Okay, the time being 6 o'clock, we'll call this meeting to order. Um, we are recording this meeting for future viewing by the general public. We are not live streaming tonight because we are a number of mo location uh at 110 Littleton Road. So meeting is
called to order and the first item on the agenda is approval of meeting minutes from February 19th um 2026. Everybody um should have gotten a copy of that. Um I sent out and uh any
questions or comments uh related to the meeting minutes from February 19th? Nope. Okay. Uh seeing none, then I would uh entertain a motion to approve the meeting minutes of February 19th, 2026. >> And make a motion to approve our minutes
for our meeting of February 19th, 2026. >> I have a motion from Dennis King. >> Second. >> And I have a second from John Souza. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor? I >> opposed. >> One abstension
and unanimous otherwise. Okay. Thank you. Um, approval of monthly project invoices. Uh, I'll turn that over to David. >> Thank you. >> And let him go ahead and Julie's >> Oh, Julie, thank you. Julie, I was I was saying to myself, who's controlling the
screen? >> Uh, Mike, I assume, can you pick up audio with myself? >> Yeah, you're you're good. >> I'm good. Okay. Um so this is just a condensed um budget that we include uh as part of the presentation for transparency uh in the packet that Hamdi
sends out. It's expanded. Um again purposes of this is for transparency. The only difference from month to month on this is that the expenditure and the unspent changes. Um, but you no one can see it here, but last month we did a
budget revision request for about $23,000 of change that was associated with the acetone that was discovered. You know, that is recorded in here. Um, but I know no one can see it from here, but again, um, updated budget. So,
>> can I add one item regarding this one? So um as everyone know like the April 28th uh we will be removing the unsolutable soil from the Parker school site. Um
I think we will have the April building committee meeting before that uh date but there will be also some costs associated with that uh from the receiving facility and trucking company. Um we don't we don't have that cost yet
but uh once we have that information we will share with you Pat and the committee. Uh so like from this 80 $81,000 uh owners contingency there will be some expenditures uh in the in the future
date >> will be similar expenditures to what we already spent around the same I >> I think so. >> Okay. And this is for the removal of the contaminated soil. The the small amount of contaminated soil that we the very small amount of contaminated soil that
we found, but we're obligated minuscule. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Isolated and minuscule. >> I want to qualify that by saying that it was a very small amount, but we're >> currently has no health concern. >> Good. >> Whatsoever. >> Good.
>> All right. Um, next slide. Thank you. Uh so this is the invoice summary number 10. Um, we have a um a uh invoice from left field um for services completed February 28th
um 2026 for $20,859 and then a periodic invoice for AI3 for $71,875 for a total invoice summary uh ending invoice summary number 10 for $92,730. $34.
Um there is a prepared motion if one of the committee members would like to um make and move the motion and then we can open it up for discussion after someone second seconds seconds it. >> So it's package number 10. I I think I made I made a typo.
>> Okay. >> So >> all right. So I make a motion approve the February 2026 invoice package number 10 in the amount of $92,734 as issued and presented. I have a motion from Dennis. Can I have a second? >> Second. >> Second from Jim. Any further discussion?
Seeing none, all in favor? I >> opposed. That's unanimous. Thank you. >> All right. This is a fun one. Um, so the backstory to this is a couple weeks ago, um, Mr. Souza uh requested that I
provide an analysis of what um a probable reimbursement would be from the MSBA on a hypothetical option. Um you know for John for your purposes of uh having some backup numbers for a town
meeting. Um I don't know if you want to I might be I might not be >> No. And like I was explaining to David, it's not so much not looking to present that information, but in the past, we had been asked by a representative um to, you know, why we don't have some kind of a number in the in my excluded
debt projection. And at the time, we had answered about a year ago that we didn't know the option that would be selected. We didn't have good cost estimates, but I just felt, you know, get as we're getting closer and closer this year, it'll be better to have some type of estimate in the excluded debt service
projection for the town just so we, you know, it's in there. So um I did the analysis. Hi and I did the analysis and then just for committee transparency we wanted to you know explain this is what we did just in case at town meeting if a
question is asked and John you respond with a number or what that the committee understands where John got that number from and and the basis of it. So this is a 3011 budget um from the MSBA. It is essentially an Excel spreadsheet that um
um you put data points in on the project from a financial standpoint. There's all these formulas that and uh assessments that are done with the formulas that determines what's eligible, ineligible, reimbursement, and so forth. Um I'm not going to go through it in detail, but it
was performed. And if you could go to the next slide, Julie. Um the option that was utilized as a hypothetical option at this point is the three grade enrollment um uh 45 excuse me um yeah 45
and six uh new construction on the Parker and um I did the 311 in a manner where you know I um purposely had it land with the estimate that was utilized for the PDP for that particular option
which is $272.6 million. Um, by doing the 311, my analysis came out to be an MSBA share of about 105 million, a district share of 167 million, and then we provided John
with a range of up and down 10%. Uh, one thing to note, and I'm going to round right now because I don't have the number in front of me, your current base reimbursement, I believe, is 52%. Mhm. >> Um there is incentives once you get into
a PFA. There's uh an incentive of either zero to 2% of or two extra points for uh maintenance. I plugged in one and a half which is kind of the standard. Um then there's an additional three uh three points or three percentage points for
green initiatives. I included that. There's another point that I purposely did not include for insurance reasons and that is uh it's another green initiative but it's um a certain um air quality standard and so forth. So the
analysis I did I have some insurance um built in but what I wanted to say is that your 52% is going to go up to you know 56 57%. But when we do the analysis, your net reimbursement goes to about 38%. Because
if you remember my my our first meeting with everyone, we said do not tell the public the MSBA is paying for half. The MSBA reimbures you based on eligible costs and not all costs are eligible. But what I can say is that if Hamdi and
I were to guess at the beginning of the project, we would have said maybe 35%. But the MSBA has recently upped their allowable cost per square footage for construction and site work. So this project I think I feel is positioned
where you're in an attractive market because the MSBA does not update their allowable costs, you know, every year or every two years. It's like it could be every five years. So, you know, you're entering you're entering uh kind of like
the the lane when MSBA just upped it. So, you're in a good position. So, um if anyone wants to review the spreadsheet, by all means, let Hamni and I know. We will set up a uh Zoom meeting with you. We we kind of geek out on um
those spreadsheets. So, uh more than happy. Um so um any questions? >> Okay. >> Give you what you need. >> Yeah. Thank you for thank you for developing that because it's much more and honestly if we presented a number
last year it wouldn't have been accurate as this. So >> and again this is not >> this is a probable >> and again right and again we're s we're still at this stage. So this will just be part of a multi-year debt service projection. I'll be shocked if we don't get a
question at town meeting. >> But yeah. Yeah. I mean the other thing related to town meeting less than 6 weeks we'll be at town meeting. I assume on the committee reports we'll give an update on this project. >> Um I add on your I don't sp that would I don't say we got to put
into this detail but I think we got to we the responsible thing is to give the committee an update of what we've been doing since last town meeting. uh and we'll we'll put that first on and then we'll also do a similar one with the fire station project in the town and then the financial status. So you know
cuz our next meeting will be real close to town meeting. So that's why I wanted to mention it now is again not a huge presentation it's a few minutes but just getting everybody in the mindset that hey at that point less than a year you'll be voting on a school project. So, I'll likely be looking for a couple
of slides just for that night for article one, which you know we'll present and then I would assume um I don't know who's going to do um fire station article one but I guess Tim would probably be looking for some slides as well. So, but we'll be in touch with you guys about that.
>> Yeah. And then the only other thing that comes to mind and John and you may have had discussion is he's also going to need a cash flow thing as you know we're we're funding feasibility and then if once it gets approved that I know it's a way from now but just anything over the next year because John and I in the town will be going out for bonding.
>> Sure. >> Uh in June for this year's town meeting votes as well as any bond anticipation notes which this thing would be under for a project. So >> you have everything in each. That should be that should be great.
>> Okay. Anything else on the overview of the preliminary budget? Seeing none, um, schedule overview. >> That's a good segue into the schedule a little bit because what we wanted to point out from the recent activities in
March is that last week we sent out the latest options for cost estimating again. So, as you get closer by the April building committee meeting, we'll have updated costs associated with the options that have moved into this PSR
phase. So, um you know, just continuing to refine that budget and the projected um district share as we continue through PSR into schematic design. So, you see that thick red arrow continues to move
on. We're about 5 weeks or so out from that PSR submission. And then one other thing I wanted to point out here is that to date we've been showing this phase 2 as to be determined and we don't have exact dates or anything projected. AI3
will be working with left field over the next few weeks to make sure that that project schedule becomes a little bit more detailed as that'll be a requirement in this PSR submission. So in April, we'll be able to report more on, you know, what are those targeted dates for some of the phase 2
deliverables. And then looking at the detailed schedule this month, we we sent out the cost estimates as I mentioned last week. Those should be returned the second week in April. So that'll be positioned in
time for the committee to be able to review ahead of the April 16th building committee meeting where you'll be able to vote on your preferred option. We are anticipating following a very
similar sequence for that as we did with the PDP. So, we will share an evaluation matrix that's specific to the six options plus the code repair option ahead of time that um Homdi will coordinate. That way, you'll be able to
fill it out and then at the building committee meeting in April, we can review those results and that can help to inform, you know, the committee's ultimate decision on a preferred option. Another item this week was we received
the MSBA review comments for that PDP submission. So, we'll be able to report later in the presentation on what some of the highlights from that were. And then we continue to just fill out our PSR report with all of the documentation that we've gathered. And Chris tonight,
Chris and Tori will share um where we've landed with the development of all those design options. for the MSBA's review of the PDP. Right off the bat, there was nothing that wasn't provided. So, that was always good just to run through their 30 plus
pages of review comments. Everything was provided. Some of the main topics that they were looking for feedback on were related to the educational program. So, we'll be working with superintendent um this week to be able to fill out some of
the responses specific to the ED program. It's actually a really good opportunity now for the district to get into the weeds of staffing and scheduling and what you're really anticipating and envisioning for a
building project. Um they also were looking for a little bit more background on why the committee elected to eliminate sites B and C. Um which of course the committee is very aware of and just the logistics of
having to replicate its fields. Um as well as the congestion that a project on like the McCarthy site would cause. So we've crafted narratives to be able to provide the MSBA with that background. Um, and then they started to comment a
little bit on some of the spaces that may or may not be seen as eligible for reimbursement. So, in this first pass, it seemed like the art and music spaces that were in excess of the guidelines. And then, of course, any of the Chumsford Teleia spaces, they at least
at this time weren't recommending as eligible costs. Um, but we'll be able to get more of an idea of what the MSBA is deeming eligible following this PSR submission. >> I could be wrong, but I thought the
additional PE space um not close the door. >> Correct. Yep. So, there's um and so yeah, something like the the added gym space. It seemed like that was an opportunity where they were willing to um reimburse for that. So, we'll be able
to report more on um their eligible costs as you know, David continues to develop um the 311s moving forward. And I'll hand it over to Chris who's going to walk through where we've landed with our new construction design
options. So, we'll start with a little refresher of the different areas that we looked at on the site. Um, as we reviewed last time we met a month ago, we were targeting the area in green. All of the area in red is really our non-buildable
area. Um, there are advantages and disadvantages to all of the locations that we show. Um, and we sought out the area in green as the most advantageous with its alignment to the solar orientation as well as its advantages for uh, view opportunities into the
wetlands. So from there we are continuing to uh study all of the grade configurations on this site. Uh so A2.1 being the 5 to6 2.2 to the 4 to6 and 2.3 the 5 to8. There are a lot of similarities and
overlaps between these grade configurations and the way that the buildings are organized with the 5 to6 being very similar to the four to six just having um only two stories with the third floor removed for that extra grade configuration and the grade uh 5 to 8
having that extended uh double grade configuration on the third floor and then the added gym and auditorium. So, one of the benefits of the feedback we've been able to receive from both the SBC and some of our workshops is we've been able to really proceed with these
plans in a more detailed fashion than maybe even typical at this stage of the game. We're almost ahead of ourselves. Um, which has really allowed us to dive a little bit deeper in detail into the adjacencies for the program analysis and how they work uh together in clusters.
So focusing first on what is our typical academic neighborhood, we have distributed and balanced out the special education spaces with the core academic um and created a very balanced cluster that would be repeated uh three
times on each floor. And this same academic wing is used in the addition renovation schemes as well. The collaborative corridors become extensions of the classroom, allowing some of that educational space to move beyond uh just the classrooms, allowing
for that collaboration uh project work as well as small groups, maybe a couple classrooms coming together. There are small group rooms in between pairs of classrooms uh which allow for different smaller areas of um clustering together
as well as pullout intervention. Um and then each would have their own like toilet core. So, some of the images that you see here are inspirational for what those uh collaboration zones could look like um that represent ideas that came up during
the visioning and were well responded to during the building tours. There's also the opportunity for outdoor learning in these courtyards that um become developed in between the clusters. We took the opportunity working with our
landscape architect to develop a couple different opportunities and alternates for the site plan. This one starts and the main uh the main point of this one is really to include a mult a fully structured multi-purpose field. So um
this replicates uh in part what you have on site now. Um, you can see that it does get very close to what is the existing stream and it does push h all of the parking up closer to the intersection.
We would have um open green space at the main entry of the site and in that area we've also clustered the playground and the outdoor basketball court. Those adjacent are adjacent to the wellness center and the gym allowing for a sort of clustered centralized area for um
either the gym, physical education to extend to the outdoors or recess depending on your grade configuration. There are separated circulation loops for bus circulation as well as car allowing those to be uh independent loops. And this configuration does allow
for the full queuing of the 29 buses on site. um removing that from uh the street. Another opportunity that we studied was if you remove the need for locating a full structured multi-purpose field, uh
we can slide the parking further down Granite Bill Road from the intersection, allowing us to increase the size of that organic open green space. That moves it a little bit closer to the wellness center. uh allows a bit more green open
space at that corner um as you enter the site and allows for a little bit more organic green space um towards the stream and wetlands and allowing more of that natural topography to slope down.
As you can see, uh what we have with us today is a large 3D printed model. Um there's a lot of fun that can be had with this. We have different options that have been printed so we can test out the location of the building. How does it proportionally look on the site, its orientation,
um, and really allows us to further study this from a scaled version. Looking at the full floor plan, uh, we have continued to progress the idea of the three academic wings oriented towards the natural wetlands. They have
um a corridor separation from a clustered common area and this would allow for an ease of separation for afterhour use. Those three wings in this um as we show here would be all of fourth grade on the
first floor. Um, but as we reviewed last time, having these three wings with the three 3x6 configuration would allow it either to stack horizontally or to stack vertically for that flexibility down the road. Um, and then on the opposite side would be all of your clustered um shared
program including your dining, centralized dining, and then your uh gym uh art and music and uh your um media. We are showing in between the clusters the opportunity for paracity. So glazing
that would help bring in light to the dining area and connect to the outdoor learning and potential outdoor uh dining areas. That double height space in the center could have walkways from the second floor that look down into that big open bright space >> because it's probably hard to read the
labels. This would be that student dining space, music, the four music classrooms, gym, the Chelsea media space having its own community entry, and then some admin guidance nurse.
