okay and we'll have to make presenters they want to share okay okay Bob welcome everyone to this meeting of the community preservation act committee on June 6th 2024 uh I am calling the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m. we're meeting remotely via Zoom uh according to the decision of toy ammer which is permitted by the state uh this meeting is being recorded and will appear on the town of ammer uh CPA website I'm going to call on committee members now so that we all know that we can hear you and that you can be heard um I'm Sam McLoud I'll try to go as I see people on the screen Katie here Tim present Matt here David here Michelle here Doug present Bob here Robin here I believe that is everyone so very good uh we do have to have a minute taker for every meeting I know it's late in our annual cycle so uh I will volunteer to take minutes for this meeting um we've called this meeting to order uh both because it was a timely meeting for us to wrap up the uh cycle for fiscal year 2025 but also because we received a request recommendation referral from the Town Council regarding uh a request from the school committee on the track and field project uh information has been provided to committee members and in the packet uh and I'm going to proceed with the agenda the first item on the agenda is public comment uh so I'm going to go ahead and call on anyone who's participating who wishes to have a public comment it can be on any topic uh and if you're able to please raise your hand if for some reason that doesn't work seek to communicate us via chat or call in uh and I'll try to be patient to allow everyone the opportunity to speak um I see a hand raised currently from Tony Cunningham uh Tony I would like to invite you to uh speak publicly uh we don't have the cameras for the those attending uh to be seen on screen I did communicate with Holly we're going to seek to enable that if we're able to come the pending site for fiscal year 2026 starting in the fall uh Tony so please uh proceed uh with whatever your public comment is thank you uh Tony Cunningham at district one I'm just calling in in support of the request to lift the restrictions on the CPA allocation of $800,000 for the high school track and field project I think the plan to pursue option 1D is a good one where the interior field is fully reconstructed as opposed to just rejuvenated uh with new drainage and new sod on top so thank you thank you Tony uh for joining us and appreciate your comments again anyone who's in attendance uh and wishes to make a comment uh please raise your hand so that uh we can see you another hand raised Maria kapiki Maria if you can hear me uh you're welcome to uh join us and make a comment thanks so much Sam and uh thank you to the CPA committee for meeting uh about this to to entertain the the question from the school department I uh also support lifting the restrictions uh that are in place on the the current money for the track and field project and hope that you will vote favorably on that um it would I think this is the time that we should go in even though the there is an option 1B on the table I think 1D is far superior um and uh yeah I hope you guys will will lift the restrictions to allow that to happen thank you Maria appreciate you joining us and sharing your thoughts uh I see a few other folks in the audience I'd like to invite anyone who wishes to speak to do so uh if you wish to make a com ment please raise your hand I Will Wait Another Minute I don't see any hands here but I don't want to uh rush to prevent anyone from speaking so I'm gonna pause quietly uh and we'll see if anyone SE I believe if you are on your phone you hit nine to raise your hand just in case somebody's on their phone versus computer press number nine is that what you I believe that's it yeah thank you I believe it's star n star n thank you Doug star n so anyone who's on their phone press star N9 if you wish to make a comment doesn't look like we have anybody else so we can proceed I'm not seeing anyone uh so I'm going to uh end the public comment portion of the meeting and proceed to the next item on the agenda which is approve any outstanding minutes now we have three different sets of minutes that had yet to be approved from last fall cycle and the materials have been provided to all members so I'd like to take them one at a time um I don't know who has had the opportunity Unity to review them or not but the first set of minutes uh we might as well go uh by the calendar is November 9th 2023 uh submitted by Robin uh and I'd like to invite any committee members who have any suggested edits to the comment to raise their hand I see Michelle you have your hand L raised I'd like to call on you thanks Sam um just my only comment is that my name is spelled wrong throughout it 20y that's all thanks uh thank you uh hopefully that can be done via widespread uh edits find and search uh anyone else have any comments on the minutes of November 9th Matt yeah I guess it's somewhat minor but the the the URL for the recording is not the correct URL and also in the election of chair and vice chair there's triple X's as to who um moved to nominate and who seconded so those should probably be yes it was moved by uh David and seconded by Michelle I have that same edit here uh so thank you um the URL is is to different meeting okay that's good to know any other comments related to the minutes of November 9th I have comments in that the votes affiliated with the election of chair and vice chair the vote totals were in fact eight in favor zero against and one abstain for each of those two votes motions that took place um I don't believe I have any other edits requested for the meeting uh like to ask committee members again if they have any other further edits requested two minutes of November 9th not seeing anyone I'd like to uh does anyone like to make a motion then to uh approve these minutes with the edits I'm moved uh who was that Doug uh Doug thank you is there a second a second second from Michelle so we have a motion on the table second to approve the minutes of November 9th 2023 as with the associated edit so I'd like to call on members to vote uh with a roll call vote it's required I'll say h i and I'll call on your members Tim all Katie I'm going to abstain David hi Bob hi Michelle hi Doug hi Matt I Robin hi did I miss anyone so I believe the motion passes seven in favor and and eight in favor and one absten is that correct okay uh next set of minutes moving right along were provided for December 14th 2023 uh submitted by uh Matt does anyone have any comments that they wish to make on those minutes or any suggested edits not seeing any hands raised I looked through the minutes and I did not find a single edit that I felt was worth making uh Matt you're welcome to do the minutes every time if you'd like does anyone else have any uh comments I'm not seeing any hands so I'd like to go ahead would anyone like to make a motion is there a second second so we have a motion and a second to approve the minutes as draft minutes have submitted for December 14th 2023 I'm going to call on committee members uh and please uh speak so that we can hear you regarding your vote I'll start by saying I uh Tim I Matt I Katie I David hi Doug hi Bob hi Michelle hi Robin I so the motion passes nine in favor uh zero oppos zero abstentions thank you moving right along uh the last set of minutes that uh we had yet to address from last year were December 21st 2023 draph minutes were submitted in our packet uh as entered by Michelle uh I found two minor edits that I'll reference here one was that we should add the name of the person who submitting the minutes submitted by Michelle at the end and there was an abbreviation of whoever was making comments their initials throughout uh which is very useful and I did see uh a few referencing DZ for David Zac but I did not see the DZ after his name where the names appear at the start so that would be my one suggestion that we add DZ since it's referred to in the minutes uh do any committee members have any additional edits or comments related to uh these minutes please raise your hand if you do not seeing any hands raised I can't see you on my screen at present Robin if you have something to say Please Speak Up um no no comment so would anyone like to make a motion regarding the minutes of December 21st so moved moved is there a second second uh who was the second Tim Tim okay so we have a motion to and a second to approve the minutes of December 21st 2023 again Voice vote proceed with your names roll call please speak up I will vote I Tim I Matt hi Katie hi David hi Doug hi Bob hi Michelle hi Robin hi okay so the motion passes 9 to zero uh that went quicker than uh better than I had hoped we just got three three sets in minutes just like that thank you all for uh submitting these minutes and uh getting to us in time for this meeting I appreciate it this is likely to be our last meeting of this cycle so I think it's important that we address these administrative issues um proceeding right along the next item on our agenda is financial update if or as available uh Holly would you do you have anything to communicate to us um no I have not prepared any Financial Updates this um meeting has no financial implications whatsoever it's just lifting a restriction on a previously approved we're not voting anything new there is no new numbers uh thank you Holly so there's no Financial update to share so I'd like to uh next excuse me although I I would like to add something in this um I guess this falls under the um topics not anticipated 48 hours prior to the meeting um I just wanted to let everybody know that there was an email that I sent out earlier today with an invitation to a um rededication of the church bell steeple at the South Congregational Church it is a project that was funded with CPA funds and they have extended the invitation to the entire CPA committee if anybody would like to attend I did just send that information out to everybody this afternoon just received it and I just wanted to make sure that everybody saw that that's all I have thank you and that's on July 6th July 6 at the South church thank you for uh bringing that up PA they've actually made quite good progress on that if you drive by there you can see the cranes and the inprocess uh reassembling of newly constructed steeple uh sections so uh the next item on the agenda is the presentation of the uh track and field project options um I do see uh from so can you Dave can you tell me it is the Kevin fuser and whom else should I be bringing in is that it Dave you're muted if you could also bring in Bob parent from the town team that would be helpful Holly and Sam I do have some intro remarks because um sure the superintendent the Acting Superintendent is has a conflict they won't be able to make it uh well please proceed Dave thank you man just waiting for Bob here try to promote him to panelist Bob you should see a pop up on your screen you just have to click yes looks like uh they're both they're both in the meeting so Dave if you'd like to make some comments and comments that'd be great great I will be uh brief thanks so much uh for having us tonight thank you for calling the meeting we really appreciate it um I'm here to some degree a little bit last minute the superintendent Doug Slaughter the Acting Superintendent had a last minute conflict and isn't able to be here so I'm gonna just uh shoot from the hip here with a few intro comments I'm joined here by Kevin uh from our our Consulting team at SLR and Bob parent uh who is a a town staffer um uh so we're well represented here with with engineering and deep deep uh uh background in uh project management and uh design um um we've been working with for months uh the team working with SLR uh to really um to sharpen our pencil on the track and field project I think many of you know this is a a project that's been uh in the making for a number of years um we are feel like we've made tremendous progress with SLR on the team recently and I'm going to leave most of the details to Kevin um but we are at a point where we think uh we have U three very very important and and viable options for the track and field project um we the reason this is here before you is this was referred to the CPAC by the Town Council um and the Town Council is asking CPAC to consider the two restrictions that were placed on the $800,000 um um uh funding that uh was to be borrowed for this project those restrictions had to do with essentially requiring a north south orientation and having a field that had artificial turf that has artificial turf we have moved away given uh Community concern about artif icial Turf and its impact on the environment some months ago our team moved away from artificial turf and we are now presenting to you and to the Town Council and of course the regional school committee with three options uh that include um natural grass if you will um there are two options for an East West orientation and there's one option for a north south uh option all three options have eight Lane tracks and again I'll let Kevin go into more detail on all of those we're also here because we've met twice with the regional school committee had very uh significant and very uh um um fruitful conversations with the school committee uh there is strong support um I don't speak for the school committee but I was at both of those meetings and I think it is fair to say there is strong support for moving forward on this project we all know that we've been without a track uh for a number of years and um the field in the middle of the track needs improvements so I think with that I'll turn it over to Kevin uh Bob is here to answer other questions from the ammer side and we look forward to kind of a conversation with you after b um Kevin has finished his presentation thank you good evening everyone uh my name is Kevin fuselier I'm a principal landscape architect with SLR uh I lead our Athletic Facility division I've been there for about 18 years and primarily focus on athle ICS um if you don't mind I'll share my screen I have a brief presentation to go through the process that has brought us to this point and uh where we go from here uh thank you Kevin please uh feel free to take as much time as you would like uh we're all interested in the project and anything you have to say with us yeah and feel free to interrupt me with any questions I I find the questions are the most the best part of this process great all right can everyone see my screen in the present yep okay good so we'll just jump through I already introduced myself so um where we are today um we were retained by the school to for six phases of this project um we're about 90 95% complete with phase one site evaluation so we did topographic survey of the site uh we delineated Wetlands that are located to the north of the athletic fields at the high school campus we took soil samples and sent those to labs for uh testing for um various components but uh mainly components of concern um uh past PHH uh ah uh arsenic heavy metals our typical protocol um know thinking that potentially we'd have to remove and dispose of soils off site we completed a geotechnical investig of both the track area itself the existing track and also the potential for future light pole locations we began our analysis of the tan Brook Culvert that runs under the majority of the project site and the only piece of the site investigation that we haven't completed yet but we will soon is digging a series of shallow test pits within the field within the track and within the grass area uh if we were to choose to go reorient the track um and this tells us uh that information would tell us depth of top soil volume of top soil and also the uh the permeability of the soils beneath so that information AIDS in the design of not only the track but the uh the drainage system and the fields we uh postponed that just to get through the Spring sport season we didn't want to go digging holes in fields that uh games would be played on even though they get restored back to uh pretty much their original condition we just didn't see a need to go disturb the area so we will schedule those in the uh upcoming weeks and we'll be complete with the phase one site evaluation what I'll be showing you in a moment is where we're at with phase two preliminary design um we started this process and I think when we went to the first school committee meeting we had 11 options um we after that meeting we received really good feedback we went back sharpened our pencils we our designs and what we'll show you tonight is what we showed the building Comm the school committee at the last meeting and that's down from 11 to three options we are sort of in a holding pattern now to move forward until a one of the three options is chosen um but we have factored that into our overall schedule so the development options what I'll present tonight is option 1B option 1D and 3C so so you're missing you know uh eight of those original 11 but those were the A's and the C's and the the various other combinations option two uh but option one is to retain the existing track location same footprint but we would expand it to uh from six Lane to eight Lane in both the oval and the straight uh the straightaways the sprinting areas we would renovate the existing grass fields so when I say renovate we're not ripping out the entire field and itself subsurface drainage but we are stripping the grass we are amending the soils uh decompaction them regrading laser grading the field and putting down sod um and that uh carried a budget a current budget of $1.7 million option 1D is the same improvements to the track a fully reconstructed track but expanded to eight Lanes the grass field though would be fully ripped out in its entirety it's subsurface drainage system it'd be replaced a whole new drainage system enhanced drainage system uh the entire root zone for the grass field would be amended uh reconstructed SED field New irrigation we would do an LED retrofit to the existing lighting system uh both option 1B and 1D require a relocation of Two Poles but under 1B we U only enhance two poles to led the rest would remain metal HED as currently exists but under 1D we would do a full new LED system and that project uh option carries a budget of $3.4 million and then option 3 C would be to reorient the track into a North uh South orientation uh it'd be utilizing the Topography of the site and it would be built up against the uh the hillside on the east side um fully new eight Lane running track it would be slightly a different configuration track um it'd be a slightly wider track which would accommodate a larger field footprint within that would also be a fully reconstructed a brand new field all new drainage all the Amendments that we talked about before uh brand new lighting LED lighting system and then we' also um restore the area to the west of this track um and create a new a second multi-purpose grass field where the the track used to be uh and that carries a cost of uh 4 million 230,000 so just to go through these options again with a picture uh this shows the eight Lane running track and its current Uh current orientation reconstruction of the all the track areas and vent areas and then that rejuvenated or renovated grass field we provided our d detailed breakdowns I won't go into that in detail but you can uh feel free to look through that uh this picture looks the same for 1D but as I mentioned here we' be doing a full reconstruction of the field along with a full renovation of the field lighting cting it to LED uh what I forgot to mention under all of these is that we are adding um Ada access and sidewalk improvements uh the field itself would be Ada accessible and there would be also enhance drop off area along matun Street that's common for all three options and then option 3C is the drastically different option where we're reorienting orienting the field uh we're making a what is an iaaf or an Olympic configuration track which really accommodates just a larger soccer field footprint which all other sports can fit into uh this is a new four Poole LED D system we would be constructing a a bleacher pad for future bleachers uh just the pad is carried in the budget at the moment uh not any bleacher structures uh relocated jumping events uh relocated shotput area and then reshaping and reconstructing the area to the west to accommodate another full-size multi-purpose grass field and so project schedule uh as I mentioned the investigations the only thing waiting is the test pits after the conclusion of the spring season I think we're given the go-ahead to start anytime after next week we'll probably push that one additional week uh just wait for school to be out uh just so we're not in anyone's way uh we have started preliminary design we these designs that you see have been put on the topographic survey that we prepared uh they're to scale they're they're ready to be Advanced to uh a more detailed level of design that would be suitable for regulatory permitting uh permitting we anticipate would uh happen from July through October uh that's a little bit generous but we're we're thinking at least a three-month period to get through uh the the town's land use process and the various committees that we have to uh present to our goal is to be ready for final design in bidding uh final design would begin at the uh onset of receiving approvals from all the various agencies um that we would uh Advance final design make it construction bid ready and that we would have a probably about a two-month window where we put it out to bid and award that bid um hopefully by early 20125 and then the whole plan is to be construction ready at the end of next school year and uh the construction would run the entire summer so we'd be at substantial completion we hope by the end of August 2025 but all this really moving forward is dependent on a selection of one of the options presented that concludes my presentation I can stop sharing or I can go back to any slide if anyone wants to discuss one and one or many specifically thank you Kevin uh before I call on committee members if they have questions would you like to uh your colleague uh in the from the town in the design Bob do you have anything you'd like to add to what uh Kevin has said here or is it fine for us to go ahead with questions definitely fine Kevin's done a fine job so thank you uh both uh and thank you Kevin uh I'm gonna go ahead and call on committee members uh although right before I do that I see that Dave Zac has his hand up I think it's h appropriate given Dave's involvement in this to call on him first go ahead Dave yeah I just want to thank Kevin for that that uh presentation very succinct and uh it lays out U how far we've come since a year year and a half ago I did just want to kind of re refocus or Focus um a little bit on on what is needed tonight and really what is needed is is a focus on the two restrictions that came with your recommendation to the council and just a reminder those were Turf that that that uh you the CAC supported a turf field which as I've said before we've moved away from and two um that um you recommended to the council that this be a north south orientation only and I think what's key is from a staff standpoint from a project standpoint um we need to we are asking for some flexibility in whether this ends up to be a North South or East West we don't know that yet and some of that will obviously be based on budgets and so tonight we're not really here to vote on option one two or three but to give us the flexibility uh obviously Turf is off it's a natural grass field in either scenario any of the three but we really need that flexibility to consider north south if the budget allows um but to go east West if we don't have the budget to uh additional funding to go north south so I just wanted to kind of frame that and I think your recommendation uh will be heard by the finance committee and ultimately the Town Council and of course will um the Town Council I think working with the regional school committee will decide on what the school and with the town support can afford so I hope that was clear I appreciate you're sharing with us your perspective as the uh proponents of the the project uh Dave and uh for the committee members uh four of our committee members were present in June of 2022 when uh the committee originally made the recommendation which was approved for the 800,000 uh there was a great deal of discussion at that time and there was strong uh strong support uh unanimous support for the north south field as presented at that meeting as well as um for the presented Turf uh artificial turf components uh Dave has accurately described from my perspective the two elements of consideration regarding restrictions one is is there uh one is the north south orientation which existed with option three at that time and the other is the uh artificial turf that was a component of option three at that time as a committee of course CPA funds cannot be used for artificial turf it was simply one of the restrictions that existed with our recommendation I see our uh task as a committee here to understand the options as presented by uh the uh by Kevin and the applicant group uh and then you know ask questions related to that and then to discuss uh as a committee what we think is the best route forward uh based on our uh motivations as a committee I'm sure uh we all have opinions on that and we'll certainly have an opportunity to uh share our opinions but for the moment uh we do have the presenters here and the uh uh Consultants so like to open up as I said before to the committee uh and Matt you've had your hand up patiently waiting so I'd like to call on you Matt okay thanks thanks Sam so I have additional questions for Dave but I'll probably Focus my questions now for Kevin so my first question in option um 1D uh what's the rationale for um includ upgrading all of