Uh, welcome to our January 13th meeting. Hopefully everybody had a great holiday. As I begin, I will read our public participation at Town of Hatfield Select Board meetings. The Hatfield Select Board welcomes everyone to its meetings and all the other public meetings of the
town of Hatfield. All regular and special meetings of the boards and committees of the town of Hatfield shall be open to the public and shall conform to the open meeting law. Executive sessions are closed to the public and will be held only as prescribed by the statutes of the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts. It is important to recognize that the opening meeting law affords the opportunity to listen to the proceedings but not necessarily participate during meetings of the select board. An attempt will be made to find a balance between hearing from
members of the communities and conducting required business of the HRO select board. for the public's information. This meeting is being recorded. So, under announcements, I do want to thank everyone and hope they had
a great holiday. Uh, and basically those are my announcements. I don't know if you have any announcements. I >> do not have any. >> I just want to say the end of the year was great because of the uh with the tree lighting that we had and the illuminaria was great here in Hatfield. That was a lot of fun. >> Can't believe it was only a couple weeks
ago. Okay. >> Sure. >> Can I put two things out there real quick? >> Go ahead. >> Very good. So, uh, both of them are also going to be in my announcements later, but just in case people don't stay till the end, I just wanted to put them out there, uh, quickly. Um, first is an
update from the opioid committee. Um, this group's been doing a lot of work to try to figure out how to address the opioid uh, crisis here in in Hatfield, uh, or across the state and then, you know, how it affects Hatfield. Um, and the group is going to start doing a a uh
set of support groups. Um, the first meeting will be on January 21st. It's a Wednesday at 6 p.m. And these are support groups for folks who uh may know someone uh family or anyone else uh struggling with opioid addiction. Um they're peer-led um and anyone can come.
So uh I'll talk about that more during the update, but uh we put information on the website about it as well. And then the other thing uh on a completely different note um is we are updating our uh our website and we have the opportunity to put new pictures on there. So we're having a photo contest
for the public. Uh if you have any great pictures of Hatfield uh please submit them. Just send them to the email of town administrator at townofhatfield.org. Um just looking for high resolution photos. Uh mostly for the banner image on the website. So horizontal is best,
but any photos you have we'll find ways to try to incorporate those. We've gotten some great submissions already. Um, and I think it's going to make the new website look absolutely beautiful. So, uh, please send those in if you have anything. I look forward to having that that contest. And the deadline will be, uh, next Monday, the 19th.
>> Okay. Thank you. >> Uh, anybody here for public forum? Okay. Uh, we'll move to our consent agenda. Uh, do I have a motion on >> I'll make a motion to approve December 16th, 2025 meeting minutes. Second.
>> Motion made. Motion seconded. Any discussion? All in favor? >> Motion carries. >> Okay. Under posted posted business, we have a hearing at 6:00 which is not here yet. So, we will move with our agenda.
And uh I guess if if for any reason we'll go with Michael on our agenda with our discussion and if for any reason 6:00 comes here and we're not finished then we'll stop and then we'll come back to you. Fair enough. >> You want to just take >> Okay. So why don't you come up and have
a seat? We have >> Do you want to chair? Do you want to just take up move to topic three or four so we can keep all the route five discussion >> seamless without break? It's up to you if you prefer >> I think it would go better. >> You prefer not to take a break? >> Yeah.
>> Okay. So, you think you don't think we will get through by six? Okay. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, that's fine. Sorry. >> Okay. Um let's move to topic three then. Uh notice to proceed for Jon Jon
project. Uh update from Andrew on that. >> Yeah, this is pretty straightforward. Um the last time that we met, uh we approved of the contract. Uh there were no major changes to that. Uh that's been signed by both parties. So we're ready now to move to a notice to proceed. The
contractor um is already out in the field doing some early work. Um but they um we're before they start the actual dredge, we needed to give the US Army Corps of Engineers a twoe notice. So that was given on Friday. uh if they
come back earlier and say we can get started then hopefully they will but otherwise they'll do their other field work. They'll be ready to go when the temperatures are just right um in that next two weeks. We're also coordinating with uh D and of course the conservation commission. So uh conservation
commission uh requires a number of of uh things as part of their order conditions. Uh but all of that is being addressed by the contractor. We had a good uh meeting with them last week uh and and got things started. So that they had some some good ideas about some submitts that have come in um and I
think have some some pretty pretty good ideas about how to do the project even a little more efficiently than that was originally advertised. >> I was impressed with them at our meeting this week. So uh and I'm happy to see this project going at this time of year because you have less effect than any of
the aquatics in that pond at this time of year. So that's great. So I'll take a motion on that. >> Uh I'll make a motion to approve the notice to proceed for Dayon project. Second. >> Motion made. Motion seconded. Any discussion? All in favor?
>> Motion carries. Uh topic four contract and notice to proceed with Adams plumbing and heating for the elementary school boilers. >> Excellent. So we had bids come back for the uh elementary school boiler project. As you know, we have uh two boilers in
there that uh are on their last legs. So, the the preference was to have the work uh begin as soon as possible. Uh we have a contractor that that is able to uh do that work as soon as we're ready to start. Um I we'll get in touch with
them and and make sure that they're they're ready to go, but um they uh came in significantly under our initial estimates for the project. So, the whole project was originally quoted at around $600,000. Uh, counting design and everything else,
it's going to come in much closer to um $300,000. Uh, which is great. So, this uh scope or the construction itself came in at $239,000 for everything. And the um company is Adams Plumbing and Heating out of Adams,
Mass. Got a great reputation in the field. We've checked references. All went very well. We got a lot of help on this bid through our designer uh BLW who really did an excellent job throughout this whole project. So, um the recommendation would be to to approve
this contract. We'll have this executed by the contractor as well and then we should be able to to get started and I'll let you know when that will be. >> Okay. I know they've done a lot of work at UMass and they they they have a good reputation. So, I'm I'm happy we have a local contractor that has a good
reputation. So, uh, any questions on this from my colleagues? If not, I'll entertain a motion. >> I'll make a motion to approve the contract and notice to proceed with Adams Plumbing and Heating Incorporated for Hatfield Elementary School Boilers. >> Second. >> Motion made. Motion seconded. Any
discussion? All in favor? >> I. >> Motion carries. Uh, topic five, appointment and resignations. Uh, I have an appointment of Bernie Shimmerski to agricultural advisory committee. I'll entertain a motion unless there's
any questions on that. >> No, I'll make a motion appoint Bernie Sarowski to Agriculture Advisory Committee. >> Motion made. Motion seconded. Um, any discussion? All in favor? >> Motion carries. Uh, we do have a resignation of Jackson Bulliard as a
laborer and I'll need a motion to accept his resignation. >> I'll make a motion to accept the resignation of Jackson Riard. >> Second. >> Motion made. Motion seconded. Any discussion? All in favor? >> Motion carries. >> We do have a request for an abatement
from Kim Propov on behalf of Cecilia Harvey West Street. I believe we've had discussion on this in the past and >> we did. Yes. When this first came to us, um it wasn't clear what had happened. Uh
we were looking for more information. um we thought there was maybe some kind of billing error or something else because it didn't make sense that that there was such a high bill for a woman who generally had the the minimum billing. Um and uh at the same time they needed a
a building permit because of damage that had been done to the trailer actually through a town vehicle. Um so there's just a lot going on at the same time. The dust has kind of settled on this. When when we met last, we had more information that it almost certainly was
a leaky toilet uh that contributed to all of this, but that leak uh either would have occurred, you know, right when this woman was leaving the trailer or sometime after. We don't know. Uh this woman was in a nursing home for almost this entire period, is still in
that nursing home, has since sold the trailer. Uh essentially, the application comes to us as a hardship application. This woman does not really have any funds left. Uh, anything that came from the trailer is going towards paying the nursing home. So, while the water was
used, it was used in a way that there leak that that had gone undetected for 6 months. Um, this was updated with a final reading. So, it did leak uh at at the rate of an additional $674 uh even after we did this final reading.
