.

'Major Steps' Approaching for Proposed Police Station

The project is expected to cost at least $7 million.

Discussions continue for a new Sudbury police station.
Discussions continue for a new Sudbury police station.

The final cost of the proposed police station on Hudson Road has yet to be finalized, but the plans are reaching a critical stage with residents expected to make a decision on the station in the near future.

Sudbury’s Board of Selectmen approved the site plan decision during their meeting this week. There was little discussion surrounding the approval, but this was another step towards completion of the proposal.

According to Town Manager Maureen Valente, the proposed 14,500 square foot project will be voted on by residents during Annual Town Meeting and at the ballot box this spring.

Valente said that the proposed cost has not been finalized, but it is expected to be in the range of $7.5 million. Town planners are still determining items like building materials that could impact the cost slightly.

Ultimately, residents will be asked to vote twice on whether or not they support a new police station.

First there will be a ballot question to approve the funds on Monday, March 31. In addition to seeing a list of candidates as usual on the ballot that day, residents will also have a single ballot question regarding the police station.

Then on Monday, May 5, at Annual Town Meeting, the project will again be up for discussion. If the Town Meeting body approves of the plans, the police station will get the green light.

The Permanent Building Committee has brought the project before countless boards in recent months, receiving approval and scrutiny on a variety of topics.

“I’ve rarely seen as hard working a group as this one has been in getting this ready for consideration,” said Valente. 

Editor's Note: "Public Building Committee" in the original story has since been changed to correctly read "Permanent Building Committee."

john baranowsky February 14, 2014 at 08:40 AM
There is no "Public Building Committee" in Sudbury.
Jamon February 14, 2014 at 09:24 AM
Only 5 people work there at a time -why need a palace for these 5 people? Nest feathering, of course. A modest renovation is all that is necessary. Police officials from other towns find it unbelievable that $7.5 Million could be spent on a building that houses 5 people at any one time. How is this possible? This town will always strive to grossly waste millions any chance it gets. New bathrooms (for 5 people?), expansion- all permit issues can be waived by town controlled boards – this is seriously not a problem. Why did they move fire dispatch to the police station instead of the abundantly proportioned fire dept HQ? Excessive space, of course. We don't need new and expensive lockup. For the handful of annual prisoners, we can use existing facilities or other lockup facilities in towns only a few miles away at a fraction of the cost. Lecture hall for 40 people? Come on! Meeting space goes begging in town, and a police dept meeting that needs large space happens very infrequently. Further, why is the sale of the current station not in the projections to diminish the new station cost? A prime Route 20 property could sell for seven figures, and dramatically reduce taxpayer burden. If the building is so small and such an abomination (though hard to imagine this building is too LARGE for the 5 people there each day) why would the town keep it? It seems like there are now five selectmen competing to get more pet projects, wasting taxpayer money. Worse, they back eachother’s pet projects, scratching eachother’s backs, so that their personal pet projects gets support. The utter waste of millions in taxpayer money never ends. Sudbury’s taxes are among the highest in the state, approx 30% higher (some argue 40%) than comparable towns, no matter what metric is used. We voted for the new LS building with the promise that debt service would decrease over time and lessen the tax burden. Instead, they are scrambling to replace the decreasing school debt with an onslaught of projects to add new debt, almost all unnecessary. This is just the first of a rash of new and unnecessary projects, guaranteeing Sudbury’s place at or near the top of highest taxed towns in the state. Home prices are stagnant here because everyone knows taxes are out of control. Buyers can get the same environment in other towns for 30-40% less in taxes. Let's count up just a fraction of projects which will add new taxes guaranteed to keep Sudbury the highest taxed town in the state by far: New police station 7.9 Million -Why? See above Town Hall Renovation 9 Million Community Center 6 Million the annual school override LS / other school roofs (how is this possible that this is necessary already? who allows a contract for commercial roof construction that lasts only a few years?) Sherman’s bridge Pension and Retiree Health Care shortfall (why have no revisions been made to this, and part timers get pension benefits?) Sewer 10 Million and the list goes on and on as new items constantly come up. It will never, ever, end. This has to stop, and more reasonable expenditures must be proposed to address issues and eliminate unnecessary projects, like all those listed above. Sudbury is the only town that does this, and as usual, Sudbury looks to spend the most it can without considering reasonable alternatives, all wasting millions in taxpayer money.
Matt Schooley (Editor) February 14, 2014 at 09:41 AM
Thanks John - You are correct. I have changed it to read Permanent Building Committee as it should have in the original story.
john baranowsky February 14, 2014 at 09:54 AM
Thanks. Far from being "public" but as "permanent" as there ever was.
JON999 February 14, 2014 at 10:02 AM
the current police station is +/- 2500 sq. ft. -- this proposed one is 6 times larger! why? seriously, why does it need to be so large and expensive? how would Sudbury be better policed with a facility so many times larger than the current one? even if we doubled the space to 5,000 feet, wouldn't that be plenty? and that would be half to 2/3rds as expensive. I've been paying attention and haven't heard Chief Nix even address these issues. Isn't it his case/proposal to make? has the Permanent Building Cmte considered a much smaller (I mean much *larger* than the current police station) design?! have we thought of more creative solutions? for example, wouldn't it be more cost effective to put a small police station kiosk on town-owned land next to Longfellow Glen and renovate the current police station? btw, interesting strategy bringing the binding ballot vote before any real discussion happens at Town Mtg., where it will get the rubber stamp in any case. honestly, the PBC could propose a 100,000 sq. ft. facility with an indoor water park and it would pass TM.
Silence DoBad February 14, 2014 at 10:03 AM
I think they need a separate permanent building to execute their coffee breaks, we cannot expect them to take coffee breaks in the same building they work in! Let me tell you, I have this cousin and he will only charge the town 3.75 million for a new PERMANENT Structure set off to the side of the police station, giving them a whopping 500 square foot room to take coffee in. WHO COULD PASS THAT UP, CERTAINLY NOT SUDBURY!
john baranowsky February 14, 2014 at 10:09 AM
The strategy is fail-safe. By voting on the same day as Town Election, turnout will ensure passage that might not otherwise be there for the case where ballot question is separate vote. This one is a done deal.
pmotw February 14, 2014 at 10:32 AM
If this is voted down at the ballot box, could a TM approval override it? Doesn't seem just.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »