two one. >> Good evening and welcome to the November 12th, 2025 meeting of the middle school building committee. This meeting will be a hybrid meeting both in person and remote. Um we uh I am recognizing that
there is a quorum. I have uh Kate. Oh, we'll say I or here Chris. Lynn >> here. Armen here. Marty >> Josh
>> and Chris I know will be joining us but is not here yet. So the meeting is called to order. >> Um any public comments? >> Seeing none, I'll move to the approval of immediate minutes from October 22nd, 2025.
>> Is there a motion? Mo motion to approve the uh minutes from October 22nd, 2025. >> Motion. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Motion and second. Any discussion? >> Seeing none, I'll call for a roll call vote. Kate >> I.
>> Chris. >> Do you want? >> Yes. >> Armen. Yes. >> Mari. >> Yes. >> Josh. >> We don't have it wasn't until >> Yes. Motion passes. Minute meetings
approved. We have no correspondence. We go to new business update. Uh the Fontaine CMR contract approval. Marty, do you have >> a motion? That's all. >> Uh like to make a motion that the school building committee authorized town
manager to sign the Fontaine contract and price proposal subject to final review and approval by town council and town procurement. >> There is a motion. Is there a second? >> Second.
>> Motion and seconded. Any discussion? >> Seeing none, I will call for a roll call vote. Kate, >> yes. >> Chris, >> yes. >> Lynn, >> yes. >> Armen, yes. Marty, >> yes. >> Josh, >> yes. >> Moving on. Schedule update. Allan,
>> yeah, thank you. Um, well, I can't believe it's November already. We've, um, got the vote passed at the end of September, so that was fantastic. and we got started on design development otherwise known as DD in our slang. Um that phase the architects have been and
design team has been busy with that. It started uh on uh October 9th when we had contracts executed for our services and theirs and it's going to run till March 26 of next of 2026. And the the key dates that are coming up
that we're working toward is I um I think I told you that we're doing three estimates through this phase. We're doing one at design development and we're doing two estimates at construction documents, one at 60% and the other at 90%. And those estimates
are um both going to be done by Fontaine doing one and PMC doing the other one. So they're they're both blind estimates to get done. And then once those two estimators uh look at it or estimators for Fontaine look at it, we get together
and we reconcile them and we come together on where we think the price is. And the whole purpose of that is to make sure that we stay within the project budget through the the whole course of the design documents before we start putting it out to bid to the filed sub bids. So, the the first um it's going to
go to the estimators on January 8th coming up of 2026 and they're due back on January 27th of 2026 and we're going to hold that reconciliation meeting on the 29th of January. So, with um all the the reconciled
estimates done, then we're going to bring it back to school building committee meeting with uh where we are on that budget for your review and approval on February 11th. and then we're going to submit it to the MSBA and DESIE uh the following day on
February 12th. So that's pretty much a high level view of where we are for the next uh 3 months or so. Um so a lot of work to be done and but a lot of lot of uh things coming together on the plans. >> Alan, the reconciliation will be just like the last time like plan for two
days and we're just going to go back and forth. But if it's a day, it's a day. If it's two days, it's two days. >> It's it's whatever it takes. uh typically takes a good full day and sometimes a second day, but it's just looking over what how much quantity one estimator had versus the quantity other estimators. So, what were you looking at
materials here? Because the documents are at a stage right now where not everything's been drawn or selected or specified yet. So, people are making kind of guesses and that's what's called design contingency. So, they hold a reserve for that. So, we try to bring that design contingency down through the
different phases. DD. It starts a little bit higher, then it it goes down at the 60% CD and then down to 90 at 90%. And by the time they finish the documents, there should be no design contingency left because it's going out to bid. So, it's a it's a good process and uh keeps
us in in check um budget-wise. >> Nice. >> Any questions on the schedule from anybody? >> All right. All right, then moving on to design update. Christian and Dory, I'm guessing. >> Yeah, Marty, you want to
>> I think you can just go forward to slide number five if you're driving. Oh, one up from there. So, just first wanted to report on meetings that we've had since uh the last school building committee meeting on October 22nd. On the 29th, we had a
site design meeting with um a lot of members of our design team as well as um folks from town and folks from the district. Um it was a good kind of initial uh uh kind of review of where we were at
site design for schematic design um and and you know determining priorities moving forward. We talked a little bit about the turf field which was helpful. Um, again, this is good to get some of these um decisions finalized to bring them into that estimating process that
Alan was talking about. We decided that we will have a future turf field focus meeting. Um, so that's f that's on November 17th. Um, but we did start talking about it. We talked a little bit about general site maintenance, which was also really helpful. Um, talked a
little bit about parking and vehicular routes. Nothing really changed there. some slight, you know, suggestions um that our site team's taking into account um fencing emergency access around the school. So, uh that was a good kickoff meeting. Kind of the result
was yes, that turf field meeting on November 17th. And then importantly also on November 19th, we'll have another site meeting. Um that one focused a little bit more on town utilities um and also on phasing of
the project project and early work that Fontaine might be doing uh in enabling work it's called before the project really gets started. Uh that one will be in person at the Williams Middle School site which will also be helpful. We can walk around afterwards if needed. Um,
but in general, I think, you know, we'll have a lot of these meetings in between school building committee meetings. We have even more than this on the design team side of things. Those we'll just kind of keep quiet about. we won't bore you with, but we will try and come back
um you know for for these larger um meetings where we're getting input from the town and the district report back to the school building committee so you guys can stay a breast of of those decisions um and and ask any questions. Um on here are again a lot of uh
meetings we've had with staff uh on November 3rd and 4th at uh both at Glenbrook and at Williams um that Dory will go into in a little bit. Um and then just this morning we had a really helpful data uh it uh and audiovisisual
uh meeting with the district. Um again just kind of getting people back into the project and we'll have uh future meetings on that. Um but again clarifying what our scope was in schematic design making sure there aren't any changes. Um we've started
this design uh advisory group. Uh we met with them again today. Dory will talk a little bit more about that. Um, and then we've got a security meeting later this week. Um, and then as I mentioned that Turfield meeting and that site meeting on November 19th. >> Any questions on those kind of overall
meetings? >> Yeah, I have some questions on uh the turf specifically. >> Yeah. So I I think beyond just the general uh people didn't want this for any number of reasons I the school I
mean I think the a specific concern we heard from people that even more in favor of the project overall was uh for health reasons but also injury reasons heating up um and we we've had some
articles sent to us uh some of which I've read And uh but I understand that the technology may have changed dramatically over the years. Uh so I I guess I got a a couple questions. Um
one, are we are we still taking public input on the turf fields? And I know people can always come speak at our meetings, but uh whether we have them, is it is there still a chance to change that part of the design if we want to?