the light towers and then secondly my second question is in option 3C um in the town council meeting there was a question as to whether the restored field was going to be good enough and I guess uh I guess my question specifically is uh whether the restored field in option 3C would be as good as or better than the part of the field that's being removed being covered by a track in op 3C so those are two questions all right so for option numers 1D um the reason for all LED was just for efficiency uh it's the newest technology out there uh it's cost effective if you have all LED lighting um and we would go from a six pole system down to a four pole system uh to really get the benefit of LED you actually make the lights taller um since these light pools went in Wind co building code has changed uh and because the wind speed and we couldn't reuse the existing poles in their locations to make an LED system effective so there's an upcharge to go rather than move two poles and retrofit them uh that we do all four new poles with LED technology so that's the difference between the 1B and 1D um and then please uh repeat your question the second question about 3C it's it's related to um when you rotate the track you lose some of an old field but then you say you're going to regenerate a new field so will the new field be as good as or better than what was covered by the track I think it'll be better yeah it definitely will be better um we're not putting you know we're not building that field that secondary field is a high performance field um but with the the right amendments to the soil uniformity through out the soil uh we may you know we haven't gotten that far in the detailed design of that secondary field there may be opportunity to retain some of that under drainage that exists under the track right now um but it will be a level laser graded field with a mended uh better draining soil so we definitely believe that it'll be a a very good field and better than what's there thank you Michelle thanks um question for Kevin currently is there still a playable field to the east Northeast of that field with the reorientation just as is currently as is the the fields to the north of the track would more or less be the same we're encroaching a little because we're adding two lanes to the track so we're pushing North a little bit but those uh it's it wouldn't encroach into the full which is a little to the Northeast there's a full playing field there there's some practice fields to the Northwest that they would move a few feet into but it wouldn't be I those fields would still function as is okay um and just to chime in I'm I'm okay with ar resending those requirements although it's you know too bad that we' lose orientation and anecdotally like 25 to 30 years ago the joke on those fields which I spent a lot of time in is that they installed the drainage system upside down so it's been a problem for a really long time and I'm I'm a fan of at least option 1D thanks that's good to know that's the first time I've heard about upside down drainage but I I think I know what you mean though when that can happen uh uh yeah yes uh my recollection when we looked at this before was the north south orientation and our recommendation therefore was consistent consistent with the long range plan for that entire complex and that's in great part why we put the restri restriction on the north south because we felt it should be part of an overall a long range plan where are we on that long range plan not sure if Kevin is I don't know who can answer that that that sounds like it would be a question for Dave uh or for our committee perhaps who has influence over what the outcome might be here Dave would you like to comment sure um so um I guess the short answer is this is uh if we look back on the west and Samson plan this was really phase one of that plan is is a new track and a new track and multi-purpose field um north of matun Street the second phase was really to take a look at the area around War Memorial Pool and we're already well underway with that uh work uh Amy RI from our Department of Public Works Bob parent who was on this call and many others are already working with a consultant to look at the War Memorial Pool bath house and the area around the War Memorial Pool which we all know is um pretty tired so um this was phase one get a new track because it was such a high priority get a new field high performing field turf or grass and the the next phase down the road according to the Western Samson plan and the preference was for north south orientation was someday to move the softball field The Varsity Softball field also used by the community to the western edge of um the area that we're talking about here today but again that's some years down the road I think our hands full with what's what's ahead of us here yeah part of my question was I believe my recollection back when we made that restriction was we were not supportive of uh helping out the track in its current position if the town was going to move to the long range plan it would be quote wasted money because the long range plan calls for the north south so options one whatever they are one B and D now replace it in its existing place and if we then proceed with a long range plan we are going to have to at some point reoriented or is that not part of the equation I mean I can try to answer that as well Sam okay I mean that's I I think Tim you've kind of captured the the gravity and the importance of you know today today's discussion the discussion with the finance committee and the discussion with the uh subsequently with the council I I believe that's on the 17th of June I mean this is kind of a once in a generation or more decision we're making is the north south orientation or the East West orientation um previously as you said CPAC supported the north south orientation however we have to be realistic and that's one of the reasons why we're here tonight um is we have to be realistic do we have the money can we find the money can we put the budget together the numbers are pretty pretty straightforward 1.7 million for the first uh option 3.4 million for the second option and 4.2 for the third option we believe it with the $800,000 from CAC and $900,000 from free cash we can get to the 3.4 million doll option however that is an eastwest orientation um you get your eight Lane track you don't get the East West orientation and you don't get a field to the West we don't get a field to the West the only option that gets us the north south orientation an eight Lane track and a new field as Kevin outlined rejuvenated field to the West is the 4.2 however um it's a bit of a stretch budgetarily to get there we're about s $750,000 short I think there are members of the school committee there are members of the Town Council that expressed an interest to see if we can reach that far um to get there because it is such an important um decision if we go east west I I think the reality is we we as a community are unlikely to we will not reorient the field after spending three and a half million dollars you know um for a very very long time so that's just a reality right thank you thank you Dave thank you Tim uh Doug thank you Sam um and Tim's first Tim's question took care of my first question which uh I Now understand that in fact the realization of the long-term plan depends on the track to be reoriented so that being the case I guess uh I guess I want to just ask I guess it's Kevin mostly uh about uh a variant on your 3C which would be more affordable uh because at the moment we don't have a track it's it's it's it's it's there but it's unusable so is there an opportunity to have a less expensive reorientation plan where you actually reorient the field that's inside the track put in the lights maybe but don't build the track and then you everything you've spent is setting you up for the long-term realization of the vision and you know it's probably a more affordable option than uh what you've percentage because it seems like the only thing you're the only you know the only north south option right now is the most expensive uh I guess is that an option or the opposite to where just just build the track and don't build the field inside of it well I'll say to to that we you know when exploring these options we had about we had about three options for each configuration and we talked about six Lane ovals uh eight Lane oval or six Lane ovals with eight Lane straights um but we were directed to you know the eight all all the way around was what was desired um we have talked about cost-saving options uh in maybe phasing where we put in infrastructure for lighting empty conduit pull boxes maybe light pole foundations but we don't actually purchase and install the lights right away um there's a few hundred ,000 or at least yeah a couple hundred, savings there um the the sidewalk improvements along theun Street being uh Municipal property and not school property we talked about potentially taking out that portion from this project and funding it elsewhere um which would be another 100,000 plus or minus um it none of those make up the full 750,000 I think that's the number differential at no time was there a discussion that no track or no Fe would be acceptable um that's just the direction we were given okay thank you I guess it it just seems a little bit uh disappointing that we the only north south is an all or nothing thank you thank you Doug uh Matt yeah I just realized I had one short question one of the features of option 3C was that you would make the interior playing field wider and larger um is that also included in um 1D since you're reconstructing everything or is the field in 1D the same as 1B uh the field in in 1D is the same as in 1B um it's it's what's called a Fat Track it's it's slightly wider than your old traditional tracks which were called equal quadrant um those really can only fit a football field in there or you know or narrower field um so there it is a Fat Track that's existing this one's just slightly larger um there's nothing that is really stopping us from exploring that if we were to go with one b or a because we are um you know in rebuilding it when we started this process we didn't know how much of the existing track we could Salvage but now that we've completed our geotechnical investigation um unfortunately there's not too much that tracks in really bad shape overall um so sometimes we can salvage some of the asphalt um which I think in the original Western Samson's con Concepts that they did uh think Reclamation uh some kind of milling and Paving would be an option but when we did corings in the track we just learned that the whole track asphalt oval has to be replaced that said we are going to reuse as much of the stone base under it as possible that's why for these Concepts we kept the configuration uh exactly the same is for 1B and 1D uh I think we could explore it and wouldn't change the budget that much if we wanted to shorten and widen the track a little bit to uh accommodate a slightly larger soccer field within thanks thank you uh Tim yes um sorry I was looking at my phone I walk my dog over to amoris College's PRACK field every day and I should know this but I don't how many lanes are on that track let me fill up an aial bear with me yeah I I did too but I couldn't see the lanes and second question would be the UMass track so ammer I'm looking at that right now that's a it's an eight Lane isan L Sprint and then zoom over to UMass okay that might be a ner a 10 leaner over there that's a big okay well just curious okay that's kind of maybe I don't know if it's immaterial or not but I just didn't know so eight Lanes is is uh a larger track than we currently have correct yes you currently have a six Lane and it's consistent with so-called quote Championship tracks or whatever yeah the additional Lanes just add for the efficiency of track meets okay um more athletes at one time less Heats did you did you call on me Sam I did oh thanks um I was just wondering I know we were talking about the track but I'm thinking about the field and you know the when you're playing a game at like 3:30 and the sun's in your eyes that that's a thing and then it's like okay in the second half you switch sides and all of a sudden you have a huge advantage and that's a big thing and it's kind of weird that amorist has this oriented field where the sun's in your eyes so I was just wondering has has there been any like Community input from the students on this or is it just like us sitting around talking about this because I have spent many hundreds of hours on it and I can just say it was terrible and it was a thing so um yeah and if anybody has heard anything I'd be interested to know thanks um I certainly heard quite a lot of participation at the original discussions related to this at Town Council meetings uh from the students uh relating to orientation uh the north south orientation was significant for I believe everyone we heard from that I heard from