Sure. So, as we move up to the second floor, the academic continues to stack. This could all be fifth grade, and you would have additional special education space and your art classrooms. These could overlook the dining area and the health
classrooms on the back would have that opportunity to overlook the gym space. And then the third floor would be your third uh academic wing. It's centrally located and I think I skipped this on the second floor so I'll go back. That area in green in the
center would be your centrallylo media center. So there's opportunity for that to be a double height space with a mezzaning level on the second floor continuing to bring that academic um and tie into the third floor above. This is the site plan for the 5 to6
option. The footprint of the building is pretty much the same as the 4 to6. So the site plan really would be the same options. What we're showing here is with the multi-port field, but similarly, if that were to be removed and we wanted to slide the parking down, you could have
that larger green space in the front. You can see when we look at it in 3D, being only a two-story building, it does allow for it to be a little bit lower and the academic side of the building towards the wetlands and that central portion for that student dining can pop
up a little bit on its own. The first floor plan is pretty much identical to what we saw for the 4 to six and similar to the second floor. What's just missing when we go to a 5 to six versus a 4 to six is that third floor
that for that additional academic wing. What starts to become a little bit different is when we start looking at the 5 to8. Um, so the footprint on the academic wing side of the building is very similar, but you'll see on the towards the intersection where our
shared program is is where it starts to get a bit bigger when we add in the increased physical education space as well as the auditorium. From a massing standpoint, you can you can see how much more of that is coming towards you on the screen and the building gets a little bit bigger as
well as you can start to see how the third floor portion is a double size and there's much more of that third story. So, looking at the first floor, you can see the whole blue area would be your auditorium and then the enlarged gym um
adjacent to it. You'll also notice I think our student dining has also increased in space. So that's another the component that changes with your higher enrollment. >> That'd be a bigger auditorium than the high school 1250. I just caught my eye. >> Yeah, he knows that. So >> 1250 seats.
>> MSBA is not paying for that. >> That would be ineligible. >> We know that. >> So moving up to the second floor. very similar in configuration, just slightly increased to address the higher enrollment.
And then this is the sort of double grade configuration where you have seventh and eighth on the third floor creating a onetory courtyard uh above the twotory dining. And this was a solution to keeping the building at
three stories, which is a little bit more appropriate for the neighborhood rather than going up a fourth floor. >> It helps with the massing too. And you could if you could see only the three story. When we had a fourstory, you ended up with a two-story section and a four-story section. When you have that sort of doubling up, um it did become a
bit more cumbersome. I'm going to hand it over to Tori to go through the ad rena. >> Thank you. Uh similarly we have been studying three ad rena options. So looking at all three grade enrollment opportunities that we are have been discussing here. Um all three of these
options will be pretty similar to one another just kind of changing that enrollment. Um we would be looking at keeping the same portions of the building existing primarily focusing on that eastern portion of Parker. um the three-story portion that includes the
existing or two-story portion that includes uh Trump televia in the lower level um and the admin suite up on the upper level as well as the portion of the building that includes student dining and the gymnasium currently. So those would all remain here in all three of these different options and then kind
of increasing the building in size as we increase the enrollment as well. So taking a look at the site plan first for option A 1.2 two, which is the four through six enrollment. Um, you can kind of see here, similarly, like we discussed with the new construction
options, really focusing on having the maximum amount of daylight into the academic wings, which are at the top of the page here, um, and maximizing the views to the wetlands. We can't quite get all three academic wings facing the wetlands and still have enough space for natural daylighting. So, that third
academic wing would be facing some of the new multi-purpose fields um, and some green space. So those students would still get really nice opportunities for views um in those academic wings as well. Uh similarly we would have separated uh car and bus drop
off loops for this option. So we could reduce some friction there in that area and I believe here we would still have um enough queuing for the buses as well where they would not need to be queuing on the street. similar to the new construction options as well. Here we have a multi-purpose field that's a
little bit more structured kind of near the intersection as well as a less structured open play space um that would be sort of on the west of the site which could be access accessed across a learning bridge over the existing stream where the current Parker building is.