And if we are confident that the turf fields are uh the concerns, the benefits outweigh the concerns, which I I think is a maybe a reasonable stance to take.
Can we communicate to people who may be concerned about this why we feel that way? Yeah, I mean, uh, Josh, I think how you concluded that is I think the direction that at least I've, you know, the input
that we've received, um, that that's the direction the project's going that that the benefits out outweigh the, uh, the concerns. Um we we created and it was shortly before the town vote as I recall
a little like maybe two or three page summary. Um I'll make sure that that gets out to the school building committee. Um and to be honest with everything that was going on at the time, I don't know how widely distributed that little sheet was, but
that's quite helpful in addressing some of these concerns. It also points to some state resources um where people can can do more research on their own. Um we have had those questions at each of these meetings. I think that's why we're having this turf
focus meeting on the 17th. Um I know that we're also going to try and present to the uh environmental and sustainability committee tomorrow night. Um, and we've got our um with our landscape civil engineering team. Uh,
Ryan is the expert on the turf field who's come to the school building committee meeting before um and presented, but he'll be there tomorrow night to talk to the um environmental and sustainability committee. Um, and I think in general, uh, I I would agree
with you that that from a somewhat objective point of view, it does seem like the benefits outweigh the concerns. Um but certainly we're open to input in terms of whether it's too late to change that decision. I mean I you know that
would be a larger discussion with the school building committee meeting. I don't know or the school building committee uh I don't know if it's ever you know too late but there are repercussions with you know these decisions coming later and that we might need added time or added uh design effort to to change
uh change uh such a major component like that now. Um but so far all the meetings we've had, people have been very uh enthusiastic about it. Um especially with the uh amount of different sports that would be played on it, the amount
of use that it will be able to take. Um you know that it can be used kind of throughout the seasons much more so than a natural turf field, etc., etc. I think more of the decision or the questions have been about, you know, what specific line striping should go on there? uh you
know, should the goals be stored here or there? Um what type of fencing should go around the um synthetic turf field? So that that's been more of the focus of the uh conversation. I I know that Ryan also said that there are material choices on fill that are really there's
cost benefit and those costs are not necessarily financial costs but just like differences in performance and to some degree the material quality of it that would be of concern you know to the community and we'd want to get that information out those choices have been made part of it this upcoming meeting I
think is to really start to get at that level of detail so also as we evolve the design we can keep sharing information out about where that's heading. Um, >> yeah, I know we've got input. I I I guess, you know, I would just address some of that input. I mean, we as a
committee made a decision. We voted on this. We had plenty of information before we voted to in favor of the the the turf field. So, I would not want to waiver at this point. Um I think the input in regards to
design elements that may mitigate some of the concerns is definitely something that can be done. I mean we had so if you're looking at some of the articles the one was from the Wall Street Journal uh or New York Times one of one of the big papers and in the end it said you know they looked at all these fields in
New Jersey and in the end they said well they get so much play there was nothing else you could do but turf like like the article started out being against turf but in the end was said came to the same conclusion that our consultant said like these fields get so much play that
there's nothing that you can do but you turf would be the best option for that field. Now, we've also seen some articles come in and said, "Oh, it's 130 degrees in the summertime, right, on the turf." Well, that was 20 years ago, and that was with pure rubber fill. Does not
speak to the stuff that, you know, that that can be put on for infill today. The cork nut or um the cork, just plain cork or the the the coconut and the cork together. There's lots of different fill opportunities now that do not represent the same design elements of 20, 30 years
ago that bring the negative. And if you're looking at NFL studies over the last what is it three, four years, there is no discernable difference between ACL injuries on turf versus grass and that's the that's the NFL. Um,
so I know people reel against it on the injury thing, but I yeah, I just think there's >> from a making sure people understood that we looked at this upside down, got all the information and made a decision on it. This was not something that was done
lightly. And I think number of us, including myself, said this would not be my first choice for what the material would be. I'd like a grass field if we could keep it, but you can't. And even if you're looking at this field here on the grassy gutter where the soccer team plays, the goal mouse, we have the R.
What's the DPW guy? Is it Ryan? No. Sean, >> you know, Sean's asking us not to play in front of the goal mouse for practice five days a week because they can't maintain the field without it getting brown spots on the field. Um, we had to
pay for the use of the Holio Stadium at least three times this season for the girls um, field hockey because they cannot play on a grass field for the sport and the MIAA would not let us play
on the grass. So, um I you know I hear I hear what what's out there from from the negatives. I just think what you you said said it best, Dory, is the benefits outweigh the the the not positives for the the the turf field. And in a perfect world,
I'd love to have a a nice grass field like, you know, Real Madrid Stadium, but it's not going to happen here. >> Sorry about Josh. Sounds like you had something to say. >> Yeah. And and so this is for anyone who's been on uh paying attention to the
town discourse the past couple days, it's one thing for us to talk about something at a meeting uh like select board of water rates for five meetings and another for it to get out to people. And so I I totally
we made a decision. We looked into it. We we thought about it a lot and we have consultants who made a recommendation and that's fine. Uh and that no should say it's fine. That's good. But we need to make sure it gets out to people that
they understand that we have addressed their concerns and this is why we made the decision. And I I something that was circular right before the vote. I I didn't I don't even remember it. I'm sure there was so much going on it didn't get out there, but we
should make sure that people are seeing it one way or another, which is much easier said than done. Uh it's really hard for people to to get out to people, but we this to me is the thing that I think people had a lot of really good faith uh concerns about and I want to
make sure that people understand they were heard and we're not just brushing aside and there's a good reason. And one of the things, so Armen, you're saying that the technology has improved. Let's tell people that. And uh I that's that's really my my point. Not that I think
we're making a mistake or anything like that, but I want people to understand how we got to where we are. >> No. And and you know what, Josh, I mean, I'm hearing you on the water rates. Would you have voted differently if people had said anything else? I mean, the facts were before you, right? You had to make the best decision based upon
what you had. And now people are coming back at the 11th hour and saying, "I didn't know about this water rates even though you guys had seven different meetings on it. It was in the newspaper 20 times." Um, you know, it's like like we can't I know people are always going to have a
difference of opinion about it, but we can't be knee-jerk about it. We've had all these meetings. We've discussed it. We had the expert here not once but twice to talk about this. I don't know what more. And if you have a suggestion on how we get it out to more people, I'd be glad to hear that. But two letters
against is not to me an outpouring of information versus the sensing sessions we've had the town meeting vote on the floor where we talked about this and knew what the plan was. I don't know what else we do. I mean, that's the most amount of people we've ever had on a town meeting floor in, you know, the
last 10 years and the information got out there. So, if it's not out there, I don't know what more we can do. And by the way, just a little >> Yeah, I'm sorry that you're going through that because I know what you're going through and I believe me, I've you
gone through some pretty >> If I could jump in, I I think probably a wider point and and maybe kind of underscoring what Josh is saying a little bit is just continuing to fulfill our obligation to keep the community informed on where we
are with the project. So whether whether it's the turf issue or the sustainability features of the building or the educational design, um I think sort of we just need to regroup and and make sure that we're continuing to put
communication out there on this project. So I'll talk to Lynn about that and how we can kind of continue to keep people up to date. Some people might be very concerned or have questions about the turf. Others might have questions about the the educational design. Others might have
questions about the overall aesthetic. So, we'll we'll continue to work on that and and um we'll go back to that communication that Christian mentioned about the uh >> the turf and try and push that out as well. >> No, Marty, I think that I think that's a great point of Go ahead.
>> Yeah. I was going to I was going to say that I was going to say something very very similar to what Marty was just saying. And I think that um obviously I'm sure we don't have any kind of a budget for any kind of a communication, you know, specialist or marketing specialist, but I think that
this project, you know, especially, you know, in a town this small needs we need to find a voice where um it's going to go out to the broadest audience possible. Um, and I, you know, I think that different people use different kinds of mediums
for their for their information. Uh, whether it's the reminder or it's online or it's emails or it's text blasts or it's YouTubetubes. I mean, there there's a lot of variety these days. And I think that
we can take, you know, some um education from, you know, how how our younger politicians are are getting their messages out because people use very very different mediums these days.
>> No, I don't I don't disagree with you. I was just going to to echo Marty on your point on the other thing is I think we need to have that communication as a whole, right? Not taking out parts of design elements and keying on certain design elements as a communication, but as this is what's
going on with the entire project, like you guys were saying with the updates on PV and sustainability and where we are in the the process. And to that point, Allan, I'm going to say day one, what impressed us about you guys is we were promised that you guys had this marketing person behind it, and I
haven't really seen much out of that yet. So if there's anything you can do to help us on that messaging, then I think that's reaching out to Marty. We will we'll get on that. >> Yeah. I think the more transparent the better. I mean the the more
>> um decisions will be more more readily accepted. >> Okay. Any other comments? >> And again, Josh, I know what you're going through. I feel bad for you. um plane J plan changes under consideration. >> Sure. Let me jump in here on the next
slide. Marty, thank you. Um so this is just a couple screen grabs from some of what we've been working through. So the two days that were spent in the school, the focus there was uh meeting with faculty of specialized classrooms that
have specialized technological needs. So there's always a lot more infrastructure required for STEM and science some of the special education classes. So we were going back and revisiting sharing the plans from the SD set with them talking through the logistics. What's
really interesting about the schools were taking two schools and combining. So that's also opening up all sorts of very unique kind of possibilities and questions um that have been very interesting and helpful. Um, so that was largely getting data into the project because we're trying to sort out both
furniture equipment needs, establish a list of equipment um, for these specialized spaces as well as what infrastructure has to be aware and being sure everybody's happy with the direction we're taking. Um, it's all been very helpful. I'd say it's opened up those conversations opened up some interesting u realizations for the um
the staff that the relationship of PE to OTPT is going to be a real boon to the um school because it there's a lot of ways in which those two programs can interact and support each other and it can add versatility to the PE program um and to the special education programs.
Same with health. Health is currently nowhere near the PE program. We're having a special call Friday, which is not on the list, to talk about health because there's some real openness to really rethinking the way the health programs are operating at the medical
school in relation to how fitness uh is located and and perhaps, you know, strengthening elements there. Um, so that's the kind of thing that happens and I think uh it's it's opened up larger conversations I think for the district that have nothing to do with the school building that have to do with
professional development and prepping for consolidation which I think has also been really helpful. Um, we've also created this design advisory group and that largely came out of the fact that the faculty were already starting to have these conversations about consolidation and what that's going to look like forming a common identity uh
and culture for the school which is great conversation to be having. So we asked that rather than us continually go to two different schools and have two different types of conversations with two different faculty that a group be made that is essentially brings faculty from both schools together to work as
kind of a a leadership group that we would meet with regularly at each phase of the project to get input and really the bigger educational questions that we're having. Um wouldn't just be between us and the uh district offices but would also have faculty voice. Um and that group's been great. We've
already met twice. The first conversation focused on these um academic neighborhoods. U there's two per grade. >> Go down one slide. >> Next slide, Marty, just to touch on that. So, we we honed in on this. Um this is our SD uh plan, and this is a
sample neighborhood of uh a grade level. So, half of a grade is in this combination of rooms. Um and we talked about how that design came about. And before committing everything to exactly what you see here, are there any tweaks we wanted to make in terms of the
relationship and how could we support education going forward? So we weren't just, you know, particularly looking at the area shared between because there's lots of different ways to use that and also the relationship of classes and how differentiated are classes from each other. So if you go to the next slide,
these are just a couple slides from that conversation that that I led um talking about um really moving away from that kind of more traditional lecture style teaching to which teachers have obviously started to move away from but how you may go even farther with that in
relation to other spaces to support students and a lot of the goal in the school has been about developing more resilient learners. learners who are um capable of independent learning and learning with each other rather than simply being kind of you know it's a progression from elementary school to
high school. We want them to be very capable learners um and independent learners by high school so they succeed in high school. A middle school is really where some of those progressions need to be thought out and supported. So the common area between on the next
slide just this is to show the different ways that space could be used and believe it or not a large conversation topic in every school now but particularly at the middle school level is the role of lockers and student storage which has taken a lot of time and uh I think we came to a a good
conclusion today based on that which is not to have that destroy the shared space keep lockers in the school but we we even had one of the teachers do a survey which was helpful of students to to get their input and I know it seems like a small thing but it's kind of a
big thing in middle school. Um so that was quite helpful as well and that's helping us to hone our thinking about the common areas. >> So question on that. >> Uhhuh. >> We put all the lockers in the high school. They don't get used >> right. They don't in high school really. >> Right. >> And that was the biggest mistake we
made. I that was one of the biggest mistakes we made on the high school project. That's why in the middle school are they being used? Is that what they're saying? So it's uh they are being used. Um there's actually a very lovely bell curve that reflects the >> Well, in Glenbrook is going to be different than >> Exa. Exactly. We know that, too.
