15, 2026. Executive session at 5:00 p.m. and our regular meeting at 6:00 p.m. or as close to the 6 p.m. as possible. This meeting is being held at the Howard Alden Memorial Chambers, Medford City Hall, and via remote participation. This meeting is being recorded. The
meeting can be viewed live on the Medford Public Schools YouTube channel, through Medford Community Media, on your local cable channel, Comcast channel 9, 8, or 22. Bless you. And Verizon channel 43, 45, or 47. Participants can log or call in by using the following Zoom link
and the meeting ID is 9559913874. Member Rouso, if you could please call the role. >> Member Graham >> here. >> Member Masterbon is absent. Member Olady, is he going to be absent or just like >> he's on his way? >> Okay. Um, member Parks
>> here. >> Member Rinfeld >> present. >> Member yes. Uh, present. Mayor Langokarn. Um, five present, one absent, one on their way. If we all may rise to salute the flag, please. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic
for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> We have executive session um upon motion to enter executive session pursuant to Mass General Laws 30A section 21A. executive session
to conduct strategy in preparation with non-union personnel or contract negotiations with non-union personnel specifically but not limited to the assistant superintendent of academics and instructions chief operations officer the director of student services and assistant superintendent of special
education and student services and the human resource director executive session pursuant to 30A section A3 to conduct strategy session on the basis that an open meeting may have a detrimental effect on the bargaining positions of the Medford School Committee. Specifically, the
Medford School Committee will convene an executive session to discuss collective bargaining with Massachusetts Teachers Association regarding a teacher grievance. And the chair so declares an executive session of the Memphis School Committee um pursuant to general law chapter 30A
section 21A to conduct strategy session on the basis that an open meeting may have a detrimental effect on the bargaining positions of the Memphis School Committee. Specifically, the Medford School Committee will be discussing ongoing collective bargaining negotiations with SEIU88 Carpenters Union. And the chair so
declares we will convene in public session following the executive SE session meeting at at approximately 6:00 p.m. Is there a motion for on the floor to go into executive session? >> Motion under executive session >> by member Graham, seconded by member
Rinfeld. Roll call, please. And we'll mark um member Olare present. >> Member Graham. >> Yes. >> Uh member Olady. >> Yes. >> Member Parks. >> Yes. >> Member Einfeld. >> Yes. >> Member So yes. Mayor Lungo Kern. >> Yes. Seven to the affirmative.
Six. So sorry. Six in the affirmative. One absent. Uh motion is approved. Thanks. Ready? Welcome everyone. Thank you for your patience. We've been much much worse at times, but we're in executive session at
5. It's now 6:15. We have a couple things to go through and then we cannot wait to hear um you play. Thank you to our reps, student reps for being here, Ryan and Leo. Happy to have you. Um next up we have our consent agenda. Approval of bills and payrolls, approval of
budget transfers, journal entry 20937 for 114,44894 and approval of meeting minutes from our June 1st, 2026 meeting and our June 8th, 2026 meeting. Is there a motion on the floor? by member Rinfeld, seconded by
>> member Leady. All those in favor? >> All those opposed. Consent agenda is approved. We do not have any reports of our subcommittee and we have a number of reports from our superintendent. First up will be a performance by the middle school string ensemble who re
recently won the gold medal at the statewide MICCA. Congratulations Uh thank you for joining us to celebrate the children's hard work and achievement. I'm just very proud of them and thank you uh all the parents and
administrators and school committee for your continued support for fine arts. They are going to play Cakewalk from Serenate for Strings by Leen without a conductor. Enjoy it.
Hello. We only get one. >> That was beautiful. I just was hope I was hoping for one more. Yeah. You want to take a picture? They're all dissembling very quickly. >> Um, it's up to you. Yeah, >> usually we do a picture.
>> Miss Chang, could we just have a picture with the students? Do they mind coming back? We can we can be right here. >> They don't have to bring all their >> I know. Yeah, that's Thank you.
>> You got two This is fun to school. Sorry, I'm just jumping around. >> No. I'm going to turn it over to our superintendent um for one additional announcement under the Mustang moment.
Thank you very much u mayor. So, the second part of the Mustang moment this evening is just a recognition of the spring athletes for Medford High School. I'm going to just list um the accomplishments. It's been a very busy
season and between graduation already happening and sports kind of actively coming to a close. I just want to make sure that we acknowledge our spring athletes. So this spring, Medford High School enjoyed three GBL Greater Boston League championships and nine postseason
births. So athletes were not, as I said, able to attend, but in order to acknowledge them, the GBL champions are boys lacrosse, girls lacrosse, and girls softball.
The postseason teams were boys lacrosse, girls lacrosse, softball, baseball, girls track, boys track, boys tennis, girls tennis, and crew. I It also says to congratulate the GBL
Allstars, but that vote is being finalized tomorrow. So, I don't have a list of the spring GBL Allstars. We'll make sure that we include that in the Friday memo so that the students are rightfully acknowledged. The timing just
didn't totally line up with the end of the spring season. So, just wanted to make sure that we acknowledge the spring athletes and thank them and acknowledge them for their successes. Thank you. Thank you, Dr. Galooi. Um, next up we
have the Roberts Elementary School HVAC project update and recommendation to approve. Uh, RFS engineering and Mr. Ken Lord, chief operations officer, is here for questions and online. >> I think there was going to be a
request. >> Member Russo, sorry. So, um motion to um take the uh budget item out of order. >> Motion by member Russo, seconded by >> second. >> Member Graham.
All those in favor? >> I. >> All those opposed. Um motion to take the budget paper out of order. So, that's our item number four, budget update and approval. Mr. Jerry McHugh,
budget analyst, and Noel Vez, uh, director of finance. >> Thank you. So, thank you, um, Jerry and Noel for coming here again and all of your hard hard work. I do want to just take a moment to, um, thank publicly the
mayor and her team um, for allocating an additional additional funds to Medford public schools. We were very incredibly grateful for this additional allocation and we deeply appreciated uh the extensive work by her and her team to secure these necessary funds for the
schools. This evening you're going to see um the continued work that we did in reviewing and closing the gap that we had. Um this year has truly been one of review and reflection. And this evening you you will see what was consolidated,
reduced, repurposed and what we were able to um bring back. So again, many thanks to the mayor and I will turn it over to budget analyst Jerry McHugh and our finance director Noel Vez. >> Thank you both very much. Thank you
everyone uh for today. So as you see here on our next slide, we're just going to give a quick review of where we were in our last meeting and where we are now. So originally we had presented a preliminary budget of $89,933,398. Uh the city's uh original general fund
budget um allocation was 87,750,000 which gave us a variance of $2,183,38. Um after the finalization of the city's uh general budget of 89,100,000 we have we came to a variance of 800
$33,398. And over the next few slides we'll talk about um how we closed that gap um to have a balanced budget. So on this slide here uh additional savings needed to close the remaining budget gap. Um, we ended up we ended up
moving approximately well we ended up moving $962,568. Um, and and beneath that you'll see a summary of how we came to that number. We're moving one special education coordinator to our to our fiscal year uh
26 circuit breaker. We're reducing the math high school teaching staff by three. one in ELA, one in science, and one in world language. Uh these are all covered by retirement or non-renewals.
We're reducing the Medford High School vocational program by one early education um staff member due to low enrollment. This staff member will be transferred to an open vocational grant uh funded position. So they u they will still be on the
staff, but they will they will not be affecting our general ledger u budget line. and the correct paraprofessional over staffing over at the Brooks. We're reducing by four paras uh three to be transferred to vocational
programs and one non-renewal. Uh to continue on the narrative, we're reducing one parah at the mituck currently on workers compensation. Um the person who was filling in for that um PAR on workers comp is currently will
still be funded. Uh we'll be discontinuing the parbehavior specialist position over at the Brooks. Um we're going to discontinue a psychologist position funded in the Roberts. Um this position um will be shared between the McGlin Elementary and
the Roberts. We're going to be reducing one academic support position at the high school currently assigned to the vocational program. And also we found um other areas of savings in non-unit salary schedules um
versus actual um budget cost. >> That's all you >> Yeah. Just just wanted to add that um you know the the teachers at the high school were a result of um you know um
uh we were informed by the schedule uh that was developed. We did the um we we did something different this year. We scheduled the students first. uh and so it's the case that um all the
sections are completely covered and we have uh three extra positions as a result and and that work is actually continuing um with the paras um we you know I guess
what I would call it is position creep. Uh we had um uh special ed directed looked at the uh regulatory requirements for staffing and based on that
we can repurpose those par professionals to other vacant positions. Um we did also um manage to get a few uh extra savings. We got we had the state earmark for our vocational program ban.
Um so we'll be able to save uh $50,000 in our budget for that. We we reduced uh slightly the um the asks from the academic directors. These were for supplies of materials that covered uh
challenge courses, um electives, um high quality instructional materials, uh things like that. So, they still will have a sufficient budget to to make those per purchases. Um and then we were able to um reduce
the um waste management account. we kind of rightsize that to what we're actually spending with them. And uh the same thing with a copy of lease in the vocational program. We were just slightly overbudgeted for that.
Um so this is also in addition to closing the budget gap, we we wanted to put back some spending that was previously cut. So, we're proposing to add back the art teacher at the high school and the inclusion specialist
districtwide. Um, and then, um, additional funds to fully fund our professional development plan for next year. And, uh, adding, uh, even though we cut contracted
maintenance, we're adding $50,000 back. Um, so we're pretty close to what was asked for in that account. So, this is just a recap of um the elements as how we will close the budget gap. And u
we got that down to zero because we want to be able to make sure we're aligned with the uh funds the city provides for us. Uh and then just a a recap of what the final budget will
look like bottom line. So be happy to answer any questions you might have on this. >> Thank you for the presentation. Any questions or any motions from the chair for the chair?
Anybody from the committee before I go to the students? Do you want to speak? Yes, the students. Yes. Feel free to sit down if you'd like. >> Well, that's okay. They have a microphone there.
>> Um, member Master Bon's chair, Cat, if you don't mind. >> Um, yeah, it's a relatively small thing. I just noticed that um you said you saved some on the um like u non-unit salary schedules versus actual budget
cost. What was what is the sort of for people that are watching or for people like me that might be Westl could you maybe expand on what that means? >> Okay. Um so uh most of our employees belong to a
union and the there's contracts negotiated over salaries and terms and conditions of work. Uh but there are a handful or more than a handful but there's there's probably about 50 or 60 positions that are we call non-unit. So
they're not affiliated with the contract. So, their salary is set by school department policy >> and um we uh budget money every year in order to give those people uh some
raises and it turns out that what we uh what we gave out in raises came in less than what we budgeted for. So, that created some budget savings and that we can put it towards um that budget gap that we had.
>> Wonderful. Thank you. >> Ryan, you want to come up? Um, first of all, I just want to say uh thank you for doing the budget and um I think it's great that we got the deficit to $0. I think that's awesome. Um, one
question is could you go more in depth to the open vocational grant funded position? Is that like a position to any of the vocational shops or just a open one that's going to do everyone? Can you go more in depth of that?
>> Dr. Galooi, >> thank you. I could speak to that one. So, that one is still kind of being figured out in terms of the needs of the vocational program. Next year we're bringing in two new shops, right? So, information systems and plumbing are
coming on board. And so, the Mr. Fallon is working between um many of the grant opportunities. As we all know, he was also awarded $1.75 million um in a grant to help bring these new
programs on as well as develop the others. So part of this position would be in support of new teachers, existing teachers, and existing programs that may need a little bit of extra support. Um once we have that finalized, we can kind
of give you an update, but it's still being worked on. >> All right. Um just just a quick question. What is an informationational support? >> Information systems. >> Yeah. Information. Yeah, sorry.
