call to order the senior center building committee meeting of the March 19, 2026. And I'm going to read the remote participation open session meeting agenda notice. So, in accordance with chapter 2 of the acts of 2023,
suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law, the OML, public bodies otherwise governed by the OML are temporarily relieved from the requirement that meetings be held in public places open to physically accessible open and physically accessible to the public so long as
measures are taken to ensure public access to the body's deliberations quote through adequate alternative means. This meeting will be live on Zoom. The public may participate remotely by joining the Zoom meeting at ID3754146055
or by calling 9292056099. For additional information about remote participation, please contact Kiellis, assistant town manager at atmair.mma. us or 978-7728220
extension 100 prior to the meeting. So now that the meeting has been called to order, I take a motion to approve the meeting agenda, which I guess everyone should have or if there's any changes to the agenda, need do we need to amend the
agenda? >> Anybody? >> No. I I move that we approve the agenda as submitted. >> Second. >> Okay. Moved by Dennis, second by Ellen. Any discussion on any changes to the
agenda now that we have the motion, please? No. Okay. Hearing none, I have to take the vote accordingly, you know, remotely over the So, Ellen, >> Dennis, hi.
Dan >> Hi, >> Linda. >> Hi. >> And Katie >> I chair says I Ken says I so that's unanimous. So we have enough I think people to
approve the minutes that is the next on the agenda and first of all have to thank Dennis Curran for putting those minutes together and bringing them up to date. So that's a big deal as far as I'm concerned. So the first set of minutes
to be approved is from uh 10:30 2025. Anybody have any comments on the minutes that have been reviewed and whatnot? So So Katie, just to let you know, I got your email and I will make that adjustment. uh when you suggested that
the the kind of the discussion regarding the friends committee was not appropriate for this committee's meeting minutes. So I will delete that from the uh from the meeting minutes that you have in front of you. >> Great. Thank you. >> Okay. Anybody else have any comment on
the 103025 minutes as prepared by Dennis? Okay. I'll accept a motion to approve the 10:30 2025 minutes. >> Uh would we have to approve them as amended?
>> Correct. >> Okay. I move we accept the uh minutes of 10:30 25 as amended. >> I'll second it. No further discussion. We'll take a
normal vote again. Start with Ellen. Hi >> Dennis. >> Hi >> Dan. >> I >> Linda. >> Hi >> Katie. >> I
>> and the chair says I. So that is passed. So now move on to the 123 2025 minutes. Uh I'll accept a motion to accept the 12 12325 minutes. >> No.
Ken, can I ask is that the one where you wanted the numbers changed? I had put in right >> 30,000 30 instead of three. >> Right. So, I was going to amend it to change the guarded amount for a guarded invoice. >> Okay. >> But, uh,
>> and what should it read? >> $3,475 instead of I think you have $30,000 in there. >> Okay. That was a 3,475. >> So the only thing changed the only thing changed on those minutes was an item
that got a bill amount for God. >> Yeah. >> Any other comment on the minutes from 123 2025. >> Okay. Hearing none, I'll take a motion on the minutes as amended for 12 20 123
2025. >> I move we accept the minutes of uh 12325 as amended. >> Second. >> Moved and seconded for 123. So I'll take a vote from the committee. So Ellen,
>> hi >> Dennis. >> Hi >> Dam. >> Hi >> Katie. >> Hi >> Dave. >> Hi
>> Linda. >> Hi. >> J says I. So 1225. So, excuse me. 12 three of 25 minutes are approved as amended. So, I'll move on to the January 29th 26 minutes.
Uh, I mean, I read them. I didn't find anything out of order. So, does that anyone else have any thoughts on the 12926 minutes or any amendments? Nobody.
Okay. If there's no proposed amendments and no other comment, I'll take a motion to approve the January 29th 26 minutes. >> That we have approved the uh January 29th, 2026 minutes as uh submitted.
>> A second. >> Okay. It's been moved and seconded by Dennis and Ellen to approve the 12926 minutes as written with no changes. So all in favor please indicate by saying I yes
>> I >> tennis >> I ke >> hi >> Dave >> I >> Linda >> I >> Katie
>> I and >> the chair says I so the one 2926 minutes approve with no changes So lastly, the minutes of 29 2026 are open for discussion or amendments.
So anyone have any amendments or discussion on the 219 2026? >> So KD asked that um uh the uh within the minutes the scheduling for today's meeting I neglected to have that it was
going to be fully remote. So, I will make that change to reflect that what this meeting is is fully remote. >> Okay. Fine. And uh just to follow up, when we approve all these minutes, they go to the chair Katie for signature.
>> No, I sign them. >> You sign them. Okay. You >> I sign them and then bring them down to the clerk. I I sign I sign the hard copy then bring them to the clerk's office and they stamp them and then post them. >> Okay. Fine. Thank you. Okay. Okay. So, any other amendments or changes or
discussion on the February 19th of 2026 minutes? Okay. Hearing none, I will take a motion to accept the minutes as amended by Dennis for 219 2026.
I make a motion to approve the minutes to accept the minutes of 219 >> as amended. >> As amended. Sorry. >> Second. >> Okay. It's been moved by Dave, seconded by Ellen that we approve the minutes of
219 2026 as amended. And I'll go around again for the vote. So Ellen >> I. >> Dennis >> I. Linda, >> I >> David >> I
Katie >> I >> Arie >> I >> and the chair says I. So all four minutes are either approved as written or approved as amendments. So that we move on to the next item on the agenda. And thank you very much again to Dennis
for that work. So the next phase of the meeting is going to be the value engineering discussion. And this is going to be it may take us a little longer than we think it may not and we may get Matt Starts involved here as well. So the the question for us by by
me is going to be has everyone had a chance to look at that matrix that was sent out to all of us for review and we feel comfortable that we've had a chance to look at it and kind of understand where our comments are and what they
have done. So anyone can pipe up Bonnie, you seem to say you're okay with it. You seem to be nodding. >> Yeah, I'm okay with it. It's great. I think it's great. >> Uh Dennis, >> yeah, I think it's uh Yeah, I mean I I
think we understand what we're asking for. Um so, >> David, do you have a chance to review it? >> I reviewed it. It It looks okay. I mean, I really didn't see anything that jumped out at me that said we need to fix this
right away. >> Okay. Um, others on the committee like Dan Velwick and Linda >> at this time I I I'm good with it. >> Okay. And Dan?
>> Yeah. Yeah, I'm good. >> Okay. So, what So, I leave it up to Matt now to take it from here. So, I did Did I miss anybody? Number one? Hope I didn't. I looked at it too. >> I'm sorry. >> So, the way I understand this to go,
Matt, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that we have quite a few items here. Some of these items are involved with potential uh cost savings. And should we go through that as a committee and decide that, you know, we're going to proceed with these the
cost-saving ones and the rest of the comments we'll look at as we get further into the drawings and see if they're incorporated in the work or how would you recommend we take this next step. You or Brian, either way. >> Yeah, I'll let Matt speak to it first
and I can add color. So Matt, if you want to start. >> Okay. >> Sure. Yeah. Our first sort of filter in in looking at the um these was to try to identify ones that had cost impact potentially uh and raise those up to the
top to to discuss uh which we um have done. This this list here is is filtered by um things that we thought might potentially have a uh a cost impact. Uh and so some of those items um or actually all of those items uh have uh
as part of this gotten an initial response from the design team, John and his consultants uh in some cases. Um so yes, it it may be helpful to uh to talk about them at least in terms of um of
topically. There are a number of things uh in particular about the uh the kitchen. Some suggestions on uh potential simplifications to mechanical uh items. Some of these are already actually um we we've actually closed
them or they were um sort of had a follow-up discussion about them after the comments were initially uh submitted because um you know there were a couple of rounds of um soliciting feedback from the committee members.
>> Can I I'm sorry I should have mentioned that at Matt. >> Yeah, go ahead. The other part that Matt mentioned or alluded to is the working group had a a session on this as well. So we met separately as a small group, Katie, Dan, myself, um the architect and
vertex and we were able to close out a bunch of the comments that especially the ones that came from me I guess. Um, and maybe you can at least run us through the uh kind of the cost impact ones and see how we these folks are
aware of the things that are might be closed. Do you have the latest? >> Yeah, he he does. And just as he's as he's pulling that up, what I'd like to just um add to that is so we've created the document which was kind of dumping everybody's comments into one master spreadsheet and then also filtering
through it and what and trying to parse out what was going to have cost impacts on it. And obviously our biggest priority right now is assembling the budget making sure that we are comfortable with where the total project budget is. And so with all of those comments that came in, if there while
they're not going anywhere, if we're seeing anything as a cost impact of increasing the costs of where we're at right now, we're not implementing or we're not recommending implementing anything into the drawings. As we're trying to really identify things that are going to help our budget and bring
numbers down as we further into design, we come along with other factors of uh grants not coming in, uh other things not working, meetings with the town administrator, we want to make sure that we're as comfortable as we can. So, we this is of a financial value engineering
exercise here. And as we proceed throughout design, if there are things of wants and needs, we would address that with the design team as we get there. >> Okay. So, for clarification at this, I guess what I'm interested in is how do we get this to the conclusion? So, we
just do not keep u >> this sheet open and what's best for the committee to to do that. My my opinion would be is for Matt to run through them from a a high level. If there are instant questions or concerns that come up, we shout them out and and bring them
up. But we go through them. We accept them and then either through the working group or or through meetings with with our um with Catelyn and the architects, we we put them in and we we implement them as well and we can realize what those what those savings are. C can I
make a comment um just quickly? So I just noticed in the cost impact column it's there's nothing in there, right? So I would I I could I'd like to make a suggestion if if if if you will of like
classifying high, medium, and low with respect to cost impact so that maybe we can focus on the high ones first and then you know kind of go sequentially from there. Okay. So, Bonnie, what you're saying is that column now just has either the word
yes or no in it. You'd prefer to see a dollar value or something that uh is more related. >> Yeah. >> Value of the work. >> Yeah, maybe. I I don't know how hard that would be to do. >> Some of that is spelled out um in I think it was distributed as an
attachment maybe um in the slides that were uh delivered to the select board on Tuesday night. just to throw some dollar values um at some of these items. >> Just a just a a thought that we we've started to do some of that.