>> Because they didn't use them at Glenn Brook. >> Yeah. >> When we put the brand new ones in there, >> so we decided not to spend the money on Williams because they weren't being used. Is that is that my memory correct? >> People put their things >> Yeah. Williams wanted to renovate them. So they were wider to accommodate
today's backpacks, but >> and then that >> data didn't really show middle school using them to the degree for the money would have cost. >> Right. And and interestingly, in this survey that was done, one of the things that really jumped out to me is that students do want to put their coat in
lunch bag somewhere, but they're not going to give up their backpack. You'd have to pry it off of them. Um, uh, so maybe we were also of the opinion that if you're going to have lockers, they got to be big enough for the backpacks, but in reality, they're not letting go of the backpacks. >> Maybe that doesn't need to be the case.
So, we're we're um and the reason it came up is that we were showing the the uh the faculty that 100 lockers in that space that I was just showing you takes up a lot of space. There's not a lot of space for a lot else. And then you have a larger corridor, you know, thicker
walls. We have all the same concerns you do and and and and it's not that lockers are bad, but that is it getting is is it impeding other things that you want to have happen in the corridor particularly close to the classrooms and the the decision I think that the consensus
seemed to be after much thought because I'd say they also really felt this concern too but that doing away with lockers might also be a huge mistake but that actually moving them to peripheral kind of locations and sizing ing them appropriately so that they don't
overwhelm the corridors is kind of the way to go. And then I think we're still going to have to deal with the fact that when students go into the classroom, they're still carrying a backpack. And that teachers don't want to give up the storage of a classroom for cubbies. And I don't think they they're going to we
can accommodate that with hooks and you know baskets and things like that a little bit but it's it is a persistent problem that uh that the amount students are carrying uh into the school and dealing with middle school students do tend to carry their coats still. High
school students often don't. So there are kind of trend lines toward high school that make it a little bit different. But we we in high schools we we put lockers but fewer and we put them associated with specific spaces. So um it's in middle school you still have a
big debate. >> Nicole's do you have any uh thoughts on this? >> I think I think it's a tough it's a tough conversation because yes I agree. You know the high school definitely doesn't use them. I was saying that my
oldest went through four years and I don't even know if she knew where her locker was. Um, but she also never wore a jacket in high school or did anything because she didn't want to have to carry anything because she didn't do it. But we find I think middle schoolers tend to have more stuff, especially our sixth graders. Sometimes they have like they
still wear like actual like kid boots during the winter and like take them off and change and stuff. So I I just think it's it's tough. Like I don't know I don't know what the right decision is for this. Um I don't I don't think we should do half of them. I know that came
up in the meeting earlier today. I I think that would be a disaster. If everyone wanted to use them, we'd have to do a lottery or like have them sign it out. I think I don't like that idea. Um but I I don't know. I don't know what the right answer is. We definitely need a place for them to put their stuff. I mean, we often hear teachers saying they
don't want backpacks on the floor in their rooms because they could trip over them. And so I I think we just have to have a plan either way. um cuz we don't know what what the rules are going to be or what we're going to do in the new school as far as those
things go. So, is there enough room in the classroom where backpacks are put against a certain wall or >> Yeah. I don't know. Like I know Nikki said this earlier, but these pictures look so clean. It's like where are there where is their stuff? >> You know, it's like I don't know. So, so
the the one I this is I went to uh this middle school with the the large opening, not the yellow opening, the one on the right. So, that's Situit Middle School. Um uh so top right hand side, the lockers are along that corridor. They're just not cluttering the common
area. Um and I think they went through the same exact debate. >> Oh, I see. >> Um and same exact thing and and that one that you know, we had the same discussion about, okay, if you have the lockers come to this high, are students just going to put their stuff on top? The answer is yes. This is like a lovely
award-winning school that works quite well. Um they could not give up the locker debate either. They did create them and they tried to kind of ended up almost I'd say where our group ended up today in their discussion which was
yeah we kind of can't take it away from middle school. So, >> okay. >> But, um, appreciate the, uh, the conversation. >> I mean, I know the history of what we've went through here with multiple schools on them in the past. So, >> yeah. Yeah.
>> Um, you said there was a survey, one of one of the teachers had done a survey. What did the kids say? >> Um, so again, you had uh I think it was maybe 20% that really wanted them, 20% that really didn't, and then it was a curve like this in between. And that really
reflected in in their use as well. And then what was most interesting actually is what do you put in your locker? And that actually surfaced a lot of very interesting things that I can see why people would be uncomfortable at that age, you know. I mean there are things that you need to put there. People have
instruments and uh you know um >> and that was just eighth grade though Dory, right? >> Yes. >> I think so. And that right because they were talking back what they've done in sixth grade. >> Yeah. But I think it might it could look different sixth grade >> verse seventh verse eighth, right? Like I think there is a little bit of a
difference. And now with our new cell phone policy, it does go in their backpack. Their backpacks are on them all the time. >> Um >> but I I do think that, you know, I mean it's not a bad idea to ask the sixth or seventh grade if we wanted to just dipstick again. Um but
>> but wasn't also the thinking that eighth grade is the least likely to use them and and there was still substantial use. >> I I agree. Like I think they are the least ones to use them. Sixth grade does and again at the instruments most of the kids go to the instrument hallway to put their instruments away. A lot of them
couldn't can't fit them in their lockers. Um. >> Right. >> So after we were kind of starting to do study like to hone in on size and think about how we might use the music area to pull the big stuff out >> and that might help us out. So we're
still studying it >> but it you can see how it impacts other things. Have you? So >> I guess further on this topic then have we talked about music lockers? >> Yes. So that had come up and we were already talking about storage in the music area and particularly with those
teachers they definitely wanted um you know area but that students are bringing things in because that's what happens now. They bring the instruments to that area and often leave them in the hallway or in the storage near near the music rooms and inside the music rooms. So that will get cleaned up automatically.