>> That's okay. I would information systems is a CT it'll be a new CTE shop and within that shop students learn the various uh levels of information systems both in
the um I believe it's in the um I'm looking at Dr. but in the IT networking field. Um, but I can find more specifics for you, Ryan. >> All right.
>> If you'd like, >> I would like that. Okay. >> All right. Thank you guys again. >> Thank you, Ryan. Any questions or is there a motion on the floor? >> Member Rouso? Motion to approve the FY27 budget
>> by member Russo. Seconded by member Reinfeld. Roll call. >> Member Graham. >> Yes. >> Member Master Bon's absent. Member Olady. >> Yes. >> Member Parks. >> Yes. >> Member Rinfeld. >> Yes. >> Member Russo. Yes. Mayor Long Kern.
>> Yes. Six in the affirmative, one absent. Uh fiscal year 27 budget has been approved. Thank you for your work and thank you for your presentation. Motion to revert back to the regular order of business by member Russo. Seconded by member Lady.
All those in favor? All those opposed. We are reverting back to superintendence report number two, Roberts Elementary School HVAC project update and recommendation to approve RFS engineering and Mr. Ken Lord, chief operations officer to present. Welcome.
>> Thank you. Um, so tonight we're going to hear the uh feasibility study and options for the Robert's accelerated repair program for HVAC and roof replacement. Uh, the we have Brian Lar Ro from PCA 360 here is going to do most of the presentation. He can introduce his team. Sure.
>> Thanks very much for having us tonight. Uh, and again I'm with PCA 360. We're the OPMS uh, for the project. So this uh Robert's Elementary School project is uh partially being funded through the MSBA accelerated repair program. Uh so I know
that you had a presentation just recently on the new high school which is their core program. So it's a little different than the high school project. Uh so the accelerated repair program follows slightly different uh parameters. Uh so we'll get into a little bit of that as we go through the
presentation. Um so we're very early. Uh if you could go to the next slide. uh we're very early in the process with the MSBA and so uh in this particular program uh in the beginning we have to study three options for how we're going
to replace the HVAC systems and electrify the building basically using heat pump technology. Uh so we have completed the initial study of the building and then looked to see what would be appropriate for the three options. So we're presenting them to you
tonight. Um, and the idea is after tonight, uh, we'll, or I guess you have a little bit more time, maybe a week or so, when we hear your your decision, uh, we're going to take that one design and develop it up to the schematic, uh, design level. Uh, the MSBA before we
submit to the MSBA board requires that we've selected one option and we've developed it to schematic level. So, tonight you're seeing feasibility uh, very early in the design. and we've only really been in the the process for about 6 weeks. Um, and so that's where we're
at right now. In the MSBA flowchart, the red star you can see where we're at in the process. So, in the uh as we move forward uh through the project, uh we'll move into uh funding the project and that's really a two-part uh process. The
first part is we present uh the schematic design package to the MSBA board. that will happen at the end of August uh for the October 28th board meeting. Uh and then once the board uh then votes uh then they'll kick it back to the city uh to appropriate the funds
for the project and then once the city has appropriated the funds then we will be able to move into the detailed design. Uh so uh I'll tell you a little bit more about schedule. If you could go to the next slide please. Uh as you can see uh from here as I
mentioned we're in the early phase of the project feasibility schematic design. Um and uh we have uh we'll be before you again before we finalize the scope. We'll come back with the schematic design presentation and ask for your approval before we make a
submission to the MSBA. Uh so that will be happening uh mid August uh when we'll come before you. Uh so that will have to be scheduled. Uh and then uh after that uh we uh like I said we would go through these approval process between the MSBA
and the city that takes us to about the first of the year and then right at in the beginning of the first of the year we're going to uh develop the design to a level we can go out to bid for the project. The goal for our project is we want to get your project out to bid and
awarded with plenty of time so that we can use summer 27. Uh there's quite a long process of getting through submitts and shop drawings and ordering equipment and so forth before we can do anything in the field. Uh the summers are extremely short and we have to make sure
that we have all of the planning in place well in advance to make sure that we make uh the summer a success. Uh so we see this project as a two summer project. Um and you know we have two options to present to you. Um each one is a little bit different in terms of
its uh timing and again we'll get into that a little bit as we get further into the presentation. Uh so with that uh I just want to talk slightly about the accelerated repair program. So next slide please. Uh I know I watched the presentation
that was made to you and there was a discussion about um re how the MSBA reimbures in a core project and you know what's the effective reimbursement rate on an accelerated repair project. There aren't as many exclusions to the project. So, I know your reimbursement
rate from the MSBA is 53 uh.32. Um, you know, there there will be probably a few things will be exempt, but generally speaking, if we stay with the program of replacing the HVAC systems and the roof and making the ADA upgrades, it's generally all uh
reimburseable. So, that's the good news about this project. It's only if we start adding on other scopes. For example, I know it might come up tonight if we add solar to the to uh this design team's scope, the MSBA wouldn't reimburse for that. Uh but it certainly
could be part of the project. So what we're uh presenting to you tonight is largely all part of the program following the the uh uh the requirements. Uh so everything is pretty much uh reimburseable. Change orders of course with the MSBA are subject to
their final approval. Um anyhow so the uh again you're getting a very good reimbursement rate uh of 53.32 and um with that I just would like to talk to you uh briefly about the scope before I turn it over to our uh engineering team. Um so as I mentioned
it's a roof replacement as part of this uh and because of the size of the project we will trigger ADA compliance. The building is not that old. It's uh was built in or opened in uh 2003. So at
that time we had ADA. So the building is basically uh compliant. Uh but we did have a code and consultant go through the building and they did an extensive evaluation and there are a few things that we do have to do. You know there's a code hook in the wrong spot. The
mirror's too high. The toilet's a little bit too close to the wall. So there's those types of things that we have to do. and in all they amount to about 500,000 for a building of that size is really not significant. Uh so the good news is we're not adding an elevator or anything sizable like that. These are
all fairly small moves. Um and then um so on the roof, let me just touch a little bit on that. Um so the existing EPDM roof uh is at its end of its useful life, so it needs to be replaced. So we do have options on the roof replacement.