at that time there of course was a separate significant issue related to the discussion which primarily was the nature of the field that is to say grass or artificial turps that was the U area of significant conflict but the north south orentation uh in terms of what you asked student the students all uh and former athletes I've never heard anyone not be in favor it that's my understanding as an answer to your question but Dave I see that your hand is up uh I'd like to call and Dave Z sure thanks Sam I think Michelle raises a great point and and I was trying to think how I would phrase this but unfortunately I think the project is now for all of us the project is is now suffering um from Community fatigue this has been around a very long time we've been we as a community have been working on this for many many years um and I think um going back a few years we had very ex very extremely good attendance at a number of uh Regional school committee meetings um Town Council meetings CPA meetings but I think there is fatigue what I can say and and my memory is very clear those meetings um we heard from students faculty staff coaches community members parents we first heard how poor what poor condition the fields are in near the Regional High School we also heard an equal equally loud voices about how poor the track condition is and again we heard from you know all sorts of coaches um and we also heard from uh folks our official officials about the track and how they how the track is you know we can't use it for competition any longer the three issues that came out loud and clear in those meetings were north south orientation turf was very strong and the reason was playability again we've moved away from Turf for all the reasons we've talked about and then the last one of the three was an eight Lane track that came out loud and clear from those athletes those coaches those parents those alumni who participate in track events that that is a must in 2024 for any Community R siiz um it allows for competitions it also allows the Regional Schools to H host competitions and raise money through fees and um all of the associated U uh fees that might come with um hosting competitions um unfortunately I don't think we're going to get those teachers faculty staff students at the couple of meetings that are so essential here they're all on tape they were very spirited some of them got very intense but um we we pivoted to support for a new track and a new field uh at this site so that was my quick summary if you will uh thank you Dave uh Matt yeah so to Michelle's question I think a large justification for the um in in the s western and Samson study of rotating the track and also you'll see the field is north south also in option 3C a large justification for that was what you said that East West fields are problematic in the fall season because of sun and players eyes um now I sort of have a question for Dave now I know Dave has talked about simply being here to remove the Restriction but since uh the 800,000 is actually a debt authorization I would think that potentially we could change the amount also I don't know whether Town Council would be interested in that kind of a situation but is there any reason we couldn't change the amount as well um I would defer to Sam and Holly a little bit on this but um my understanding of the of the referral from Council and also our posting of this meeting y was that that was not that was not on the agenda tonight if if cbac wanted to send that a message to the council to the regional school committee to staff both at the schools and the town myself and Doug superintendent Slaughter Etc that CAC would be open to additional funding we would have to we collectively would have to come back through the process in the fall and ask for those additional funds correct me holly or Sam if I'm wrong but that's my understanding I'm uncertain regarding the need for additional meetings related to a debt authorization um because we did have a public meeting at the time uh regarding the project and the dollar amount was to be determined I would think it might need to be in the fall but the concept uh is an interesting concept that Matt raises which is getting from point A to point B meaning if the there's motivation for option C 3C uh you know how do we get there uh but I'd like to bring us back if I can at this point in time to the discussion related to the three different proposals so that we can understand uh the details or any questions that we might have related to the three presented options and then subsequently as a committee we can discuss what we might wish to do whether there's one option we favor whether there's uh a desire for additional means of achieving those results such as Matt's questions so I'd like to ask uh committee members if they have questions related to uh the projects uh I do see that Holly has her hand raised I'd like to call on Holly uh briefly given the uh question that Matt raised okay so in regards to Matt's question um at this time there are no available funds we have spent all of our available funds through the uh FY 25 process there we I mean we certainly could look to change um with a debt authorization but there is no available cash funds at this time I don't think that the town and the Regional School District at this point is looking for additional funds I think all they're looking for is for us to lift the restrictions so that they can proceed with what is the best available option um at this time they are not asking for additional funds and I think it would be premature for us to to go there until that is something that they're looking for um so I guess I'll just leave it at that right now we're not looking for any additional funds we're just looking to lift the Restriction so that they can do um what they see um at this point Thank you Holly um so I'll bring in again to ask if I I have questions but I'm seeking to allow all committee members to speak uh if there are additional questions uh related to the different options that were presented uh by the by Kevin um if you have questions raise your hands I'm not seeing or comments for that matter I'm not seeing hands so I'm gonna go ahead and ask a few questions of Kevin but certainly committee members please uh chime in and or raise your hand it's an important discussion and it's helpful to other committee members as well we may have the same questions you have so uh Kevin I I did read the three uh proposals and thank you for the details that were included I found it very informative uh I made notes to myself on a few different things one question that came to my mind was there's a reference to a contingency and an inflation amount uh the inflation was set based on the percentage of you know 5% I assume that's one year's time between now and when it commences the contingency uh also was a function 15% uh and that's what I have a question about uh in your experience how often are the contingencies do they actually come into play it's a large amount it's $550,000 I recognize the need uh for planning appropriately uh because you never know what's going to shake out but in your experience yep how often do contingencies come in and at what percentage might they come in I understand that anything can happen but what's your general sense Rel yeah so just a little background when we first presented the 11 Concepts to the school committee um we using aerial mapping uh GIS available online uh topography uh we actually carried a 20% contingency once we updated our plans and started using real survey and our field investigation data uh we lowered it down to 15 U at the upon completion of preliminary design we're going to be down at a 10% contingency so each round of developing the plans we're going to sharpen our pencils we're going to revisit the estimates um and we we our experience is by the time we're at bidding we want to be around 5% contingency um we feel that's enough money to tackle any unknowns um sometimes we see things in the field once construction starts and you know we we present options or Alternatives um you know or the contractor May identify something and sometimes we see that contingency tapped into you know until you rip the ground open and and really expose everything you just don't know what you might find so we never want to go into a project with zero contingency and have no money to tackle unknowns or you know potential change orders that might be unavoidable um so that contingency number will come down but again we definitely don't want to be below 5% for a public bid job such as this um so we have known that going through that um that we do have a healthy cont uh excuse me contingency at this point um but that number will come down and hopefully you know the escalation numbers a little higher and something we probably wouldn't have carried five years ago but with the unknowns of the economy still going on um estimating has been a little unpredictable and difficult say from the Consulting world uh the past couple years due to the pandemic and everything else going on um but again that number will come down and the overall project number might come down too but at this point these are the numbers that we feel comfortable with and a decision needs to be made to tell us which one to advance so we can bring this project towards construction uh thank you um and I have a follow-up question as I looked at the projects particularly project uh proposal 3C I was trying to contemplate how that number might come down and or be phased in similar to what doug uh raised the question and another item aside from contingency that came to my mind was I noticed the lighting poles are more expensive 500,000 approximately in option 3C whereas it's a lesser expense because of existing polls in the original version uh the the options 1B and 1D uh I'm curious uh was any consideration given or might it be possible for one of two things to occur one would be to move some of the existing poles into the new Option 3C so that they would have maybe not the best but similar setups to the original one and or um Can the lighting be phased uh I mean way back when when I play on the field there were no lights the games were always in the afternoon great benefits of Lights kids love playing in the in the evenings but you know is that something that is an aspect of potential phasing uh and similarly are there other items in the proposed option 3C that might be eligible for sing uh for phasing I heard you reference the believe the lighting fixtures or and also the sidewalks does any other come to mind so two questions yeah so to answer the first one uh relocating the poles that was a question asked to the actual manufacturer of the existing poles and because of changes in building code and wind load we can't relocate them they would not be up to code anymore we can retrofit them we can modify them in their current location but we cannot pick them up and put them on New Foundations because the the pole design just isn't up to code um and then to part two yes we definitely talked about just putting in infrastructure um you know whether it's just conduits empty conduits and pull boxes while the ground's opened up whether we just put in the concrete foundations um which is a much smaller cost than actual light poles and the fixtures themselves and the controls um so those are two options that we've considered in two different levels of cost uh scaling back the uh the sidewalk uh scope uh potentially eliminating the concrete bleacher pad um those are all things that are options um the one thing though I think I mentioned before if we're say $750,000 uh deficient um I don't think all that combined would get us that difference um that Delta but um there's other small things we definitely can look at um we can't get rid we're not going to get rid of ADA access to the facility um that's just we something that's a necessity um there are probably options again we just haven't quite figured out $750,000 in phasing options thank you and if I understand the answer to your question uh the lights cannot be moved from the old place to the new and the the capacity to put platforms and not actually install the full set of Lights does exist it would not prevent the project from going forward it would just be something that would be desirable to proceed with uh uh in the future if yeah we we've done that on numerous projects where we just put in the infrastructure for the poles and with this type of lighting it's a pier that sticks out of the ground a concrete pier that sticks out about six feet so it's not the most sightly thing but we've had jobs projects where those concrete peers are there for five years before light poles arrive to the site they get funded for through boosters through other means and eventually they they are there thank you um I'm going to call on Bob parent you've been patiently waiting with your hand up and I assume it was related to one of the questions that was asked so I'd like to call on Bob if you have