Uh, but the water was was turned off. So, it's unfortunate that this has happened, but um they owe over $3,000 um and are asking us to recognize this hardship. So, we'll have to think about how we want to approach this. >> But I mean, you're saying even if we say
get to 3,000, there's no money in the funds anyways. >> We're being told she doesn't really have the money to pay this. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I don't know. be my colleagues require I think the previous discussion
was that if the water was used it should be paid for but this is a situation now where she's in a nursing home she was in a nursing home and the trailer was sold right so >> yes and she doesn't even own the trailer anymore so
>> she's not >> surprised this doesn't carry over to the new owners honestly Well, and the argument is we we have the leverage in that we could have refused a building permit to to fix the the work on the trailer because they owe that
money, but we didn't think that was appropriate given the situation. >> So, so the so there was $600 more after they shut the water off. Is that what you said? >> It that would have happened before they shut the water off. It was after the billing before they shut the water off.
Just gives you an idea of how fast they were using that water. If I may, we were into a new filling cycle. >> Got it shut off. >> So, the water was running through the toilet for an additional period of time before we knew. >> I mean, that's a lot of water. >> It's a lot of water.
>> It's an awful lot of water. >> I don't know how many times. >> A swimming pool of water essentially from the other abatements that we saw earlier this year for swimming. Well, for swimming pool fills earlier this year, they were all about 25 to $2,800 worth of water. Yeah.
>> So, essentially the same amount. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I mean, basically what I'm hearing, she's in a nursing home and the funds have been her funds, are you saying or they're saying her funds have been depleted or the nursing home gets all the funds anyway?
>> I was told by the conservator was the money's all gone to the nursing home. >> Okay. I mean, we do we do give uh when we have ambulance fees for people that have passed and we know we can't collect the money, we've sort of
otherwise this stays on the books. I mean, but if if we did vote for the money for this, uh it would just it'd be just an outstanding bill for whenever, right? Or >> how did the trailer sell with this unpaid bill? Wouldn't that be a lean on
the on the sale? >> Not if it's sold. >> I Well, >> yeah, it should be or not. >> It's sold. >> Yeah, but this is the um I think because we had an outstanding baitment application. I don't know if that's what we did, but I I I'll find
out. >> Yeah, find out then you can get back to us. >> Okay. I think I guess it wouldn't have gone to a lean because it hadn't gone through enough bill cycles of being it was late but it wasn't and we had an abatement request in but it probably
never gone to collection at this point. >> Gotcha. >> Yeah. So yeah. So if the house was house was sold this should come out of there, right? Is what I'm thinking. But yeah. >> Yeah. But I know nursing homes, nursing
homes have the way of grabbing everything. >> They certainly do. >> Some of these accounts, >> taking all the money. >> Yeah. When I spoke to her early on, she had mentioned that the the funds weren't available only potentially of the sale. Um, but I don't know the connect
connection between that conversation and now the nursing home gets the money. So, I have have not talk talked to her since the caregiver since we talked about it three months ago, two months ago, whatever it was. >> What what she told me was just that they they don't really have a lot of
>> money to pay this. So, they're asking us to consider the abatement hardship. >> If we said no, try to pay something potentially. I don't know. >> Or it goes unpaid. I >> ask if they can pay something and maybe that's a compromise we can make, right?
>> I guess they paid a little bit already, but They paid $150. So, they paid that minimum bill that they thought it should be reduced to back when we thought this was a billing error. Is there an amount that we want to try to
>> I mean, I wouldn't >> bring it down to $500 or something. >> I would, if we're going to abate it all, my opinion is is we can split it 5050, but I'm not in favor of going any lower than that. Yeah, >> that's just my opinion, but I don't know how you guys feel, but I I'm certainly
not in favor of abating $3,000 down to $150. That's not that's not fair to the rest of the residents in town who have had leaks and other things like that and have had to pay for it, >> right? >> I I think I'd like to know about the sale of the house first is like how did
it how did that happen? And maybe whoever bought it should be responsible for this or I don't know how that gets how that gets worked out. I don't know. Just doesn't make sense that that happened with with an outstanding bill. A really big outstanding bill.
>> Well, I guess we'll see what Andrew can find out. And one more shot and then >> Can we postpone this or >> Of course. >> Yeah. >> Yep. That's fine. >> Okay. >> Okay. We have a license agreement, Brian. So uh for Day Pond project
>> so we conditionally approved this at the last meeting. This was attached to the the Day Pond project. Um Mr. Stoya and I was were still discussing some of the details here. Um and you know we we approved it. He wanted to check on a
couple things. One is um the uh tree uh that's mentioned in here in section three. Um they will be taking down a tree on his property. He just wanted to make sure it would be ground down um the way that it's described in here, which which it is. Um he had a question about
repair of damage. Um he added language to say um that the any repair of any damage would be to the satisfaction of the licenser, which probably only fair in this case. The large the largest change in here that was asked for by the
landowner, Mr. Stoya, was uh under consideration. We had originally asked that this be given to him uh that this access be given at at no cost um to the town. Uh he's asked for $1,500. Uh the reason for this and it's it's a small
amount. We have it budgeted. We can pay for it. The small amount um comes from uh in 2012 there was dredging work that was done and uh there was access on his property and he feels that the his uh
his yard wasn't restored to original conditions and he ended up being stuck with the bill to to fix it. Uh so he still is a little upset about that and would like to see uh that rectified here with the financial contribution and then uh also the uh um just making sure that
everything's restored to original conditions at the end of this project. So that's this request. I think we can pay that, but it's up to this board to make sure you're comfortable with the 1500. >> I don't have a problem with it. I do think that we should photograph both of the properties that we're using for the
easements to reconstruction so that way we have a reference back to what they need to be repaired back to. >> Yeah, >> that's a good idea. >> Other than that, I don't have a problem with it. >> Yeah, I I had I'd seen the before and
after aerial view and I get it. I'm okay with that, too. >> You both okay with this? >> Yeah. I think the other license was just delivered to me. So there's no changes on that one and I'll have that for your signature after this meeting. It should be in my office now. Mr. McGrath just
brought it up. >> Okay. So >> take a motion on this. >> I'll make a motion to approve the license agreement with Brian Soya for the Dave Pond project. >> Second. >> Motion made. Motion seconded. Any discussion?