Uh the MSBA asked us to look at a uh recote which gets you about 10 years more of life, but we know that the uh city wants to move forward with solar. So we know that that's not a viable option for you. And so when we present the schematic design package to the MSBA, we'll let them know that if we're
putting solar in the roof, which I know you want, and that's a goal of the city, uh we need a new roof on there that's going to have the full life of the roof before you put solar. That way the roof warranty and the solar system match in terms of their uh how long that they can
be on the roof. Uh so what we'll present to you in the budget later on is a roof replacement uh with a uh PVC system uh 80 mil because that's what solar uh needs. Um so that is already baked into the scope of what we're considering at
the moment. Uh then we get into the HVAC uh and our team uh from Risk Frost Engineering is going to go through that in detail. The only other thing that we're as a team looking at is uh making the building future ready for full electrification. Uh making sure
that we're sizing the electrical service so that uh as time moves on that the work we do now is set the building up for that. So we'll get into that a little bit more in the presentation. Uh so with that uh I am going to turn over uh the presentation. Uh just a moment if
the risk for us team want to come up. Uh I'll just finish with uh the next slide on the roof just to give an overview of the project. Um so the school here uh aerial view you see on the left corner there is already an existing mechanical
well uh and the building. So all of the equipment uh the rooftop equipment is inside this enclosure which is an acoustic enclosure. So that's something that's going to come up in our presentation that we'll talk about a bit a little bit later. you know, there's an option where all the equipment fits in
with this existing uh infrastructure and then there's a third option where the equipment has to go on the higher roof and now we get into considerations with noise uh and making sure that we address that in the project. Um, but we're looking at uh replacing entirely all of
the black area uh with new roofing systems. And if you could go over to the next slide. Um, I talked just briefly about some of this, but as I said, the roof is at its end of its useful life. Edge flashings, uh, especially that well
that I was just describing where the mechanical equipment, there's a lot of active leaking. The roof has been infrared studied, so we know there are some points of failure even on the upper roof where roof insulation has uh gotten wet, and it there's quite a bit of it.
Um, so when we move into the next phase, we'll be looking at options of whether we can reuse and augment any of the insulation to save money. And that's something we'll be studying a little bit further as we get into this. Uh, but for the moment, uh, what we're presenting to
you tonight assumes a full roof replacement, including the insulation. That way, we can get down to the roof deck and put in, uh, the proper membrane, uh, for, uh, vapor control. Um so that's uh what we're considering right now and um next slide we can kind
of briefly go right through I already talked about uh code compliance. It's largely ADA uh because of the scale of the project uh and the assessed value of the building we exceed 30% threshold and at that we have to look at full uh
compliance with accessibility. Uh so that's why we're considering it. Um, okay. I will stop talking and I'll come back at the end and we'll talk about the options. >> Thank you. >> Sure. Thank you. >> Welcome.
>> Thank you. >> Hello everyone. My name is Goshi. I am senior uh mechanical engineer at RFS Engineering. And with me today is >> I'm Stratton Nub, the project executive with RFS Engineering.
Griffin Sanange, mechanical engineer, project manager. >> Thanks for having us today. Um, everybody can hear me? Okay. Okay, great. I'm going to start with uh some slides regarding heating, ventilation, and air conditioning options. Um,
starting with uh describing what we have for existing conditions. So, if you don't mind moving on to the next slide, please. Thank you. Um the current building have um a whole bunch of systems. We have a bunch of air
handlers. We have um so basically you have um four uh three air handling units. One is serving uh calf and another unit is serving uh gym um and then there's another unit that is serving office and admin areas. All
these three units are located inside a mechanical room. Um and the uh cooling source for these is an existing chiller that is inside that well that we just were talking about just a few slides earlier. And um the heating source for
those units is a uh two uh uh uh boilers, gas fired boilers. Um the classrooms um majority of them are served with unit ventilators. So there's uh the air hand they're not served by air handling units but they
are served by uh unit ventilators. So the so the uh air conditioning and ventilation is done through the unit ventilators. Um most of this equipment is uh approaching end of life um you know ranging from 15 to 25 year life
expectancy uh and um should be replaced. The um one part that I uh neglected to mention so far is that the air handling units have um uh the the cooling system is
refrigerant based. Uh it's outdated. Uh the aircooled condensing units and the refrigerant systems uh that go along with it are 410A systems that are now obsolete um and also in uh pretty rough shape. Moving on to the next slide. Uh
here what I'd like to talk about is what we've done so far for um studying the the um heating and air conditioning and um ventilation options um and in in particular uh what you know what we uh bring to table as far as the thermal
energy sources. So in in light of the electrification uh we've looked at three different options um and and uh we're presenting to you what we've evaluated so far. Um generally heat pumps use um they're all
electric systems and um they use different sources to extract heat um uh from a particular source whether it be an air or ground source and um and that's what we're presenting. So we have three options. Option one is a air to
water source heat pump where um the heat pumps are um utilizing air to draw heat uh in or in and out of the building. Um you can think of the heat pump as a uh in a simple terms it's kind of like a
refrigerator in a house. So a house being the outside and the refrigerator being the actual conditioned space that is serving. Uh the only difference between that and this is the scale of things and um what heat pumps do is
they're also reversing. So um in a technology they can provide heating and cooling and sometimes simultaneous heating and cooling too. So technologies evolved a lot uh when it comes to heat pumps. Um and I'll go a little more in detail on the next few slides. The option two that we've studied is the
ground source or also called geothermal option. uh where um the uh source of energy is essentially earth. You know, heat sink uh is used to um take the heat out of
the building in in summer months and putting into the earth and then draw back in in winter months to heat the building. Um the third option that we um are looking at is air source heat pump options. This is sort of a hybrid option uh where we look at the VRF systems
combined with air to water source heat pump for reheat. I'll get into that a little more um detail shortly here. Um each of these options reduce um uh energy use and also lowers emissions. Um and uh
the options vary in cost, complexity and incentives. So each one of them have pros and cons and what they uh bring to the uh to the table. Next slide is um option one air to water source heat pump. So like I described earlier in
this particular option um the air water source heat pumps are going to be located inside the the well and uh are going to be used to um provide heating uh and cooling and uh they have an inherent uh problem not problem
limitation uh where they stop operating at a certain ambient conditions so require a backup source uh which would be boilers. uh and the boilers will only be used as a backup when the temperatures go
sub-zero. Um the in this option when intend to do is is uh the existing air handling units we like to replace certain things. For example, all of these existing air handling units have uh refrigerant coils
in them. Uh those will be replaced with uh hot water chill water coils. Um and we're going to modify controls, add controls uh to the air handling units for better modularity and um efficiency.