I think the question becomes do we do we want lockable areas there or is it okay if it's just in that wing where the teachers are observing it and that's just a design we've kind of made a suite there that the teachers can see intentionally so that would be a you know cheaper solution than than putting
more metal loud lockers all over the school. >> Okay. I mean I know like some of the instruments are >> pretty expensive. >> Yeah. Right. Right. So, >> might be a little out of touch, but do kids >> bring changes of clothes for after school sports or activities or
>> not very much. I mean, that that's that's the next controversial topic of every middle school, which is >> what >> showers and changing. >> I see. >> They they actually do some of them will bring like sometimes in our office we have like lacrosse sticks and backpack
like we sometimes house kids stuff in in the office. >> Yeah. Yeah. But not it it's not a prepoundonderance of kids. It's a small minority. >> Exactly. And I mean I think we we're moving towards a consensus the that I I
had to break it to us >> that we do by code have to have two you know two showers. Um and I think that this thinking is that having a couple changing rooms near those two showers is helpful for variety of reasons. Sometimes it might be an afterchool use
of the building as well. So to create some place where there can be changing but students don't change for gym class in middle school. >> Right. But after school activities >> Right. Exactly. And there could be theatrical performances and other reasons why you'd want to change. >> If you've been in the Glen Brook shower,
you will know that the the water has not hit the floor in the last 20 years. So >> yeah, >> but there could be lockers in a gym locker. >> But people do change. I mean, I know they change for games on the weekend. So, >> right. So, just want to allow that changing to occur. Um,
>> just I just wanted to share, we don't have them change a lot, but sneakers, I get deliveries of sneakers all day long and then they end up in their locker. So, um, kids like to wear like those UGG boots and they can't run in them. So, there's always sneakers being delivered
with lunch boxes all day long. Just a heads up. So maybe it's just that nobody wants to admit that the users are >> just some sort of storage sounds. >> Yeah. >> Um we also talked a little bit about classroom differentiation. The idea the
question because early on it had been clear to us that faculty in different disciplines had different desires for classroom layout um and furniture. And as we started working towards these communities some discussion about whether that should change the nature of the furniture selection.
So, we vetted that with the DAG a little bit and I think we slightly altered um but not significantly the the general plan we had in place. I think uh there's a little bit of difference that we can accommodate. I think this the concern for the school is that they commit to just all one thing and that's it. It's a
long time before anybody buys more furniture. So, so how do we make sure that there's enough here that it really supports the school and doesn't feel like it's become dated quickly. So, >> making good decisions basically. Um I think what we did decide and one one
area that was I think soft in SD is what that large classroom called the community by calling it the community room but we have a classroom that's part of the vocational tech commitment from the MSBA that can be very multi-purpose and I think we've had some good conversations about the usefulness of
that as a unique space that teachers can team teach in that uh that more kind of station based learning or um collaborative learning can happen in and therefore it might be treated differently since we're staying somewhat more um straightforward in the
classrooms. Um and then to get into that's all the educational planning. We have more going on there, but I'd say there's there's two strands. One is the educational planning and furniture thinking and and technology for instruction that we've been trying to
double check simultaneously, quietly, not in front of everyone. We're working through can we fix and make the bathrooms better? Can we make the roof line work here or there? So, we do these larger moves that we're exploring that are about trying we're putting structure
in and and essentially it's the consultants working collaboratively to try and keep revising and rebuilding the model and moving towards the drawings. I'll let Christian talk about some of those moves. >> Great. So, yeah. um lots and lots of
little minor changes all over the place, but we wanted to, you know, if if something more significant is occurring, we certainly want to bring that to you. So, up on the upper right here, we have the um first floor plan as it was at the end of schematic design. Um and what
actually what kills Dory and I, uh we actually throw away our 3D model at the end of schematic design and start all over again. Um, we've found that it's just because we have, you know, during schematic design, you're basically, you know, mixing things together, it turns
into a mess. So, it's easier to start all over. So, we take kind of a step backward to then move forward. But, as Droid mentioned, we're also now is when we're really coordinating with all of our engineers. We're meeting with them every week or two. And so as all of that
those layers of information come into the 3D model as well um you know it's really important to start from a from a clean slate. So um kind of the the major move that we've made since schematic design is changing our roof line a
little bit on the two classroom wings. Um and so that's reflected here in plan. What's happened and you can see that in the B-wing is that basically we mirrored the B-wing. So before the um resource rooms and small group rooms were on the south side which is to the left of the
screen and now they're on the north side and that was one aesthetically we thought it was helpful to kind of clean up that roof line a little bit. We also heard a lot of feedback from the district that um folks wanted daylight directly into those rooms and they are
landlocked because they are not used 100% throughout the day. Um, but by changing the roof line, we're able to get some high windows up on that northern wall of those small rooms. So, um, that helped a great deal to to
mirror that that middle B-wing. Um, we're cleaning up the front entry a lot and, uh, we're going to reserve it until our next school building committee meeting, but we'd like to show you some kind of 3D renderings as you walk through that space. Um, but we kind of had some, and you can't really see it,
but in the schematic design floor plan, we had a little bit of extra space just to the north of that front entry. The front entry also protruded out from the building, and we thought was a little bit of an awkward manner. So, we've cleaned that up a little bit, consolidated it, pushed the classroom
wing a little bit further south. Um, and think we're we're making some great improvements there. um minor issues like bathrooms, we're really going through making sure that we're meeting all of our clearance requirements. Um and then the one area that I have circled over there by the cafeteria is where for now we have um
inserted the two code required showers. Um those might actually flip to the other side of the hallway. We're still evaluating that, but we're looking in that area to uh to incorporate those. Any questions on that first floor? Second floor. Marty, if you want to go
down a sheet. very similar. So again, that uh second floor of the B-wing, that's the um that classroom wing kind of in the middle. Um again, it's been flipped since schematic design. Um another area that we got some feedback of folks wanting more access to natural
light was the math lab and lit lab. And so those were landlocked in the center of that kind of guidance counseling suite. Um and we've shifted that so that they are now on the south wall. And we've got some group rooms and bathrooms that don't need as much access to
daylight um in the center there. Um and then we've also done some rearranging of the um teacher planning room. That's the circle at the far west side of the um southern classroom wing. Um and so kind
of again just cleaning that area up and trying to give be a little bit more generous in what we can give to that uh teacher planning room. This shows a section of that classroom wing. Um, again, at our next meeting, we'll be able to show you a 3D uh kind
of exterior massing view, which will help. But you can see on the upper right is the schematic design version where we had that clear story landing and it was landing in the middle of the commons so that we were getting daylight into the
commons but it was landing in a little bit of an awkward spot structurally. It wasn't lining up with our grid lines and our in our structure going down to the foundation. Um, and we had a flat roof over on the classroom wing that was for mechanical equipment, but it wasn't working out very well because the
mechanical equipment didn't have the clearance that we needed. So, we in fact think that we can do a a sloped roof on that classroom uh side on the north, um, which will help. We want to try and expose that structure and have that, um,
ceiling uh, feel much more generous. Um, so you can see here we've got some daylight getting into that resource room. um some borrowed light being able to go into that classroom that's on the north side. Um hopefully plenty of room for our mechanicals um with that roof
sloping up. Um we're still working on that with our mechanical engineers. Um but all of this is is um certainly uh seems to us to be a huge improvement over what we had um previously. >> So that slope is more gradual than
>> the schematic design. And so is the height going to be reduced by a a little? No, because we extended the roof. >> So, it's just extended. It's just more gradual against >> It was way higher and then we realized that by by Yes. by making the slope more gradual. Good. Hi, Armen. Um, so yeah,
it's a 2 and 12 slope. Uh, before I think we were at 3 and a half and 12. Um, and uh it's still we're still planning on that being PV ready, which we'll get into a little bit. That's facing due south. Um, so that's all still working out very well. Um and we
are still over the um uh height maximum um but not by very much. >> Yeah. >> Any questions? Thanks for the update. That was great. >> Great.
