Referendum Results by precinct

Question 1 on yesterday’s ballot read as follows:

The City of Lowell is reviewing several options for its high school project. Do you support extensive renovation and rebuild at the existing Lowell High School location, at 50 Father Morissette Boulevard, Lowell, MA 01852?

The outcome was 7254 voted YES; 4629 voted NO (61%/39%). Twenty-nine precincts voted for downtown; 4 voted for Cawley (pro-Cawley precincts in bold).

How was that vote distributed throughout the city? Below is a precinct-by-precinct report of the referendum vote with each line showing the ward and precinct number, the voting location (to give a sense of where in the city the precinct is located), the number of people registered to vote in that precinct, the number of YES votes,the number of NO votes, and the YES/NO percentage:

1-1 Immac Concept Church Hall, 1871 reg: 148 yes, 82 no, 64%/36%
1-2 Reilly School, 2533 reg: 977 yes, 346 no, 74%/26%
1-3 Reilly School, 2361 reg: 866 yes, 260 no, 77%/23%

2-1 LHS, 1461 reg: 61 yes, 29 no, 68%/32%
2-2 LHS, 2063 reg: 104 yes, 54 no, 65%/35%
2-3 LHS, 2630 reg: 266 yes, 97 no, 73%/27%

3-1 Bailey School, 1838 reg: 162 yes, 145 no, 53%/47%
3-2 Bailey School, 1844 reg: 129 yes, 63 no, 67%/33%
3-3 Morey School, 1767 reg: 155 yes, 89 no, 64%/36%

4-1 Morey School, 2120 reg: 232 yes, 152 no, 60%/40%
4-2 Morey School, 1647 reg: 94 yes, 61 no, 61%/39%
4-3 Rogers School, 2091 reg: 123 yes, 56 no, 69%/31%

5-1 McAvinnue School, 1853 reg: 150 yes, 159 no, 49%/51%
5-2 St Louis School Hall, 1870 reg: 103 yes, 91 no, 53%/47%
5-3 St Louis School Hall, 2137 reg: 178 yes, 161 no, 53%/47%

6-1 McAvinnue School, 2200 reg: 253 yes, 245 no, 51%/49%
6-2 Pawtucketville Memorial, 2249 reg: 280 yes, 214 no, 57%/43%
6-3 Pawtucketville Memorial, 2163 reg: 187 yes, 219 no, 46%/54%

7-1 Senior Center, 1696 reg: 110 yes, 75 no, 59%/41%
7-2 Senior Center, 2046 reg: 187 yes, 43 no, 81%/19%
7-3 Senior Center, 1595 reg: 123 yes, 58 no, 68%/32%

8-1 Daley School, 1868 reg: 137 yes, 132 no, 51%/49%
8-2 Daley School, 2122 reg: 222 yes, 199 no, 53%/47%
8-3 Daley School, 2329 reg: 393 yes, 414 no, 49%/51%

9-1 St Louis School Hall, 1985 reg: 141 yes, 103 no, 58%/42%
9-2 Robinson School, 2219 reg: 267 yes, 232 no, 54%/46%
9-3 Robinson School, 2118 reg: 176 yes, 181 no, 49%/51%

10-1 Rogers School, 1850 reg: 127 yes, 113 no, 53%/47%
10-2 Rogers School, 1503 reg: 80 yes, 60 no, 57%/43%
10-3 Rogers School, 1520 reg: 82 yes, 32 no, 72%/28%

11-1 Butler School, 1969 reg: 160 yes, 123 no, 57%/43%
11-2 JG Pyne School, 1997 reg: 250 yes, 186 no, 57%/43%
11-3 JG Pyne School, 1975 reg: 331 yes, 154 no, 68%/32%

6 Responses to Referendum Results by precinct

  1. Jason says:

    Interesting that the support for the Cawley location was highest in some precincts located on the edges of the city, which would theoretically had the longest commutes there. Those neighborhoods who likely do not walk to LHS and use buses could view the commute downtown as time consuming already. Those neighborhoods are also probably used to paying to use busing. Therefore it was not as off putting to move to Cawley and force the cost of busing to be distributed throughout the entire city.

    I’m not a lawyer but I wonder whether the referendum and success of the so-called downtown block,supported heavily in Belvidere, could be used against the city in the voting rights lawsuit to show disparate impact. The percentages on the referendum were much closer in Centralville, Pawtucketville and the upper Highlands.

    Primarily precincts in and surrounding LHS which stood to lose the convenience of the high school location and Belvidere which arguably did not want the school located there, had the numbers to control the outcome. The higher number of registered voters in Belvidere relative to population(compared to other precincts) coupled with the results could be potential factors in the case. It would not have changed the overall referendum result, but it does show how much influence one neighborhood can exert.

  2. RG says:

    Ah, Good Ole Lowellians…

    Given the chance to build a brand new, state of the art campus style High School from the ground up in a pristine neighborhood while keeping current students safe and respecting (without seizing) the private property of several downtown businesses.

    Sounds too good to be true, doesn’t it?

    Sure enough, it is.

    Nope, the voters (not nearly a majority of the people of Lowell by any stretch) chose “nostalgia” as a way of keeping LHS downtown. Thus kids for years on end will be educated in the middle of a construction zone. Private enterprises which contribute in many ways to the community will be seized, and the cities most successful (and only) restaurant will lose there parking capabilities. I thought Lowell was all about making downtown business friendly? Apparently not for Cobblestones or the dentists.

    People avoid downtown at all costs because of traffic. Can’t wait to see what it looks like in the middle of construction.

    The cost? Add 20%. Easily. This is going to be Lowell’s Big Dig. Unlike Karen Cirillo’s analysis, (who?) there is ABSOLUTELY going to be hidden costs. Rehabbing buildings which have not been properly maintained is of course going to uncover hidden damages and costs. This project is going to be a big ugly sloppy expensive mess; it was going to be either way, but the voters chose to do it in a location where the emphasis was on business development.

    And why punish establishments that have been successful in the area? The property on Arcand Dr. has been there for decades successfully serving clients throughout Lowell. We are now just going to take that away from them? I thought we supported business in downtown? Apparently the “new” council doesn’t think so. It also affects Cobblestones, arguably the areas most “high end” restaurant with regards to parking. Is this really the best we could come up with?

    Hey…lets send more $$$ into buildings that we just spent money on 20 years ago even though they are falling apart, are unsafe, probably have asbestos (the Voke does), destroy business downtown, kids will go to school in a construction zone, no one knows the true cost in reality until we rip open walls, and hope it all goes as planned!

    There’s A Lot To Like About Lowell.

    Sadly, There Is Still A Lot To Not To Like About The Ignorant Nostalgia that sends this city “forward”.

  3. Anonymous says:

    HCD was permitted over 10 years ago and still sits empty. Vacating another property the size of LHS would leave more than half of downtown empty. This was as much about downtown needing the HS as it was about the HS itself.

    The Ghost town DT of the 80’s & 90’s was a depressing, dehumanizing place. Now we have a healthy business environment to go with the students. IF the HS left we’d back to square one. We should always resist any idea that involves removing thousands of people from the DT.

  4. Anonymous says:

    What s waste of a question. It doesn’t mean a thing because it was so misleading, just like most of the DT supporters.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.