All in favor? I >> motion carries. Okay. Topic eight, I let's say we still have time. Topic eight, Andrew, you have a update on Massachusetts office disabilities grant and work proposal.
>> Yes. So, we were awarded a grant through the Massachusetts Office of Disability. Uh this is a um transition plan and a um uh diagnostic grant that that you do this every 10 years or so to be uh
eligible for additional funding from the state to address any uh accessibility issues across the town. Uh we had this done some years ago flagged some some things that we needed to to work on. Um we can do this again um through funding by from the state. Um, you know, it does
show uh gives you an idea of things that you can improve. Um, in most cases, I don't think there'd be requirements since we have historic uh um elements. I think that's mainly the library, but it does give you some ideas of things you can do and then you're eligible for more
grant funding. So, uh to do this, we would need to contract with a consultant. Uh I did find one that actually reached out to me but but has done a lot of uh these projects and would would be very good um through the center for living and working uh is a gentleman named Jim Mazic uh who has
done these projects with a number of towns. Uh we had a good conversation and he has a proposal for us uh with a draft contract. Um so I would recommend working with with them. I think they would do a good job. Um, I can also look for for other options, but this would um
uh they're on a state list, so we wouldn't have to go to um three quotes or an RFP or anything. Uh, so I think that this could be a good option for us. >> Any any questions? >> No
questions. I will grant take a motion. I'll make a motion to approve Mass Office of Disabilities Grant and work proposal with CLW. >> Second. >> Motion made. Motion seconded. Any
discussion? All in favor? >> I. >> Motion carries. >> Topic nine, letter support for local power. >> Yeah. So, um, we had, um, gentleman named, uh, George, now I'm forgetting his last name, but, uh, uh, George came
to our last meeting, if you remember, um, was looking for a letter of support as he tries to bring some western mass communities together to look at, uh, alternatives to waste disposal. um looking at uh a project through with a company called Whis to Hydrogen, waste
to hydrogen which would uh convert waste to hydrogen with a CO2 sequestration uh thank you sequestration uh technology was not looking to have the facility built in town. was instead looking uh uh to see
if we'd be interested in um diverting our waste to to such a facility if it gets built in Western Mass. So, other communities have signed off on this. Um it feels very early to me. It's preliminary, but he says that um it's a helpful thing for the company as they
look at uh if the state and others would would support this. I think it's important language and see if you're you're comfortable with it. I don't know if we want to add anything about how we're interested in potentially working with them, but we're not interested in hosting a facility.
It's really up to you about how comfortable you are with this. >> Well, I' I've looked at online on the facility and I have a lot of questions of this facility. So, I'm I'm not comfortable right now signing on to this because
>> I do have more concerns than answers. I mean, I I appreciate the concept. I appreciate the idea that there might be another way of getting rid of our garbage and trash and converting it into a clean energy, but I want to be sure
that it's not going to be harmful to the environment in any way because there are some uh poisonous or or hazardous gases that could emit from that facility. So, unless that's proven to me, I mean, but that's me. But if my colleagues here
feel comfortable with going forward with it, then that's up to >> I agree with you. I've looked this up and like the it just doesn't seem like the plan is fully there yet. >> Just it's just not I just don't understand it well enough and it doesn't seem to be explained well
enough either or or planned out well enough. >> I think I mean >> don't wait till they get >> I don't think there is a plan to be honest. >> That's it. I I think we'll get Yeah. Once there's Yeah. Once essentially there's a plan, then maybe we'll revisit I'd revisit this. But right, right now I'm not I'm not okay with that.
>> I think what they're from my understanding what they're looking for is to try to see how many towns are even interested in participating this. >> Yeah. >> So, so they can even do a feasibility study to see if it's even worth it in
this area to try to do this, which my feeling would be probably not. >> I'm not even really sure what this is. So, >> yeah. Oh, I >> So, we'll just table this for now. >> Fair enough. >> Sounds good. >> That's fine. I think taking a pause for
now is fine. Uh they've got a a long ways to go. >> Yeah. >> Good. >> All right. >> Topic 10. We still got six, seven minutes until our hearing. >> We're making record time this agenda. >> Grant grand update. >> All right. I think I can do everything
real real quick and give me six minutes. Great. So, uh, first, uh, on the list for my report is budget. Um, I have most of the operating budget requests that I need. I'm tracking down just a couple others, but we'll have that put together shortly and then I'll start meeting with finance committee and with this group.
Last year, we had the finance committee meet with all elected boards and commissions and we had the select board meet with departments. That sounds good to you. I'll bring a schedule to your next meeting and we can start getting those budget hearings together and uh, meet with uh, the different uh, folks
making requests. Um, does that that sounds good for for that breakdown? Good. >> That sounds good. >> Uh, I did get an update from Harper. So, after I put this in, they are almost done with setting up pilot group with folks in town hall. So,
that should be up shortly. Um, I think we've been moving on our side pretty quickly. We've had a couple delays from Harpers, but we'll keep this moving. Um, two quick announcements from the clerk's office. Most people know this, but that your census is in the mail. um you you
should already have it. Uh fill out the uh annual street list census form and bring it back here to town hall. Um if you can do it within 10 days, that's great because they mail two reminders and if they don't have to mail reminders, they'll be very helpful. Uh
you do have to fill that out. Uh so please do so. Um same with uh dog licenses. Those are available now. So uh renew your dog licenses by March 31st. that can be done in person, online, or by mail. So, thanks to our clerk's office for pushing through those big big
projects. Uh, as I said, we're upgrading the website. Um, Civic Plus is no longer um providing maintenance for the the current platform that we use. So, we're moving up a platform. It'll have a couple changes to it. I think it's going to look really nice. Um, it'll be a
different template and then we'll get some new pictures on there. So, submit pictures to us that we can use and you'll get photo credits uh for doing so. And then, excuse me, I'm battling something. So, Smith Academy carpets is officially
complete. Um we are going to come in uh under budget on that by about $4,000. And then we also didn't have to use uh treeworks funds, which is great. Uh that was money that was came in a um post community agreement with Treeworks. Um, that's $40,000 that we can now use for
something else. I'll recommend that it goes towards other capital projects. Uh, Bay Pond, we already discussed school boilers, we already discussed. Um, and the uh elementary school roof, we're at 35% design. We're out of feasibility
design. They're moving towards uh construction documents and design. Um, so we're hoping to to bid that out in the next uh month. we should that should be complete uh to bid and uh we'd like to start uh to start work in late April. So, we'll keep you updated on the roof
project. Uh we'll talk about that a little more later because I have some updated financials on that. Uh grant update. So, um the town received a $96,000 grant from the rural development fund for planning assistance. That means we need to draft an RFP to find a consultant to do this
work. Uh we just got the contract with them. I have one form for Ed to sign. Um and then we'll have a a contract with them to to move forward. Um we talked about mod already. Um thank you for the the um approving that that uh proposal.