>> I'm glad to see the the process as well would work out like it is. So that's great. >> Yeah. Exciting. >> Okay. Moving on to Massie. >> Sure. Uh so we wanted to just touch back on sustainability issues in general. Um I know probably this will will start
getting uh boring to hear about. So there's lead um scorecard is the lead certified school. Um and we are constantly checking in on that and we've gone from our schematic design into this phase where we've kind of spent more time with our consultants really looking at all of the lead points and where we
really want to put the priorities based on this project, this school and and how that lays out. But there's also the mass save incentive. Remember, we've committed to the tier one pathway um which is the uh basically sets a an energy use intensity target for the
project. Um we did energy modeling. Remember we went through that extensive modeling and showed you that in the last phase. We delivered that model to the massafe team because they've now hired a third-party uh consulting architecture firm or energy modeler that reviews the
project constantly. So at every delivery we send more information to them and they keep track and they give us feedback. So we sent that energy model to them which showed us a sub20 EUI which is really very very good. Um and they were very impressed and very
excited. It was also preliminary. Obviously we have a lot more programming and information to get into it now. Um but they gave us back some comments that then you know we need to respond to and we'll be responding to now. Um but it raised issues for the team to discuss
like are we submetering the EV um charging stations or is it just one meter and that typically that those need to be broken down into into various meters. So there's EV charging is one meter. The PV array wants to be on another meter. Um so that there's a a different kind of calculation for each
of those. um they wanted to specifically clarify the building's use during the summer um because that does change the target. So we initially we have the information based on our early calculations and we also assumed our
target was 25 and massive is saying well if you're not using the school in the summer then your target has to be even lower which is okay because our target we're already looking good for that so it's not an issue but um you can see sort of why you know that is they want an even more efficient building because
all that cooling is a is kind of energy wasteful in the summer if it's not occupied and so it kind of gets into balance issues but we've we've designed our energy model based on the information the district's given us um which did not have heavy use in the summer. >> So I guess district is that still
accurate or would we consider moving like our summer programs there because the energy would be more efficient than this high school? I >> mean we might move some of our summer programming. Right now all of our enrichment is here. Our special ed program is at an elementary school.
Marty, I don't know if you um I don't know. We haven't really run a middle school academic program in a number of years. >> And I know Williams is currently used for summer athletic programs. >> Outside though, they don't really >> go inside when it rains.
>> When it rains, >> we won't we won't air condition for them for when it rains. >> No, no, I agree. But yeah. >> Yeah. It's not really a program that's there all summer though. >> Okay. I'm just making sure every rock is >> I don't know if Marty has anything.
Yeah. Mart, you got anything? >> No. Uh, nothing additional. I know our our middle school principles have talked to us over the years about, you know, summer academic programming uh to, you know, for credit recovery or to prepare kids for high school. So, I mean, I'd
say, you know, in general, new building presents new opportunities, but we we don't have any specific programming that we've yet identified for the summit. >> So, it's it's a good question to raise. doesn't ultimately, you know, I wouldn't say make a decision based on this
because we're going to be in good shape. So, and certainly the school's available in the summer when when you're ready to use it that way. So, >> so the other question I guess I have in regards to the second langu charging stations and PV array should be >> submetered.
>> I'm guessing two things. One is that in our purview as the school building committee I guess it is from a construction and what's going to be there, but I'm sure you have input,
Lynn, on what that looks like. >> I thought they had to be by the utility. So, that aligns with what I already thought we had to do. I mean, that's what's happening now, okay, >> with the EV station. So, >> we we did assume that. So, we're just
noting the the the clarification and alignment on that. We're not there was no question >> who are the what's the intended user of the EV stations >> um so that becomes a a larger
conversation so EVs are required now in construction um uh and there's a certain percentage and what is required is that you put them in to make them available that's a state's interest how you manage them is is kind of independent is my
understanding and there I know the town has a history on this as well. Um but but but it has to be a project commitment to create the EV stations whether you are making them publicly available or controlled that that is actually not dictated by the state.
>> Okay. So there's there's no way. Well, you know, we have a history. Our ours are currently chained up because our provider went out of business. And even when they weren't chained up, it was like nine bucks an hour or some some outrageous price. Uh
>> yeah, >> as much as anywhere else. Uh because that's what our utility charges us, >> right? So that we're really I'm Is there a waiver to get around it? >> No, I highly doubt it.