So you can see in the massing the building kind of opens up a little bit more towards Graniteville Road with the gray part of the building being the new construction and the white part of the building being the existing. So blooming in a little bit into the
floor plans for the 4 through six here. Um once again focusing on separating out the community part of the building which is on the left of the screen here from the academic portion of the building which is on the right of the screen. So, we would be expanding the space that's currently student dining and the gym to
all become one larger cafeterium and then adding on a new gym and a half onto the front of the building. So, this portion of the building would effectively get a new face. Um, and there would be some renovations taking place on this level as well um to include a little bit more of a wellness
and music suite in this area as well. Adjacent to the main entry would be the administration area to provide some good oversight into the main entry of the building to see who's coming and going. Um, adjacent to a media center which would be centrally located and easily
accessible for all students. The organization of the academic wings of this building is the same that we discussed with the new construction. So, it would still have those extended learning corridors to create some more breakout spaces as well as the small group spaces as well. Um the art
classrooms would also be centrally located here stacked one on each story so that each grade level would have access to a space like that. Uh similarly these are currently organized with the fourth grade on the first floor, the fifth grade on the second
floor and the sixth grade on the third floor. But as they are all organized in the same way, this could be flexible for any future organization of the school. Something that's different from the new construction on is that, you know, we
looked at opportunities to have all of the academic wings facing the wetland area as we did with the new construction, but given just how extended this footprint becomes, you really can't fit all three oriented towards those wetlands. So, it starts to
creep onto that eastern half of the site. >> Right. Exactly. So, taking a look at a 1.1, which is the fifth and sixth grade enrollment. Um, this site plan is virtually identical. Again, same bus and car queuing, same
separated uh bus and car loops with the multi-purpose field and the open space as well. Very similar massing of the building, but again, this would only be two stories rather than three stories like A1.2. And again, a very similar first floor
organization. Some of these spaces would be slightly smaller to accommodate that different student population. Here, fifth grade would be on the first floor and sixth grade would be on the second floor. This one is the most significantly different between the last two that we
discussed. Obviously, significantly larger due to the inclusion of that, 1250 seat auditorium and the double gym. Um, and with the inclusion of the eighth grade. Now, there are four grades on the site here. And so, similar to how we
kind of double stacked the uh extra grade level onto the third story for the new construction, we've looked at a similar organization here. So, similar site layout, a slightly smaller multi-purpose field just due to the size of the footprint of the building here taking up additional space.
Here you can see the massing is different with the addition of the fourth wing in order to allow us to include all four grade levels on the site here. So again, very similar with the auditorium kind of tucking itself into that corner of where the existing
portion of the building is here to create a sort of performing arts wing there adjacent to the double gym and the much larger student dining space with the main entry and admin wing. Um, one major difference here with the organization of this version versus the
other ones is that rather than the um, horizontal organization of the different grade levels, this is really set up more for a vertical organization of grade levels. So, each one of these wings would be better suited to have one grade level per wing. Um, and a major part of
that is because you can see in the academic wings here, the seventh and eighth grade levels need the addition of an extra science lab. And those spaces are a little bit larger as well in order to accommodate their curriculum needs. We are able to maintain this all on
three stories with the inclusion of all four academic wings here. I'm just going to revisit the conversation of grade level configuration for this meeting. Um we have a similar slide in the forum
tonight and really just um emphasizing that you know each of these comes with its advantages and disadvantages. We've recognized that the five to six enrollment does not really modify the current spatial inequities of the
district. Um whereas the four to six does appear to resolve overcrowding districtwide by bringing that fourth grade up to the lower middle school level. And similarly 5 to 8 does not necessarily address any of the over
overcrowding issues and does require an additional enabling project if we were to pursue a 5 to8 school project. >> Wouldn't the fifth elementary school address the requirement? >> Say that one more time. Just you're adding you're if McCarthy was used as
the fifth elementary school, wouldn't that address the overcarning? >> Correct. Yes. So without um >> I'd rather say it here than have it said later. >> Yes. Without without requiring an like an additional enabling project. Yeah. >> We can clarify that. >> Why is the population greater than the