So currently out of the three air handling units, one is a variable air volume system while the others are constant and with constant means the fans running all the time using a lot more energy. So introducing introducing intelligent controls will help save us
energy. All the termining uh All the terminal units that are inside the building will be replaced with new primarily because they're all designed for higher water temperature associated with boilers
whereas uh heat pump technology provides lower water temperatures. So everything needs to be replaced with kind however size for appropriate water temperature. The uh any questions so far on this air
to water source heat pump. Okay. Next option is the geothermal ground source heat pump option. Um the thermal source is essentially geothermal wells. We have a slide coming that kind of shows uh you know how the
wells are laid out. Um and this the uh difference between this and and the uh previous option is that u um all the equipment is indoors. So the heat pumps actually reside inside mechanical room which is um the the current mechanical
room have enough space to accommodate them. That's where we think they would go. Um and so we don't think that is additional mechanical room requirements for that. Um what happens is that there is there are pumps that pump uh water from geothermal fail field to the
mechanical room goes through the heat pump. That's where the uh conversion happens. That's where you reject and and absorb the heat and then you use additional set of pumps for heating and cooling and and and supply to the building and that um would mean
replacing any refrigerant coils in in the air handling unit system. So essentially what we do with the air handling unit systems in the previous option this is the same except that you know um the source is different. Same goes for terminal heating devices. Same
thing uh you know the water temperatures are much um not as hot as the the boiler system. So you're you know you're talking about 120 to 130°ree water versus 180 plus minus. So um the
uh it requires all the terminal heat devices to be changed. That includes VAV boxes, cabinet unit heaters, propeller unit heaters and uh your uh uh unit ventilators or any you know uh perimeter fin tube stuff like that.
Will you go on to the next slide please? that sort of shows um about 60 plus minus um geothermal wells intended to be about 800 uh ft deep into the earth and they're sort of staggered. Uh one of the
key uh uh note about the geothermal wells is that the actual bore is roughly around 8 to 10 inches round. But they because they're a heat sink they require um uh more you know separation between each
um bore so that they can they can perform well. So they're staggered that way and they take a little more space. I think usually typically is a 20 uh 25 um uh diameter um around them. Any questions on geothermal?
Okay. The next one, the last option that we've um uh put forth here is the air source heat pump. So airsource heat pump also sometimes referred to as uh refrigerant or VRF systems. Um and in addition to
that because we need um reheat water uh it's sort of a hybrid so a small portion of that system will also be a air to water source heat pump. The location of the equipment will be mostly outside. Uh most of the heat pumps will
go in the same geothermal well. That's that's the intent. And then both refrigerant and water pipes will go into the building to serve uh you know miscellaneous terminal heating and cooling devices. Um this will also
include replacing the existing units with uh package rooftop units uh air source heat pumps. Um that will also have energy recovery. the um the there will be a a backup option
required for the air to water source heat pump. So we will be using boilers for that. uh uh the terminal um you units for this option we will have new unit heaters, new VAV boxes, new radiators and then
most of the cooling and heating for for majority of the spaces will be done through um uh VRF style ceiling cassettes and that sort of thing. They're fan coil units essentially sometimes called AC units u and that's how uh the building will be conditioned.
Moving on to the next slide. I'm going to pass uh this uh to Griffin here for some but before I move on any questions on the third option. We can also come back to all these things later. Go ahead Griffin. >> Yep.
