2026. Um any um questions, comments, uh changes required um in those meeting minutes by anybody? >> I have a couple of minor edits. Um okay, >> one is the the footer has the wrong date
on it. >> And the other one is there's a vote um for the CM selection committee and it said that I abstained. I don't remember abstaining. I thought I voted for that. It was tough to tell with the video. Okay. >> The video was like there was no volume.
No. >> The rest of it you couldn't see people. >> So that might be my fault. >> Okay. >> For what it's worth, I do recall it being unanimous. >> Yes. >> So maybe we can correct that. >> Okay. That's easy enough.
>> Perfect. Perfect. Any other questions, comments um related to the meeting minutes from June 10th? Seeing none, uh, unfortunately because I'm remote this evening and sorry everybody, but we're going to have to do
roll call votes. So, um, so I'm going to go right down the list and I'll start with myself. Uh, I am an I to approve. >> I made a motion. >> Wait, wait. [laughter] I'll make a motion. Make a >> I make a motion to approve the minutes
of our meeting on June 10th, 2026 as amended. >> Second. >> Okay. I have a [clears throat] a a motion and a second. Um so I will I'm an I. John Souza
>> I >> uh Joanna >> I >> Dr. Lang >> I >> Brian Curley. >> Hi >> Christine Clancy. >> Hi >> James Clancy. >> Hi >> Tim Pley. >> Hi
>> Josh Black. >> Hi >> Brandon Kelly. Hi, >> Pat Wes. >> Hi, >> Matt Schwiser. >> Absent. >> Okay, Matt's absent. And Dennis King. >> Hi. >> Okay, that's unanimous for everybody
that's in attendance this evening. Thank you all. Okay, the next item on the agenda is approval of monthly project invoices and there'll be a required vote for this. And I'll turn that over to um left field. you just give us a moment, Pat. We're
going to bring up the presentation. >> Yeah. >> And Jay, um, in your email, um, from Chris is an updated presentation from today.
Um, I don't know, Chris, maybe what time 4:00ish or >> I think earlier, maybe around 3ish. >> Perfect. You got to find a place to put you. I'm going to put you over there. [laughter] Maybe up here. >> Perfect.
>> Okay. >> Uh if you could Yep. >> Uh >> on the screen you will see a month the project budget update. Um as shown the project currently has approximately 1.72
million uh in committed costs against the approved uh feasibility phase budget of 1.8 million. To date, the project has expanded approximately 1.07 million u leaving approximately uh
$648,000 in unspent funds within the existing uh committed uh contract. Uh the budget also currently reflects approximately $80,000 in available owner contingency.
Uh as you can see from the last three column um however for forecasting purposes at this stage of the project we continue to assume that uh the full 1.8 million uh dollar feibility budget will be
expanded. Any question? Okay. So the next slide is showing the um invoice package number 14 for the period ending June 30th uh 2026.
We have one invoice from left field for the OPM services in the amount of $20,859 and we have one invoice from AI3 architects for the uh schematic design phase services in the amount of uh
$60,993. The total of invoices u submitted in the invoice package uh is 81,853. If anyone has any questions related to the invoices
questions or comments for HD. >> Um seeing none, I'd entertain a motion to approve that uh those invoices. Make a motion to approve the June 2026 package number 14 in the amount of $81,852 as issued and presented.
>> Have a motion from Dennis. Can I get a second, please? >> Second. >> Okay. Any further discussion? Seeing none, roll call vote. I'm an I. John Souza. >> I. >> Joanna.
>> Hi, >> Dr. Lang. >> I. >> Ryan Curley. Hi >> Christine. >> Hi >> Jim. >> Hi >> Tim. >> Hi >> Josh. >> Hi >> Brandon.
>> Hi >> Pat. >> Hi. >> And Dennis. >> Hi. >> Okay. That's a unanimous vote for the folks that are here this evening. Thank you very much. The next item on the agenda is a schedule overview and I'll
turn it back to left field for that. >> Yeah. I will turn it over to AI3. [laughter] >> Thank you. Uh so just to give an update where we are in the overall schedule, we are proceeding um we have our official approval for um PSR to move into schematic design from the MSBA at the
end of June. So we are officially in our schematic design phase and we are progressing through towards our cost estimating in September and submission in October. As we look at our anticipated action items in the month of July, uh earlier
this month we had um a small group discussion for the building systems meeting and that is a precursor to the discussion we are having with the building committee today in order to help prepare that material and information for the discussion uh that
will happen today. Um just a reminder um we're at the July 16th we had a site discussion earlier today and we are talking about at our SBC an HVAC system source discussion. Uh this discussion today will not include any type of vote or decision. It is purely for um
discussion in order to evaluate and look at all the different options for the sources for your HVAC um with an anticipated vote uh for the selection in the August meeting. Uh we will also talk about the introductory into proprietary
items. Um this is a very early um kickoff to that discussion which will be a projectl long uh discussion. Um, we will also have a little bit of a design update. Um, as looking ahead to later this month, uh, the July 23rd meeting
has actually recently been rescheduled to July 27th, but that's when we'll start some of our exterior design discussions. First, looking at materiality options. Um, and that will be followed by on Tuesday looking at the lead uh, version 4 scorecard. So getting
into a little bit more in depth of what type of credits we are looking uh to achieve for this project in alignment with our overall lead goals. Looking forward to August. Um we are starting in the first week of August, actually scheduled for August 4th, a
meeting with the representatives from the Chumsford Clean Energy and um sustainability committee as an opportunity to have the HVAC source discussion with them to gain additional feedback uh to report back to the um
school committee or school building committee uh to help inform the decision in the August meeting. We will also be starting on August 11th our safety and security kickoff. This will be with the district in order to uh meet with our internal safety and security expert as
well as representatives from the Ed Davis company um to start talking about how we would like to address the safety and security design and approach for the new Parker Middle School. Uh the anticipated agenda for the August meeting will include a review of the SD
cost estimation process. Uh this pivots a little bit from what we have done at our previous phases where a third party is brought in and that process includes a reconciliation. We'll also have um we'll circle back to that HVAC system source discussion including the vote as
well as an additional design update. Looking to September uh we'll come back to a safety and security meeting and we'll loop in fire and police. Um once we have a sort of uh base of what the district is looking for, we bring in our additional stakeholders. Um we will have
a second round of programming. Uh we had a very successful round uh in at the end of May, early June, and we'll come back to the staff in September. We like to get them at all the worst times of the year, you know, right at the end and right at the beginning um in order to
get that feedback to help inform our schematic design submission. And then the September meeting um we will have some exterior and interior renderings uh to help represent what this design will look like, what it will be for the schematic design and uh to support that
outreach information uh for the vote. Um and we will then at the end of September start doing our schematic design cost reconciliation as that all ramps up towards uh the submission in October. Okay, thank you very much. Um, that
concludes the schedule overview. Uh, the next item on the agenda is HPAC system selection discussion and I'll turn it over to our consultants to uh bring us forward on that. >> Thank you. Um, so we'll start with just
a little bit of reminder of where we are. Um, as we look at the building systems and other factors, uh, we like to always, uh, reconsider what our, uh, on-site sustainable design opportunities are and how any of these selections can tie into the other, um, systems and, um,
design within the building and on the site. Uh, so as part of our uh, energy efficiency, the solar orientation, all of that ties into what your uh, HVAC source selection will be. So, just a reminder, uh, in order to
achieve a net zero building, we first want to start with a low EUI or energy use intensity. The lower the EUI, the less energy you need to create on site to achieve that net zero. The energy source, whether it be an air source, a ground source, or a combination of both,
can help bring your energy usage down um, and then help in turn with your net zero. So what we are talking about today will be the air source, the dual source, part air, part ground source or ground source.
