Malden sends students to the NEMT vocational school:
************************
The Voke needs to RE-CALCULATE

Sometimes what we have dreamt about and planned for just doesn’t work out. There are just too many problems preventing it from becoming a reality. We might have been on a path and discovered it’s the wrong one. It demonstrates a mature characteristic when one can reflect on the path and change directions.

Like the GPS says, “recalculate”. Let’s examine a few things about the NEMT chosen path that has made this recalculation necessary. When the GPS says “recalculating”, it makes no judgment. It just chooses another path.

Northeast Metro Tech Vocational School (NEMT) in Wakefield, MA needs to address its contradictions. Although questions about these contradictions have been asked, they have not been answered.

During the district-wide Disability Committee meeting Superintendent DiBarri proudly explained that NEMT has the largest number of handicapped/disabled students in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts with a long waiting list of students who want to enroll.

Why, then, does Mr. DiBarri support a building plan that makes it difficult and dangerous for students to navigate? Why did he say that he wanted to build on the football field but there is not enough room? The documents submitted to the MSBA say that building a school for 1600 students on the baseball or football fields also achieve the District’s educational program goals and would allow the existing school to remain in operation throughout construction of the new school with minimal disruption.” (Feb 2021 MSBA memo).

The difficult switchbacked 1100 foot long inclined ramp structure between the proposed school and the athletic fields is equivalent to more than two football fields in length. It’s against common sense to build in the forest. It’s against your own stated values to make navigating getting to school more difficult for students on a day-to-day basis. It’s against “Forests as Climate Solution’ which was launched June 7, 2023 by the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EEA) as part of Healey-Driscoll Administration’s new climate-focused forestry initiative - for state forests and for privately-owned forests.

Besides WHY are Mr. DiBarri and Mr. Maio endorsing this 1100 foot-long switchback ramp; another question is HOW? How will students who drive navigate this ramp every day? How long will it take to navigate the switchback ramp? For students to deal with the 1100 foot-long north-facing ramp/stairs - in rain, in sleet, in snow, in fog is dangerous. Why does anyone think that is acceptable? How is that consistent with Mr. DiBarri’s stated all-inclusive school?

WHY is it necessary or even ‘preferred’ to destroy an historic forest with beautiful animals, birds, and trees? This important question has been asked multiple times. Although the public are allowed to speak at the school/building committee meetings, the school/building members decline to answer any questions.

There is documented evidence that Mr. DiBarri, and Mr. Maio want a Hockey Rink in the athletic area, and that appears to be why they chose to build the school in the beloved forest. Mr. DiBarri has vociferously stated that there will be no
hockey rink where the current school is. Does that imply another site?

Why is there so much secrecy? Twelve cities and towns need more answers to account for the millions of dollars that they will be required to pay over a 30-year time period. When have the representatives of the 12 cities and towns brought the most-recent updates to the townspeople they are said to represent? What do
the city/town representatives do, other than to vote unanimously for what Mr/DiBarri and Mr. Maio want? During the committee meetings, few of the representatives have any questions?

Why risk polluting the hilltop forest’s vernal pool? Why blast away innocent animals and deprive others of a habitat? Why destroy a corridor of trees for migratory birds?

All these whys and more clearly indicate that this hoped-for plan needs to be re-calculated. Buildings that are the same size and for the same number of students can be built on the athletic fields. NEMT’s own documentation says so. All the above questions and more need to be asked and answered, Mr. DiBarri and Mr.
Maio. Each of these paragraphs has questions. The only sensible conclusion is to RECALCULATE. The path you’re on isn’t working.

Build the Voke in the athletic area. RECALCULATE, again I say RECALCULATE

Joy Pearson, Malden Resident