>> Can someone pop that up on a screen share? I think that might make it easier. Uh the that that particular slide, >> Brian, do you have that handy or do you need me to to try to grab that here? >> You should grab it. Meaning uh Matt.
>> All right. Give me just one second. has a hand up as well. >> So, while he's doing that, the um I guess if we could clarify, you know, this is my first rodeo here.
So it's been my understanding that once the construction documents or the bidding documents that are used for the you know to put it out to bid once those are finalized it is not recommended that changes be
made that is we need to know it seems like we need to have a lot of information prior to John completing the construction documents in order to make sure that we have as few change orders as possible and and how do we make that
happen? >> I think the I'm just going to comment then I'll leave it up to Matt to come back or or Brian or John. But I thought this step here was a first step of maybe two steps that we would do as much as we can here to get this list out so
everyone had a chance to comment. Then we'd reduce this list to much smaller than it is by closing out the items. That would give us a smaller list for the architect and for us to consider as the potential um changes in the construction documents
make any sense to that? So I guess I don't know if we can hack this out in the meetings what I'm getting at this whole list, but can we at least start to close the cost impact ones or not?
That's like how many pages have we got here? Class impacts, right? >> I've just hit the uh screen share button. Can folks see what I have up? This is from the select board presentation. And um Brian, I don't know if you want to run
through some of these items and and because I know that you had gone through the estimate in evaluating some of the the potential here. >> Sure. So before Katie's presentation with the select board, she was asked to try to put a rough order of magnitude on what we had on here. And this is some of the things that we identified through
that VE process without having official recommendation from the board or from this building committee about some things that we identified that we thought we'd be able to take in order to to start driving down some of the costs um on our estimate from a construction
standpoint. I did put the values in here. Some of these are educated guesses. Some of these are taking from the estimate from AM Fogerty and deducing what those numbers came from. And so, for example, the first is the
soil disposal fee savings of $100,000. This is per conversations that we've had with um our DPW director and our working groups, understanding what was put in the estimate for um disposal of soils on site and that we'll be able to
accommodate some sort of spot and minimize the amount of fees that was going to come uh with disposing of those soils. I think that the original estimate was was well over um was it well over 400 grand that we had there or
it may even been higher than that. Um so conservatively we put $100,000 on there for savings. We had a site cut savings on here per the uh estimate that was in from AM Fogerty. Uh we did have a separate um number that we had looked at on it.
There was quite a discrepancy on the site cuts. I think the site cut from Mayan Fogerty was around $150,000. Um we're hoping to maybe uh create some savings there with the cut. >> Oh, Brian, can I ask what is the site cut? >> Uh that's for elevation of where the
building is going to sit uh at the end of the day and what the elevation currently is right now. So, it's a it's a matter of um material that needs to be removed in order to get the building and foundations where the building's going to sit from an elevation standpoint. I
see. Okay. >> Stone veneer cap and flashing duplication. We had that as an ad alternate in the in the specification. It was also carried in the main uh main scope as part of the estimate. Um stone veneer was around $87,000. There was a
cap and a flashing that was also as part of that. I added and rounded to around $95,000. >> Are we are we are we maintaining some stone veneer or are we getting rid of it all? So what we have currently right now, Bonnie, is that would be that would
remain as the alternate that we have in the estimate. So it's not being carried twice. >> Yeah. If the money's available, it would be taken, but it it's an ad alternate kind of down the list. So that that that may or may not end up in the project. >> Okay.
>> I kind of like the stone veneer. >> I don't >> I don't It's all in the eye of the beholder. Exactly. I I like the way Wilburham looks. >> It adds a little >> We can We can debate this later. We'll
debate it later. >> Back it out. But >> yeah, that's okay. It I I'll just make one mention. The uh siding that comes down to the ground is a cement board. And the reason why they often do stone and and it's it's it's in Littleton too
is that that there's a sidewalk that goes around the building currently and there's a lot of shoveling and snowb blowing or what have you. That stone veneer actually protects the building. That's why it's there. And besides aesthetics, you know, I I think it looks
good. >> It does. That's okay. >> Okay. One thing to say about it as a as an alternate is that whether you know you prefer it or not as part of the aesthetic of the building, it involves a single trade, which is masonry. And
items that involve a single trade are often simple to add or subtract and thus are good candidates to be bid alternates. >> Yeah. Okay, >> good point. Thank you. >> That's good to know. Thank Thank you. It sounds if it protects the building
that it might be a good thing to have as an add alter in it. >> Y >> Yep. >> Just to go through some of the other smaller items that I had put on here. Um we had uh there is some back and forth
in our working group in in regards to what we're doing around the perimeter of the driving uh as it pertains to granite curbing, vertical granite curbing, and how things would be paved. We had about $95,000 in vertical granite curbing. We understand that if something does get reduced in areas that maybe aren't
hightraicked or aren't high plowed, that will need to be replaced with something. And so we put a small number on there, we that's something that would need to be worked out between um the town and the designer to identify areas that could reduce some of the cost with granite. >> Yep.
>> Um other smaller items, we had a unit pa reduction. This may not come to to fruition as we go through the options of what could be used. Um, this is something we may have used in a previous job that uh thought we could use something else. I think that still needs to be fleshed out uh in our working groups, but could potentially save
around 15 grand. There was also a question about the site sign. Currently, the estimator is carrying around $25,000 for that. Maybe there's another option where we reduce the um what the specs are out there and create a less expensive sign. Ryan, can can I ask is that is that the permanent
sign for the building or is that the sign that's put up during construction to give everybody credit? >> Permanent. >> It's a permanent sign that's on the street >> for And they have how much now? 20. That's a hell of a sign. >> 29,000.
>> Are you saying you're not Are you saying you're not going to keep the credit sign for us up there permanently after the building opens? >> Well, no. I I would certainly love to see it, but not at $35,000. >> Yeah, that that that's a rather generous number, but understand that that's the
same sign you probably saw in Wilberham, the sign out on the street. It's the same same sign. >> No, this is much >> I don't remember it, but All right. >> Excuse me. >> It's bigger. This proposed sign is bigger.
>> No, it's the same. Absolutely the same. >> How big is it? I don't know. It's maybe five feet high by six feet wide. It's >> Well, you got to be able to read it, guys. >> Okay, let's move on.
>> Driving by in a car. Yeah. >> Some other items have come up. We'll give you >> just based on some of the comments that we that we gathered from everyone in the committee, there were some mechanical questions in regards to uh certain areas being heated with certain fan coils,
whether or not a a a substitution for unit heaters in potentially non-traded areas could be switched out. I put a small reduction to something that maybe the mechanical engineer could be put in there for 10,000. Um these two the the last two items
these are something that I brought up and these are fairly common in value engineering exercises is is looking at the overall scope for what we have for both plantings and for architectural mill work and putting a goal of of a reduction of a small percentage whether it's five or 10%. Um
this would be at the purview of of uh the director and I think of the working group to identify maybe areas that either there's a reduction in mill work or maybe does not need full architectural mill work and could be procured um through some sort of an FF& package if it's not going to be highly
trafficked or or affect the aesthetics of uh common areas. So ultimately those that uh I put I given to Katie for the presentation added just north of $300,000. Uh we also wanted to identify uh to the
board that now that we have the bids in for our utility projects. We were currently budgeting a million dollars for all of that. With the two bids that we had received, um I believe we're roughly around uh around $700,000
between the two. We understand that there's still some work that's going to need to be bid out for the clearing. Uh Dan is working on procuring that. The hope is that we still are able to realize some savings on that million dollar uh number. Um we put a round number of $150,000
that will start to realize itself as we get further into design to design and uh Dan gets um a sharper point on exactly what that cost is going to be for clearing. >> Okay. Thank you, Brian. Um, >> so I want to throw a question out to the
committee. So, let me go back to Matt Stur, please. >> Yep. >> The working group, the way I understand it, the working group, and from what I remember, I should say, we closed quite a few items in the working group. >> We did. >> You haven't had a chance to put that on
this matrix yet. No, I I um as we were working through that uh I made a few notes of what we had closed on the way through and I have that document that I can pull up now to go through the items that remained open
or that we had flagged for discussion if that was actually going to be my suggested next step to take this list and >> what I'm trying to do is I want to make sure the committee is is comfortable with the fact that the working group did some separate work on their phone and
tried to close some of these items and it's primarily by se myself, Katie, Dan Velquick and Vert.ex and John Catlin working on that. So I just want to make sure the committee understands that being comfortable with what we closed >> some of it's real easy. So
>> I have a question. Will we be able to uh tell today what exactly we have in add alternates as opposed to uh the building you know itself that >> we have a pretty good handle on it. I mean,
>> yeah, but I don't think we'll have a precise mainly because as we get the final estimate, we'll look at the ad alternates with you as a committee and prioritize them. And I think as as Brian said, we we'd like to keep them limited.
>> I think five or six alternates. You might go a little bit more than that, but that's asking a lot because contractors get kind of bogged down in that. >> That's a good point, John. So, one thing that we will need to do as we identify our alternates is the um we'll need to
have a vote of the committee on what the priority is because when we bid the project, we will need to take those alternates in order um >> on on bid day. >> Ellen, are you satisfied with that? >> Pardon?