>> So yeah. So so we understand that Medford is interested in planning for the future for future electrification. So we we're with this project though it's just a retrofit of the headend systems. We are we are going to be planning for the next step of this
school. Um so we're going to be making sure that one of the big one of the only archite major architectural changes is upsizing the main electrical room. So we have a couple options of where we're thinking that could go. But we're going to make sure that we have enough capacity for not only this current
project but for the f for future um solar as well as eventually when the domestic water heater needs to get off of uh be converted from gas to electric. We'll also have space there as well. So in doing this it'll make the next future
electri electrification project um more reasonably priced. Um, and regarding the solar panels, we did do a study which I'll get into um, shortly. Um, like Brian said, we are planning to upgrade the roof and make
sure that uh, structural structurally that we'll be prepared to in the future put PV um, or solar panels. Um, we will also be in this scope that we got priced, um, we're going to be putting down, um, empty conduits from this new main
electrical room up to the roof so that this PV project will be streamlined and it'll just be majority just a project up on the roof and we'll have everything already ready. Um,
you go to the next slide, please. So, this is the preliminary layout. Um so we're showing two different um studies we did. The first one is the base which like goshi mentioned option one and two where we're going to be
reusing the air handlers. Um so we have we approximated approximated about 14,000 square ft of solar panels. um which will come out to about 250,000 to 285,000 kilwatt hours per year which will offset
the utility cost about 10 15% for the school. This will also offset about 20 to 25% of the emissions as well eventually when we move on to the PV. Um and then on the right is if we decide to
go with a um option three, which would be um new air handlers on the roof with energy recovery. So it's just reduces the space needed for those air handlers to about 9,000 square ft. Um but it still leaves plenty of room for getting
some renewable energy onto the site. And um Okay, can you go to the next slide, please? So I think the the important point here on the three options is is what do they what do they cost? So be presenting the
the life cycle cost analysis that we did. So in order to do this we build a computer model of the building. We uh declare what systems options are going to be the insulation hours of operations. A lot of these things are
assumptions at this time, but we've it's been set up so it's equal on all three options and we can do a comparison. Um, so and this shows um the capital
cost of just the HVAC systems on the uh the left column there. So you can see that the the cheapest capital the least capital cost is the airto water heat pump system. Um this may be a little counterintuitive
if you've seen this if you've seen uh airsource heat pump on other projects but it has to do with the nuance nuances of this project specifically that we are removing the unit ventilators. The unit ventilators as goshi mentioned not only
um they poke through the exterior wall in order to um air condition the space but also for the ventilation. So if we remove those we have to add back in ventilation which is the dedicated outdoor um energy recovery unit that
goshi mentioned. So that is why uh that the capital costs of option three are are a bit higher. Um and the the costs of the option two the ground source heat pump that differential comes mostly from
the drilling that is required. So the middle column shows the uh the total project costs um and then the the far right shows the differential. Uh if we move to the next slide, what
you'll see here are incentives. Um so tax credits in Mass Save that can help to offset some of these costs. Massave provides incentives for all heat pump projects. So we've we've uh we've put
those in the far right column. You get slightly uh higher incentive for the ground source heat pumps. The other benefit of the ground source heat pumps is is the tax credits. We've worked with a um with a with a company to help
estimate what tax credits might be available uh for this project. It's important to understand that these are a snapshot of the incentives and tax credits at this point in time. These are
ever changing and and and not guaranteed. Um so if we move to the next slide I think that this is an important slide to show uh the difference in performance
for the building as it currently stands um in comparison to what we are proposing. So this what this slide is showing is energy use intensity. So that is how much energy in in uh KBTU per
square foot per year and this equalizes across systems. So it's uh it's re it does not consider the the source of um the energy. So you may be the source may be a coal fired plant providing
electricity. It might be a hydroelectric dam providing electricity or it might be on-site combustion. But this equals it out to just how much energy in KBTUs is being used. So you'll see all the systems, the heat pump systems are far
more efficient than the existing system. And um they're they're all in the same order of uh magnitude which is 40 to 50% less than the existing system. So in the
next slide um is calculating the CO2 emissions and you'll see this is not directly analogous to the um to the energy use intensity. This is
specific to carbon. Um so again all options will be uh will be a significant reduction from the existing system. The red indicates uh fossil fuel heating.
So, so the gas we we will still plan to have some gas in the building for domestic hot water and the backup boilers. Um Griffin mentioned that we're setting up the electrical upgrades so
that all of this can become electric at some point in the future. The electric portion is in is in yellow. Um and then the PV the uh so the potential reduction is 30 40% depending
on the option but uh and then the as Griffin mentioned the a future PV array could offset further another 20 25%. So we're not PV is not included in this project but we're setting it up so so it
can be solar ready. And in the next slide, um, get down to brass taxes here. What is the energy cost? So, currently, um, and I'd like to explain that currently the model is showing $290,000
for an annual energy cost. This is not this does not reflect your exact utility bill from the previous year. Um this is this is a model which is dependent on um a prescribed
uh year of heating and cooling versus you as as you know every year varies whereas last winter was 2025 was fairly warm 2026 was was colder. This is sort of an indication from an average year.
Um so what what you'll see here is that all the uh the annual costs are predicted to be less. There's a slight uh difference between each of the options. Um the red
indicates the gas the fossil fuel and the yellow indicates electric. >> Yeah sure. Just one just one more one more one more one more one more one more one more one more one more one more one more one more more point to note about that is that this is um you know direct comparison it's it's modeling but we
think that you may actually be end up uh paying less because we're also incorporating more controls so more um you know turndowns and scheduling and things like that so to reduce help reduce you know consumption and so we
also think that there's more to this than what you see >> that means it'll be a smarter building the the costs that we've included do in in uh account for a controls upgrade. Um not not only for the new systems but
tying into the systems that that will remain such as uh the existing domestic hot water boilers etc. Um and then the the the next slide shows a 25 year life
cycle. Um so this includes the capital costs in green and the um the energy costs. So which would be in the red. So you can see that and we went through this on the
capital costs of the HVAC system that option one has the lowest capital cost but it does have higher annual energy costs. So that the important thing is to look at this uh together as as a whole
and what will the costs be over time. So ground source heat pump has the reverse. It has the highest capital costs but the lowest operating costs. The uh as goshi described the the ground is a more
efficient heat sink than the air. That's because it remains a fairly consistent temperature. Whereas when you're trying to reject heat in the summer, it's hot out. When you're trying to reject cold air in the uh cold in the winter, it's cold out. So you lose a little bit of
efficiency there. So ground search heat pump is the um most efficient. Um we and then in option three which is the uh the airsource heat pump hybrid option we
have uh high capital cost as well. Um and then uh the the cap the operating costs are are somewhere are somewhere in between. The the um primarily the reason for that
and you know you can ask the question like why is the because they're very similar the air source heat pump and air to water source heat pump very similar technology. So why does it look like this? The reason for that is because in this third option, we're replacing a lot of equipment.