something you'd like to add certainly I just wanted to briefly reinforce the point that Kevin made regarding contingency the approach that Kevin and slrr are taking is industry standard it's the same approach that that I took in my 30 years of experience with the Consulting business and the same approach we're taking for instance in the Ford River school project and Jones Library projects in that you start with a higher number when there's more un certainty and that number shrinks As you move closer and closer to the design phase so there you know there may be some opportunities of reallocating some of that contingency Andor reducing the contingency as we move forward on this project uh thank you Bob I appreciate you uh sharing that with us and certainly uh we're directing questions Kevin but certainly certainly raise your hand certainly raise your hand if there are other aspects you'd like to add I'm gonna call on Michelle thanks Sam so we're being asked toin the orientation based kind of in the framework of these three options um not redoing the drainage is is I think a no-go but why can't we think about the third option which is now 3D without the additional field you know remove the bleacher pad phase the lighting I mean is there a way we can draw on those other eight missing versions that I have not seen admittedly um to talk about reorienting the field because it's would be consistent with the long-term Vision frankly it would we're getting this fancy eight Lane track and to keep this East West orientation seems kind of ridiculous to me and unfair to everyone playing on the field versus track so can we talk about ways to have that reorientation and like Sam said we didn't always have lighting do we need the lighting right away so I would just be interested in hearing other options for that thanks thank you Michelle um Tim oh sure um part of my consideration in all these CPA projects is the uh funding for the greater good and the Community uh we've talked about the high school track program The High School athletics on the fields I frankly don't recall how much the overall Community uses or will use those fields and then is there a benefit for the overall Community not just the high school students but the overall Community with a north south orientation versus a East West orientation or any of those three who's the question directed to I don't know uh whoever's the presenters but any comments from any of you Rel or response regarding Tim's inquiry I see two hands up I see uh Bob and Dave I'm gonna call on Bob um yeah just a general comment I'm not addressing I'm sorry the other Bob the other Bob yes okay first I'll get to you though Bob sorry I didn't take my hand down if you're referring to this okay so uh Dave Zac your hand was up I assume it was in relation to uh either Michelle or Tim's comment um yes yes and no I I guess um I'm trying to to kind of get my head around and and where where we are and and why we're here and and I keep coming back to as much as I appreciate and and I think the questions and the the exploration of the three options before us and the overall budget is helpful um I still think the fundamental reason we're here is to consider whether CPAC would resend or remove the two restrictions that they plac on the project some time ago and allow the team the council the school committee to work on the the bigger picture of you know what can the community support the $ 1.7 million option the $3.4 million option or the $4.2 million option um and so you could take multiple motions tonight you could have a motion to do something with those restrictions I'm not presupposing what those are that would be but you could also take another motion uh or another vote May somebody could make a motion to emphasize your support for one of the options before you but I don't think tonight the ultimate goal is to figure out how to how to fund or change the project uh for the third option 3C to to um to get it within the available money so I'm stumbling a little bit with this but so I I think the key point is about the restrictions and then if you'd like to voice your support for a particular option be it perhaps 3C in the north south orientation to make that known to the council and the regional school committee ultimately I think the funding falls back to the council and the regional school committee and they may recommend that staff come back to you in the fall to help reach that $4.2 million um uh go goal if north south orientation and 3C is the is the chosen um uh the preferred and supported option is that clear I know thank you Dave for sharing your perspective and thoughts on this um Bob or Kevin do either of you have a response or awareness or general indication of the dis iction of community benefit of north south versus East West which was the question Tim raised I'm not sure that you would or not but if you do from my perspective we've been looking at this for athletics for the high school um of course we always acknowledge that a track in and playing fields is in a public setting is very beneficial for the local community uh I think you know local public walking on a track or playing in the field that's not really where we focus our design um and again we when we were uh brought on board we were task with you know not Reinventing uh not not being stuck to Weston Samson's original plans but um also kind of re-evaluating them and seeing if they made sense and and Weston Samson's a very reputable firm and uh we see them as peers and you know we would have if we had we been at the beginning we would have presented these options as well but again we're looking at it from The High School athletics point of view thank you Kevin so I'd like to just you know make a comment for the committee members again we're seeking to discuss the proposals that were presented uh by Kevin uh three different options and any questions that you might have related to those proposals regarding understanding and or Finance you know elements of it and phasing I think it's appropriate to ask those questions at this point of our discussions if desired so uh we can talk therea regarding how we may wish to proceed uh based on the referral that's come before us uh Bob sa it it's just for my edification and I think Dave um answered this I'm I'm not sure why we're opining on the specifics of the design features at this particular meeting maybe there's some Legacy of doing that in the previous uh uh restrictions but it to me it seems like we're trying to just consider removing these restrictions uh thank you Bob that is the primary uh reason for the meeting is moving the restrictions uh it's my belief uh which is why I'm entertaining the discussion that uh the information related to questions on these are significant in terms of how committee members might choose to vote relating to the removal of restrictions that is to say what might those implications be uh which is I I can only speak for myself that's why I'm asking questions because I wish to have uh an informed uh uh knowledge base as I as we come to the questions of whether what we may or may not wish to restrict or remove um Michelle I believe your hand was up next I'm not sure so sorry if I cut anyone but I just wanted to comment on Tim's question about greater good and I would just like to say that I think that Public School athletics you know is the greater good of our community just that's that's it like that's the heart of our community is our public schools and everybody comes together for that I'm here talking to you about that like that's the heart of it um per Dave second motion um you sort of put that in the context of 3C so I am in favor of the north south orientation for the reasons I said but not necessarily in favor of 3C so if we can take it out of the explicit options in front of us I think I would think about that or talk about that differently thanks thank you Michelle uh Doug yeah um I'm not going in order forgive me I'm trying to go in the order I saw the hands so go ahead okay um so there was some talk about the contingency and all the uh discussion centered around what I would call a design contingency that reduces as the design gets fleshed out um but I'm I'm wondering if there's also an owner contingency that is generally carried uh into construction uh and and where where that fit in this picture because I I couldn't really separate it out in some of the estimates in the in the presentation and then I guess the other uh question I was going to ask was if if we agree to eliminate the restriction on the artificial turf but do not release the restriction on the north south orientation is it correct Dave and Kevin that the team would then focus more clearly on how you how you can what steps you would take now uh and how you would uh get to the north south orientation within the budget that you end up having thank you so two different questions there one was regarding an owner's contingency uh and a second one is uh if the outcome was a removal of a Turf restriction but not the option 3C does the team uh have the capacity I'll phrase it this way Doug to focus uh further on options three in those conditions uh yeah so I I'll start um so the contingency right now the way we see it it's both the construction and the design contingency um so as we get to the final design bid documents uh and we get down to that 5% that 5% carries overs the construction or owner's contingency so you know a couple hundred thousand is there for the unknown during construction um and then for the design it would be up to the school to direct us uh we have gone through different scenario scarios uh lesser cost scenarios and more expensive ones um for the reorientation um we would have to be given direction that okay let's look at you know uh six Lane oval and eight Lane straight um you know lose some of the track area um you know eliminate the lights or put the lights in some sort of phasing package um we can definitely revisit it in if a dollar value m not to exceed am is given to us we can present well this is what we believe you can get um but that is not the direction we've received to this point we've just given a wide range from 1.7 to I think at one point with Synthetic Turf we were up over five million um and this is what we've narrowed it down to at this time thank you Kevin uh Katie you've been very patient and if I skipped over the order forgive me I didn't intend to that's okay Sam I I appreciate it and um I I don't have specific questions um but if you wouldn't mind just I have a couple of comments um regarding this I really appreciate Kevin's presentation and I spent a lot of time um reviewing all the materials you sent and listening to the school uh committee meeting and to the uh Town council meeting and I feel very confident in um allowing I do feel very confident that all of the folks who are trying to make this decision are in favor of saving money and in favor of a North South orientation and are going to do everything they possibly can to combine those two things in whatever decision is made however um the result might be that it can't be north south based on what funding they can get from um donations Etc so I feel I'm ready to call the question and to um have a vote around removing that restriction and I feel confident in allowing the folks who are doing this um they're trying very hard as Dave said it's been years in the making and I think that um in the end the best decision will be made to save the most amount of money and to get the north south orientation if we can do that um and I don't think keeping a restriction on there is going to leverage anything that's what we thought when we voted on it we actually I think I'll just bring that you know from my experience in that vote it was we thought if we said it had to be north south orientation that would motivate more fundraising and a different approach and more money from the town in order to meet that need and I'm just not I don't believe that that is valid point anymore and I'm willing to make um to take that restriction off and I'm happy to make a motion I know Sam I'm jumping up and I know you want everyone to have a chance to ask the questions so um you know I will try and be patient but I just I'm happy to to make that motion if everyone else is ready thank you Katie uh Doug yeah uh Sam I just wanted to tell you that there's this uh ammer Regional school committee chair woman who has her hand up and has been waiting to contribute some information for a while and would like to a chance to do that uh thank you for calling attention to that I did not uh see the participant list I'd be glad to uh invite I see Sarah Marshall is attending uh she's chair of the school committee I believe uh Sarah if you can hear me uh I'd like to invite you to uh say something if you wish thank you can you hear me I can hear you yes thanks very much and thank you Doug um first of all I chair the ammer school committee not the regional school committee I am just a member of the regional