So looking at our energy goals decision-m tree, uh where we started in May and into June is identifying if we will be a path one, which means we are targeting an EUI 22 or lower. Um and that was decided we are trying to
achieve mass save path one. uh we have anou and that is our project goal. Uh knowing that um we have the school has elected or the district has elected to proceed with the elimination of fossil fuels. We know that this building will
be all electric. So the next decision point and which is where we are uh within the month of June and August is what will our system source be will be air source, ground source or dual? Um, and as I mentioned earlier, the vote on that selection will be targeted for the
August meeting. Um, >> quick question. >> Of course. >> Sorry to interrupt. Um, did we vote on >> Can you say that again, Pat? >> Did we vote on path one at some point in
time? >> Yeah, it was a few months a few months ago. The U we had a conversation I believe a few a few months ago. We had a conversation related to Enrid and their path one approach and the
committee elected to maximize reimbursement um um reimbursement of um um Massave and the rebates that would uh apply to this project. And in doing so, it's consistent with um the district's
overall achievement of um uh all electric and um uh reduced or eliminated fossil fuels. Um so it was a conversation that occurred um occurred with the committee and also with the
leadership group um during the um during a few meetings along the way. This is also in alignment with uh Chumsford's election into the opt-in uh stretch energy code >> and following that meeting we also had a
separate meeting with national grid and we applied for the uh mass save and uh I think at that time Paul Cohen was the town manager and he signed the memorandum of understanding with uh messave. So we we picked the I believe
uh pet pet, right? >> Correct. Thank you. >> Y that's right. >> Thank you. >> So over the next couple of months and throughout the progress of the project, we will continue to uh discuss with the district the goals for achieving net
zero, what level that would be um and how that would be achieved um with additional incentives. So part of the selection of the source is understanding uh how we calculate the EUI or the energy use intensity of the
building and that starts with an understanding of what the hours of operation anticipated use of the building will be. Um this initial pass at a high level uh was uh discussed with the superintendent and principal based on uh their anticipated use of the
building. uh the current hours of operation. Um assume pretty long days of use for the building. Um further design and conversations will allow for additional detailed information and schedule refinement which will be needed to more accurately predict the potential
EUI and all that will tie into understanding um the size of the PV system that would be needed in order to meet the net zero. So those really get tied together. Um and we'll continue to develop that with the district um alongside with the design of the
building. So as I mentioned before, there's really three different source um systems that you can select from. You can go your baseline is what we assume air as your most initial cost effective um and that is all air source heat pumps. Um for the
sake of this comparison we assumed a VRF um system um that could be different but in order to compare apple to apple to apple um that is what we used for this matrix that Magda will walk through. Um so like I said air is the baseline. Um you have an opportunity for air plus
ground which would be um alternative one and that means some air source heat pumps and then some ground source heat pumps. And those would which ground source is what um I think is commonly thought of as geothermal. Um and that would be anticipated in the stool system
to be only the shared public space of the building and that's how it would sort of be separated. or you could go all ground source or all geothermal uh for the entire building. So those are sort of the three options that we'll be comparing in the matrix
to give a little bit of a visual understanding um of how much the those ground wells would take up on the site. So one of the considerations if you wanted to do geothermal or ground source is that you need to have the real estate to put those wells in place. This is a
very high level study and it takes into consider consideration a lot of assumptions which we are pulling from um the data that was collected from the geothermal test well and what's being done at the fire station in Chelmsford as well as a recent project in Canton to
give sort of a highle idea. Um the first option alternative of one is that dual source. So in this example, say you need about 40 wells to provide um geothermal for the shared spaces of the building.
That area um just at the front of the site that shows you 40 wells at about 25 ft on center from each other and about 750 ft deep, which is a fairly conservative or safe assumption of what you would need um and how many wells um that would look like. Clearly have
plenty of enough sight for it. The second option is if you wanted to do all geothermal um how many wells would that be? Um extrapolating about 120 wells and that is about the um dispersement or use on the site that it would take. These can go under green space, it can go
under parking lots. So what we're showing is a very realistic um approach with our sort of assumed or extrapolated data. And from here I'm going to hand it over to Magda, our um energy consultant with AL.