Uh farm museum working on application uh for the state's uh preservation projects fund uh that can help uh fund the work in the farm museum that we'd like to be doing. That application is due March 13th. So we'll have that all together in the next two months. Community compact. Uh the state is not doing its community
compact best practices grant this year unfortunately but they are still doing the technology grants. So I'm working on uh an application for that. Last year we applied for a uh access controls uh system that was not funded. So I'd like to stick to one of the pro projects that
does get regularly funded. One of those is for creating a records uh management system and doing digitization of of records. I've talked to clerk's office and others who would find that very helpful uh to get most of our materials have to be saved for a long time. Uh getting those digitized that includes
building departments from other places. That's a helpful thing for residents to have access to as well. So that would be my preference. I'll let you know if I end up going a different direction, but I think that's probably the way to go to to get funded. And I do have a quote for that work. And then I gave you the update on opioid settlements. I have one
other thing to say in the next minute before we hit six o'clock. Um we are looking at doing a large uh program uh through that um a speaking program at the high school uh mainly geared towards students but we're looking at potentially bringing the
community in as well. Uh we've identified a speaker who does these uh educational uh events across the the country. Now it's a former Celtics player named Chris Herren. uh he um played in the NBA, played successfully in college and elsewhere and actually
was battling opioid addiction for almost an entire time. Um and he's now a speaker, does a very good presentation on this. Uh so it would represent a good chunk of our budget for one year, but we think it could be worth it to have the amount of community um uh reach that
we're looking for. So we can talk about that a little more later, but I'll pause for 6 p.m. >> Okay, thank you. Okay, we're at six o'clock. So, we're going to have a hearing at this time on alcoholic license for Hatfield Rally
House. And the way the hearing is going to go is we will open up the floor for any first any of the individuals that are against the plan. Open up the floor for discussion of anybody that's for the plan. And then we'll have the applicant
uh speak on it. And then once the hearing is closed, then we will discuss with the applicant any questions we have. And then we will decide whether to move forward with this motion or not to approve or disapprove. Just ask you to
keep your comments civil and stay within a 3 to four minute time frame. So for the rally house, is there anybody present that is against the applicant receiving an alcoholic? What? It's a
wine and beer license, correct? >> Yes. >> Um, wine and beer. >> It's just wine and malt beverages. >> Wine only and beer, right? No. >> Okay. Nobody present opposed. Is there
anybody present for the applicant? that's present. Okay. Now, I'll have Rally House come up and uh please state your names uh and who you are. And I guess
I can I can move since there was nobody here for against or for I can close the hearing now to us. So I now close the hearing to the board to speak with you guys on Rally House. So uh welcome. >> Thank you
>> to our our meeting and uh explain you know who you are and and what this is all about. >> Okay. I'm uh Patrick Roach >> Ashley Schaefer the owners. >> And so we we I know if you we just
opened to the public uh last weekend just a few days ago. Um, we have a grab-and-go cafe. We have eight pickle ball courts and four tennis courts. And, um, we want to get a beer and wine
license so that people can, uh, enjoy a beer after they have, uh, a game on the evening or the weekends. Uh, we've had lots of members ask for this uh, service, so we applied uh, for the
license. Okay. So, your operating hours on this would be what? >> Uh, we're open from 6 to 9:30, 6:00 a.m. to 9:30 p.m. Monday to Friday and 7:00 a.m. to 900 p.m. uh Saturday and Sunday.
>> And what time would you be selling uh beer or wine? >> Oh, noon to a half hour before close. I don't know what. >> Yeah, noon seems early, but um on on the weekends, I guess. Maybe Saturday, Sunday. >> Yeah.
>> I mean, is is this license in conjunction with uh like just is it just for people that are playing there, they just want a drink or so afterwards? >> Is it to have them there all night or you know that's >> No, no, no, no, no, no. We're not gonna
>> have you know ladies night or No, no, no, no. >> You know, darts leagues or anything like that. No, I don't have a problem with this. You >> have any questions? >> This is open to the public. This isn't just a club, right? >> Right. It is open to the public.
>> No, I'm okay with this. >> No, I I if I it helps fall for your business, then I don't I don't have an issue with it. I just say be smart about, you know, what you're having there for events and what you're doing
and make sure you're not selling to underage and >> stuff like that. >> Of course. >> Uh if I have no more questions from my colleagues, I'm willing to entertain a motion. I'll make a motion to approve the
application for a new alcoholic license by the Hatfield Rally House, North Hatfield, Massachusetts. >> Second. >> Motion made. Motion seconded. Any discussion? All in favor? >> Okay. Uh thank you. >> Motion carried. >> Good luck.
>> Thank you very much. >> All right. And and the last thing we had was uh you had one more comment and >> I'm happy to go to Mike or let's >> you might as well do your last thing.