school committee that has made this request to you and I have not been deleg delegated to speak on the committee's behalf but I can tell you what what we have done and um is in the public record we have made a request to council that they award us an additional $750 whatever it is thousand that would allow us to reach the funds necessary to reorient the track it you know I think I myself I would be thrilled I hope they can do that but it may not be possible money is very tight as as we all know so maybe it will be possible maybe it won't we we are giving them the option of um making that happen but if it doesn't happen um I think it is safe for me to say the committee wants to proceed it has been many years um and it's it's a it's terrible for our student athletes that they that our facility is so deterior deteriorated so if we don't have the money to reorient the track we will go ahead and um rebuild it in place but if counil um but we will only be able to make the best possible track and field in place if you remove the restriction on the funds okay but if you remove the restriction and Council Awards the extra money then yes I I think our intention is to proceed with reorienting the track so um just know that we're trying to we're trying to make that happen and that decision is up to council um but this will just give us flexibility if that additional funding does not come through thank you thank you Sarah I appreciate your chiming in with your uh information and thoughts Doug your hand is still up is you're so um we've heard from the presenters regarding the proposals we've had a number of questions um I'm G to say a few comments I I I recognize it's a long meeting but this is an important subject and it has been for some time uh and I think it's all the discussion so far has been quite beneficial um we do have a request for two different uh you know whether or not we will remove restrictions and there are two distinct ones that Dave pointed out at the start one is a Turf and another the artificial turf the other is the orientation I do want to uh make a comment related to the meeting that took place in dece in June of 2022 where three other commit members were present at that time our discussion was very clear regarding awarding funds for the purposes of reorientation um and the reason being is a variety of uh many former athletes myself included having played soccer field on the field recognize the advantage or disadvantage of the sun coming in one's eyes and at that time there was not interest in funding the program or the proposal if there was not orientation reorientation this was at that time so uh from my perspective I recognize that it's a generational opportunity and whatever the outcome is that the town and the school committee arrives at assuming that there's work done on the track and field it's going to be in that place for 30 to 40 years uh I recognize the importance of Athletics to the community and to the athletes and the students as well uh I remain very much in favor of anything that the committee could do this is my personal opinion uh to achieve the original vision of the master plan and improving the track and field and reorienting the field in a north south manner that would achieve the original objectives uh that it sounds like many of us share uh in that regard what I'm hearing is that the financing is uncertain I think it's unfortunate that uh financing hasn't been fully explored before a decision has been presented to us uh a request presented to us to make a decision when we don't really know entirely what the financing will be it sounds as though the town may not come up with funding but my understanding is that as a committee we do have the capacity to recommend additional debt to achieve the objective which would be po potential objective if it were desired to reorient uh Matt had raised that question and although it's not our uh it was not the referral it is something that might be a long-term resolution to achieving the goal so I'm not you know I think we need to talk about two different items one is removing the turf field uh and the other is whether or not we wish to remove the reorientation uh requirement uh I'd like to for someone to make a motion related to the turf aspect of the field so we can uh get that out of the way uh and my own belief on it is that you know part of the process of being a community is there's a lot of different uh inputs I was a very very strong Advocate being a soccer player coach and player of having turf field uh I spoke up in numerous meetings because I know personally the difference that it makes for uh the athletes in the town it's une equivocal in my opinion but it seems we're not going to achieve that or we would have to achieve that with great conflict and part of being in a committee and part of a community is sometimes you have to know when to step back and recognize the situation and make accommodations so would anyone like that's my Preamble would anyone like to make a motion regarding removing the Restriction of the uh Turf artificial turf requirement of the award from 2002 so moved is there a second second is there discussion uh anyone wish to say anything the the motion on the floor is to remove the uh artificial turf requirement restriction affiliated with the $800,000 award from uh originally recommended June 2nd 2022 Matt King I I think we just say we reduce we we sorry we we remove any um option based restriction because I don't think the actual Motion in this the original CPA didn't mention Turf it only mentioned option 3C or three sorry so all we need to do is make a motion to remove any Project Specific restriction on the $800,000 appropriation that could be done done as a single motion but doesn't that include two of the it does okay oh so some people might want vote differently on each one is that is that your point correct oh I see correct um there is there are two aspects of it and I see a I I understand if if people want to vote differently on those two different aspects then I understand why you would do it as two different options two different motions is there additional discussion so there's a motion on the floor to remove the artificial turf restriction requirement that's affiliated with the award uh the proposal award from June 2nd of 2022 uh I'd like to have a roll call vote um Tim I Matt I David I uh Michelle hi Bob Bob Saul cannot hear you you're on mute I'll come back to you Bob sa you're on mute hi hi sorry Sam Katie hi Doug hi Robin I uh and I'll vote I as well so the motion passes is 9 to Z uh the other item for consideration that we've all been talking about is the north south orientation uh you know perhaps we can share our thoughts on that prior to making a motion uh one way or the other uh would anyone like to say any comments related to uh removing a restriction or not related to a north south orientation uh Matt yeah I pretty much agree with what Katie said earlier that um and I think this is also what Dave is sort of implying is that the Committees that are actually working on the details of this the school committee um and the the school administration Etc all basically want to have the north south orientation if possible and um I'm confident that they will do what they can given the funding that they have available to make that happen so I'm I agree with what Katie said and I don't think we need to make a restriction here Michelle I agree with Matt per ktie and Dave but I also see like given the three options presented to us tonight that we have about probably a 75% chance of them not going with the north south orientation so if we do go with this resending it I would like to offer a second motion or whatever is appropriate to strongly say at least for me and I would offer this that um we'd like to see a reorientation of it but I don't think what we need to be the hand that tries to move that any other hands raised on this subject Tim yes that's exactly what my feeling was Michelle so I am going to make a motion I'm going to move that we we remove the restriction on the north south and instead recommend that the Restriction be removed however the committee strongly recommends that a north south option be uh considered by the town officials we we have a motion in a second I will second that motion and a third um is there a discussion uh Doug yeah I think uh the word considered is probably too weak uh I think leader you know the Committees have already considered that uh and I I think that we should urge that it be implemented uh as a north south option uh to the EXT ENT that funds allow okay well I'll mend it to say I move that uh we remove the restriction on north south and instead strongly recommend that the now north south orientation be the chosen option or the we we strongly recommend a north south orientation for this project we I could remove the word consider but the intent is to have this committee strongly recommend that that be the uh intent of the of our funding require our funding um recommendation so procedurally we have an original motion and we have a an amendment to that motion if I understand correctly we have to vote on this amend Amendment to the motion somebody please chime in if I've got this wrong that's that's Roberts yeah I don't know if we need a second on that Amendment to the motion uh go ahead Dave I think if the original if Tim is willing to accept a friendly Amendment from Doug okay I think that is allowable I am willing to be friendly so as long as the person who seconded oh as long as the person who seconded agrees with the amendment then it can move forward into one vote correct the person who seconded it was I agre with the amendment I also okay so uh we're back to further discussion relating to an original motion that has a friendly Amendment um I'm to make a comment which is I share the concerns that were raised by Michelle and Doug in that uh it seems to me that if the Restriction is removed related to the award uh that there's a strong possibility uh that the um outcome will be a improved Improvement of the and a proposal which red do the track in place um I it would be a last resort from my perspective to seek to have an improvement to the track in place such as 1D uh just because I recognize the generational aspect of this once the track is done it is done in whatever fixation it might be and I understand understand what's gone into this I understand the amount of work that's the town has occurred but I do have issue with the fact that we're being in a situation to make a decision uh without the financing hav been discussed in advance it it seems a bit um done for convenience for the purposes of uh trying to proceed with the project on a timely basis as opposed to what the actual outcome or endgame might be uh I would like to see the committee uh if uh uh support a long-term reorientation and I'm not convinced that removing the Restriction leads to that it places the decision for the funds in the town Andor School committees but perhaps the committee itself can do something such as seeking to add debt to meet that differential we know that there's the capacity to phase aspects of this project if we were to go with option 3C or or option three and we also know that the committee has the capacity to vote and recommend funds which would put the recommendation to the Town Council here's what we would like to do and we're willing to meet that gap of funding I don't know if that's what our committee wishes to do but I don't know because we're doing this now as opposed to next fall when proposals might come in we don't know so um that's where my mindsets at I I have a strong belief in the reorientation and would like to from my perspective uh achieve that I've heard from most of our committee members that let me rephrase that I've not heard from any Committee Member that they're not interested in reorienting the track I could be wrong and if so please please speak up if financing is the key element but I have concerns that we might prevent we might lead to the that option not occurring if we remove that restriction without simultaneously offering a solution of funding uh yeah just going back to the discussion about whether the the CPA committee could be um a solution to the funding Gap to get from 1D to 3C um I guess the feeling from Dave and Holly is that we can't do anything about that tonight but um uh I for one would like to see the town consider CPA is a potential option there I believe we can do it it's just it's not our task at hand we can make well I don't know I mean I I don't know what's possible to do with altering I mean we we we're altering a CPA recommendation from two years ago by removing a restriction can we also alter it by changing the amount I don't know not sure why we couldn't if the committee wanted to I mean given that it's debt Finance it's not based on a a balance at hand it's got It's not cash but I don't know if the committee wants to do that or not but it seems to me that that could be a recommendation