>> Good evening. Magda Le with Enmanle Engineering. Everybody can hear me and understand me somewhat. Okay. [laughter] Okay. So, uh so this is a matrix that compares those three HVAC systems that Chris mentioned. So I apologize if I
explain something too much. the the group may be very familiar with all the terminology but just in case I thought I would explain some of the terminology. So HVAC stands for heating ventilation and air conditioning systems. So these are the systems that provide heating in
the space cooling also move the ventilation air as needed and conditioned that ventilation air. So in this metric what we are comparing is um everything else in the s in the is assumed to be identical. So the energy
use consumption of the building or that the EUI which is like a mileage for the car this is mileage for the building right how much energy will the building use uh per year so that um but to that
EUI goes any energy consumed by HVAC equipment but also goes any energy consumed by lighting equipment any plug loads meaning anything plugged to receptacles and kitchen equipment or anything that consumes electricity. Since this is an all electric building, that's the only source of energy for the
building. So the EUI um the Arax system contributes to that EUI or is one of the elements of the EUI but not the only one. And to compare apples to apples and to apples, we assume that the building otherwise is identical including even
this building side of V of the HVAC system. So the amount of ventilation air how the ventilation is distributed and so forth. The only difference is how where the source of heating and cooling will be for this building. Now since it
is all electric building the expectation the the most efficient systems this day as a solution are so-called heat pumps. Now heat pump is simply a device that works a little bit like a refrigerator in the house. So if you need heating it will take energy from somewhere using
compressors would move that energy and pump it in a sense to higher temperature as needed uh and and heat the space. If you need cooling it would work it would take the energy heat from the space and throw it somewhere. Now the options that
are on the table is the baseline is the that the heat will be taken from outside and heat the building in winter or in summer the heat will be taken from the building and from to the outside air. Now this system because the the the
system works harder the higher the uh it has to sort of it's the same the refrigerator if you had your refrigerator in the kitchen in very hot kitchen it will work much harder to maintain the inside temperature uh than if you have your refrigerator standing outside in winter it would work very
very little to maintain that cold cold temperature inside the refriger refrigerator. So in this case if in summer you are taking the heat from the building and you need to dispose it to the outside air that is at 90° um it has to work pretty hard. It is the
same way if the if you are taking heating energy from outside air in winter that has 32° temperature and you need to make it 70° in space the system has to work that heat pump has to work relatively hard. On the other end of the spectrum is the alternative free which
includes I'm sorry alternative two which assumes a fully geothermal system. The geothermal system the difference is that in instead of using air as the source or the repository of excessive heat or the source of heat in winter it simply uses
um ground as that repository. Now ground has more consistent temperature. So the heat pumps it it's this way the the the ground is the storage. So in in summer you you charge the ground in a say in a sense through the heat pump system and
in winter you take that that energy that is sort of stored in the ground and move it into the building. Now um so that makes the alternative to the most efficient option energy efficient and alternative one the least efficient. Um
it doesn't mean that they are inefficient. It's inefficient. it's just more efficient, less efficient and and and and uh most efficient whatever. Um the the important aspect so uh the one in the middle simply assumes that
sections of the building will will use ground source heat pumps and other sections of the building would use air source heat pump systems. Now, as like if you had two cars and one was had very efficient mileage, you would want to use the car that has more efficient mileage
to to use it more than the other one. So uh in this case typically the team would solve this this hybrid solution by using geothermal systems for the sections of the building that will be used the most which are typically the common areas the areas that may be used outside of school
uh uh school hours the areas that may be used for community use in the evenings or on weekends and in during summer. So typic the solution would be the maybe classrooms would have airsource heat pumps and the um sections such as
gymnasium and administrative offices use year round and so forth would use the uh geothermal system. So that's the sort of concept of it. Any questions? >> No. >> Which which one did you say was the most efficient? >> So the most efficient is alternative free. This one is I'm sorry
but it's >> the system that is fur on the in the is alternative. I miss her again. >> It's called geothermal and the least efficient is the baseline which uses the air source. >> There was a question somewhere else. Pat. >> Yes. >> Um um so on the baseline or on any of
the alternatives any of the three alternatives is there any um supplemental heat to these or is it just pure heat pump? >> It's pure heat pump. It's pure heat pump in all options except for some areas. typically what you would see in this
type of situation in our climate. So you may have areas that are partially heated tool lower temperature like maybe stairwells or some vestibules. Those would typically in all electric schools will see simply electric resistance
units or some obscure [laughter] >> I'm sorry under these so under these scenarios what happens if we have a five below zero day >> so these systems aren't Yes. Yes, they are designed. Uh there
are selections available for the airsource heat pumps. There is typically um some of those systems. No. Um so you without going into a lot of details, but some of the air handling units may may have heat pumps, packaged heat pumps rather than VRF like the gymnasium may
have a dedicated heat pump. Those systems tend to have additional electric resistance for emergencies like this, right? Or or unusual circumstances. But >> definitely question. Yeah. >> Yeah. But does that answer the question? >> So there there is backup to the
>> there is backup electric. Yes. Yes. Does that answer that now? Sorry. [laughter] >> Yes. >> Okay. All right. Okay. So um so this was the the to set the concept of of what is presented here. And now
starting with the first sort of category which are called constants. um for uh the first item first row is the um um install one-time installation cost. So you as you can see the least efficient
system is also the least expensive and the most efficient is the most expensive um which is what we typically observe. So the the idea is of trading off is it worth going with the more expensive system if it gives some savings are the
savings large enough to justified and so forth. Uh the good sort of uh good um news is that the project uh project uh um target for EUI is 22 right that's
that's where the maximum incentive is available from mass safe and minimizes energy use. So as you can see in the second row uh the the EUI ranges in this case between 21.3 to 20.2. So all those
options can satisfy the EUI of 22 given all the assumptions. Right? So uh they are lower than 22. 22 is the upper limit. Um it's worth noting that uh because the EUI as I mentioned includes all the energy uses in the building
including lighting and plug loads and everything else which is not affected by the choice of source of HVAC equipments of source of energy for HVAC equipment. You can see that while the alternative to the fully geothermal system is indeed most efficient it only trims the EUI but
maybe by one or so maybe two in some circumstances. So it's it's a very small difference because it only deals with the HVAC equipment and only a section of it that that it deals with the compressor's operation effectively. So any questions on that concept? But the good news is any of those options would
satisfy potentially the EUI of 22 given the assumptions used about other efficiency features of the building like you know building envelope will be efficient no matter which scenario is chosen for HVAC and and again lighting system will be efficient and so forth. Uh the next uh category talks about the
use of electricity. So again um this is simply energy consumption per year by for this building as predicted in KW kilowatt hours and the the uh least efficient equip system u we are talking
about one um one and a half million kWh and the alternative to the most efficient around 1.4 4 uh million kWh. The next line item is the actual cost of electricity predicted for using current
assumptions for each option. Um so you can see again the the difference is not dramatic. So the so-called least expense uh least efficient baseline option we are talking around maybe five $550,000
right uh in annual operating cost. So that's the cost of electricity to operate the building and the alternative to the most efficient is around $500,000. So we are talking $50,000 in savings uh in the annual operating costs. Since this presentation was
prepared to account for life cycle costing uh another component. So with life cycle costing you take into the account the first cost installation cost you take into the account the operating cost annual operating cost and the third piece is the maintenance cost. Um and
estimated annual maintenance costs are on the order of $45,500. Since the systems are very very similar in number of ways, the only difference is that ground loop which by itself does not really require an excessive maintenance uh to speak of really none.
Um then the maintenance costs are assumed to be practically identical for each of those options. Any question on this constant category? Okay. Um so then the next category of entries there uh deal with the available
monetary incentives uh specifically from the uh mass safe program. Um so um the cons there are the the utility mass safe program offers three elements to the within the path one incentive program.