>> Um I mean that's an interesting DOER hasn't had a waiver for this. Whether that will change, I don't know because I think as people start to experience this that maybe comes along as a possibility. Chris, I don't know if you've heard of any waivers for that, but I've never
seen a waiver. Um, and they didn't even have a waiver pathway, but I know people said, "Gee, there should be waiverss for some of these DOER requirements." Um, I do think that, um, you know, typic just in general terms, this is one of those things where we would hope the town had
a specification they wanted us to meet for the EV stations. If they don't, we'd make a recommendation. Um, and there's abundant number of programs to work with. Some seem to not, you know, to see seem to be short flyers that I wouldn't
trust and some that seem to be pretty solid now. So that that should be taken into consideration. So we do want the town to tell us if they have something specific. I think and you know I think we'll continue to talk about this but we don't have the ability to and we have
planned for this in >> I guess that's just my point for for Lynn or bringing it up is that yeah we can put the infrastructure within the the middle school building committee purview but if it doesn't match up with the infrastructure that's in town or however
you're building in town or whatever you choose to like you know right so >> and and Josh I'll just say you know personal experience like If I'm there for, you know, a two-hour soccer game, I'm probably hooking in if it's no more than I pay at home.
>> It's more than you pay at home. >> Well, we'll talk about that. I'm curious why that is. >> At home right now, it's 34 cents with the delivery charge. I mean, I know it's way more there, but I mean, commercial chargers around the area, you can get at
like 18 to 22 cents at commercial places. So if we get competitive, I'm not saying we are now. Yeah. I mean I still even if it was 50 cents, I would probably still plug it in just the peace of mind, right?
>> How does how does a company get the actual hold on >> just the infrastructure? Because what we find with like the accelerated repair program with MSBA is uh for the for themselves on the roof, they just want
you to be solar ready in some situations, you know, based on the town's position and certain bylaws and things like that. >> This is a this is an energy code requirement of the states. It's not the MSBA at all. >> And Dory, there's so many that have to be put in up front, but then a
percentage that have to be infrastructure ready. Correct. >> Yes. Exactly. For future. Yes. >> Yeah. Yeah. And that's just about putting the conduit in the, you know, anticipating that future capacity. Yeah. This is much more about the state's climate goals than the MSBA.
>> So, you have to actually pick an actual station. >> You do have to put in I believe it's 5% of your parking. >> Decide what company to go with. Um, so the previous company we were with, we had an energy consultant work with us on
it. Uh, and we picked a provider that was offering the same technology, um, but at a much reduced cost compared to Charge Point, which is like the most well-known besides a Tesla charger. >> Um, and that didn't pan out so well in
the long run. I just know a lot of um car manufacturers that manufacture EVs for some reason have agreements with Electrify America where they give, you know, two or three years free charging on their vehicles. And I think a lot of
EVs are on that program. Mhm. >> So, I don't know how that, you know, matches up with using them or I mean, but if people are going to buy a new EV, they're going to probably get
free charging with Electrify America. >> Yeah. At participating stations, I believe. >> So, I'm not sure that we would qualify, but it's something worth looking into. >> It is complicated. And yeah, >> no, it's super complicated. I mean,
>> being an EV owner, the amount of options out there and the amount of options that don't work, it's pretty impressive. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I mean, I have an EV as well. >> Yeah. >> That's like big why I built all the superchargers and like they don't work. >> They don't work. >> Just been off forever on the shell
recharge. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> But I do have to say I have a huge solar panel system on my home and I don't pay anything. >> Right. >> Right. Yeah. Yeah. >> Um, so another thing, this is an easy,
this is a softball >> softball. So they asked about whether the district wanted to concern lowfl low toilets and I know the answer. I just wanted to share the answer is no. >> A strong no. >> A good example of where sustainability
kind of gets ahead of reality. >> Nick Nick was like ready to jump out of his seat to answer this question. >> I know I brought that one. Amen. Thank you. >> Um so there's a lot more that will be happening. Um uh what really is uh kind
of also important to know is that uh we have the effort moving forward. I believe the town is working with u collars to find that IRA tax consultant because that we're now at the point where the IRA tax consultant becomes important to talking about the geothermal system. So geothermal is in
the project. Um and there's still um federal tax credits for that project. Um and that was a big part of the the original plan here. So in general, everything's going well with mass safe program. Very happy about it. And we're moving on to the next round. Um we also
did take a look at uh the um lead scorecard as I said and I just thought it's often impossible to understand what the priorities are in the scorecard. So I wanted to summarize some of the highlights on this project, things that are, you know, getting particular
attention on this project. Um, so in the water category, rainwater management, indoor water use reduction, and water metering. Indoor water use is not going to the lowflow toilets though. So that's great. We're just we're very aware of that. um energy optimization because of
the MSBA's um uh additional reimbursement that's associated with the energy um alignment with the opt-in stretch code. Um so that automatically puts us in the high high um point scoring for energy
optimization. Um and tied into that is not only optimized energy use but also commissioning of that system. Grid harmonization is an interesting one because that has to do with basically forming a relationship with the utility that you are as a large user available
and willing to discuss the possibility that if there's a power outage, you would lower your energy use in order to allow them to have a little bit more energy on the grid. So, it's a it's a conversation that they want us to have between the district and the utility. it
doesn't obligate you to participate, but even just having the conversation um is kind of a a lead point and something that we do recommend and if you go that way, it's a it's kind of has some financial benefits to the district. So, it's something we'll talk more about. We did discuss a little bit already. And then the fact that we have this
renewable energy both with the geothermal and the potential for the PV means that we're just really stacked with really good points. uh in the energy category. MSBA's priority is on um um a material product declaration and
air quality. So those are high points uh focus for us. Um there's also environmental product declaration collection which is really not about the chemical nature of the product but where it's coming from and what the life cycle and carbon impact of that is. Um so
those are both categories that we would normally look at. Adding to that, we're in this project um because the codes are starting to require that you assess carbon use all the life cycle of carbon. So um so where building materials come from and how they end their lives. Um
that's going to be in the next version of LEAD a standard requirement. We are prioritizing that on this project as well so that we can actually make good decisions along the way based on that and it won't affect you but it affects us. We're putting more more time and energy into modeling and calculating
that. Um, and then some things that on this project we're also looking at our design for active occupants. It's a point we've gotten on other projects. Doesn't require much, but it really does bring a focus back on middle school health. Um, assessment for resilience was really just about district conversations about how this building
fits into other um kind of community resilience concerns and that that's already taken place. Clean construction is a logical point for a project like this because of in general it being a public building in in a neighborhood. Um and it's a project it's a point we've used we've gotten before and it really