The the last topic 11 is the PCA 360 contract. >> Yeah. So I'll I'll just say I was um on the opioid uh task force funds. Um I did just want to make sure that um we we need to bring a full budget to this board at some point uh to go over
this. You know, we we've identified prevention and education and then connections to care as the two areas that we're focused on the most. the connections to care. I think it'll be really helpful to do these support groups, the education. Um, you know, I think they'll there'll be education that's brought into the schools and then
this public outreach program, this this large um event with with the speaker um the former NBA player, I think could be a really good step. So, I just wanted to make sure that the sports comfortable us proceeding with that before um you get, you know, a full budget of kind of what
the yearly activities look like. we have the budget to do, you know, a larger event this first year and I think we we'll be comfortable. So, just want to make sure there's no concerns there. >> Okay. Uh with that, >> yeah, that's good. >> Great. >> We can now go with Mike. I guess we
covered all >> the hit the last one at the end. >> Got it in. Perfect. Okay. We're meeting today with uh Mike Hull. He's the engineer CI for the five and 10 project. Uh Mike, his company has went and they
did a a report which is project post construction findings and recommendations by his firm. And I know I have a lot of different questions. So
what I'd like to do is is you can tell me if I understand this or not. I'm just going to go through a couple things and then and then I'll ask you a couple questions and then my colleagues I know will have questions for you. The way I understand is that in the pipeline there
is some gaskets that didn't fit correctly and in the pipeline there was some slopes that were not the correct slopes and in the pipeline there is some manhole rungs where you go down that were not installed. So it's a safe
situation for the workers to get in and according to your recommendations the way you understand it. So if I got it in my head you have a couple options. One would be to uh dig it up and reinstall
it. The other one is in some areas uh pipe busting. Uh for the viewers that are listening in, pipe busting is where they they take a large metal head and they attach a larger pipe. So if right
now we have 8 in pipe in the ground. So they would take a head that's a size of a 10-in pipe. They would attach a thermally welded pipe to it and they would pull it through which breaks up the existing pipe and installs the new
pipe. And then the third op option that was presented for some areas was to put in like in an insert inside the pipe and it's like an epoxy type of situation where it sort of expands and supposed to
adhere to the inside of the pipe and take care of uh the seals that are leaking. But there's still there's a there's a lateral that's leaking in in this report. >> Correct. >> And then you also sent us your your
options of of what it would cost under your various plan. I mean, for if they dug it all up, it'd be like $1.6 million. and to fix it correctly. And if and if they did other
things, it would be different prices based on and right now the way I see it the there's a lot of work that needs to be done to bring it to correctness to >> and I was sort of shocked that we have
that much work that's needed. Unfortunately, the contractor is not here. I wish he was, but I understand that later he would be meeting with uh uh the Aison Luke and Marlo and Andrew to go over some of these things. So,
>> and I think it's important to note really quickly that any of the repairs that need to be made to the system is not coming from the town of Hap. It is on the contractor to to cover those repairs. So, >> thank you. I was going to get to that, but that's
>> so and I I do have I don't know how any of this happened because basically one pipe goes into another pipe and and somehow those gaskets they were pushed against or the pipe wasn't evenly in or whatever. But
however it happened, the thing is it needs correction because we're going to have infiltration. What I I didn't like in the report was like the last option that if we put the inline uh
stuff inside with the epoxy then we would need a like a constant flushing plan that that is so I mean it's sort of to me saying well you guys uh it's not put in correctly but you're going to have to flush it a lot which is going to
cost the town more money for manpower is going to cost the town more money for treatment, etc., etc. So, I also have concerns if if the contractor uh is certified and has an understanding
of how to do pipe busting, if he's certified or has an understanding in the equipment to do the inline piping. I I don't know. Does he have that expertise? So, but we don't know until you talk to the contractor, right? because this
report just went or do you have some information? >> I can speak to that particular point. Okay. >> Um those two types of they fall under a trenchless technologies. So you're not having to cut the pavement, dig a trench. It all
happens underground. Those are very specialty subcontractors. So I'm confident that those would be if that was the direction that the was acceptable to the town
that it would be a specialty subcontractor doing that work. >> Well, I mean, I'm not an expert in the engineering, so I mean, we sort of relied on the engineering expertise to tell us the correct way to do this
project. And I hope you're not sort of asking us to make a decision because I'm not an expert in this. So, if I was to make a decision, I don't know if we'd have to get another engineering firm in here to double check your work to see
which direction to go or not. But I I don't I don't know how we're going to how he's going to fix this or if he's going to use outside contractors to fix this or >> Well, what I presented are the
the potential solutions just to lay it all on the table. At this point, I really think it would be valuable to have the board's liaison, Luke and Marlo and myself and Andrew meet with the contractor, hear them out.
The town is protected in terms of money's not paid and uh potentially the bond if the contractor does not take care of this stuff. So this was more forformational purposes
to highlight what we specifically saw as the issues because we didn't know exactly what where the like some of the ponded water that we were seeing in the video post
flushing what was causing that. So it was helpful to look at and say there are definitely two clusters, two sections each. So each section is
300 ft nominally. So there's two areas 600 ft and another 600 ft that are too laid too shallow. Um, one is this the spec slope call it for an 8 inch pipe would be it's
the 0.004T per feet. That translates to roughly an inch for every 25 ft. So there's two sections.
One of them is probably 3/4 of an inch, half an inch to three/4ers of an inch. The other one is much less, you know, borderline flat >> flat. So
the one section that is more of a borderline on the slope would be amendable in uh my professional opinion to do the pipe bursting as a non
excavation method to get it to an acceptable slope because the slope wouldn't change because we're now fixed by the manholes, but a larger pipe ends up having a
smaller minimum slope requirement, >> but it's still greater than zero. >> It definitely is still greater than zero. >> Right. So, and with the trenchless technology, the new pipe is still going to follow the path of the old pipe.
>> Correct. So, in one of the two spots, the slope that is the two areas. One was say the 02 to 03. >> Mhm. >> 02003.
That one if it were changed to a 10 in the minimum slope requirement for a 10 in is less than the 04. >> Right. But it's if I might be wrong in the exact number, but I believe it's 0031. So if it doesn't meet that
>> it it would because I checked. >> And the other question would be most of these trenchless technologies you need a fairly large excavation on one side or the other so that you can get the angle to be able to get the fusion welded pipe into the ground. >> Correct.
>> You can't just make immediate 90 degree bends to get down in there. >> Correct. So with that, >> but it's less than the three than the 600 foot run, >> but we're still ending up with a
a product that's not what we contracted. >> Correct. >> And what if the contractor says, "Well, I looked at your uh your stuff and I'm I don't think I want to do it that way." How much say does the contractor have in
determining what he's going to do as far as your report? As far as you know, >> right right now the town could take a hard stand that it doesn't meet spec. So those two areas
that have two sections each need to get fully replaced and upstream of both of those areas would need to get replaced also because that's where you need to pick up the slope.
Essentially what happened is the furthest upstream pipe for each of these sections is steeper and then the next two don't meet the minimum slope requirement. So to get all three to get
the two back to the requirement they need to do all three in two spots. So to get back to spec they need to do six sections. And how do how are we guaranteed that if they didn't do it right the first time, they do it right the second time? Are
are you guys on top of watching? And I mean, how can you if they put the pipes together again, how can you really can you determine if the gasket got rolled over or by from the outside you or do you have I you know what I'm We
found those gasket the issues with the gaskets when the there's a leakage test that's done on the main. So based on that, those areas then got grouted, but then the video ended up showing that not
only was it rolled, but it was now protruding into the inside of the pipe causing a physical obstruction. So, those are the areas where >> Do we have a receipt from the grouting company? Because I don't believe that it
was done. >> We do. We have a test report. >> Yeah. >> I don't I'm not really quite sure how the how the pipe passed its test with rolled gaskets. And from all the footage that we've reviewed, there's no evidence
of any grouting that was done at any of these rolled gaskets. Well, the grouting's on the outside >> after it's backfilled. >> It's backfilled and they they seal off the area around the joint and then they pressurize it and force the grout
through the leaking gasket. >> But how >> to the outside of the pipe so it almost forms a collar. But at no point was any part of this man any of these runs manhole to manhole were never fully excavated for that to be able to happen.
They excavated and had to back fill almost every single day. >> So, >> right, >> there's no way that they did a pressure test manhole to manhole until it was actually backfilled. So, there's no way for them to grout >> from the outside. They would have had to do internal grouting.