So all the air handlers are going on the roof. You know, there's all the conditioning air conditioning systems are completely just being replaced with new. Um so that's why you can you can see the first you know uh the the capital cost is that high for that specific reason
>> and and the energy cost is is slightly lower is there's contributions from the fact that we are replacing the air handling systems to account for or to add energy recovery. The important note, if you remember back to the solar slide, is because we have to put equipment on
the roof, there isn't sufficient room in the mechanical room to add air handling units with energy recovery. They have to go up on the roof. Then you lose space for solar. So that's another consideration there. Um and then finally on the next slide uh
gives the o overall picture comparing um the life cycle costs of each of the three o options. Um and ultimately whereas the low energy
costs um start to help the geothermal come into line with the airto water heat pump. There is a significant uh capital cost investment to that as well as
uh a more disruptive project. So, one of the very tricky things here is the limited amount of time that we have each year to work on this project in the summer months. We're assuming two two summers. Um I think it would be very
difficult to do two two summers with the geothermal plus it is more disruptive on the site. So, um, if we go to the final, if we do the final slide before we hand
it back to, um, to Brian. >> Sure. >> No. >> Um, so, a lot of technical uh, information and, uh, it's hard to convey it in sort of a short uh, quick format. uh but I I wanted to take this chance
just to talk a little bit in a higher level uh how the the different options stack up because I think this is kind of important as we start to get into the decision of which option. So for me, not an engineer, um I figured I'd sort of
relay it in in the way I think. Option one, when we as a team got together and looked at the school and looked at the school year, we were trying to come up with an option that was pretty different than some of these others. So I think some of you might realize that we don't
have energy recovery uh shown in option one. What we're doing in this particular one is trying to minimize the amount of work that we have to do out in the educational areas. We're tailoring the scope to be within the mechanical areas up on the roof. Uh what we're trying to
do is create a project that is uh cost-effective uh gets us a significant energy savings, also works with the school calendar and works with the building itself. Um so as we get into some of these other options
so for example between option one and option two uh option um sorry three option three has energy recovery. So in that option you've got to put um dedicated outdoor air units up on the high roof that takes away from solar. So
not producing as much uh electricity on solar has an offsetting gain. So we felt like option one had a benefit with maximizing solar but yes true does not have energy recovery. So what happens with energy recovery is um like bathroom
exhaust and and uh air that we leave the building and energy recovery you capture that heat energy before it leaves and then recycle it and put it back in the building. But that is requires a significant amount of duct work uh throughout the building duct shafts. So
option three means that we need to take some educational areas to put this infrastructure in place to drive new air shafts that don't exist in the building. Option one doesn't have that. So I just want to make sure that these are some sort of distinctions um in a less
technical way because uh that's how I think. Um so the option two um we have to replace all of the piping in the building. Uh we use a refrigerationbased system. So, we're in every ceiling, every classroom throughout the building
to do option three. Option one reuses all of the existing distribution piping in the building with that system, which means again we're in the mechanical rooms. Very different uh projects between option one and option three. Uh
option three is very invasive to the building. Um like I said, we're in every space. So, I just want to make sure that's clear as we move forward and start to talk a little bit more about uh you know, some of the pros and cons. Um, and the team here has done a great job
talking about costs. My next slide will talk a little bit more about that side by side so you can see it. Um, and they've already talked about the energy savings and so forth. Um, the other distinction that I wanted to make with option one is that we have uh you can
leave that slide up, that's fine. um the existing enclosure um that's on the roof has an acoustic uh surround. So option one, we're able to stay within that. Option three, we have to uh look at studies for in the next round. If you decide that's what we want to do, we now
have to study the acoustics. We haven't gotten to that point yet. Um okay, so cost. Um so option uh 1 2 and three I owe you a total project budget which I will give you at schematic design but at
this point uh it's still pretty early. We're still flushing out some of the scope. Um so what we have for you here what we've modeled uh for option one for backup heat we're saying electric boilers. That's the cost we have here.
um just we had to pick a number but that's a point of in when we get into schematic design um I'm sure we'll have other meetings with you and we can get into whether we replace the boilers with new condensing gas fired boilers or we
stick with the electric and then we have discussions in schematic design to talk about how does the building have uh protective heat so what happens when there's a prolonged power outage how are you going to keep that building maintained ed with heat. If you have an
electric boiler, then you have to then upgrade the electric generator to run the electric boiler. But if you kept the electric, the gas fired boilers, then you wouldn't have to upgrade that system. So there are a lot of nuances um that we would have to make uh decisions
once we move into the next phase. But for now, we're trying to keep it fairly high level. So in terms of the cost, what you have before you for option one is an electric boiler. Uh all three options have the roof replacement the same. All three options have the ADA uh
500,000. Um and then um I put the incentives there and then uh what I uh forecasted for the MSBA reimbursement and then put the city share at the end so that you could look. So with that, we've given you an awful lot of information and I know some of you have
some pointed questions for us and we're happy to answer those. Oh uh yeah thank you. Um the slide I have on the screen the numbers in the middle column at the bottom vary slightly. Uh the incentive line um there
was a miscalculation. It only captured the um uh the federal tax credits. It didn't capture the mass save. So the middle option on incentives the number increased about a million. So from your handout that you were given uh in
advance that is the one difference on that slide. So it does make the middle option uh different in terms of uh cost compared to option three. So thank you for that Ken should
any questions from the committee or is that a lot to digest and member Graham? Thank you. I just wanted to say thank you for the presentation. Um this is like super technical stuff and it's very
clear. Um at least I think I'm clear on on what what all you are going to do. But I think um it was really helpful to see some of the trade-offs that in real time that we're having to consider as we do this around like disruption to this
the school year and the school day and how invasive all the options are and um to clearly sort of summarize all of that and wrap it up in a bow of how much it's going to cost. Um it was very very clear and easy to follow. So thank you for
that. Um, for I'll just say for me like I think the the option one seems to be a clear answer for us for the Roberts at the moment given all the sort of totality of all of those factors and in
particular knowing that we have um two more of these coming down the pike um through the MSP accelerated repair program. So, um, I'll yield to my colleagues, but I'm happy to make a motion. Um, one option
>> in just a bit. >> Member Reinfeld, member Russo, member Parks, then Leo, >> I was just hoping you could comment. Thank you. I agree this was a presentation that communicated what we needed to know um,
efficiently. Is the performance and maintenance plan similar? I know we saw the operational costs, but in terms of disruption over the course of the lifetime like we we've seen a lot of educational things get interrupted in order to be servicing. Are the lifetimes similar of these
systems? >> Similar. They're all heat pumps. >> Okay. >> They're they're different. But I know sometimes some you said some of them is re reusing existing systems and doing some of that upgrade from the get-go. But are we looking at >> changes?