There are three elements of incentive. First one is if the building on paper through some simulation and detailed analysis which were done throughout the design if the building is predicted to use an EUI of have an EUI of 22 or below
that's the first part of incentive paid off at the end of construction and um it's at at certain rate I believe don't quote me on this I I didn't write myself a cheat sheet but like$125 per square foot of building area so that's based at
the pay at the construction after construction at the at the end of the construction. The next element is the heat pump adder. Uh this is element uh of incentive that if you are using heat pumps uh you can get additional
incentive at the rate of um it's certain amount of dollars per a unit of capacity of the heat pump. Now the rate is different for for different system types. The airsource heat pumps and VRF uh airsource VRF systems have lower rate
of incentive. The geothermal VR systems have much higher rate of incentive. So you can see in that line there is a significant difference. For the baseline we are talking about $400,000 of you know heat pumper incentive. Um, and on
the other end of the spectrum for the alternative tool where you every whole building is geothermal based, it's 1,300,000. So again, this is a significant difference between the the incentives and the post in and there's a third piece of the incentive called post
occupancy incentive. That incentive is paid after approximately one year of normal building operation if actually metered utility data indicates that building operates at EUI of 22 or less. So the sort of proof is in the pudding here really. So a building has to operate. If that happens again there is
incentive that is paid at the rate of I believe $150 per square foot of building area and is identical for each option. So that there is no distinction. So the only difference in the um mass safe incentive is for that heat pump adder. It's much greater for geothermal and u
than for the baseline op b than the airsource heat pump option. Um so the next line item shows the when we deduct the available incentives from the of the first top row where there is one time
installation cost. This is the net cost. uh and that net cost again is plugged into the life cycle cost. I do want to point out that even with the incentives the heat pump adder being much greater for the fully geothermal the net cost as
currently estimated for the system is still lowest for the baseline system. So that that still stays. And then we plugged that in into life cycle cost uh analysis uh spreadsheet and
using the the net installation cost the annual energy use uh cost energy cost of for the building and the maintenance costs and we ran it over the life cycle of 20 years. I do want to mention that we did not account here in this life
cycle costing for any cost of borrowing money is assume as you would had the money and you put for each option you are able to put that money down down um and um there is assumption that with this the um 20 years was chosen because
this is how long pretty much the baseline systems would last. I mean everything on the building side would last around 20 years. this that's a that's a common number used. I mean they may last much longer if you have great uh maintenance program or you know a little bit less but 20 20 years is a
safe estimate. Uh and because these are air systems in the baseline there's a presumption that after 20 years everything is kind of gone requires certain replacement. So there is no residual value left in it. However, for alternative one and alternative two, there is an assumption that there is
residual value left in the form of the ground source uh ground loop of the ground loop. Ground loops can last 40 years, 50 years. So there is an a presumption that there is some value left in it and it's uh and it's plugged into the life cycle cost. With this all
um calculated uh you can see that the baseline system is still has the shortest life cycle cost or the lowest life cycle cost which means it's still the best sort of selection. Um so even accounting for incentive accounting for the potential
residual value in ground loop for alternative one and two the in this life cycle costing the best option is baseline. Now um we we move on to the next category of of information. >> Before we do that >> mhm sorry >> before we do that can I just ask what's
inclusive um within that life cycle cost on each option >> like is that is that um electricity and maintenance and like what's inclusive in that life >> right so the the what is included here is the installation cost from that line
item that says installed cost after mass save incentive. go for option one around 15 for baseline around $15 million and for alternative two on the other end of the spectrum around $20 million. So that's the first cost. Um then annual
operating costs uh of cost of electricity which is the under constant it's the one two three fourth row from the top. uh again around half a $550,000 for baseline and around $500,000 for the
alternative to on the end of the on the other end. Okay, so these are the and the third piece included on the life cycle is the estimating maintenance cost which is the last row in the constant uh category and it's around $45,500
and it's identical for each option. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. All right. So, so this is uh so far when we account for uh mass safe program. Now if we account for the federal IRA tax
credit which is still um in existence for geothermal systems then the picture changes dramatically mainly because this IRA program can provide so much money for the geothermal system that it shifts
the equation and now the alternative to effectively becomes the least expensive. Um so uh as you can so in the federal uh IRA tax credit so the third row of the third category or third box uh you can see there would be nothing available for
the baseline because there are no ground loops uh ground source heat pump systems in that in that option. For alternative one there is some money available because approximately half of the building is served by ground source heat pumps. So that incentive um very or or
credit tax credit very roughly estimated again please keep it all in mind is on the order of 2 million $700,000. Now for the alternative two where the whole building is based on geotherm has geothermal ax system that potential IRA
tax credit making the same assumptions would be on the order of 5 million300500,000. So when we now um look at the installation cost after deducting mass safe mass save incentives and the
potential uh IRA tax credit as you can see in that middle line of the federal box um the least expensive option becomes alternative two. So alter the baseline is still $15 million and some change. uh the alternative one now
becomes slightly less than $15 million and alternative two becomes uh even less als so so 14,600,000 and some change. So when you plan this new installation cost all the other
things are the same. So um you uh cost of electricity use is the same for his option as was previously calculated and the maintenance cost now you plug that in using the same 20 life cycle the the lowest life cycle cost is for
alternative two but again there is so the one with full geothermal again there's nothing magical about this now because clearly it's also the least expensive option from the first cost perspective. Um do you have a question? I >> I do have a couple questions. Uh, so when is the IRA tax credit set to expire?
>> I'm sorry, can you repeat that? >> When is the IRA tax credit set to expire? >> So, uh, supposedly it's in place under at the current rate up until 2036 and then it will taper off, >> okay, >> before it expires.
>> Is there any concern about accelerated phase out like there was with the other forms of clean energy? >> U, I'm not sure why you speak other. So other forms of clean energy had these IRA tax credits and they actually lost them because the the phase out was accelerated through different national
um uh legislation. So is there concern that best this will also fa face that within the next five so 10 years? what I heard and again I'm not either tax expert or decisively not an expert on American governmental policies but this is my understanding that this this um
IRA tax was included in the one big beautiful bill and it was supposedly included in a way that it cannot be changed regardless who may be in Washington. So >> okay, >> but again I this is you you you uh again the usual disclaimer you want to contact
your tax consultant. [laughter] >> I understand it's just the fact that >> but it's supposedly is um again uh relatively safe for several years to come. >> Okay. um my anecdotal story. So I we work on many projects very very many
projects in in similar sort of circumstances and there are some customers who do not want to take any chance although I have to admit that the this when this decisions similar decisions are being made in few other school districts that was before the election. So I guess maybe there was
more of volatile what might happen. Now maybe people feel a bit more comfortable with the predictions but um and I know of one school district I was not uh involved with the design of it but I happened to live in D and they did uh end up applying for it not long ago and
receiving it and they were that indeed trimmed so much money from the cost of the HRA that it made it the least expensive option. So >> Sure. Sure. And and it can only be applied for after completion of the >> after completion. Yes. So that's another thing. So like those must save national grid incentives. They are after
construction or one year after construction. This is I think a little bit longer process before you can get it. So >> you need to borrow the money. >> Magn is it safe to say it's it's called a tax credit. >> Yes. >> But and John you can correct me. Towns and cities
>> don't pay taxes. >> So it's called a tax credit but for a public entity it's a rebate. >> Yes. It's an application. You have to actually apply for it in order to be fedally funded because you're right. There is no taxation of municipalities. >> Yeah. >> Yes. Thank you. That's a very useful
point and and I understand >> any risk is there any risk of being turned down for any of >> so I mean I there are some rules but they I don't think any public job direct there has to be u some requirements about
um using um like the uh union labor or something like that but typically I my understanding is public procurement in our state would would not violate any of this or would probably fall just in line with that. Um I I was my understanding
is that uh the fire station right in transport is going to have geothermal system right. So I don't know if anyone started maybe looking into the process locally that would have more of financial exploit um insight to it but uh my my opinions not opinions by
knowledge is anecdotal based on what I heard secondhand about the actual >> is the installation of the geothermal there option to does that take longer is is that is it a more extensive process of because you're drilling
>> I don't think this delays the construction at No, no, it can be done simultaneously with everything else. So, that shouldn't be >> a question for you on the the tax credit if if someone else um so the project would be you'd apply ahead of time, but the project would be completed and then
you apply for the rebate. Is it a one-time rebate or like that we'd be able to get before 2036 or is it something you get like per year? I understand that it's a one time and I think you just need to apply before 2036 but not necessarily but
>> so if I understand it correctly I mean the project will be done >> right >> well before you know 35 but it's it's all about applying >> yes >> is it safe to say also that
that most of these incentives and rebates from a financial standpoint, they're actually not deductions off of the cost of the project because you have to pay for everything up front. >> Correct. >> They're all incentives that you'll get after that. We'll go back to basically
the general fund or free cash or >> Yeah. I I would um [clears throat] I'm going to just qualify. I'm going to throw out some numbers that are not representational of the project numbers, but they're just numbers for simplicity of explanation.