>> They did. They grouted from the inside, but the grout gets forced through the joint, the leaking joint. to the outside of the pipe even though it's completely buried. >> I I understand that. And okay, but there's no there's no evidence on the inside of the pipe. There's no grout
residue. The gasket should have been trimmed before it was grouted and that wasn't done. We were also told that the pipes were flushed and cleaned before the grouting and the trimming was done, which clearly also didn't happen. >> Correct. So, I I think that we
need a rece I want to see a receipt for the grouting company that came in and did the work. >> Totally. >> Um because to be frank, I just don't think it was done. >> Okay. >> And so really, we're talking about in the in this report and the essentially
six sections that you're referencing that have to be relayed at this point. Uh it's about 1,900 feet out of 3650 ft >> and it's the first 52% of the project. >> Correct. >> The southernmost point.
>> Correct. >> Do we happen to have any information on since this has been a five-year project now um of what year those portions of the work were done? Was that >> Yes. Yes. >> Was there a break in the project between
when things were going not well and then all of a sudden they started going well? >> Yes. So the way the project evolved, they started at the southernmost point, which would be pretty typical, and work upstream
because of the issues with the groundwater. When they came back the following year, they regrouped so that they started a second crew or kind of alternated
working from it was like the third the top third. So they started at an interim manhole and did that section because it the groundwater the the sewer isn't as deep. So they didn't have to contend with uh
the severe groundwater issues. Meanwhile, they were continuing to work on the southern end. So they're in parallel were doing from the southern end and then from the northern end and then there was a gap in the middle. So
there the sections that are problematic are the southernmost ones, not from where they stopped or started like a second effort, but it was the same crew throughout.
And you also have five or five manholes that need correction on the rungs. >> I believe it was six. >> Six. And I I'm just I told on it comes in sections. So if you line everything up right, the rungs should be perfect.
And how do they get screwed up by not lining it up right? I just >> Yeah. And two are two are so severe that it's laughable. Um the other ones are a safety risk. They shift just enough that if you were going down, you'd miss a step.
Now, those are relatively easily rectified in compared to all the issues here. The big issue is the the main itself in the slope. >> So, we're at the point where it's got to
be cited by the group of you guys to determine what fixes need to be done. And so I guess you guys got to start have a meeting and try to see if you come up with something I guess or
>> Yeah. I mean >> what's what other options do we have? >> May I I'll let Marlo comment. So I first of all thank you for the assessment and the uh the estimate that came today. Um the estimate pretty much summarizes
what's in the the assessment. >> Yeah. >> Uh and I'm I'm just offering um my strong opinion on a couple of these things. Um back to Luke's point, um the
town paid for a serviceable uh gravity feed sewer system, if you will, sewer main. Um 5.5 the 0.25 25 million I I feel is truly unacceptable. You're right, Ed. It's going to add
maintenance. It's going to be another piece of infrastructure we're going to have to maintain going forward. Um, one little thing that not to confuse it anymore, but when you let sewage sit in a sewer main for quite some time, there's the biological effect. Then you
flush it, you send it to the plant, it can really upset the plant at that point. So, in other words, standing sewage a backup or whatever creates a really high bacteria. I don't want to get too far into the science, but it could create issues down the road with
adjusting down the plant, which is a cost with chemicals. Um, it would be a cost to us uh through the water system having a constant flushing on this main. It it fixes nothing. Um, so I'm leaning really back
towards um, you know, the the 5.3 um, on this list, which is actually replace. I mean, that's what we paid for. That's what the town paid for it already. Um, continuous pipe with no
um, for lack of better terms, band-aids. Um, so and I had one question on on all of this. Was paving uh of repaving of West Street included in any of these estimates? >> Repaving of
the southbound lane where this would happen for the full length of that essentially. It's the 1900 ft that is in those numbers. >> Yeah. >> And then fixing all the cross trenches as well. >> Correct. >> Right. I'm I'm I'm this is an opinion,
but I've worked with Mass DOT for a long time and they're they're pretty stringent. Um I don't believe I don't believe and again I'm putting this out there. I don't believe for a second they're going to allow only one lane to be paved. They're going to want a solid mat. They're not going to want to see them in the middle. Um just my
experiences. So I'm putting out my opinion. That's why I asked about the pavement question. Um, so if it pleases the board, in my opinion, I I think the repairs should be done and I I understand that, you know, traffic and it's a problem and whatnot,
but um I mean, we we paid for for for a product that we don't have and I think it should be put back to standard of what was requested under >> I think I already put a giant X through the flushing program. I I don't think we
need to waste any more time talking about that. I think it's it's not a viable solution. I could I say one thing really quickly? Um we'll see if I can say something. So just for anyone who's who's watching at home or watches this
later, um uh Mike of CI or engineering firm has presented us with essentially five options for for how to address these issues that have been talked about tonight. And the one that Marlo just talked about 5.5. So option five um
doesn't fix most of the issues that that we're talking about. It's it's really just relying on a more frequent flushing pro program. So it sounds like we're going to eliminate that. >> Yeah, that can come right off. >> I think that sounds right. >> Yeah, two of the five options 5.2 and 5.4 make use of this pipe bursting
technology that we've discussed and I think that there's some concerns about that from this group. So if folks hear about 5.2 and 5.4 before and we don't really seem to talk about them much. I think it's because the pipe bursting isn't of interest to to the folks here who who know a lot about that. Um although we could continue that
conversation if needed. 5.1 and 5.3 I'm going over and trying to figure out what the difference is between those two. So it might just help me to hear. >> Yeah. The the difference essentially would be from manhole 10 to manhole 9 and then 9 to 8 would be sliplined.
>> Yeah. So, a new liner put on the inside of the pipe, which would mean the road doesn't have to get excavated to address the rolled and leaking gaskets, versus 5.3 would include excavation um to go down and actually replace those
joints. So, while five I while 53, you know, is full excavation, everything gets relayed. I personally would be okay with 5.1 with the lining of those two sections just to help speed the process along and
decrease the amount of impact to the residents of Route 5. Also knowing that the slip linings are, you know, warrantied for 75 to 100 years. It's a perfectly clean, smooth inside of the
pipe. you can almost argue that it's even going to be smoother than a jointed pipe. Um so my own personal opinion that is would be for for 51. um slip lining those two areas and then
relaying of all of the 1900 ft of pipe that is either sagged or does not meet the minimum pitch requirements and then epoxying in the new rungs um to straighten those on the manhole
sections. Uh Mike, in your uh numbers that you sent us today, just as kind of an estimate, you did put the same time and money on both 5.1 and 5.3, but it it sounds like it would probably be a
little bit of a difference. Maybe not >> marginal. >> Marginal. I mean, there's going to be an inherent cost for a subcontractor to come in and slip line the pipe versus >> the in-house contractor being able to excavate the roadway. And the slip lining is pretty expensive. Yeah, but
the slip line like being able to access through the manholes and not do any excavation for the slip lining is a huge plus. >> Okay. >> Yeah. And compared to getting your crews out there and digging a hole, shoring
it, the last eight years I've probably done 20 miles of this slip lining. Um, I think the reason there's not much of a difference in cost is to have a company come in for 380 feet is going to be steep. Yes,
>> very steep. Because the more footage they come in for, the the better pricing you're going to get. I've done a lot of these projects. >> We've had bid prices recently that pretty much doubled it because it's there's not a lot there for them to do it
>> to make it worth their while. And there aren't a lot of companies that do it. Well, do we have the say in this or is the contractor can't say no, we we want to put our guys out there because it's going to cost us, >> you know, ultimately it's our it's our
sewer. It it's >> but but but if they said that they want to come out and do it, just redo rip it all up and redo it and save themselves some money, that would just be bringing it back to what we paid them to do originally. >> Correct. >> Yeah. I two issues. There's sections
that we're saying completely need to get relayed. Separate from that, there's a couple isolated areas where there's the remnants of the protruding gaskets susceptible to leaking in the future, even if they were to be regrouted.
