Supporters of the measure argued that shoddy equipment and service had gotten them into this fix in the first place, and that investing in a quality product was worthwhile.
South Hadley Town Hall.SOUTH HADLEY – When the first article went down, the next two followed like dominoes.
Special Town Meeting on Tuesday decided not to authorize the South Hadley Selectboard to enter into an “Energy Savings Performance Contract” with Siemens Industries.
The performance contract would have given Siemens responsibility for implementing cost-saving measures that it had recommended in its Energy Audit of South Hadley municipal buildings, including schools.
The appeal of Siemens was that it uses energy-efficient technology that would eventually pay for itself, that it guaranteed its work, and that it would probably be more expensive for South Hadley to find and hire consultants and contractors on a case-by-case basis.
The Siemens question was originally destined for the fall Town Meeting, but two broken boilers in Town Hall speeded up the schedule.
Siemens offered to replace the boilers for $104,000, plus $60,000 for weatherization and other improvements in time for cold weather.
But a majority of the Capital Planning and Appropriations Committees, whose members included people in the building and heating professions, were confident that replacing the boilers could be done for less – closer to $80,000.
The boilers were the first article on the agenda, and the debate went on for over an hour.
On the one hand, supporters of the measure argued that shoddy equipment and service had gotten them into this fix in the first place, and that investing in a quality product was worthwhile.
Siemens added that it approached the problem “holistically,” not just as a boiler replacement issue. It proposed looking at the “envelope” of the building to repair drafts and leaks that might affect the cost of energy.
But opponents of the measure argued that, with some people in town struggling to pay their taxes, now was not the time to take a “premium” approach.
They also said that two of the four boilers in Town Hall were still working, and would be working long enough to maintain a reasonable temperature into the fall.
What complicated the matter was that the boiler issue was bundled up with a proposal for Siemens to fix the former FiberMark building, which the town now owned and which came with a leaky roof, moldy carpet and other needs.
Town Meeting declined.
Article One was followed by a request to enter into an agreement with Siemens for three years and a request to pay Siemens a sum “not to exceed $500,000” – though it turned out that, based on some estimates that Siemens had gathered in the meantime, the price would be at least $200,000 less.
But once article one went down, so did articles two and three.