that's included which provides the strong solution desired and a means of achieving it if necessary but we don't know at present what all of our committee members think on these issues because we've been talking about the proposals uh so I don't know how strongly our committee members feel about seeking to ensure a north south orientation or not uh I know how I feel I think I know how a few people feel I don't know how everyone Now Dave has his hand up um okay uh Dave you yeah I think I I I referenced this earlier um I certainly think the the body could take a vote to um you know send a message to the council that the CAC is open to considering additional fundings to achieve the uh 3C option the $4.2 million option north south orientation however um I I as much as it pains me I think uh I think process-wise you don't have a proposal I I going back to your process you have a community process that is followed every year that process includes an applicant applying for X funding for something in one of the four categories you don't have that proposal before you uh there needs to be a public hearing on the the the the application so I I think from a process standpoint um I I I do believe the town or the school would need to come or the schools or in Partnership would need to come back to you in the fall which might very well be a a workable timeline so I I think you could send a message to council about your preference for the north south orientation but I I certainly couldn't advise perhaps Holly you know disagrees or agrees with me on this but I think process-wise you you really do need to have an applicant an application and a justification in writing and go through the the normal process uh thank you for sharing that Dave I'm not I have to admit I'm not certain regarding how that works but you know there's more experience in your and Holly's uh knowledge base than in mine uh relating to these issues uh but if if we were not to discuss such an option I guess the subsequent question arises is what would be if if the committee actually wished to proceed in that regard do we why is the urgency of now in other words why does the decision have to be made now as opposed to in the next cycle if that's a strong desire I'm just speaking aloud to the committee and that's what goes on in my head and that's what I wrestle with relating to whether or not to remove a restriction because I think it uh leads to a high possibility of decision for a non- reoriented field without the ca having any further input um Katie um well Sam I I appre I really appreciate this creative thinking um and I also think that um I I do disagree with this idea that it if we take the Restriction off that there's a strong likelihood that it won't get the that north south orientation because I think everybody I mean Sarah spoke up Sarah Marshall spoke up about their requests for more funding from the town and my experience on this committee is the town is not shy coming to CPA with a request for funding um and it feels like there may be um you know possibility of the funding coming through and being figured out without us which would be great um I don't I feel very having you know reviewed all those videos and you know of the meetings people really want that north south and they have for the the whole time as you mentioned I mean the students speaking up in 2022 and I just I don't think I think we can let the town know that we're you know that we would be willing to entertain this to support this and we strongly urge them to select the north south orientation and I think they're going to do everything in their power to get that done um so I I would call the question here um there's no motion to call at present um I I would like to let the other committee members who have not spoken on this subject um oh is there a motion there is a motion isn't there yes there is forgive me uh so when a question is called what is the procedure we take a vote whether to proceed or must we vote immediately I believe we have to vote to see if we wish to End discussion um I do see a few members who have hands up who have not yet spoken so do we wish to End discussion at this moment or do we wish to allow other members who have hands up to speak that is the motion before us uh I wish to uh I vote no against calling the question at this moment because I see two committee members with hands up who's not uh Matt Kane I'm totally confused does the question has been called which means to End discussion my understanding on the motion before us the motion that why would we End discussion because Katie has called the question right I'm pushing the envelope Matt it's it's I mean I'm fine with I'm fine with other people like we can vote on it now that I've called it this I'm being a pain in the neck and I'm sorry I apologize I'm happy to have other people but I you know I do we need to move forward on the motion that was you wish to withdraw the calling of the question hly Shak your head that you can't I I'm not gonna withdraw it no but yeah I just wanted to explain to Matt where I'm coming from the question has been called so as a committee we must vote to either End discussion or allow discussion to continue that is what we must do at this moment I am voting no I do not wish to End discussion at this moment I'm calling on other members to their vote to either End discussion which would be a yes Vote or to allow continued discussion which would be a no vote uh okay so Matt I'll allow continued discussion so I'll vote no okay uh Tim well since I was the one who made the original motion I was going to withdraw the motion and I think I can do that which means we have further discussion all right are you withdrawing the motion I am withdrawing the my motion to to move ahead with the restriction and instead use phrasing highly recommend I'm withdrawing that because I think we need further discussion and I have been convinced yeah through the conversation so as the original uh I am withdrawing my proposal forgive my ignorance regarding Robert's rures of borders we have a motion withdrawal within the middle of a calling of the question well I was trying to do it at the time that's all right do committee members mind if we accept Tim's withdrawal of the motion accept and withdrawal second okay uh so once withdrawn I'm going to assume that that's done so uh we can continue with a discussion uh thank you for bearing with me procedurally on this I believe we got it correct so uh there were some hands up earlier David Williams I saw your hand was raised yes I'd like to ask you uh to uh share your thoughts with us if you wish uh I'm just thinking listening and thinking but we are discussing a project that um contractors uh come forth with recommendation who been working with the town and the school district and it was my understanding that there were two concerns the tur and north south and I think my my thinking is we need to make our recommendation um for those two issues and the town and contractors will deal with the rest of it and if there's additional funds that they need they will make the necessary step to come back to the CPA or the town as it was mentioned the town may find some monies for the school committed to move forward not CPA that's my thinking thank you David uh Doug Marshall uh similar to what David just said um my wife handed me a note that says Regional school committee has not yet has not applied to anyone for more funds so for us to be seriously talking about how we might do that at this point seems premature okay uh thank you Doug uh Bob Saul um I just wanted to double down on what uh Dave Williams said and I completely agree with all of his points thank you Bob uh Michelle um I appreciate Katie's optimism and everybody's you know putting this on the school committee but I have a hard time seeing school committee coming up with a couple million dollars for north south orientation um and given the timeline presented to us tonight which was a 2025 breaking ground that's pretty quick for a new CPA cycle so I just I have big reservations about if we remove the remove the rest restriction if it's actually going to happen so that's big for me but Sam and but still I'm willing to let it go to the people who are deliberating on this which is the town they already you know it's in their hands but Sam do you have a recommendation we can't we can't up our we can't up our $800,000 we can make a strong recommendation for the north south but is is there more we can do I'm not sure so if if you had an idea all yours that's a good question uh nothing has come to us regarding requesting new funds something has coming come to us regarding opening up the discussion of a 2022 fiscal year 23 project so we request was made to rediscussed additional funds because that would be a uh new process because it would be more than has been requested uh I share your concerns Michelle in that we have been presented with a very short time period and I'm cognizant of the financial uh dilemma that the Town Council and the school committees have been in to the point where staff has been uh put on layoffs and to where many other projects in the Town Council have not gone forward and I don't know how quickly the town might come back to the committee the CPA committee uh given the sense of urgency that's referenced I think it would be a juxtaposition of the need for a track and field for our athletes versus uh let's come back to CPA none of us here can answer that question I'm not I'm not confident that that that someone would come back to CPA to request more funding I would hope that they would CPA might move as quickly as they can I'm curious is there any member of the committee here uh if they had their where with all that uh would not want to see the FI The Proposal reoriented we haven't gotten into that we don't have proposals in front of us but is there anyone who's not leaning towards something that might achieve an outcome with a reoriented field I realize that doesn't address the issue at hand but I'm just curious does anyone have something to speak against that desired outcome I raised a question that was required action to speak negatively so I'm not hearing that um I don't you know we don't have to take any action if we take no action then where we sit is that we have not removed the Restriction of the north south orientation relating to option three that I believe that would put the uh the Town Council Andor school committee in a position where it would delay things and would force them [Music] to come up with additional money or not do we really want to do that or do we want to give them the flexibility with the hope that they would come that they would find the financing somehow whether it's through the town which we can't say that they'll come up with or not we know how challenging the budget discussions in the town had been or that they would come back to CPA again we don't know what our committee would state so that's where we're at we can do nothing which would obligate or turn or vote down the resion resending of the reorientation that would obligate the school committee and The Count Council to only consider option three it would remove their flexibility uh and they've requested flexibility from us so it sounds as though we can't really vote to authorize an additional funding Gap we can simply make a motion that would request that the town Andor school committies look for funding and or come back to CPA we would like for them to come back to us to seek new funding if the funding can't be found elsewhere that's a possibility we and that's kind of what Tim had said initially um so I realize we're running on here but it's a significant discussion um that's my answer to the question that you posed Katie uh excuse me Michelle uh I don't know how we can proceed other than to vote to resend or vote to vote to resend with a strong recommendation that the Town Council and school committees find additional money or come back to CPA or not resend I think those are our three choices before us uh I see a lot of hands up I've been talking a lot uh Katie I think your hand was up first definitely not everyone else was ahead of me okay then uh if you'd like I can call on someone else but you waited the first to go around it's up to you okay well I all I all I wanted to I appreciated Michelle's um noticing my optimism because that's maybe a rare thing but um I I wanted to clarify that I'm not necessar optimistic that we'll get the north south because of the cost but I'm optimistic that that's what folks are really pushing for and they're going to work hard to figure out if there's any possible way to do it and I want to give them the flexibility to get something as Sam said uh completed and and an improvement um the best way possible and so that's that's what I'm optimistic that that folks are really going to try their very very hardest to get the north south um if they can and if not I want to give them that flexibility to do something for the next um several Generations uh