>> Illustrative. >> Thank you. So if the project hypothetically was 200 million um you know the vote you have to authorize the authorization to borrow up to 200 um hypothetically if the MSBA um uh your
reimbursement was 100 million then your tax impact is based on the other 100 million. Um and then mass save as an example if we get 3 million for mass save. Now my opinion mass save is guaranteed like mass save is happening.
>> Um so then your tax impact would be 97 and then you know with the federal um tax rebate we'll call it if that's 5 million then your tax impact goes down to 92. So that's just kind of the
simplistic way to to look at it, but you still it it it doesn't come off the total project cost. It's just the tax impact. >> Um within our initial budgetary rounds, what did what did we contemplate for
using for HVAC systems? >> Baseline. >> Baseline. Yeah. Baseline baseline only. >> Yep. So the given cost of 263 something like that would be
>> it would would go up. >> It would go up and then but the anticipated um district share I did not include mass save or the federal tax rebate. So, um,
you know, I'm not saying it would be neutral, but but we'd have to, um, update that kind of cost model and not to change the subject, but just to finish the table. So, there is one line item related to PV system since the PL project is potentially considering
being net zero. So just for illustrative purposes we presented the impact on the size of PV system. PV system cost some money too, right? So this is the capacity of the PV system in KW kilowatt. And you can see the baseline will require the largest system to make
the building net zero. Um the alternative one would be approximately 2% smaller at 1220 kW or kilowatt. And the alternative two because it uses the least energy so the smallest PV system would be able to satisfy to make it net
zero. It's around 5% smaller than the baseline. So again there is some cost imple implication there. But this is mostly because you know um if you if you end up with alternative two then you you don't have to spend as much money on the PV system but that impact is relatively
small. That's the whole point that is only maybe 5% in the capacity. So that concludes my presentation. Thank you. And Vivian, I will take the notes on this one. [clears throat] [laughter] >> Clearly not my wheelhouse. [clears throat] >> Okay. If there are no further questions,
>> any uh any further discussion, questions, comments on the HBAC system selection? The only thing the only thing I would um clarify just so just so everybody understands uh Magda is our energy
efficiency consultant. We also have Griffith and Barry which is the mechanical electrical plumbing fire protection engineers. Griffith and Barry Enamel AI3 we've been working together for 20 >> four years
>> four years. [laughter] So, we've done a lot of projects together over the years and Magda's worked with um many other firms as well and does the majority of the energy efficiency um analysis for u most school
projects in Massachusetts. U so just extremely knowledgeable. If there are any questions that are um uh that come up after this meeting, please reach out. uh we'll we'll filter that through uh David and Hamdi and and Dr. Lang and uh
get you the information. So, just wanted to >> I was going to say um Jay Faxton, our HVAC in-house expert, unfortunately, he had a um family situation. He couldn't be here tonight. Um but but you know, he he he has done many projects with AI3,
has experience with geothermal. um you know he has his his opinions on what he what he thinks systems you know would work the best um but unfortunately um he couldn't be here tonight but we'll um you know invite him to uh our next
meeting in August because um I I do know that you know Chelmsford knows Jay now and Jay knows Chelmsford um from being involved in the fire station projects >> I have a um Pat, I have a question. Um, I don't
know, Christine, did you know I know when we met um you had some thoughts of um kind of a uh real estate, how much real estate the the wells would take any and I'm sorry I'm putting you on the spot, but I'm kind of curious if you
have any thoughts. >> Yes. So for the uh for the fire station project, this really is our first pilot program for the town to to really have geothermal and um that fire station is about 7,500 square feet. There are seven wells being installed about 800 ft deep.
Um and it's taking up half of Robert's Field. So I think when we first were looking into this, I was not thinking that geothermal was really even maybe an option just because of the real estate that it would take. Um, but it seems like based on preliminary calculations, you don't need three, you know, 150, 200
wells. You could you could accomplish that with less wells. Um, I think as far as the real estate, like, you know, the important piece is that it's captured within that property line and it seems like that can be um I know underneath parking lots, underneath underneath
fields, that has no impact to how we operate the parking lot or the field. So, to us, that's fine. Um, but that was I guess our hesitation having seen I was trying to do math. Okay, seven seven wells taking up half of Robert's Fields for 7,500 square feet and then the
square footage of this building. I was coming up with a a [laughter] different number. Um, so it's reassuring to hear that. Um, and it makes it seem more feasible. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Anything further on HBAC discussion?
Seeing none, uh we'll move on to the next agenda item which is introduction to proprietary items. >> Thank you. So we wanted to have um this initial conversation and this just um to spark the ideas and for the district and all
the stakeholders to think about what um proprietary items are, how they impact um a public project and what might make the most sense for the district moving forward. a final decision on this does not need to be made until um right before we go out to bid. So, there's
plenty of time. Um but we have found that having this conversation early allows the district um the most time to really figure out what makes the most sense uh for their project. So, what is a proprietary specification? Um these are descriptions of materials that site
specific brand names um such that only one vendor or manufacturer can provide these desired items. than a typical public bid. Um you need to provide three or equals and allow for that competitive opportunity. Uh the disadvantages of
having proprietary items is that you limit that competition and can potentially drive up the cost of that item within your project. Um there are requirements um for when a public project does um add proprietary items into uh their specifications or their
design. Um and those are controlled so that you need to say the district or the owner would need to say why it is appropriate, why it's in the best interest of the public and provide that documentation um within the project. Um and that would all be um we would help facilitate that.