Those are the areas where we're saying that's really the big difference between this the one and the three option. One is the slip lining end to end of those sections. No question there's not
going to be any leaking. The other one is a just doing very separate excavations, you know, that are going to be, you know, 10 to 15 ft deep. uh to essentially cut and then put a
replacement section in where that gasket instead of that pipe joint that had the gasket functionally at the end of it. It's similar and initially
the contractor was like I don't want to dig, you know, compared to getting a sub in and do the slip lining. Who knows? >> So, in answer to your question, if the contractor came back and said, "No, we really want to dig those isolated
areas." Okay. >> Did I ask the question? >> Yes. >> Will you have that groundwater problem again if they dig this these areas up again? >> Yes. So, these >> and that could add more to the cost. >> Nope. the cost that the contractor again
is bearing um not this is not an additional cost to the project to the town. These cost estimates were just for relative magnitude and then along with it an estimate of the time realistically
that it's going to take them to do this stuff. So the cost estimate does include uh the dewatering expense uh pretty much in line with what they experienced. >> Yeah, Mike. Um so the the slip lined um
the slip lined areas we confirmed there was no sags in that because I didn't cross reference that when I re >> we did. What I'd like to have the contractor do, this has just been developing, you know, right up to the last minute. I'd like to have the contractor
revide the entire length. Um the video that they took post flushing, there was some water in there that I really have the sense that it was backed up
because they were following so close behind the flushing >> and it didn't have a chance to drain and kind of equalize. uh because we didn't see that same amount of water when we went and physically opened manholes and
a lot of it was like just upstream of a manhole. So that'll be the proof. There's no first fix whatever's going on up the utmost upstream end where there's like there's water coming in from somewhere >> and then once that happens it's like
okay work your way through. There should be there's a steady stream like a hose running of water into the wet well. There shouldn't be anything. >> Well, that's that's fine. I But if the contractor walks away, we have the bond,
but if the contractor said he's going to do what we say, we still need a time limit and not to have it dragged out where he gets up and goes onto another job someplace. We have to have a commitment and we have to have better
oversight either way we go. I mean I >> I don't want this I don't want to redo it and and they do it wrong a second time. That would really be enough to >> right >> make it extreme.
>> Yeah, I think it there's a conversation to be had between us CI and the contractor and establish a hard deadline >> and if it's within our bounds to impose a
fine after that point because this has gone on long enough. the the contractor has been the one who has extended their deadline and we have accepted it previously and we're well well beyond the scope of work and when
it should have been done. >> Mhm. >> So >> So is it definite you guys are going to meet this week? >> Nothing has been established. >> Maybe not this week. We're going to try. >> Okay. The other thing that I just want to point out is that on this list of to
complete in the back of the report, >> yes, >> there's many more things that are on our punch list that aren't on here. >> Okay. >> So, I don't think we should consider this comprehensive or exhaustive. Um, yeah, this realistically needs about
another page and a half of things. um so we can collaborate and get the full list together >> and that has not been issued formally to the contractor. >> Okay. Uh and and then also
you know making the assumption that the road is being opened back up to relay these sections of pipe. A lot of the punch list items in terms of reoming and seating the lawn areas adjacent to the houses that the work is going to be done are going to be going back on the list because that needs to be completed.
>> Um it does feel like a lot of maybe most of those punch list items were related to opening up the road. So seems like we'll need to revisit that again. >> Yeah. Once it's all done. >> Yep. >> Yeah. And and just to to bring my conversation full circle to help the
rest of the board, I I didn't really specify, but I was on board with 5.1 5.3 either or 5.3 is is basically replacing everything. I'm okay with the slip lining, but 52, 54, 55 I think are should be out of the question, not on
the list if that's helpful. And that's because of the hesitation about the pipe bursting. >> I just don't think it's realistic for the problem that we're facing. And I think longevity wise, I don't think it
provides a benefit to the town to have sections that are a 10-in sewer that's transitioned back to an 8 in sewer that then transitions to a 10 and then back to an eight. In the future, if there ever is a a sewer break that we need to service, now in the middle of the night or days later, we're trying to figure
out what pipe it is. I mean, we would have mapping, but it it's accepting a band-aid to a problem where there's an option to fix it properly. And I think since the sewer is not active, it's not turned over to the town, we haven't accepted it yet, that
it needs to be fixed properly. and that what we put out to bid to numerous other contractors who all were in the same ballpark in terms of figures for this that didn't get the opportunity to build
this that it needs to be put back to what those documents went out as. So, >> you know, the other piece of the the swapping back and forth to 8 and 10 in down the road 10 years, 15 years could have a root problem. They got to run a
big cutter down there. >> Mhm. >> They run it down a 10 inch and they get into an 8 in and now you got an excavation that's going to break the pipe, >> right? >> Or get the cutter stuck, >> right? >> Um I know we'd have it in our records, but um that's just not a common thing to
be switching sizes of pipe throughout a run or a segment of a sewer system. So, and then I'm real skeptical on pipe bursting. works great on cast iron. Um, but following plastic, if there's any kind of belly that's made by the
bursting or whatever, your brand new pipe now has a belly in it, I guess, is what I'm getting at. >> Just because it could be inconsistency of the back fill and compaction of the original installed line. It could travel plastic when it bursts.
Yeah, I guess I just want whatever is going to be done the right way to be corrected like you guys are already talking about and some oversight this time like Luke was saying because this all got done apparently nobody double checked anything.