thank you Katie uh Matt I'm ready to go back to uh Tim's amended motion or a similar motion and proceed to a vote uh Robin can I hear you you're on mute okay there I am yeah that's exactly what I was going to say I think we should move for to vote and then if the discussion after a motion should be F should simply be focused on why or why not to vote on that particular Mo motion um David uh I'm coming back to my earlier statements restriction the it was my understanding that um we're we are meeting tonight to remove or either approve or leave the restrictions as they are and uh I think I think that's should be the focus or the vote that we been working okay uh thank you David uh Tim um yes in my mind it comes down to my personal vote is coming down to are we going to uh provide some leverage by maintaining the restriction for the town to move to the north south option if we remove it there's a good possibility that the east west in place might happen and I personally don't feel comfortable with that and I like the fact that we have some leverage with the Restriction um secondly in terms of Town Financing I would not support te the Hound coming up with any other monies to help this project along in fact I think that's in part what the CPA is all about we have a recreation component of the funding that's totally outside of the overall Town budget and I think that's something we could use so the town in my opinion would be silly not to re to ask for more funding in the next cycle for this project by using CPA funds and not excuse me not using any of the other so I'm not sure who's would like to make a motion or I'd be happy to but I feel we should maintain the Restriction because of that um would you like to make a motion relating to the oh excuse me Robin go ahead oh I I wrote down a motion I'm happy to make uh I was I moved to resend the Restriction uh on the north south orientation with the strong recommendation to pursue the north north south option and encourage the town to return to CPA for additional funds to meet that north south objective I'll second it we have a motion in a second uh discussion related to the motion that was made uh Tim do you have further disc oh no no no I didn't take my handbound but I'm opposed to that I am in favor of maintaining the uh for all the reasons I just gave uh so I'll just wait till I vote see how other people feel so um discussion so I'll say something Tim if I hear you correctly you wish to retain The Leverage to obligate a north south orientation to obligate if the Project's going to proceed to come back to the committee uh the one thing that comes to my mind in relation to that is the timing Gap uh the timing Gap meaning that we it's a one-year cycle um if it's a timing Gap that leads to a north south orientation perhaps that's a timing Gap well utilized um so I share concerns about whether or not there will be funding arrived at in a timely manner to allow option 3C to proceed uh I share your concerns in that regard because I'm a played on the field had the sun in the eyes we used it as a home court advantage uh coached all the kids in the school coached the high school soccer team heard from all the athletes a non-north South orientation is just not something that addresses the needs of the town in a major way IT addresses the track needs IT addresses the track needs which are significant but I would hate for a lack of let's call it 500,000 with some of the removal of items with the staging of the lighting as an example I'd hate for a lack of $500,000 in a Time pressured decision for the generational or perhaps 40-year opportunity for a re reoriented field to go away and I've seen the Dilemma that the Town Council faces with funding uh I would hope you know one other aspect du Slaughter didn't come to present is there was no request made of other town Regional CPA committees for funding related to this originally there was about 200 some odd thousand that had been slated for possible funding from the regional CPA committees they objected because they weren't in favor of the turf fields we have already voted to recommend removing the turf fields to the Town Council those CPAs are our potential source of money now that the artificial turf field barrier is no longer in existence would this project be delayed to allow for that funding to take place I don't know because we've been presented with a request to arrive at a conclusion before we know what the financing is I'm raising my thoughts as I consider what's there and I would you know I just think we need to go with the north south field and I'm not sure what gets us there and it may be Tim's comment about we remove the turf field requirement that opens up the door to CPA funds from other towns and other communities we say we'd like for you to come back to us for more money how long does it take to do that um so I I share Tim's thoughts on this uh other thoughts from anyone on the committee we have a motion and we have a second can we repeat the motion again Robin please yep the motion is to resend the Restriction with uh the restriction on the north south orientation with the strong recommend recommendation to pursue the north south option an encouragement to return to CPA for additional funds to meet the north south objective thank you Robin uh Dave Zac I see that your hand is still up do you have something to add just yeah very quickly on timing Sam I could be wrong on this but you know we we changed our form of government some years ago to have a more responsive uh form of government then town meeting and and select board some years ago um but strikes me that if a an urgent request came into the CPAC from the schools or Andor the town you know during the summer months I I think the CPAC could take up that urgent request based on the timeline of the whole project out of the normal cycle again we'd have to follow all of the you'd have to follow all of the established you know protocol for doing that but um I'm suggesting that it may not have to wait until you know September proposals October you know consideration November December January into that because we will need to know before then to bid this project so I'm just suggesting that there there could be a more urgent request coming to CPAC to reach that goal and that could be feasible um would anyone like to add a sense of urgency in the motion add the words as soon as possible if needed um I'm seeing NOS I I'll move to amend the motion to other words as soon as possible if needed I accept the amendment all right one last time Robin bear with me if you can read the full motion with the amended comment yeah I didn't write the amend comment down but uh motion to resend the restriction on the north south orientation with the strong recommendation to pursue the north south option and encouragement to return to CPA for additional funds to meet the north south objective did we say as soon as possible is that was that the amendment if needed if as as needed needed as needed as soon as needed ASAP all right add that as soon as possible that is the motion before us we have a motion before us I'm not seeing any hands for further discussion I'll give one last opportunity if someone wishes to speak to the motion um the motion is to remove the Restriction from our June 2nd 2022 relating to north south field with a strong recommendation or request that the uh school committee and our Council seek to come back to CPA if they can't locate additional funds that's the essence of it uh without seeing any hands I'm going to go ahead and proceed with a roll call vote uh Tim no Michelle hi uh Matt Kane I Katie I Robin I Doug n Bob Saul hi so it's four and no what's the current count one two three four five to three right now David Williams I and I will vote I'll vote now so the motion passes 6-3 if I added this up correctly so thank you for bearing with me and for all as we um discussed this issue I think we had a good discussion thorough and I think the desire of the committee is heard um we do have a couple other items on the agenda and I think they can go fairly quickly here I know we're running over a bit uh and I'm going to proceed according Sam I have to go I'm sorry I'm gonna cut out now that the votes have been done y thank you okay thank you Bob so one item here was a discussion of feedback from the fiscal year 2025 process uh I wanted to do this earlier after we had the application placed back up it didn't we don't have anything we can look at so I just wanted to reach out to the committee because this may be our last meeting prior to next cycle um does anyone have any comments or suggested improvements in the process that we used last year last year we introduced One new thing which was having just a spreadsheet that Katie had introduced to allow the questions to be completed in timely manner as members think about what we went through last year uh and previous years is there any suggestion in terms of how we might approach things or tweak what we did it's a good time to ask this now because our next meeting may be at the onset of the new cycle uh Tim um I am going to request that frankly I'm fried and I don't I just canot I just don't want to spend more time talking about that uh if we have to call a meeting another meeting we can I think Bob being a relatively new member would be very helpful in that and he should be part of the process okay so I just I'm G to request I'm myself Frid and just don't feel like discussing anything more tonight if that's okay it's heard and we certainly be done show if if there's anything that was prominent that came to somebody's uh thoughts regarding last year's cycle I'd be glad to hear it at this point in time uh simply because we don't know how soon members will be uh added we have five different supporting committee members where it has to go through Council which overlaps with the time frame for the application cycle uh if anyone had anything that jumped out at them that they wanted to um uh bring up please feel free to speak speak now you certainly can email it as well Michelle I had nothing to comment on so I'm just in favor of closing this now rather than tbling it yep okay uh no motion so we can talk about it a later time um one other item Holly are you still here yes I am yes so Holly the the application uh sample application and information on the website uh has been missing since last fall um and I had provided uh Recreation the for the town um it's significant in that potential applicants can't uh see the information that they need and as we approach the application cycle so the question I have is uh what would be required to enable that to be recreated and or is there a time frame when we could expect that that would reasonably be accomplished um Again Sam we can talk about this offline it is um it is something that I have to work with our information technology department on to get reactivated and I do not have a time frame at this moment but I can discuss that with you um at another time we have a new person that will be starting shortly and we'll hopefully relieve some of my burdens and other staff members burdens and a new communication director coming on board and I hope to give that project off to um communication director or the IT department and suspect in the probably within the next 30 days we can get that accomplished but it's not something I can handle right now no that would be fantastic and I recognize the burden that you face it's an awful lot of responsibility to also be doing that so I'm glad to hear someone's coming on I just wanted to bring it up while we're all here and it is significant for potential applicants to have that information available on the website we can talk another time uh and a 30-day time period would be quite good that would be great so um it'll be up well before the next application round yeah yeah that that sounds good um um I don't have any other topics that the chair did not reasonably anticipate 48 hours before the meeting so again I'd like to thank all the committee members for uh sharing their thoughts and participating in this long meeting uh it's an important one I do want to remind committee members uh if their term is expiring uh if they're an at llarge member that they should communicate with Town staff uh specifically I believe Andrea and or the town manager if there's interest in uh committing to a new term uh and for the committee so the members the five members from planning uh conservation Recreation housing and planning that uh as your committees meet in the new cycle please raise the item on the agenda to select aaon for CPA because uh we have to wait till we have our committee members or we like to wait until we have a full committee so there's a timing element there uh so please bring that to the attention of the chairs of your committees if you're able uh thank you all and I'm going to go ahead and call the meeting to end at 8:28 PM I hope you all have a great uh rest of June and summer and uh see you soon thank you thank you take care