So some of these items and like what are the reasons an owner might decide to put in proprietary items? If it might cost more, why would you add it in there? Um some of them are to align with district standards. um but the product is currently used throughout the district. Um and deviating would create um a
hardship. Um so that might be an item that you would want to continue on with. Um if you have trained staff, if extensive time and effort has gone into training uh the staff and it's been invested by the district to use a specific product or item, um it might be in the best interest to continue with
that and identify that as proprietary. Um seamless integration. This is kind of in line with the district standard. If any of these items happen to align with town um or other building standards, is it in the best interest for the district to include that as proprietary in the
project? um if there are unique or unmatched advantages. Um if there is a specific product or item um that offers unique or unmatched advantages, the district um for the development or technology or educational delivery, they might identify that as a requirement and
um necessary to incur that potential extra cost. Um and only one product maybe meets the needs. um there's a specific need that this project or district has. Only one product meets it. We need to have that in the specification. It needs
to become proprietary. >> Another item that might I don't know what category it fall into, but a lot of times um there's a certain element that relates to um a standard from a public safety standpoint, which um a lot of
times drives it. >> Yes. Um so here are just some examples um of common proprietary items that we have seen uh throughout our uh history of projects. A lot of locks and key systems um a standard throughout the district. Um certain locks and keys are required.
Um panic devices uh different door closers, your fire alarm panels so that those are consistent throughout. Maybe it's a requirement of your fire department. Um video management systems so that those are consistent throughout the district. um different network video
recorders if that is again district town standard um access control and that has to do with um your different card readers, how you get into the building. Again, aligning with um potential public safety. Uh your building management systems, if your maintenance staff uh manages your buildings a certain way
throughout the district, maintaining that um in your new building. Um interactive panels, and this aligns with technology. If you have a district standard, your staff is uh trained to a specific type of delivery interactive panel for the display that might be important to maintain. Um intrusion
system again with the public safety uh different device charging locker tower. So this is a smaller item but could be in align with uh the different equipment that your district already uses throughout. Um and then assisted listening system. So these are just some examples and something to consider uh as
the project proceeds. So, um Christine, do we have any propri I mean do we are our control systems or anything proprietary um things like that? What do we have currently that we would consider?
>> Sure. Uh locks and keys most definitely. Um we just went through this with the with the fire stations too. And so locks and keys, we do have three specific products uh for um boilers um in school systems. Um Loch Navar, Reello, and I'm
drawing a blank on the third one right now. Um but we can get you we can get you a list uh because we just went through this with the fire station, so it probably have some similarities. >> Um the other is uh BMS system. I guess we ended up not doing it. So we have
specific specifications u but we found that that does not necessarily have to be proprietary as long as it works. Um so we do not um we also right now are looking at intrusion um intrusion. So um that's something that uh I guess we
we're looking at defining as what's proprietary there um and fire alarms too. I think the thing is is that we're right now evaluating what makes sense to if it do we want to stay with it proprietary or do we want to change it? So there's a few of those systems we're evaluating right now actually.
>> Figure it out there. [clears throat] >> All right. [laughter] Uh so yeah, I think we can definitely uh forward what we have done so far and then like I think this summer we're going through a few of those updates with some of the intrusion and the fire alarm. So uh we'll have those updates. >> This is not urgent.
>> Yeah. No, it's good for us though just to because as we do projects we like you know um so we have I guess at DPW and for the town a list of proprietary like what in town is proprietary um that's what jumps to mind not to there could be
a couple others that come up because that's the thing is this is a much larger building than the fire stations and in the fire stations too there were some um elements specific to you know the fire fire stations so we'll have to take another look at this um but that's what comes comes to mind definitely um
locks and keys or swipe access. >> Yeah. On the school side, we have a couple of like unique uh issues like the access control, the swipes. We have a a system that's districtwide and then even with the uh video surveillance system in the schools uh that integrates with the
police department and town or whatnot. We'd obviously want to maintain that. We wouldn't want to have a standalone system running on its own. But those are a couple of the minor ones. I don't think there's anything >> that right now we're in unusual. >> Yeah, right now we're in the middle of upgrading all of our clock systems. So,
it would make sense to call it propri from a maintenance perspective. So, that's the thing is I think right now we're we're switching over to some couple new systems. So, we I think we would be important to call those proprietary um and and uh include that in this project. Even on some of the
systems that I guess we would term proprietary, we do have multiple vendors um on state contract that provide the product. So I think you'd still get multiple bids. It would just be a product installed that like is capable to integrate with our system. But we can work on putting that list together for
you, Joe. >> Trying to think with the kitchens, we didn't have anything proprietary, but yeah, there's nothing. it was we have certain criteria we want to meet but nothing proprietary for um some of the that once you get into some of the equipment. >> So is it helpful to AI3 and left field
to produce a list a preliminary list at least at this point um so that we can uh start zeroing in on that >> definitely >> we can get that over. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Anything else uh related to the discussion of introduction to
proprietary items? Seeing none, we'll move to the next agenda item, which is the review of town meeting approval timeline and authorization uh timeline to the select board for [clears throat] approve. And uh for those that don't understand or don't
know um we are planning on being before the select board on August 10th to discuss um this actual subject. So I'll turn it over to AI3 I assume uh left field maybe for discussion.
>> Right. Um thank you Pat. Um Jay the order of the slides might be a little different. If you could >> keep going forward. Yeah, if you could keep keep going forward, please. And then we'll we'll come back. Oh, perfect. All right. Um, so this
slide uh was presented to the committee previously. Um, and it provides a draft road map of the major activities leading to the local funding approval of the project. Um, since the slide was last presented, uh, Hamdi updated this, um,
uh, updated this with the anticipated local approval dates to reflect the January 11th for a special town meeting and February 9th for a townwide ballot, which were recently coordinated between the town manager and the town clerk. Uh
however, I want to state and it's important to emphasize that these two dates remained um remain proposed planning dates. The authority to formally establish and call a special town meeting as well as set the date uh of a related ballot measure rests with
the select board. Uh therefore the project team is using these dates for scheduling and coordination purposes but they remain subject to the select board's uh formal consideration and approval. Um, now to tee up the next series of slides, uh, we were recently
tasked with providing an analysis of a whatif scenario if the decision were to present, um, to the Parker School project as an article at the Springtown meeting, uh, which is currently scheduled for, I believe, April 26th,
which I think is a Monday and the last Monday of April, um, next year. Uh, if you can go to the next slide, Jay. So [clears throat] this slide was previously presented to the school building committee uh at our June 10th
meeting and it illustrates the anticipated CM at risk uh project schedule based on receiving local approvals through a special town meeting in January of 27 and a townwide ballot vote um in February of 27. And the key
point here uh is that this slide reflects that AI3 um no matter how you slice it, they need 13 months following local approvals uh to advance the design and produce a construction set of documents necessary to support the first
award or series of construction scope awards. Um that period includes remaining design development construction document prep uh estimating review coordination permitting procurement activities required uh everything required for the first we'll
say package uh under this schedule local approvals would happen in January and February of 27 and that would position the project to begin making its first construction awards during the spring of 2028.
Next slide. So this slide reflects the same project activities, the same durations shown on the previous slide. Nothing has been compressed or shortened. The entire schedule simply has been moved or pushed
to the right to reflect local approvals occurring through the spring annual town meeting and subsequent town ballot vote um after um April sometime in May. Um because of the design team still requires the same 13-month period to
complete the work necessary for the first uh construction awards. Uh moving the local approvals into the spring would push downstream design procurement award construction activities out by approximately 4 months or slightly more.