>> Ellen, I'm asking Ellen if she's satisfied with that or she had some other comment. >> No, I guess that'll work. I mean, how soon do you think we'll be dealing with that though? Because John said not until we after we have the the estimate >> April.
>> It'll be April. >> Okay. >> We got the final estimate mid to mid to late April. We'll have 100% or 90% estimate. And at that time, he'll have more accurate numbers on the ad alternates, the option, the optional ad
alternates. And then um then I think the committee will sit down and hash out what's what's important in in the list, you know, prioritize it. >> Yeah, that works for me. >> I thought that the um we were going to
get 60% on on the construction documents in June. >> No, it's it's closer than that. >> No, we're going to be 100% on the documents in April. Well, that's that's great news. I took that off of our schedule. So, if it's
ahead of schedule, that's even better. >> Yeah, the documents are moving ahead. The one hold up is Dan V was bringing up at our working meeting is that getting the final approval from the bureaucrats and at the state level might not be till
August. and that we and I think Ken and I were talking about the fact will that actually impede would it possibly stop the project? If it could stop the project, we don't want to bid it early, but we could bid it earlier. And I and I
think Brian and and Matt might comment on that. We might be able to bid earlier. I'm just, you know, I'm concerned about where the economy is going. Right now, we're in a pretty good position, but you know, this crazy stuff in the Middle East could really stick a
something in our spokes. >> The next item on the agenda is going to be the schedule. So, let's kind of finish up the value engineering. So, is the committee satisfied that the update we gave the psycho board update was actually coming at the end, but we're going to do it right now, I think,
because this is the re this is what we gave for the select board update. And for anyone who doesn't know, I wasn't there that we had no questions and no comments from the select board, the Zoom people or anyone in the room. So it was a very clean uh presentation by Kate.
Um, so I I think it's good that we got this this list to start with here and then this list I'm hoping will expand uh as we get further and further along and potentially, you know, look at other >> things we can potentially save the dollar on or things that might impact
the the budget and go up. >> But does but but given the new timeline, does that need to be completed by midappril? I guess I'm confused on John saying that we're well ahead on construction documents and it'll be in April and not June and you saying that
we can continue to add to the list of >> No, what I'm sorry I missed. What I should have said is as we go through the process, Vertex will then determine if we need to add or subtract some items from this list. I guess that's a better
way to put it. and and the help uh with Dennis was saying the um the drawings are well on their way. They're they're going to be completed. They can sit and wait completed until we're sure we're comfortable with the permits before we
go out to bid. And while they're sitting completed, there may be an issue that might come up that we might want to look at and make an adjustment on. That'll give us more time if you push it right out to the edge. Right now, we've always been our our team has always been on a
schedule of April with a bid in May. But but depending upon some of this environmental stuff, it's really important that we don't get contractors on board until we're absolutely sure. Uh, I think as Brian brought up at the
last meeting, um, you can hold a bit for a little while, but you can't hold it, you know, 30 30 days would be >> max we'd like to do. We've done 60, but it's really uncomfortable. >> Um, I have a question. Um, Ken, it's
Ellen. Um here where we're showing plus on the um top line where we have 15,730 it says plus 565 uh 247. Is that meaning that we're
currently that much over budget from what the town gave us? Because I know there's a contingency that if we want to only ask the town for 10 million for the taxpayers, right? But we can get the additional 1.5 million from the
taxpayers if we don't get enough grants or get enough uh fundraising or whatever. So what does this mean? I mean if we're looking at the 305,000 plus
150,000 that's 455,000. Does that mean we can subtract that from the 565? >> Yes. that we're over. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Okay. But then we're still over by what?
100 >> um approximately 115,000. >> Exactly. >> Correct. And that's and that's what we're working on right now. And to give some clarity because of a meeting that I did have with our town manager,
our goal is to borrow the $10 million. And there is also separate different funding sources that we have that we're tracking with it. The added buffer for borrowing was explicitly there in the event that the grants did that the CDBG grant does
not come through at this point. And so there's a little bit of a if it's one or the other type of a deal. And so that's how we've structured our kind of total project budget. So these numbers that we've shown here, we're trying to get that number down with the overages that we're showing right now. We understand
there's a lot of other irons in the fire as it comes to other grants and other potential funding sources that we have inclusive of donations and um fundraising. But we're also going to be working on some other things in order to try to get our budget as a whole down. And it would
leads me to one other item that we have. With the documents being as far along as they are, we may be in a position now to go out and get some preliminary quotes for furniture that's going to be in that building. And that will put a sharper point on some of our soft costs that we have and potentially find some
realization in savings on that as well. >> Okay. So, at this point in time, we're pretty much unchanged on the total project cost at this point in time. Just rough figures. >> John is going to emphasize that we
really don't know exactly where we stand until we actually go out to bid. But between now and then, we're trying to determine ways that we potentially could save and we're we're looking at the fact that some funding may come through and some funding may not come through. So that's >> was just kind of moving along trying to
stay where we are at this point in time. That's the way I see it. >> Okay. >> Okay. So Matt and committee, is it important for us to go through the list that Matt has got join us? Things that are closed. How
does everyone feel about that? >> Happy to pull that up. Great. I'll do that. Making sure folks can see the Excel file on my screen. I was going to edit this live while we're doing this. >> Brave man. >> Yeah. Um, so I'll go through these. Um,
some of them are um were already close. I actually hid those rows. Uh, but one thing that we had talked about was the um possibility of um I think simplifying the envelope. And these were Ken comments about possibly eliminating a couple of windows. We talked about that
and we closed that among the the working groups. I don't think that's something that uh we um were thinking we were going to pursue. Uh one thing that was open uh was um about APAC uh and can we provide space
and electrical as required for APAC um in storage room 122 off the multi-purpose room. Um, so that was something that we identified if there's a space requirement that there might be a cost impact associated with and wanted to bring that forward to uh to the
committee for discussion. I don't know if there's any more you want to say about that. Ken, this was one of >> Yeah, I just leave it now and when we get to the cons there's another discussion with Apac that's not for tonight. But the important thing to me
that I brought this up was that we need to put on the final drawings at least some electrical requirements in that room that don't have that doesn't have electrical. It's a minor change I would think for John's team to do that. >> Can I just ask a clarifying question? I
don't have the drawings in front of me. Um, but we had sort of talked about having that closet be on the like if you're looking at the plans, the lefthand side entrance into the multi-purpose room. I just wanted to
make sure that was not the wall that the general donation plaque was intended to be on. >> No, the there's already a door to this room that we're talking about. U comes in. It's It's basically the big storage room off the uh multi-purpose
room, just carving out a spot for a desk for them to work at and some power. >> I thought we had talked about him being able to enter that door through the hallway instead of needing to go into that room. >> We can change that if if that's the main thing just to make a provision to that
to get some electrical. We can decide on the layout. So, >> we would work we'd also work with him. He might want to pick a different spot. We want to work with him to make sure that he's comfortable where we're going to put him. >> There are lots of op lots of options.
>> Okay. So, this is still open is is what we're getting at and we can see we have to work on it. >> And just to jump in the the intention what what we're going through here are I don't know if the committee has the appetite for are we going through every line item here of what we're going or is this going to be cost impact for people
to to kind of chime in on? I had been planning to go through the top part of this list that is just cost impact items that were also still open. >> So that's like uh maybe 30 or so items. It it um I think it's going to be manageable.
>> Okay. >> Uh see that was closed. Um parking lot walkways. Um, so this was sort of getting back to what uh Brian was talking about and that we um were
discussing as part of uh sort of general site reductions that were identified on the select board slide about um possibly making some of that an alternate whether that's uh curbing um walkways. But we
had talked about the possibility to um put in something um lesser and then uh be able to add I think granite curbing was the uh the alternate in this location. >> Yeah. So >> this is going to this is going to need
another discussion. Um I say we keep it open, but I like the idea that you put the the cost saving in there. We'll work on trying to figure out a way to to get the cost savings. John is totally opposed to us changing those islands down the middle and taking away those
islands for people to to walk on towards the building. And you know, that's his position. So, we're going to have to determine as a committee >> if we see another way to uh make any changes on that. >> But, so
chime in on that. So, it would be helpful to take a look at the target parking lot in Lemonster. That's your preferred, Ken. That's your preferred or Katie's preferred. >> No, what we're talking about is the difference between u no raised. This particular item was
brought up by Katie and myself. I believe that there are raised areas down the raised penins islands down the middle which separate the cars like four feet, five feet wide. They're granite curbed and they have a concrete surface. There's three of them. Plus the rest of
the site, as pointed out by Vert.Ex, we potentially could look at a different kind of a granite slope granite curve rather than a more expensive granite curve. So, >> so, so, so if I go to the Target parking lot in Lemonster, I will see your preferred solution. No, my my preferred
solution was what we saw up in um Wilberham, but the direction of the walkway is 90 degrees from the direction of these walkways. They're just striped. These areas are simply striped. They don't have the curb and they don't have the concrete surface.
>> Yeah. Now, if I can chime in for a moment, right, the real issue here is that the the one in Wilberham, nobody walks along it because it's not taking them anywhere. On this parking lot, which is much larger, the the uh walkways are the ways in which the
elder, let's say with a walker or what have you, walk safely between the cars to the front of the building. And what happens is that if you don't have that, they're walking out on the parking lot and maybe at Target that's not a
problem. But here we have um our average age is about 70 and we we go from 65 let's say up to 90 95. This is a safe place to walk. Cars cannot move into that space because the curb is
there. It's for safety only and access from a fairly good distance if you park out far. So, and all of our centers have that arrangement. In Wilberham, we don't go front to back. We go side to side. If
you go to Long Meetal, you'll see that. And and actually, every other project that we've done has the curbs for safe passage. That's the idea. It's safety. And we don't we don't have a what's the
we don't know what the cost difference is. >> Well, it's it's if you just pave it and paint it, the cost difference is pretty substantial, but understand that we're doing this for safety,
>> for the welfare of the seniors walking to the building. Um, that's a very important part and and and and we do that because we've had problems in the past from previous centers that we've learned from that
this issue is an important one. Also keeps people from driving over the space into the car across from them too or hitting a a pedestrian. >> So my recommendation here is that when we find an item like this that's still
probably unresolved, we get to a list of the the ones that are open and do that later in another meeting even if we have to have a separate meeting just for that small. >> Yeah. Sorry. I I feel I would need to see some illustrations.