I I don't know what the answer to that is. >> Yeah. I mean I think I think the comment that if the town wants to take a hard stand on it then we can and I that's exactly what we intend to do. Um, I don't think there's any room for
negotiation here. Um, I don't intend in doing any myself. No. >> Um, so >> yeah, I think we'll talk internally and with the contractor and yourself and find out if we're going to go with plan 51 or 53. I also want to point out that
all of the manhole inverts on the bottom need to be redone. >> It's not on any of the plans, but it is part of the plan. I thought it was on one of the punch lists. >> It's on the punch list, but it's not on a removal reinstallation part of it,
which would make sense for them to do it at the same time. So, um, as long as it's addressed. >> Yeah, >> it's just amazing. I I I don't know much about this kind of work stuff, but I can tell when rungs on a ladder aren't aligned,
and something that simple wasn't done. It's just it just blows me away that all this has gotten this far after taking this long. >> Yes. >> And yeah, I think a really good plan is is really needed and got to make sure that the folks that live on that road
who've already put up with a bunch of stuff know what's going on. Hopefully they can tolerate this. One of the things that we're definitely going to be asking is that um we'd like to do a public information meeting
>> with obvious open to all residents, but specifically everyone on the Route 5 corridor will get a mailer um once we set that up. Yeah, it's going to be a requirement that the contractor is there um as well as you guys from CI
um and we will be there as well. So, we just want to make sure that it's clear and communicated what's happening with the project and what the expectations are, deadlines, and ramifications if those aren't met. >> Um, and so we'll
we'll talk amongst us. We'll find out a time that that works for everybody and we'll put it out with plenty of notice for towns people. >> Um, we'll move forward from there. >> Yeah. So, any more discussion on this until you have your meeting and get back to
us? >> Yeah, I think it's outline done a good job outlining the problems and where we're at with the solution that we want and we'll meet with the contractor and CI and continue in a
positive direction. At some point we'll be have to meet with mass >> DOT >> um and we can talk further but >> because that road does >> well just to go back give them a essentially you need a permit an access
permit >> y >> okay unless there's any further questions I know we we're going to be having future conversations on this so uh >> I have a feeling I guess we'll move on. So, thank you for
coming, Mike. >> You're welcome. >> Thank you, Mike. >> Well, Andrew, I believe we covered all the topics that were presented to us this evening. >> We have one more topic. We had an
amendment to the um to the agenda to add one more topic. That's number 11. And that is something that came in after we posted the agenda. This is a request from our OPM to um uh amend their
contract uh for the roof and boilers project at the elementary school. Um, so this uh came in from the U OPM and it makes a lot of sense. When we wrote the original contract, what we decided to do was just start with the essentially the feasibility
um and design process. Uh, and we had a a contract cap of $25,000. So, they've been supervising this process. They're actually very helpful in the um in the hiring process for both the designers for the roof and the boilers. um been
helpful in the uh in those processes and in um in in the design for the roof. They've kind of taken a a backseat now on the boilers. We're managing that. Um and really there's hopefully not going to be too much more to do on that uh once we get construction started. Uh Marlo will be dayto-day point on that.
Um but their contract, you know, really should be mostly on supervising the construction that will occur on the roof. And that's really where their their competency is is needed. Um so while we have a you know in-house team that that can work on some of that um we
really are required to be uh using our OPM for for for that construction uh observation um and for managing that project. So they have put in a uh request to amend their contract. You can see um kind of how it breaks down. The
bulk of it is for the construction phase that'll be $87,500 bidding. uh they would help and supervise uh at $18,000 and construction documents is $12,000 and completion at five. So it would bring their total contract to $147,500.
Typically you expect to see OPM services come in uh around 10% of the project. This would be below that which is nice. Um they've been doing good work. I could probably try to see if we could bring down some of their um their work on the
bidding phase. We could do more of that in house if we wanted to. Uh but at the same time, it's a fairly sophisticated project and having their their assistance on all of it um would certainly be welcome from me. Um so that's their proposal. It's it's worth
discussing and checking out. Um but they it's kind of nice that we've had a trial period with them. Uh and so far I'd say so good. I don't know if Marlo has anything to add about working with them so far, but good. >> I would say it's been very good. Good communication. It's been excellent actually with them.
>> So the only question I have is that uh I see in the spreadsheet that you handed us the OPM fees already been amended in there for the schedules. Um so even if we were to approve this, it still leaves us with about a $48,000
surplus. So we should talk through this and thank you for reminding me about the the numbers here. So the reason we have a surplus here is because uh this was bid or or this has been budgeted together with the boiler project and we've already talked about how the boiler project is coming in with a
significant uh surplus. Right now there there always could be you know change orders and other things but the way that we have it bud um budget at the moment it looks like we'll have a surplus. So if you want to look at the border project here first that's the bottom table. Um, it shows design cost for
38,000. Posting in bid docs is around $1,000. The low bid is coming in at $239. I didn't put any of the OPM costs towards the boiler project. I just kept it in one project to not confuse ourselves. So, the surplus as it stands right now, as long as there aren't any
significant change orders, would be around $320,000. So, I took that surplus and added it to the top chart here because our original budget for the roof project is around 1.7 million 1,668.
When we originally budgeted, we were really just counting on the construction costs. We weren't thinking about design. We weren't thinking about uh project management. Um, which is something we need to fix for the future. Um, we're lucky in this case that this was paired with another project that's going to
come in with such a surplus because we should end up being fine. We have this fair share earmark for $75,000. That's capital funds that uh Senator Kifford helped secure for us. So, that's great. And that that has to be used on capital projects at the schools. So, it's not like we can use it for
something else. We have the 40,000 from TreeWorks that I mentioned before. We don't need for the carpets. We could use towards this project, which I would recommend. And um if you add in the current surplus for the boiler, that brings us to a total available of $2.1
million. So we know the design is is capped at $176,000 that with our uh designer SOTH. Um OPM um I added added the full amended amount just so that we could uh model this out.
That's 147,000. I put in bid fees of,00 um construction cost estimate right now the estimate is 1.57. We also add to that an owner's contingency. That 1.57 has a contingency
built into it from the designer which is good. But we add this extra owner's contingency which is standard. That's another one uh $157,000. So that would bring our total cost to 2.057. It's very possible that in the bidding
uh the co construction cost could come back lower. Um the OPM has said that lately when they've been doing construction bids right now there's a lot of folks who are hungry for work and the the bids are coming back lower even on these roof projects uh to the tune of
$2 to $300,000. So we can hope for that. Um that would be really nice and that would put us back towards the original budget for the project. >> But as it stands right now Yeah. Sorry. Go ahead. I guess I'm confused that if we didn't have a $321,000 surplus from the boiler project, how
were we going to fund the roof? What would we do? I mean, how what was the plan? >> We could look more at at um at cost cutting of of the design that we have. But because I'm showing us having the money right now, I think we go forward with the with the plan as as currently
uh designed and then we see what the bids come in at. you know, we have we have this uh this surplus right now from the other project and then we have the a real possibility that bids come in below um but we can feel comfortable with the amount of contingency that we have that
we can still get this done. So that's what I would say. >> Okay. >> Any more questions on that? >> No, I get it. I'll make a motion to approve this as presented by Andrew. >> I'll second that.
>> Motion made. Motion seconded. All in favor? >> I >> uh any discussion? Motion carries. Did that backwards, I think. Okay. >> Yeah, it's getting late. Yeah. >> Okay. Okay, we >> we have a lot of signatures before you
guys leave. So, we'll go over this. I believe we are done with everything on the agenda. >> So, with that being said, I will entertain a motion. >> I'll make a motion to adjurnn. Second.
>> Motion made. Motion seconded. All in favor? I. Motion carries. Thank you, John, and have a good night.