The actual impact may vary by activity. Certain tasks can proceed primarily upon completion of the preceding design work while others may be influenced by seasonal weather conditions um available construction windows, school vacation
periods or the need to avoid disrupting ongoing school operations. Therefore, while the approval dates may shift by roughly 4 months, the impact on certain construction activities could extend beyond 4 months depending on how those activities align with certain calendar
impacts. We'll say next slide. So, this slide is uh about escalation. Um it explains that construction escalation should be treated as a real project risk, not simply a theoretical possibility. Uh various market
indicators continue to show that construction costs are increasing uh with many industry sources reporting annualized or year-over-year escalation in the range of anywhere from four to uh 6%. Um at the same time several key
construction materials including steel, copper, aluminum, electrical components uh remain um volatile. Um the continued expansion of uh data center construction uh is also placing additional demand on many of these materials and the labor
required to install them. Tariffs, supply chain uncertainty, labor shortages further complicate contractors and suppliers ability to provide uh reliable pricing. So the takeaway here is that escalation does not need to be unusually high to
have a meaningful effect on a project of this size. With approximately 211 million of anticipated construction awards, that's not the project cost, but the construction value at this time, a four-month delay could reasonably result
in several million dollars of additional cost. Next slide. So, this slide uh translate the escalation percentages discussed on the previous slide to actual dollars based on approximately $211 million of
construction awards. As shown in the table, if annual escalation were approximately 4% year-over-year, a 4-month delay would result in approximately 2.8 million of impact. At 5%, the potential added cost increase
goes to 3.5. At 6%, it increases to 4.1. And if you get into the high-risisk escalation, it just continues to grow. Um, we're not suggesting that any one of these escalation rates is guaranteed. Rather, this slide is intended to illustrate a range of potential cost
exposure if construction awards are delayed from the summer of 2028 to the fall of 2028. So based on the current market information, we believe a reasonable expected range is approximately 2.8 to 4.1 million.
However, if the market is volatile, then that exposure could uh creep up to 5 million or more. Um this slide uh addresses potential consequences of shifting the local approval schedule. The effect of the
delay could have on the seasonal timing of construction under the current January February approval path of 2027. Uh the project would be positioned to make construction awards during the spring of 2028 and begin construction in the summer of 2028. This would allow
several weather sensitive activities including site work, utilities, earth work, early foundation work to begin during more favorable late summer and the fall construction period. This schedule would not eliminate winter conditions or guarantee that all
foundation work would be completed before winter. However, it would help mitigate some of the exposure and position structural steel erection to proceed during the winter months. Steel erection is essentially unaffected by cold temperatures compared to earthwork,
concrete, and other weather sensitive activities. Once the weather improves in the spring of 29, Sly on deck and Sibon grade activities could proceed under more favorable conditions, reducing the need for costly temporary heat protection, snow removal, and other
winter condition measures. By comparison, a four-month delay could shift the start of construction into late fall or winter. that would essentially put weather sensitive construction activities into less favorable weather resulting in the need for more expensive winter conditions to
be implemented. [snorts] It is nearly impossible to avoid winter activities uh or winter conditions uh on a construction project of this size and duration. Uh however the goal is to organize the scheduling and the
sequence of work so that weather sensitive activities occur outside um of the most um you know basically occur outside of um uh you know winter conditions when possible. So it's it's you know it's never perfect but you do your best to try to avoid winter
conditions. Next slide. So the overall take overall takeaway from the analysis is that shifting the local approval process from January, February of 2027 and to the late April and May of 27 time frame would likely
move the first construction awards from the spring of 28 to the fall of 28. Based on approximately 211 million of construction awards, even under a moderate escalation environment of 4 to 6% annually, the potential added cost could be anywhere from 2.8 8 to 4.1
million. Uh under a more higher risk market scenario, the exposure could be 5 million or more. In addition to the escalation risk, um the later approval path could also shift construction activities into less favorable season
conditions and that would increase project costs as well. Um the winter condition kind of uh impact is not included in these numbers. So um this analysis is not intended to dictate when the town should hold its
local approvals. Uh that decision ultimately rests with the select board. Uh our role on this task was to simply provide the uh analysis and identify the potential cost and schedule impacts associated with uh two different approval paths and those decisions um
you know could be made with informed information. Um, so that's my long- winded explanation of an impact. >> Thank you, David. Um,
did I um did I see in an email earlier today that you were looking for a vote? >> Well, yeah. I mean, I I I um I I do have a suggested u motion. Um you know, I could um I'd prefer not to make the motion. I'd prefer to a committee member
make a motion. Um, so >> Dennis, I know Dennis was copied on that. >> Yeah. >> Um, I mean, I don't know that it requires I mean I guess it I guess it would be better to go to the select board with an a full approval from the
school building committee, but um um be that as it may, we'll uh we'll take a vote. >> Yeah, I mean I'll I'll defer to the will of the committee and and others above my pay grade. >> Would you like me to make a motion, Pat? >> Yes, please, Dennis. Go ahead. >> Okay. I move the Parker School Building
Committee recommend the select board consider establishing January 11th, 2027 as a date for the special town meeting in February 9th, 2027 as a day for the townwide debt exclusion ballot vote for the purpose of obtaining the required local funding approvals for the Parker
School building project. >> Second. >> I have a motion. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Have a second. Okay. Uh we'll do a uh any further discussion? [clears throat] Seeing none, we'll do a roll call vote. I would be an I.
>> John Souza. >> I >> Joanna, >> I. >> Dr. Lang, >> I >> Brian, >> I >> Christine. >> Hi, >> Jim. >> Hi, >> Tim. >> Hi, >> Josh.
>> Hi, >> Brandon. >> Hi, >> Pat. No, I'm going to abstain until I hear what the uh what the select board wants to move forward, how they want to move forward with this. >> Okay. Um and Dennis >> I
>> Okay. Um we have nearly unanimous uh with one abstension. Thank you all. Um we will um further this and be before the select board on August 10th. [cough and clears throat] >> Okay, moving on to the next agenda
agenda item. um community outreach. >> Actually, um Chairman Maloney, um if we could go back and let me just tee this up as when, um left field and AI3 were basically putting the committee packet
together. Um we try as best as possible to provide the committee packet 48 hours in advance and also a draft slide deck. um that is typically 95% complete but you know it's always being fine-tuned leading right up to the meeting. Um so
at that time Chris indicated that uh AI3 was planning or trying to get floor plans we'll call it ready for prime time. So I told Chris if if they're ready we'll put it in. Um, so they're they're part of the slide deck right
now, but I just wanted to disclose to the committee they were not part of the packet or the slide deck that Hamdi shared with the committee on um Tuesday. So I I just ask um you Pat with your
blessing if it's okay that AI3 presents it. Um they're not looking for any approvals. It's just for presentation purposes and again we try to have the packet complete but um sometimes we ask for some flexibility and this is one of those times.