>> Absolutely. You know, it's very hard for me. I mean, certainly I think that safety of our people and the parking lot is going to be one of the areas that's, you know, the most potential for um problems particularly depend the weather
here. I mean, sometimes you're going to be dealing with rain, sometimes snow um or sleet. So, I think safety is really critical. Um, so I I don't feel like I can make a decision right now. >> Right. And I think what needs to happen
here is we using satellite views of other parking lots that John has done. We can show you in the satellite views on another meeting. And I we have the site plan. So the way it's going to go at this particular point is that the site plan that's been drawn by John is let's go into the planning board. We're
going to show it this way when we go in. If we have to amend it later or make a change, we'll amend it later. But we have to move Yeah. >> So, I think that's a good one. We need more more clear illustration of what we're talking about here >> so people can understand it.
>> The note that I made in the matrix, if folks can see that is pending review of photo examples, I think that's going to be key to understanding what we're talking about here. >> Okay. Go ahead. >> Right. But but I think as I you know in in terms of selling the building to the
public if at the end of the day we decide that the safety it you know trumps the additional cost. I think being able to say having the parking lot done this way was
substantially more expensive than a cheaper alternative, but it gives us a higher >> level of safety. So that you know the select board or you know some town Yes. or the finance committee well they needed to spend the extra 200 whatever
it is $100,000 on this rather than that. So it it kind of shows that our due diligence has resulted in what is perhaps more expensive for the town, but it's a better choice. >> Okay,
next item is distur. >> All right, we had a few that were closed. Uh and then we had a note on here about plans may require updates subject to the permitting that is ongoing um related to um MISA, MEPA um
etc. So that one is not something we can resolve right now um unless we get further guidance on that. I don't know Dan if you wanted to make any comment about that. I do see that there's a permitting update on the uh on the agenda. We can talk about this there if you want.
>> Yeah. there. >> All right. Um, so then we had a few items here. Um, these are all flagged in the light blue, which is coordination to be addressed in the construction documents. So, some of
this is coordination that just hasn't happened yet because we're only in um DD and is a level of detail that you typically would coordinate as part of the construction document phase. Um, >> that's good.
>> So, these are all open and say will be addressed in CDs for that reason. >> Uh, we talked about the generator and this was a a comment actually that was made in a couple of different places. So, you'll see a couple of areas where
I've highlighted this one in yellow because a couple of people made the same comment. So, we talked about the generator uh needing to be in the base bid of the uh the project. That was a a decision um that um that was made. So,
that's a closed item. We don't need to dwell on that. Um masonry um we talked about this. This is about that masonry water table that we talked about being a good candidate for being a bid alternate. Um, so if
unless there's any further discussion on that, that's the way that I think we left it in this matrix. >> So that that should be closed, right? >> Um, if like that's a discussion. If folks would like me to close it, I can do that. >> Is that the veneer you're talking about
or some other masonry? >> Yes, >> that's the same item. >> I think that's closed. >> It it can be closed. I think we we've talked about that earlier in the meeting. I will close that here. >> Okay. Now
>> that says that it's in both the base bed bid and as an alternate. Are you correcting that to just an alternate? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. It was it was um duplicated accidentally in the initial estimate.
>> So we corrected that and it's only going to be carried as an alternate. >> Okay. >> Okay. Uh let's see. That was closed. Um, we have a couple items here that were related to the kitchen and uh, Dave,
thank you for the um, extensive review on these and the input on the uh, the kitchen. Um, so there's a couple of items here. I think maybe 10 or 12 that were pertaining to um, adjustments to the kitchen layout.
This is going to be one of the most important things that we do and how we resolve this. Um, and the committee is going to have to be on board, I guess, if there's a price increase here, which I think Mr. Ken thinks there is a price
increase. So I'm inclined to have this again as almost a separate item for >> an hour discussion by the committee in another meeting. >> Maybe a separate meeting with with these open items because this is a lot. The kitchen is a lot.
>> So So when would we need to have the kind of finalized kitchen design? I know that you know and again Dave Cyborg thanks very much for all the hard work you put in on the kitchen. Um, when would we need to have a finalized
kitchen design done? Um, by the middle of April, >> John, >> how about the end of this month? >> Yeah, exactly. >> Yeah, it needs to be sooner than later. The the issue with the kitchen is
involves MEP, mechanical, electrical, plumbing, fire protection. um equipment um some design issues although I think you know listening to Dave and working out some of the issues I think we're
able to um integrate the design into the existing building so we're not changing any of the footprint or enlarging you like adding a a um refrigeration unit outside the building which increases the size of the building. So, we we would
like to be able to keep that. And I think we got a pretty good plan for Dave. I haven't heard feedback yet from him. I think we actually we did because we added in another reachin refrigerator. Um and then there's a lot of items which I I we talked with Katie
about too that could be FF and E. They're more surface mounted. Um so right now we would have to have a decision on that. I do not have my engineers engineering this. The hood increases in size, the Anel system
increases, the um heating system for the makeup air increases in size, and then we would be adding in the freezer and walk-in refrigerator unit. And and we're we've asked our electrical engineer to review the power requirements that might
be there because we be going electric on the stove if pos if that's the proc on the hot water heater and the increase of power for the hood and the refrigeration units. If that pushes us over a certain amount, our electric room may not be
large enough and it may require a double door system because of the size of the service. We're looking into all those aspects. I'm hoping I have an answer to that uh probably late next week in terms of power requirements.
That's kind of where we are. >> You have a a cost estimate related to those things. Are are you waiting to bundle that with the April uh cost estimate or will we have a look at the difference between kitchen drawing?
>> Yeah, so far so far we've talked to two different kitchen suppliers and we've not gotten any answers back, but I I believe we will. And I think Ken gave us another uh uh kitchen person I think in LOL or Lawrence and uh we're reaching
out to them too and we're giving them the copy of the plan along with the equip kitchen equipment both plans and and give an idea of the difference. The real issue might come down to power and mechanical systems not so much the
equipment. >> Okay. So since I'm the chairman and since this is a touchy issue, do we want to have a discussion about whether we agree that we need to make these changes according to what Dave
Cybo has recommended? And how strong is Dave Cyborg's uh uh thoughts here that we make these changes? So, we need Katie and Dave, I guess, to lead us here because this is going to be a cost impact for sure. Do
we want to talk about it tonight? Do we want to think about it longer or how do you want to respond? Well, in my in my view, um, the kitchen has always been that is the ability for the town of Air to have an
active and engaged meal service serving 30 to 40 meals at lunch and, you know, potential for 125, let's say, or 150 at a large, you know, six, seven times a year. That has always been, in my view,
the per the fund one of the fundamental purposes of the building. Um, and I I think that the kitchen needs to be designed as a working kitchen that will be used frequently to provide meals. Um,
it's not meant nor in my view was ever meant to be a mere showplace. Um, and uh, so whatever we need to do to make it a functional kitchen that can do what, you know, Katie and her staff will
need to do it is fine with me. I I think it is a fundamental part of the building. >> But there's no misunderstanding that it's a functional kitchen even the way it was originally designed because >> the problem with the problem with the original design is there's nothing there
to work with. There's no mixers. There's no kettles. There's there's you've got a stove. That's it. >> If you need to make mashed potatoes or cake mixes or something, you still need something of a decent size to be able to
mix these things and process them. >> I think Dave's got a very good point and Dennis does too. I did reach out to Wilberham and I think I copied a few folks on it. They do 30 to 50 meals every day and every week they do 125 one
one one major meal for 125 people, right? >> That's out of the kitchen they have there now. >> But they don't cook their meals there. Their ASAP comes in and brings prepared meals and serves them out of there. They're not cooking in that.
>> Yeah, I'll verify that with Paula. That's not what she told me, but you know, good point. It's a commercial kitchen. We I I have a question about this outdoor refrigerator. >> That's not going to happen. >> Isn't that something that got added on?
And what is the rationale for that? >> What was the There's no outdoor. >> It's no longer outdoor. It we we fit it into the um uh uh we fitted into the um uh the pantry area.
So if if I may too um as part of this and I will not pretend to be an expert on either side um a kitchen expert or or but the exercise that we're doing for VE here is because of where we see our budget currently and just to advise here
when when there are comments and we're making ads which may be valid that may come with added or additional cuts that need to be made or other decisions that need to be made at this point. And so as we make our way through, I think Ken, you're right that
it kind of speaks to a bigger point of potentially looking at this holistically of a of a kitchen and seeing where we sit as we shake out from this VE exercise to see what or if anything can be added into this at this point. >> Okay. Well, and that's where I'm really
looking to see the um a more accurate cost estimate because if it's all if the added cost is all in the ME is mostly in the MEP, it's a different conversation than whether it's in >> the equipment itself. And without the
cost estimate, we don't know that. and you know I have a donor who's interested in the sponsoring the walk-in refrigerator if we if we go that direction that helps to >> not put us in the situation Brian that you're just bringing up.
