Sentinel blows it (again) on Nashoba turf

Two articles this morning characterize the effort to appropriate money for a synthetic turf field at Nashoba High School in directly opposite terms. Can you guess which one is wrong? First from the Sentinel and Enterprise:

LANCASTER -- After barely managing to squeeze its item onto the Town Meeting Warrant, Nashoba Regional Schools got their wish last night. Residents at the Annual Town Meeting voted to approve a $1.28 million bond authorization to install a new track and artificial surfaces on the schools' six playing fields.

And from the Clinton Item:

Lancaster voters may have said yes to the Nashoba field project by saying no to an article to disapprove a bond notice, but it was all moot when Bolton voters, at a simultaneous town meeting, voted to disapprove the borrowing.

Voters in all three members towns – Lancaster, Bolton and Stow – needed to not disapprove the bond in order for the schools to go ahead with the borrowing.

If you guessed that the Sentinel got the story wrong (which would be your default guess even if you hadn't read the articles, since they seem to get everything wrong), give yourself a cookie and a hearty 'Huzzah!'

Despite the Item's mind-bending attempt at a lede ("needed to not disapprove"? a double negative?!), they at least have a fundamental understanding that Nashoba is a regional school district, which means that all three towns needed to approve the project in order for "Nashoba Regional Schools [to get] their wish last night".

The Sentinel is apparently unclear on the concept. (Shocking, I know.)

Tags: Massachusetts Lancaster Nashoba Sentinel and Enterprise