of $274,000, and may pay back for itself in about 25 years.  The funding will come from a 20 year bond in addition to $1.65 Million from Free-cash (cash reserves).  However, only 21 of the 26 projects generate most of the annual savings, $241,000, while only costing $1.74 Million. The other five projects, the Municipal Center Projects, generate very little savings, $33,000, but cost over $5 Million.  In other words, 25% of the total cost, creates 88% of the savings. 

Between the two extremes we should be provided with alternatives that can include some and all of the five Municipal Center projects. The justification for the Municipal Center projects is that of repairing, protecting, restoring, or significantly upgrading an asset of the Town. They are not payback projects.  One alternative scope may be to include the necessary roof replacement and brick facade repairs in addition to the first 21 projects, increasing the total cost to approximately $2.5 Million, and increasing the annual savings to $247,000.  However, this alternative does not include the $4.3 Million for a new, premium air conditioning and heating system, and windows which together only produce an annual savings of $27,000.  Are there other alternatives we should consider? Will we be given a choice or choices?

As residents of Grafton who are being faced with a tight budget with increasing costs on the one hand and the layoffs in teaching personnel, larger class sizes, and reduced programs on the other, do we agree that the savings generated by some of the projects proposed by Honeywell are being correctly channeled?

At the Town Meeting, we should be given a full explanation, then let’s decide.

Raul Nunez.