>> Yep. >> But if the main cost is in the MEP well then that's a whole different situation. >> Okay. So let me take it for you just to John for a minute. Is there a way, John, this is for John. Um, is there a way to detail, and I think
you're going to tell me it's the stove, but I'll leave it up to you to tell me what would be the the the material change that would impact the MEP part of it. It's not going to be pots and pans. It's not going to be a mixer. It's going to be some other
>> change in in layout. So maybe we have to decide what if that material change is valid is something we have to consider rather than just what fits in the kitchen and what we work with the tools in the kitchen and and uh
>> well the I think Katie brought up a good point and and Dave has been reinforcing it in terms of how we want this kitchen to function. Most of our kitchens do function as fullervice kitchens. However, a lot of this is not a very
large multi-purpose room. To give you an idea that in in in um Long uh not Long, but in um Holio, we have a 4,000 square foot multi-purpose room. We service probably 150 to 200 meals a day. That's
a full massive kitchen. They don't have a lot of cake mixing things going on, but they do have full walk-in refrigeration and what have you. What what was what was discussed today with the cost estimator was something that was a little bit new for me that the
larger stove and the um the hood requirements are mechanical costs that I had not really contemplated and also our electrical engineer. This is a two-prong thing. We have a the other issue is that Katie's
looking at giving CDBG money which requires this thing to be 100 and Ken looked into this too 100% electric. Well, our service already jumped from what our normal buildings are about 800 up to a,000 amps and and that's because
of the requirement by the state to have uh charging stations outside. And now that we're we're looking at an all electric interior, which means that the um the stove, the hot water heater, and if we do the fireplace, we may
eliminate the fireplace because of this. Um that adds a lot more power to it. And she's trying to work that out right now. We discussed that today with her. So, I think that we should probably table this whole discussion until we get more firm
numbers back so that Katie and Dave and the working committee and and ultimately this whole committee can make a decision and we don't have that answer right now. Um, and um there's a lot of things at play here. So, I I I really think it's
great that we could find somebody who would donate money for the walk-in refrigeration. We may want that no matter what. you know, it's just a really a nice thing if somebody wants to pay for it. So, I think we need to leave this. I think Ken was hinting at this that we need to have another discussion
at another time. We might be here till midnight trying to work this one out. So, that's my take. >> Yeah, I agree with that. And it's not kind of I opened it that this particular piece of work is going to take a separate a separate meeting um with only
a few items on the agenda. This particular piece, the kitchen, and a few other open items. And then because this is just too extensive, there's too much to unknown. Your vertex can comment. >> In my opinion too, Ken, I think maybe this is an exercise for the working group, but it's got to be dedicated
strictly to the budget. And I think we need to collectively as a working group agree on things that are realized for savings here and kind of reset where we are right now and our comfortability about our total project budget. And then at that point, we're able to assess hopefully we have some firm numbers and
what things are as it pertains to this to this kitchen and these other ads. And then hopefully at that point we make an educated decision on how these are going to be attacked. >> Okay. So I'm going to ask the committee, but if if we meet as a working group, we're going to obviously have to have
Dave that come that day and join us. Not just the normal working group, but Dave will have to be part of that discussion. And then does the committee feel comfortable that the working group would work the majority of it out and come back with a recommendation to the committee and then you guys can make the
final comments and just go around. I think that the the you know to John's point the electrification of the building while there may be additional costs associated with that it also I I puts us in line for some substantial
grants from national grid because the building is now eligible for energy saving credits or whatever they're called um which would potentially offset the entire cost of the additional to the kitchen. Um, so I think that that needs
to be that is we're adding expenses to the kitchen, but it makes us eligible for increasing grants grant funds or at least that's my understanding. >> So I I'd take it in two parts. I'd resolve what we really need in the kitchen first, then look at the national
grid a mass save uh system secondly to that, but and that working on that separately. So, I think the original meeting should be set up with the working group with Dave, with Katie, and determine exactly what we're going to settle for in the kitchen design, and
then take it from there. >> My only other comment with with grant incentives like that is you don't realize that that cash till after the project is completed, after substantial completion, and then you get your check at the end of the day. And so we would still need to be comfortable that we
were able to appropriate those funds first in order to receive that reimbursement. >> No, I understand. And and if you know and again if that means that we would need to dip into the 1.5 contingency
for the in order to borrow the money and then repay it when we get the check from National Grid. I'm fine with that. >> Yeah. Okay. Um, do we all agree that this needs to be a separate meeting with the working group and then come back to the committee? Bonnie, how do you feel
about that? >> I I agree. Yes, >> I agree. >> So, Linda, any comment? Ellen, >> I agree. >> I agree. But I think our time frame is very short. Don't we have to have this
done by the end of this month, correct? If that's what I heard uh John say. >> Should be done in a couple weeks. Yeah. Okay. >> Next. >> I second Linda's sentiment. >> Is is the next working group next Tuesday?
>> I think it's next Tuesday, right? >> Believe so. >> Yeah. Okay. So, we'll meet Tuesday. We'll put it on the agenda for Tuesday. >> What time? >> Uh, it's one What do we mean? One o'clock. >> One o'clock. Yep.
>> Okay. There is quite a bit to unpack as part of the uh the kitchen comments here. I think that that's probably advisable to >> just move right through that talk. See what >> stand alone. Yep. Uh we had a few comments on code and fire alarm that were closed.
>> Right. >> Move past those. Um as far as site items, I think actually wait a minute, that was the end of things that we had flagged as cost items. I see we're now into comments that we had started to go through and that we had determined were
actually not cost items, which is what these are. >> So, I think actually that was all of the things that um were cost items that required sort of more discussion with this group because now we're getting into things like this um mechanical
items to be confirmed at CDs. Um >> all right. So, it's my understanding that what we're looking at for this meeting did not include those darkened u sections that you've added subsequent to
the the the the working group putting together their comments. Am I right about that? So, you've bracketed where you have things closed, you've got a bracketed for instance, this one as the discussion will be eliminated and so forth. Um, >> yep.
>> So, based on what we closed tonight, it would be proper, I guess, for you guys to supply that revised >> reissue this. Yep. >> To the committee. Am I right about that? >> Yep, I can do that. >> And then we'd all have the items that
are open still under cost impact, and we'd see the items that have been closed under cost impact. and the rest of the document we'd have to review on our own to see how those comments are going to land somewhere else either in a CD or in a revision or they're done. One of the
other iss >> that good with everyone on the committee. >> We want to move on to the next item on the agenda if that's fine. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Great. I'll stop sharing and I'll
>> Okay. So, thank you for that. Yes. Yeah, >> there's a lot of work in that section obviously. >> So now we have uh lead >> environmental expert Damian Kellquick on the agenda, but I don't see him on the screen if I'm
mistaken. >> I think he dropped off a little bit ago. He might have had another meeting. >> Oh, okay. All right. So, um, project the next item on the agenda at 510 is the project schedule updates, and it's way
beyond 510, I'm afraid. Um, so the long and the short of it is on project I I'll try to paraphrase this if I can for Dan. There are two environmental um requirements that are beyond the town. They're they're by the state. One is the
mass endangered species act, MISA, MBSA. The other one is the Mass Environmental Policy Act, MEPA on capitals. Dan has had several meetings with these folks and recently reported to the working group that he feels we're in very good
shape on the Mass Endangered Species Act that we have pretty much given them our site drawings. We've given them now remember this is something that involves beyond our site this so-called
2:1 we are going to use a little over three acres of land we're actually going to end up giving them somewhere else among along the DPW somewhere in the vicinity of seven acres of land that'll become part of conservation and that is he has sketched that up with God had
taken it to them they've had a meeting they seem to be in line with that it doesn't impact our schedule >> and and and do we have the the town agency that will be acquiring the land and then hiring the third party to
oversee it? Is that all in place? >> Conser it'll be the conservation commission. We've we've had preliminary discussions with them and it seems to be best to just go right to the conservation commission, but it's not in 100% resolved. Let's leave it that way the moment. But the discussion we have
had that they would have no issue with taking it. Um and that would not involve someone from out of town like another uh land conservation trust or something like that would be just go stay internal to our town at this point in time. So >> I thought I thought the the law required
the conservation trust. No >> no no it could be multiple a conservation commission has other land in town they have and they can they can take another piece of land as well. >> Okay. Um, okay. The second one, which is the complicated one, the Massachusetts
Environmental Policy Act. As you remember, we have put in place guarded engineering as our agent working between Dan, the town, Dan, and the state and our committee or whatever you want to call it. And the application for the
mass environmental policy review. He's got the preliminary schedule, which I was hoping he'd be able to use tonight for us. But basically, if everything goes just right, that would be resolved somewhere in August. That's kind of what
it is. It's like a five to six month period of time. And he again laid this out, I think, in an email, right, Matt? I we Okay, we may have to share the email with the committee. We should have done that, I guess, at this point. >> I can do that. >> But we were hoping that Dan would, you
know, be here to give you a report. So the apprehension is that we have good seem to have good information and solid resolution with the endangered species and if you guys remember there was one only one issue that that's the blanding turtle issue. The other one was the discussion
about whether we had a plant on the site there is no plant there so we only have to resolve the blanding issue uh blending turtle issue and that is being worked on. So he expects to get documents back from them and keep moving. The Environmental Policy Act is
just a long drawn out process. So what can we do? So we think, we're not sure. We I we can reach out maybe to the town manager, which I think we've already done, try to find out if he can contact other people that maybe can help the
process move along. We're not sure, but it definitely the only issue that we have that would slow down our schedule. John Catlin has just told us we're he's on schedule and and this is the only concern. So, the way I left it in a in a
discussion with Dan Vince Gelquick was can at least we get a commitment that it will not be longer than August. In other words, if it's proposed for August, I'm concerned that it could become longer
than August. How do we work with the agency? How do we work with others that maybe we can have a contact with to at least commit that it doesn't slow us any more than that? >> When you say slow, does that mean you're suggesting that the bid couldn't go out
until August or September? Well, that that's part of what we're trying to resolve is we need someone to give us an answer and this is for the the vertex folks as well. One of the questions I posed was does it even because it's a review and
because it is does is it timesensitive that we can't do anything to that time or is there a possibility that we can continue doing what we're doing with a commitment that we'll complete the process the review during what we're doing the bidding and other other stuff
that we're doing. Why do we have to wait all the way to the end for them to say you know you're okay? So that's a question we're trying to get an answer to >> and and who who would supply that answer? >> It's got to be uh state I guess mass environmental policy act people and who
represents them that >> and that it will have an it'll have an effect on our cost estimate too. we have escalation and um my engineer today my cost estimator and I'm sure most of us are aware of the disaster right now in
the Middle East and the cost uh he feels right now there may be some small material costs but the real issue is the cost of fuel transportation and related work on the site if it really jumps if
gas and diesel jumps to5 $6 a gallon he feels it'll have an impact on our cost. Uh the other issue too is that we do have escalation and if we could bid and I don't know whether we're going to be able to do this and that's what Ken was explaining.