high school? What you said you're dis huge population on one campus greater than the high school. The high school is four grades as well. So why is the population greater than the high school? It's the total number of kids >> the 108 the capacity of the building or the number of enrollment >> the total number of kids enrolled like
the 1885 would be all on site the high school has about 1,400 >> but that's current you know those kids will those kids will migrate to the high school but >> some we've shown this slide a few times but it really just diagrams how that
resolution ution of bringing fourth grade from each of the four elementary schools into that lower middle school, maintaining McCarthy as a seven and eight middle school um has direct relief on the elementary
school overcrowding. There wouldn't be a need for the modular classrooms at the elementary schools. There'd be equitable instruction as a result. So all of the the pros for uh that enrollment option. So I mentioned that by the next meeting
we will have the evaluation matrix prepared. Um it's actually HDI has it in Excel form. So it's really um available for your consideration over the next month. Um we made sure that we presented
the options tonight so that um you have that familiarity with them. When we present at the community forum tonight, we will do a a slightly adjusted format in that we're only going to share um one new construction option and one ad reno
option and emphasize the similarities across the enrollment options. Um, but you will be able to fill out the evaluation matrix much like you did for the PDP phase. This time though, we are only showing the six options plus the
code upgrade option. Something I was remiss to mention with the MSBA review comments was that they will be requiring us to continue to carry the code upgrade option at McCarthy as well, but only for
a cost comparison. Um so we will update this slide for the next meeting as well. Um but you can see the the first column includes that option X2 for the McCarthy Middle School and then the Parker Middle
School's code upgrade option as well. We do have those costs as a result of the PDP exercise. So once we have the updated cost estimates for the following six options, we'll be able to compare that to both of those code upgrade option.
>> Wow, I think we're sorry to interrupt. Did I see something in the comments from MSBA that'd be some financial penalty regarding the work we did >> previous project >> 20 years ago for Are you going to get to that or >> I I can speak to her right now. >> Okay. Sure. No, cuz I did.
>> So, um when I filled out the 3011, >> there is a formula that addresses that. >> Yeah. >> But because that work that um you did was over 20 years ago, >> that the formula basically there's no penalty.
>> So, um it I included it, but it's kind of a moot point. >> So, then why did they include it in their comment? It >> it's standard. It's standard. Um I mean they may change it from 20 years to 25 and then you would be penalized but even
then the the the penalty we'll call it won't even move the needle. >> Okay. >> Was it a core project or accelerated repair project? >> Well it was kind of none of the above 2004 to 2007. We were we were in that's
when MSBA was in a moratorum and we were in desperate need at the time because we were overcrowded etc etc. Um, so, uh, the powers that be at the time within the town came up with $32 million and what started out to be
roughly a maintenance kind of project um, turned out to be a real MSBA project because um, you know, where um, where much of the um, school facilities and such come in and said, "Just give me my 15 million. I'm out of here. I got to go do my projects." And we're like, "Hold on.
we're going to try to shape this so that we might position ourselves to receive reimbursement. So during the moratorum when nobody was getting any money and we were told we wouldn't either, we reccalibrated the project to fit within
MSBA guidelines and that you know therefore we did you know two middle school libraries, we did roofs, we did windows, we did science wings, we instead of just maintenance projects, we put it in a package that kind of fit within their mold. We enable we got our
um legislators to work with us and we canvased the hell out of them for lack of a better term and we finally got them to agree to when nobody else was getting any money they agreed to give Chelmsford uh 54% of our $32 million. So um but we
had to redefine the project to fit within their guidelines which we did. So we didn't get reimbured for everything. We we needed a thousand seat auditorium. We did, you know, we got reimbured for 600 seats, you know, we paid the rest. And
um so there was a lot of give and take, but uh but we reoriented the project, if you will, to fit within those guidelines and then miraculously we ended up getting a little over $17 million back from them. So that's that's that was the
project in a nutshell. what was originally just a maintenance project to do windows and roofs. >> So, so the they only uh the formula was only applied to um what was associated with Parker um within the formula, but
like I said, it's it's beyond >> three schools involved in that project. So, it was the high school and the two middle schools. So, it was the upper >> Yep. >> upper schools that uh that received the treatment. >> Yeah. >> So, it would only be that one school. So I can see where it could it would be
minuscule with the correct activity. So >> y but for some projects it's not. So when I was doing the 3011 I I like I said I filled it in and but again it's it's beyond the 20 years. So um they kind of um you know it's a good point.