is a collaboration between design and construction. Um and then exterior noise control. you can explain a little bit more than I can, I think, because that's um um >> Yeah. Well, the acoustic consultants were actually out there already and put in some
boxes in trees. So, if you go to Williamsville Middle School and you see a box chained to a tree, that's actually a >> thing taking acoustic uh readings. And then you compare that with uh you know they then model uh how much exterior
noise our mechanical units will produce um and then take some measurements at the end of the project. Um so it's yeah very it's an interesting uh point. >> There are things that can be done in the design of the systems to try and mitigate sound impact in the area. So
we're trying to kind of keep those levels tolerable and not in any way you know become problematic. So part of the process basically design process you wouldn't think about but that what we do. Um the next slide is just showing you uh as a reminder that in schematic design we had anticipated the
possibility of PV in the future. Um and this this first slide shows where our sloped roofs are relative to our flat roofs which >> one one more Marty sorry >> sorry that's our lead scorecard for anybody who has a microscope. Um there you go. That's the sloped and flat roof
plan at that time. As Christian mentioned, we've kind of altered that a little bit. We have more sloped and flat now or than than we had at this stage. Um, and the ridge line has shifted a little bit on the first two volumes. Um, and then uh I think the third we're
we're not 100%. Yeah, I think that's generally right as well. >> Yeah. Um and then the reason we were looking at that is that in schematic design Lynn had asked about PV and its potential impact to the project and had asked us to go and look at that and I don't think we really had a chance in
the meeting to talk about it. So I just want to bring that back um because at that stage we looked at that and tried to calculate that and we also looked at what the advantages are and settled on the idea of planning for a 500 kilowatt KWDC. I can't even tell you what all
that means. Um, array. Um, that's a breaking point on for it's roughly appropriate for this size of project, but also beyond that, you start to have more complex relationships with the utility in in having anything larger than that. So, that keeps us in a kind
of a a quite useful parameter and it's what they estimate is appropriate here. Um, and that would meet roughly at per our energy modeling about 75% of the total energy use of the building. Now, I wouldn't take that to the bank because
there's a lot of design work still to be done, but that's based on the energy model at this point. So, it's clearly a contributor, which is just I think something that you asked um for that data >> and I know the community has expressed a lot of interest in understanding is PV
being looked at or not. and it's it's always been a part of the conversation as we know the question has always been about sequence and when we would want to implement um bringing PV into the project. >> So >> is there a break even on it or we don't we haven't gotten
>> you mean in terms of in terms of the payoff for the investment? Yeah. And I mean I can't tell you at the moment because it's sort of always changing based on the cost of um on of PB, but again it's a public building and the building is going to be around for 50 years and if you have the resources it's
it's more the advantage in a compared to say a homeowner with a school. This is your one-time opportunity for the community to make this investment and then that lowers your operating costs which enables the comm the school district >> to make different investments with their
operating. Absolutely. >> You know budget. >> Yeah. >> So, >> so I know the what we had talked about before was that PB ready versus doing the PV now.
>> Yeah. And the plan that we've talked about was using any of the massive rebates at the end or at least our intent would be that we we would hope the town would reinvest any of the rebates back into the panels at that
time. But it sounds like we might need to have a conversation here offline. >> Yeah. >> About what what the effect that would have on the the DD and going forward. So like saying Lynn, Marty, yourself, >> yeah, >> Lynn, whoever you want to bring in from
that should be having that conversation offline. And what does that do to the >> entire budget and the contingencies that we have out there? And yeah, whether you know >> whether it makes sense to spend $3 million now versus later if that
>> or even later. I mean, I think part of it is just that we want to be sure that you're in the best position for when you want to do that. And if we just say PV ready, honestly, that means conduit and making sure the roof is strong enough to hold it. I mean, that's not actually a large lift, but that also doesn't mean
that you can plug in panels after we leave. So, we're more concerned about being sure, as as you've all heard, coordinating with the utilities is very complicated. So, we just feel it's better in the long run for all of that planning and coordination to be done. Yes.
>> As the project's moving forward. So, it's not that we're necessarily having to jump and spend contingency early so much as it is we're thinking that it might be a good idea to invest in the design effort necessary to be sure it's done in alignment with the building
>> so that you can keep the permitting process, you know, with the utility aligned and I think you'll be in a better position at the end. >> Yeah. And I think it has to match up with the town's larger energy goals as well. >> Yeah. I would imagine it would actually cost potentially less to do it to
include it now versus remobilizing later, going back out to bid, bringing in different contractors and >> and we can optimize the roof. So, think about how many things penetrate a roof at a school. >> Yep. >> So, having us prioritizing this now means that we can actually get you a
better result, I think, in what that roof is going to be able to do as PB. So, >> we definitely take take that outline and have a better discussion about it. >> Yeah. Um and and it just feels like uh partly we did continually hear those questions and felt like we we hadn't answered them
well enough. So just wanted to come back to >> we definitely had those questions from the finance committee and energy and sustainability people. So y >> all right any questions on any of that? Marty, you can go to the last slide just in terms of uh future meetings.
Again, we've already reviewed those ones on the left, but just for the school building committee, rough, very at this point, extremely rough agendas for the meetings going forward uh for next month, talking about site and security, which we're going to meet on soon, and so reporting back to you on that. Um
design updates, like I mentioned earlier, um PV will continue to talk about. January is really when we look at kind of the final floor plans and the exterior elevations and materials because that's really when it's going to the cost estimators that Allan was discussing. And then already in February
is when we're hopefully voting on the DD cost estimate and on the MSBA submission. So um it feels like a long process but then it also feels like it's very fast. So it's a little bit of both. um question. If we're going to talk
about security, would we just plan an executive session for that? >> Depends on how detailed I think they're going to get. >> I mean, I >> I guess I'd put it on the >> agenda as executive session and then we can decide whether we're getting into
details. That shouldn't be out there in the public domain, >> right? So, you're thinking is we would still have the same time, but we would spend part of it in executive session so it could be more. That would be really >> then I would say under four number four of the executive session meetings in Massachusetts >> probably our first executive session.
>> Yeah. >> Any other questions on the calendar? >> Okay. The next meeting's out there from Tammy already. I know that >> December 10th. >> December 10th. >> So, all right. If not, then I would entertain a motion to adjourn. >> So moved. >> Second.
>> Second. >> They have a motion. Second. >> Too late. Marty >> K. >> Yes. >> Chris. >> Yes. >> Lynn. >> Yes. >> Marty. >> Yes. >> My first question. >> Josh. >> Yes. If you said me.
>> Yeah. Carissa. >> Yes. >> Armen. Yes. We are adjourned. Thanks everybody. Appreciate it.