If we could bid in June or May May we could start construction in the summer which is a great time to start. Um, but we don't take that risk as as I think Brian has said that uh we're not going to hold a bid for 90 days waiting for
somebody to give us a permission. So, we need to bid close to wherever we think either we get an okay that don't worry August we're going to approve it. We just got to go through the process or we're going to have to wait till August to get that. And so the only what's
going >> conditions too by the way >> what's going on right at the moment is that Dan Ven Kelquick is basically representing us in the process. So if I ask Dan a question he goes to guard it
goes to the state guarded represents us but we need more solid resolve that it doesn't go beyond August at this point in time. So the statement that I made to the town manager was can we get a solid commitment that
we will not go beyond August. We're not attempting to short change the review. We're going to do everything that's required. So we're not saying shortcuts, but we'd like to commit get some solid commitment beyond what we're hearing from God as they talk to them. How do we
talk to? So that that's a problem to do to work on. So would it be approp would it be appropriate for the committee to write a letter to our state rep, state senator, town manager and select board
urging the state environmental policy act review committee to move expeditiously on this particular project given you know x y and z. that is um I
mean that does not seem like an unreasonable thing to do. >> You know I I opinion that nothing that we've done been doing is unreasonable but unfortunately that there doesn't seem to be any solid uh statement there
other than what God has proposed in it schedule. So >> yeah, I if I can inter Ken hates it when >> Kate Ken hates it when I interrupt a little bit, but but I I do want to point out August as Brian and and uh Matt will
confirm here. If we bid after August, that means it's it's it's the bid process is about four weeks, six weeks plus getting closure on the contract. That'll put critical part of this project in winter conditions which is
going to increase the cost of the project. >> Winter conditions are if we could bid in the summer, get it going, we'd have all our concrete work, we have our decks poured, we'd probably even get the building enclosed. Winter conditions
will be a lot less of a problem. But but if we bid in in September, we're talking about resolving the bid sometime mid to late October, getting the project started November 1st or that that puts us really at risk for winter conditions.
It doesn't mean they can't build it through the winter, but it's a lot more expensive. >> I think that we know that already, but thank you for the comment, John. My opinion would be is when we need to have these answers for when we're ready to go out for our last cost estimate. We own
one through Catalin. We also contracted to have another one to reconcile against it when we would know when we'd be going out to bid, but also whether or not if we could go out to bid early, what the what the impacts could be if
something comes along and we've issued and we're allowed to issue a building permit before acceptance from MEPA. What is our slush funer kitty at that point in the event that there's there's modifications made or required when we already have a contractor under under contract?
>> Just to make a comment on that. So there shouldn't be MEEP is not an agency that requires typically requires modifications, >> but we think we're going to cover that with with the uh discussion that Dan has had. You know, they've seen our
drawings. So Dan has given Misa the the civil engineer drawings. So they so the they see the retention basin, they see the whole construction process, they they see the land, you know, so that seems to be resolved. Me is this
series of of u outreach that they do to the community, notifications and a lot of other things that require time and they just have a big a big workload, I guess. So >> anyway, I'm throwing it out there because that that's kind of the summary that he would give. I don't think we have anything more than that. Otherwise,
they probably would have sent it over to us. >> Well, could could we could the committee reach out to various constituencies in town? It's my understanding that the environmental policy act is was created
in order to redress environmental justice issues. >> Yeah. >> Which are historic in nature. If we can get some constitu constituencies in town to inform MEEPA or the people in trying to enforce MEPA
or review whatever it is MeEA feels like they should be reviewing that the people in town do not see environmental justice concerns as a result of the construction of this building. In fact, a stronger argument is the construction of the building
would redress environmental justice problems, not exacerbate them. Um, >> so I mean, how do you to whom do you give that message? >> Well, you can keep saying that. You've heard me, you and I have talked about
it. Um, we have guarded who's our representative and >> but I I think I mean what I'm hearing is there are kind of engineering or environmental concerns that are trying to be addressed
when I think it's fundamentally a political desire to see that no harm be caused by what's occurring. And I still haven't heard anyone say, "Identify a harm that's going to happen as a result of this building going up." >> There is there's no harm intended. The
the the process >> or not only intended, there's no harm that's going to occur. >> We know that. The problem is the form itself literally takes days and days or weeks to fill the the the data out. Then they have to review the data. they have
to hire. It's a long data process of forms and applications and they just do not waver from there. >> Yeah. Uh Ken, uh I worked for the Department of Conservation and Recreation, formerly Department of Environmental Management, for 20 years
>> and I can't tell you how many complaints we had about the MEPA um review process. And there's very little you can do about it. I mean, you can you can try and you can do stuff like that. But I'm just saying it's not it's not something
that's easily bulldozed over. >> I agree that's >> and if you you can work and work and work and you'll pick up three days. You know, >> one comment that I would make about that is in the and I'll forward the um
timeline email that Goddard sent to Dan Van Scalpwick in which he forwarded to uh to me. Um but the the timing that led to sort of the August ready date is based on average review times that Goddard has experienced um from past
similar submissions um to the state. And so that's sort of how that end date was arrived at to the um you know to the extent that we can um press to try to accelerate that uh you know we can do
that. Um but that that's where that those August dates came from. We'll see what we can do. >> I want to ask Ellen a question. So Ellen, from your experience with what you've said talked about MEPA,
is that process my concern? My real big question is is MEEP an ongoing process that we go through simultaneous with everything that we're doing or do we have to how far do we wait for MEPA before we go through everything else we have to do? That's my That's my concern.
I want to be able to keep the project moving while Meeper is doing their review and not have it affect the schedule. That's kind of what I'm working. >> Well, I I did not work with directly with projects at Duma because they were handled through the office of executive
um executive office of environmental affairs. >> Yeah. Um, I just dealt with people who we did a lot of construction and things like that and it was always it was always a bear when you were dealing with me. But so I can't tell you that um
there might be some people like um what's her name who works for Devons now? She used to work >> Beth. Yes, Beth would probably be much more um in tune with how Meepa works,
>> but I' I'll talk to you about some ideas of some things you might be able to do offline. >> Okay. Yeah. Dec and I both talked about the idea of uh meeting with Devons or meeting with Mass Development who work with us constantly and see if they had any tips as well. So,
>> yeah. And Beth would be there and again she was in the middle of that kind of stuff. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. So, that's what I've got for that. So, if everyone's okay, we'll move on to the next item. We may have already covered it. It's the next cost estimate
date from from John. >> It's the final date end of April. He starts it around the 15th. >> Okay. it it's a much more comp comprehensive one and you be working with drawings that are probably very close to 95% maybe 100%.
>> All right. So that's a rough idea for vertex as well as when we'll get that. Next item on the agenda is now this is actually important as well. So additional subcommittee updates and I'm going to start in reverse order here.
So, the there's a pre-qualification subcommittee that needs to start because we need to work with Vert.Ex on pre-qualification. Would you like to recommend how you guys get started with Vertex or Vertex? >> Yeah, we've worked with our procurement
manager too to get her on board about this. I I think the hesitation that we've done is just trying to figure out exactly what our schedule's going to be for bidding as we don't we don't want to put the pedal down and get this done and then have to shelf it for months after
that. And so we try to thread the needle to to pre-qualify as soon as we can but to give ourselves enough runway for the bidding procurement window that we have. That being said, uh I think we are ready um to at least send out an initial and have
our kickoff meeting. Um >> Okay. >> And so we we've been in touch with her. We we'll have something sent out uh well before next meeting. Uh and we'll have met by then. >> So let's say within the next couple of weeks, you'll start everybody together.
>> Yeah. the first the the first meeting is going to be an introductory uh kickoff and then we what we review is the RFQ that gets sent out that would be put out under the central register. So once we have consensus with that there's a window of when that gets advertised. We
gather a lot of the statements of qualification and that's where the big lift comes in is when you review those and actually meet several subsequent times after that to to go through your reviews of each individual sub and general contractor.
>> Okay. Thank you. Um so that's if I remind myself it's it's Dave and Dennis that are on that subcommittee I believe. Right. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> Yeah. So yeah, whenever you re you whenever you reach out, Brian, that's fine. And we'll go from there. How often
do you think we'll meet or >> So in all honesty, sometimes uh we're behind the eightball with our schedule and we need to meet weekly on something like this. I'd anticipate we would um every other week and some of which might
just be a check-in and some of them might be a little more in-depth when we get to the actual grading of certain divisions and we need to be on for um for an hour but we try to schedule it and stretch it out so that it gives everyone enough time but we're not making this a full-time job for anybody. >> Mhm.