>> Understood. Understood. Um under the guise of this material being utilized for community outreach [clears throat] and I think I'm safe in saying that. David. >> Yes. I mean, it's just um you know, it
was not put into the packet because it it just wasn't ready. Um >> Okay. >> And and uh um AI3 was able to have it ready for tonight. But again, we're not asking for a vote on anything. So, it's really just um another update. >> Yeah. if you want to give us a quick
look see on um what um to the general public here um very shortly and we will be starting a larger push for community outreach [clears throat] in the next couple of months. So um we would um welcome a quick uh overview of um floor plans.
>> Perfect. Thank you. >> Awesome. Uh so what we wanted to share today is a high level of the progress set of where we are in the floor plans as these have as part of um always within the schematic design process that these floor plans are fluid and ever
evolving to match not only what we learn and our constant feedback um but also taking into account um the programming updates that we presented uh last month. Um, we had a lot of those fantastic, really informative programming meetings, information from other stakeholders,
district input, uh, your feedback, as well as from the FAS with the MSBA, um, all informed some continued evolution of these floor plans, and that's what we're sharing today. So, some of these moves, um, have shown sort of how the floor
plan has continued to compress. Uh what we're trying to do is tighten up the footprint which not only improves some of the circulation uh within the building uh but also helps create a smaller footprint um helps with [clears throat] our sustainability goals as well as giving as much sight back to
the exterior as possible. Um trying to clean up um program adjacencies um and different relationships within the building which is really what these floor plans are starting to capture um all of that information uh to continue to evolve this. So, uh this is the first
floor plan. Um just really showing sort of that uh further massaging of those program adjacencies um and a tighter footprint. Uh going to the second floor plan. Um very similar approach. um still have the three academic wings. And
again, just trying to simplify and clean up the circulation patterns in order to make it more efficient and bring some of those program adjacencies closer and maximize uh direct external light. And uh on the third floor, a very
similar approach of just trying to sort of um continue the the theme of repeating the academic wings and uh really tightening up these plans as we move forward uh in schematic design. >> Excellent. >> I like it.
>> How was that? Is that quick enough? [laughter] >> Quicker than mine. Any um questions or further discussion regarding um those plans? >> Those will be posted. >> Okay.
>> Yes. >> Um are we So it sounds like there's still some refinement to do. Um are we clear to put that on a website or no? just are we waiting um till you work a little bit more on the
adjacencies or what's what's your um what's your thoughts? >> This will be this will be part of the upload to the website and as Chris mentioned this is this is a process that will evolve over uh the course of schematic design and refine through uh
construction documents. So this is not the final plan but there were a lot of really really good um positive improvements. So we felt it was important to share with so much information so much download um share [clears throat] these plans to make sure
that um u you get you get the latest and greatest at this point and they will continue to evolve. So it's pro it's progress and it will be uploaded so that um others could see as well. >> Excellent. Excellent. Any other questions or discussions?
>> Seeing none, we'll go on to public comment. Do we have any public comment this evening? >> Actually, um Pat, we have um community outreach slide we can go over. >> Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry, David. I didn't mean to stick on you. >> No, no worries.
We we uh we kind of uh adjusted the deck on you. So, um, so before moving on, I'd like to recognize everyone who helped make the project's participation in the July 3rd fair possible. Um, first I want to thank Dr. Lang for his tenacity and creativity in securing a location for
the project tent. Uh, his efforts ensured that the project team had a visible and accessible presence at the event. So, thank you. Uh, I'd like to also thank the various volunteers who generously gave their time to staff the project tent, speak to residents, and help distribute information about the
Parker School project. I want to thank AI3 pro for providing the building model. Um, I know um they they said who's taking care of it? Uh [laughter] uh also the pres presentation boards preparing the print and preparing and printing the handouts uh containing the
QR code. Uh these materials gave residents an effective way to learn about the project booth uh both during and after the event and um Hamdi has a been able to figure out some um metrics on the website uh on um kind of the hits
and how it varies from day to day. And then uh you know lastly I'd like to recognize uh Hamdi for coordinating uh travel and uh logistics um with transporting and setting up and returning the model and other presentation materials. And um if I uh
inadvertently missed anyone um who contributed um I apologize but thank you for everyone. >> I'll add one to you. Assistant Superintendent Hirs was very instrumental in helping get >> all right >> all the banners and everything else set up and >> Perfect. Yeah. So >> shout out to her as well. Yeah, thank
you. Um, so then this slide, um, so moving from the July 3rd fair on, um, you know, we're happy to report that the MSBA board approved, um, the project to proceed in schematic design as Chris indicated earlier in the meeting. Um,
Dr. Lang provided a uh, thank you note, acknowledgement to the MSBA board and staff at that meeting. Um, so as Chris indicated, the project is transitioning into um, you know, we're going from the evaluation of alternatives to essentially advancing into a schematic
design. Uh, over the next couple of months, the focus is on building the tools needed to support the outreach. Uh this includes updating the project website which um happened right before um the 3 um and that was updated with
FAQs, presentation materials. Uh and then during September of September and October the emphasis emphasis will shift towards educating and engaging the community through public forums, stakeholder meetings, uh outreach opportunities and uh the discussion will
focus on the project need, preferred solution, uh the design, the MSBA process schedule and local approval requirements. Um by November the project budget anticipated MSBA reimbursement which will then give us the local
anticipated share um and and ob obviously the tax impact will be clearly defined. At that point the community discussion can become more focused on the financial aspects of the project. And then the final phase um shown on the slide is the uh local approval process
including town meeting and the townwide ballot vote. obviously subject to the timing that would be established by the select board. So, uh throughout the project, the project team's role will be to provide factual information, answer questions, and help ensure that
residents understand the project and decisions uh that have been made. Thank you. >> Excellent. Any other questions for David or any of the consultants? Seeing none, we'll move on to the next
item on the agenda, which is public comment. Do we have any public comment this evening? I can't see anybody. I can't see the [snorts] audience. >> No. >> No. Okay. If that being the case, then uh I'd entertain a motion to adjurnn.
>> I make a motion to adjurnn. >> Second. >> A motion from Dennis. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> I have a second. Uh roll call vote. I'm an I >> John Souza. >> Hi >> Joanna. >> Hi >> Lang.
>> Hi >> Brian. >> Hi >> Christine. >> Hi >> Jim. >> Hi >> Tim. >> Hi >> Josh. >> Hi >> Brandon. >> Hi >> Pat. >> Hi >> Dennis. >> Hi.
>> Okay that's unanimous. Thank you everybody. Much appreciated. Great work tonight. um appreciate the uh the good work here and I appreciate everybody's help on July 3rd really. Um I think it went a far away and uh I think we um
reached um um our impacted an audience that we needed to to to impact. [cough and clears throat] So thank you everybody and have a great evening. Take care. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.