Yeah, that's helpful background. And they do have, you know, a few little disclaimers in their in their review comments. And many of the comments we respond to with comment acknowledged. So, um, you know, it's maybe not as exhaustive as it sounds. >> Believe it or not, I still have every
note from that project way back when. So, if they have a do have a an an issue or a problem, we can um we can go back and recreate history if we needed to. So, >> absolutely. That was everything we had for tonight.
Um, just recognizing that we will be looking to get in front of the school committee April 14th at that meeting to approve the final draft of the educational program as well as certify potentially certify a grade
reconfiguration. Um, and then the building committee will meet that same week to solidify what your preferred option is to move forward. So, can we get um at least I I'd like a copy of tonight's this presentation so that that
we can start looking at it and I believe the committee would probably appreciate that as well. So, if we could all get a copy of this and then as soon as possible if there is a matrix coming and if there's going to be any changes to this that that information would be really
timely sooner than sooner than later. Um, so correct me if I'm wrong, but April 16th, we're looking to finalize our grade configuration and move to in a direction, a final direction that um, we
would go with. Um, town meeting starts the 20th, >> 27th. >> 27th. Okay. Okay. All right. So, we have time. So, we'll we'll know where we're heading. We'll have good information uh, based on meeting on the 16th. >> Yeah. This happens right before school
vacation week. Then you get school vacation week, then town meeting. >> Okay. Okay. >> Yeah. The two main objectives of that April 16th meeting would be for the committee to select your preferred option to move into schematic design as well as just give us the approval
overall to submit the full report to the MSBA. >> And I can easily or we can easily update that 311 >> based on the new numbers. you know that >> so >> and the presentations are uploaded like
after the every building committee meeting to the project website but I can also share a separate link uh with the committee >> that would be great >> okay >> and and you're planning maybe you already have but um the um evaluation criteria you're >> yeah I have the spreadsheet and uh
probably tomorrow I will share the spreadsheet with the committee members Um you will have time probably until 15th. So if I can get the >> next day. Okay. >> Yeah. Next day. Yeah.
>> And that'll be directly related to this present what we've seen tonight as far as >> Yes. options and configurations >> and in between there will be cost data available and that will be also shared with the committee
second week of the April. So yeah >> yeah we definitely encourage you know take a look through at the the building plans and they've progressed quite a bit. There's of course a year years and years of more development to occur, but
um I we're we're happy with how they how the projects are shaping up. So I look forward to kind of getting you know what what is the committee moving forward with next month. So that'll be exciting. >> Can I ask one quick question? um just so
for school committee on the the Tuesday and then this meeting on the 16th, what is the difference between the actions that the two groups are going to be taking? >> So, it'll be a little similar to the PDP exercise where the school committee was given the educational program ahead of
time um and an opportunity for them to endorse it with it being written with that singular grade configuration. Yeah. Um, so then it it's a little bit of a balance. Obviously, if the school
committee is endorsing the ed program which has a singular enrollment in it, then that certainly influences the building committees, you know, which options are remaining. Um, so you know, all of that will work
hand in hand. It could certainly also be, you know, a a joint meeting if that was something that the committees wanted to entertain. Okay. >> Thank you. >> Any other questions, comments, or discussion related to what we've heard
this evening? Um, seeing none, um, do we have anybody here for any public comment this evening? Seeing none, if there's no other comments or discussion, then uh I will entertain a motion to adjurnn. >> Make a motion to adjurnn. >> I have a motion to adjurnn by Dennis
King. >> Second. >> I have a second from Jim Clancy. All in favor? I opposed. That's unanimous. Thanks everybody. >> Thank you.