>> Okay. All right. Thanks. Part of that is also um making the reference phone calls which takes often some time to reach people and get that feedback. >> So that that you you may have see particular value in that for some of your edge conditions. Ripple who might
be like right on the edge of pre-qualifying or not. >> Okay. >> All right. So we'll go back to the the the the top item here under subcommittees which is grants fundraising update and that would be the
CDG and compact IT grants. So Katie, are you available to comment on that? >> Yeah, sure. So um so we found out just before the select board meeting that we unfortunately did not get selected for the compact IT grant. Um that is
unfortunate news. Um that was $170,000 towards the IT and AO for the multi-purpose room. Um we think we wrote a competitive grant, but I don't think that for what we needed. I don't know that we got any bonus points uh based on
uh I believe there bonus points were offered for um people who were making it um infrastructure like website security updates. So, we wrote a competitive proposal, but we weren't in the bonus points um category. So, um that's
disappointing news, but we I've been working identifying additional grants to apply for. We still have the um health foundation of Central Mass out um as well as working on the CDDG grant with uh Rey Freedellander, the economic and
community development manager. And then, um Pioneer Valley planning commission. Yeah. Um so we basically that um as most of you know is a really detailed and involved in the supporting materials for CDBG and that's the one that's the max
of 950,000 for um the upcoming year and we've got all of our supporting documents in line. We're just trying to really narrow down what the actual request will be. Um we've been working with um BABA which is the Build America
by America requirements as well as the um certifying officers for prevailing wages and everything. We're getting that part worked out. Um and then are going to really further define what the topic will be. We we've talked about um steel,
we've talked about mechanical, we've talked about a couple of different options. So, um I will update the group when I have the exact narrative that we'll go through. >> Okay. Thank you. Um I have to take a small break. So, can Dennis and Katie
run for a couple minutes and I'll be back. >> Okay. >> Oh, okay. >> Okay. or do you want me to? >> I don't have access to the >> Okay, I was just going to say since I'm
in the All right, so um that was the end of the grant and fundraising update. So I think that really brings us to the vendor invoice package and I will turn it over to Vert.Ex um so that they can present and we can do a vote on that.
Everyone's muted. Katie, >> that that's me. I apologize. Uh, I did send a a sharing request. Um, someone wants to
provide me access with that. >> Brian, I can also share apparently. Yeah, if you want to pull it up, I can talk through it. >> Sure. >> So, for our monthly invoice package and Katie, I know that you're pressed for time. Um, whenever you're back, we did
receive a an email from town accounting. I think we need to sit down with them one more time to kind of go through our budget. This it may be a best after our working group as well. um that that can be for another time. But for for month ending February, um we are recommending
uh the invoices that we received to date for that. Those include um invoices from ourselves as well as Ken Architecture. Uh Vert.Ex X is the uh design and development fees of $11,000
uh for Catalan architecture uh fees of $70,787 as well as reimburseables for $175. >> Um those have been uh reviewed and approved for payment for a total of $81,962. Um just in transparency, we did have a
question from town accounting. I I think what what Vertex and what we'll be doing um between now and next month is refreshing our entire budget as it is will be implementing some of the savings that we're realizing right now. I I
think what what the disconnect may be is the budget that we're showing in this invoice package needs to be a lockedin budget from what was approved at town meeting. And we're going to have separately our working total project budget that's going to be ebbing and flowing as we go through this design
process. and actually realizing what what costs are going to be. Um the goal being that both of these are going to need to match up at the end when we get to our bidding phase. Um so that that'll be something that we'll work with the working group committee, but I just
wanted to let the committee know. Um so that's what's being recommended for payment this month. Uh packet was sent out to everybody via Katie. Um we do not have any math errors I don't believe this month as I apologize for the one that we had last. So um and that was
reissued as well for month ending in January. >> Okay. Um did everyone on the committee have a chance to look at the actual invoices that are attached to this and understand this is where we are? Would you like to bring them up? Maybe
the OPM is is easy. That's basically the the monthly uh stipen that you guys have been >> projecting, I guess, at this point in time. >> And then uh John's invoice was getting him to 50% maybe on CDs. >> Correct.
>> Excuse me. Um >> I did have a question with town accounting about how um reimburseables are being handled. I just want to make sure and Katie, thank you for answering. I just wanted to make sure that reimburseables are being paid. However,
it's not going to be a situation where we get to the end and a purchase order is has not been extended. So, I I appreciate the answer with that and I think we're all set at this point. We did review the contract to to make sure the validity of any reimbursements uh are all set.
>> Yep. Okay. Okay. So, this just to let people know the reimbursements are John's uh duplicating costs for the civil engineering plans and mailing and whatnot. >> That's taken care of. >> And that was for the planning board submission. >> Yes.
>> My understanding from accounting was that because they were added to the invoice, it doesn't create an issue. We did not use a PO for this contract. So, we will be able to approve and pay out this way. But those um reimburseables
need to fall into another budget line in order to make Catland's total budget not be over. >> Understood. >> Yep. Got it. >> Okay. Um anyone have a comment on the uh
package for the VIP for this month? A total of basically two items plus reimburseables. I put this page back up just because uh for purposes if there was going to be a motion to these have the invoice numbers on them
>> and dates. >> I got I got a just a quick question on this. So today is the 19th. Is it typical that the the invoices for the end of the previous month? That's the way it typically will go. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. >> So I'll accept a motion from for the
amount to pay the uh vendor package. Anybody else? No. All right. I move that we uh approve the vendor invoice package of 228 20225 >> in the total amount of $81,962.
>> I'll second it. >> Any further discussion on the motion for 81,962? hearing. None. We'll put it to a vote. So, Dennis, excuse me, Dennis, >> I >> Ellen, >> I.
>> Linda, >> I >> Dave >> Hi, >> Katie. >> Hi. >> And the chair says I. So, it's voted. Okay, that's that item.
So now we we have covered everything that was on the agenda. We have reached a point. Well, we have >> we haven't done FF and E. Did we skip that? >> Oh, I thought you did it while I was off. I'm sorry. So, we'll go back to the subcommittee update. Is there any subcommittee update
on the FFN portion of the work? >> I skipped it because we didn't have an update. Sorry. Sorry. So, Brian, can I can I ask you you mentioned earlier that we may want to look for the furniture
sooner rather than later? Is that the >> What I was what I was implying is that at the level of detail that we're at right now, we should start seeing some furniture plans and where things are going to go and will allow us to go out to some potential vendors to get some initial quotes on it. Those initial
quotes will give us an idea. Right now, we're going off of a square foot cost and past experience on other projects as to what our FFN costs are going to be. >> So, I I think it is a good time for that. Um, and and John, we'll work with you at the working group as to who's
doing what and who we're reaching out to for that. Um, I know we have a budgeted line item in there for interiors and so we'll we'll discuss that on Tuesday, but I think for the next building committee meeting, it would be good to have an answer on on we'll call it financials on
what we're thinking the FFN package is. And then as it comes to the FFN subcommittee, uh, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that, you know, decisions on aesthetics and and economics are going to be done at that point potentially with colors
and and finishes and things like that. >> One thing to add to Brian's comments there is we'll do a we'll do a we'll do a kind of a layout of of furnishings to give you an idea of of what we're looking for. like the idea that the
multi-purpose room might have like 125 armchairs and the tables go with them. Um the lounge will have something, you know, comfortable, you know, seating. So, we'll and classroom seating, we'll give you a rough number and then we'll
start running from there. And I think I I think that'll give us a good start. The the other thing to be aware of too, and it has a lot to do with this schedule, we usually get really heavy and and Brian can correct me on this if you like or or Matt, we usually get
pretty heavy in the FF and E at the start of construction because we want to make sure that by the time the building the construction might be 14, 16, 18 months, we want to make sure that that furniture is in in progress at the
completion of that construction period. So there we have a lot of time right now, but it goes quickly. >> Okay. >> Um Okay. So we did have a note at at the bottom of the agenda for a select board update, but I think we did that earlier
in the meeting already and you know that went very smoothly. So at this point in time, we actually have the provision for public input. any of us are aware there's any public on screen and so I would just it's not
on the agenda but I guess I would just ask if anyone on the committee has anything else they want to comment on while we're here tonight >> can I do want to ask a question I know it's kind of going back to the to the MEPA >> yes >> so
are we just are we confident that the review is going to be favorable when we get it in August or we still don't know what what's going to happen with that review. >> It'll be favorable. They don't they're not in a position to deny a project.
It's simply it's a process. >> So, is it too much of a gamble? We c we we're we're not going out to bid early in spring as we wanted. Um we're identifying that possibly waiting till August is going to be too late. So, do
we kind of time it in late June, uh, mid June, late June? So, the timing with the bid process, um, getting everything finalized, so right when everything's ready to go would be around the same time as we're getting the review back. Um, and if it comes back early, we're
ready to go. And that would I think still get us time to get in before the winter so we can you know have the the footings and all the the the the first part of the work done before the winter. Is that too much of a gamble or would it
>> No, I don't I don't I think we should be clarifying that in the next few days or the next week and it shouldn't be a gamble for us. We should be getting it clarified. So the other step that I didn't mention um is that we need to have a discussion in with John hold off
on this one John till I finish. Um we will have an internal discussion with the building department and the planning department also regarding these issues. So I'm going to submit probably tomorrow the stamp site plans and the
the drainage report and whatnot for a planning view meeting to be set up. But they should also be able to help us and know give us information if it will slow their process down at all. So in other words, will they be willing to go through the the planning board will do it. The planning board will go through
their review and we'll come out of that. But we need to talk to them about you know this how MEEP connects with the building uh permit for instance and the review of that. Um so there's there's a bunch of things going on at the same
time but I agree with you Linda. We we need we just need to nail it down. We're trying not to have it change our schedule by a lot. We should be ready to to do whatever we can as soon as we get that review complete. >> Do the p are the p do the powers that be
and and to some extent this is because you know the select board obviously was was rather neutral and and did not have significant concerns. But do the powers that be understand that there are significant costs
associated with Meepa not moving in a timely way. That is it's it's not a neutral thing as far as the town of air, the budget or the people who live here. It it has
substantial costs to us if they fail to move in a timely way. Who do we tell that to? >> Well, I can tell you that we I was on the phone twice with Dan Vancequick talking to the representatives from the state about all
these same kind of comments and it doesn't move them. They've heard it so many times before from so many different projects. They basically heard it all and they have a process. So, I don't feel encouraged by that. And I can tell
you right now that there's no one who knows more about it than this group is meeting right now. I mean, as far as anyone in town on another board or any other representatives, it's really up to the consultant to get through to to me and
find a crack in the the system, I guess. But there may not be one. I think I said the thing I'm trying to determine is that can we get a commitment that it will not go beyond August? If we have that commitment, then we can schedule all our work and just keep going knowing
that we'll be done by then. So, in the meantime, we still have to have more conversations to tighten that up. >> But we I don't think we can afford to risk losing an entire construction season. >> We're not going to do that no matter what. >> So, so Ken, I think the question, so you
know, back to Linda's question, right, is is can everything kind of happen concurrently, right? Can we go out to bid? Can we do all these things? >> And then we know >> in August we're 100% confident that we get, you know, we we're we got the green
light. So >> I don't think I don't think you can ever be 100% confident about LEA. >> That's right. >> I'm just telling you all. >> All right. Well, that's that's important information. >> You can't be 100% confident.
>> Okay. But you you have to >> I I I mean it looks great and everything and there shouldn't be any reason why, but they're not generally motivated to meet your timeline. >> Correct. >> I I guess I'll bring up a question. Maybe Brian can help us out here too.
Bring up the question. Assuming can they actually deep fix the project? Can they prevent it from going ahead? >> No. Do they have? So what I'm getting at is why couldn't we bid this July, June,
July with a or let's say end of July, beginning of August. So our start date will be September 1st, >> right? Then I think that's what we're looking into. I I think >> I think that's that's a positive. >> Yes. The questions that we've asked internally is we have some experience
with me but with other colleagues too and I think this goes to the building commissioner and and how the process is going to work out is will a can a building or de a building or foundation or any type of permits be issued without a full approval from MEO and if not okay
can we go through a bidding process and award a contract to a contractor and with the specifications let them know that shovels in the ground can't happen till X amount amount of time and give yourself a window of procurement for long lead items. Get a lot of the administrative stuff taken care of
knowing that we've got this hurdle or this administrative checkbox that needs to get done in the next two months. And so I think Ken, it's the right strategy while we're waiting on these answers though is seeing if we can get a firm date on or a commitment on to when things are going to get done. Uh and
then we can work backwards or work around that. >> Yeah. this at this point in time we would I'm going to speculate here Ellen is correct there's no 100% assurance there's no 100% assurance that
they said the schedule will be August and it doesn't slip but in our end of the deal I would agree with Brian Ford is that we need to set up our schedule now what we want to do and if we want to bid July 15th or July 1st whatever it is
I think we should just go ahead and do that get ready for that point of maybe it's making an let's call it a date July 15th something like that and do what we have to do to get bid by around July 15th then it's going to take time to you know review the bids and so forth and so
on and you know make a decision it would it would match up with the projected MEPA uh completion and then if it changes we'll have to we'll have to have a discussion but like you mentioned Brian give them a window something like that but I think it's I think it will be
important to our committee to set a date and and do it. >> Yeah. And and also just one little tidbit, I I think someone needs to have a conversation with Repenna and give him >> Absolutely. We're going to do that >> all this information because he needs to have this information in the back of his
mind. Right. >> There's no question we were going to do that right from the get-go. I brought it up to Robert a week and a half or two weeks ago. We were supposed to set up a meeting >> with both of them. So that we're going to do that. The point is, and Ellen is correct, that that may not have anything
to do with anybody because everyone else has done it as well. Believe me, people who have gone through MEPA way many times have tried everything they can to get through me. So, it's a terrible situation that was set up. I I can't
comment political, so let's let it go. It's a process we have to >> And I'm not saying not to do everything you can do. No, no, we all we all agree we have to >> you know >> and and do we think that having a a petition signed by the residents of air
or having a a public letter written >> doesn't do a thing? >> No. >> Doesn't do a thing. >> No. Imagine >> why is that why why is that not an appropriate avenue to pursue if your state repres if your state agencies
>> are not fulfilling >> um public policy goals? >> Well, Dennis, it's not that they're not fulfilling their their goals. They are fulfilling their um >> their process. And you don't like the
timing of their process. That doesn't mean they're not doing their job. >> So, I mean, >> I mean, alienate them either. >> We can respectfully disagree about that. >> No, the potentially the worst thing we could do is intimidate them. That would be probably the worst mistake we could
possibly make. >> Um, the idea is to just find the appropriate method to go through it >> and get try to get a solid commitment. >> Because everyone who's gone through this has tried every technique they can and we're way late in the game. They've been
doing this for 25 or 30 years, whatever it is. >> What we want to do is break ground in August, in September, so we avoid winter conditions. >> Sounds like there's a real possibility we could do that. And I think we should table this as we move along. We'll get
better information, >> but we can discuss this till midnight. I tell you >> exactly. But would it be smart for us to think about setting a timetable for ourselves in the next week or two that say, "Look, no matter what, we're going to try to bid it by a certain date." >> Yes, >> we have to we have to put a date and
work backwards for Vertex to to do all the work that's required to get to the bidding. >> So, let's think about that. So, think about the fact that we need to set up a solid date >> for bidding and we'll go on from there. >> And and I think the sooner the better. I mean, you know, the earlier the date the
better because >> August becomes September and >> you know, September becomes October and >> take a look at the Gant chart just to make sure that the the dominoes that need to fall in a particular order um
can line up as you know as as closely to our optimum timeline as they can. But we also want to make sure that as part of that, you know, we're we're sort of reading the tea leaves with what those tell us about where our risk exposure is financially. And we'll we'll have that
sort of layer to the discussion as well because we don't want to get in a position where there's a a you know request for additional funds because we've held a contractor's bid too long. But something we talked about sort of at the outset of the uh of the meeting. So, there's the timing and there's the the
potential for financial risk that we want to make sure that those two assessments are are in sync. >> Got it. All right. So, uh that brings us to scheduling the next meeting and so forth.
>> So, do we want to wait another month is the question or would you want to do it sooner because we have so much to get done here? I don't think we can wait a month because we have to go back to the kitchen which we need to finalize by the end of this month. So I think we need a
meeting before the end of the month. >> Okay. So today's the 19th. So what if we met a two weeks from tonight would be April 2nd. That's the end. You know
>> sounds good. Does that work with John's timeline to get to get the modifications? >> Well, we're not making any changes. We're just trying to get answers for for the costs and and we've reached out to
we're reaching out to a third um kitchen um uh supplier to get numbers. And I think, did I hear right that maybe Katie Katie and David are going to be visiting the restaurant show? When's that going to be?
>> April 25th and 26th, I think. >> Oh, that's pretty far out. But, but that's going to be a worthwhile visit. By the way, um here's what we'll do is we're working right now. We reached out to two vendors. We're reaching out to a
third that that U Ken gave us um yesterday. and um we're going to get an answer back from somebody. We're looking for ballpark. We're actually going online and looking up the equipment ourselves uh and trying to get numbers.
Um and Dave uh David, if you right now the only commercial uh induction stove we found is a single oven. Um I think >> well that'll have if that's all we can get and then then that's what we'll have to use.
>> Yeah. Yeah. >> Okay. So, the way this is going to go, we have a working group meeting next Tuesday. We're gonna work with Dave and and Katie at the working group as well to try to come up with some solid answers on the kitchen and then but this committee has to meet as well for not
just so I I think we should probably meet in two weeks, April 2nd, and see if we can make sure Dan Valk gives us a solid update >> on the Meepa and Misa stuff and then by then resolve the kitchen. I hope and uh go from there. What does everyone think
about that? >> No, I agree. I think meeting meeting in two weeks I think is I mean we we need to stay on top of this. >> Okay. So, we've been meeting at 4:30. Is that still okay for everybody? >> I'm good. >> Yeah.
>> Are we going to have another meeting in um later in the month as well? >> Yes. Yeah. So, you mean in April? >> Yes. So the next step after that would probably be the 16th. Another two weeks after that.
>> That would be the third Thursday. Yeah. Is the 16th. >> Yeah. So if you want to if you want, we can book those two now and have Katie put the notices out >> of the committee. >> Okay.
>> Okay. We have um the 16th also lands in the intervening week between two of our working group um meetings. That actually might be a good >> That's good. Yep. >> Good timing. >> So, does a the group that's on tonight want to resolve that we meet two weeks
from now and then a month from now? >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Fine. Yep. >> Okay. All right. So the next schedule meeting for this board will be April 2nd at 4:30 the building
and then the following meeting will be April 16th at 4:30 and Katie I'll get a hold of Katie and we'll put together then she'll put together an agenda and so forth. But uh looks like the work of the committee is going to concentrate on a couple of open
items. Meepa and the uh kitchen. >> Yeah. Good. >> Okay. >> Okie dokie. >> All right, Dennis, you're good. Everyone's good. >> Yep. >> Yep.
>> So, we'll we'll then we'll agend the meeting. What time is it? America. 6:30. Uh, I'll take a motion to adjurnn. >> Motion to adjurnn. >> Second. >> Second. >> Okay. Thank you very much, guys.