>> So we we would be using existing piping and duct work for uh option one and two and some for option three whereas option three would have a lot of new piping and and duct work. And is the new is the I guess I'm asking are are new things more
likely to be rob more more robust or >> I would say not necessarily because all HVAC equipment has a life expectancy. So you know for example motors have their life expectancy, compressors have theirs. Um there is a lot of good
technology out there. Obviously has improved in the last 20 years. Uh but it still has a so that's why the life cycle cost analysis >> but there aren't noticeable differences across the three. >> Uh they're very similar. >> Okay. >> Yeah. They're very similar in nature because the heat pump technology is
almost identical. just it's just the source that where the energy is coming from is different but the technology is very similar and um I just had a a thought. So one of the things that um sorry I just stuck my mind aside.
>> No I I think your question too gets into if we're reusing the piping piping doesn't have a 25 year lifespan. It has a much longer lifespan. So one of the things that we'll be doing once we make pick a direction we would do some metal
metallurgical testing to that piping to assess its condition at this early phase. We believe it's all able to be reused in terms of its size but we would want to make sure that its condition is we're not going to be dealing with piping failures in five years.
>> Right. You're not expecting that putting these new systems into that is going to one one source is going to affect it diff differently than the other? >> No, our expectation is the life expectancy of the system when it's complete will be the same across all of them. >> Do you have a sense of what that
expectancy is? >> Yeah. So we ex uh in the life cycle cost analysis what we've uh um tried to uh measure is that about 25% of your equipment would be expected to be
replaced u in 15 years and then in 25 years all of it will need to be replaced and the only exception to that is that in a geothermal system and that's why the bar was lower is that you don't need to replace the the the well field the
fields life expectancy is 50 years but as far as the heat pump technology the you know the indoor or outdoor equipment it's anywhere from 15 to 25 years they vary everything varies um so it's hard to just put one number to it but that's
why we estimate that you know historically it's 25% of it gets replaced uh in 15 years and then um everything gets replaced in 25 and current systems right now is that almost at the end of their life expectancy. >> Thank you. That's really helpful for
fitting into the context of other work we're doing in the district and then across the city as well. So, thank you. >> Thank you. >> Member Russo, then member Parks, then Leo. >> Thank you for the presentation. Um I did
read it ahead of time and uh I I've been the geothermal or die guy for a while now. Um, but I'm definitely um going to make a motion to choose option one. Thank you, >> Member Parks.
>> Um, thank you for the presentation and yes, I mean, you made a great um, case for option one. Just a few questions. Um, and I will I had a lot more. I will keep them brief. Um, in terms of how you modeled the
um, the different options, I see that kind of your your fossil fuel heating kind of looks the same across the board for the three options. Um, how does that work if the geothermal
doesn't actually have a backup heating source? Because I think you modeled using the gas boiler backup. No, it's the kitchen and the domestic hot water heater. >> Okay. So, you modeled using electric as your backup. >> Electric backup. >> Okay. Yep.
>> Perfect. Um, and then so that was factored into the pricing for these is buying a new electric boiler, not reusing the old gas boiler as it said in I think it said in one of the slides or something. >> Yeah, the the modeling is assume all all
options electric boiler. >> Okay, perfect. That was one of my questions. Um the other one is in terms uh you noted that you're installing um empty conduits for the PV. Have you
considered installing the footings for the PV at all? Um I've worked on projects where there's been issues with warranties and membranes and um dealing with that. Um have you ever considered installing the footings for the panels?
Yeah, the um that the reason that we were looking at 80 mil uh roofing membrane is so that it could be a ballasted system so that you wouldn't have to put uh any penetrations through the roof. Okay. >> Uh so the um the recovery board underneath the roof would be designed uh
with a higher density anticipating the solar but our uh goal would be not to penetrate that roof with the new solar system. >> Okay, good. Perfect. Thank you. >> And we we did verify the roof capacity. Um so how much existing uh weight it
could support and the accounted for in the estimate reinforcing the areas that did not have sufficient capacity to support a ballasted PV system in the future. >> Okay. Thank you. And then um my last question just as a last ditch effort for
the geothermal. Did you consider locating it offsite potentially at Hickey Park um which is a wide open area and could potentially lead to maybe many years down the road to a um community
geothermal um option as well. But for now, just for the school, does um MSBA reimburse for off-site infrastructure? So we um we did get your question in advance and so um the answer to your
question is it is absolutely technically feasible uh to uh have a remote wellfield. The challenge is that uh the MSBA and the ARP program it hasn't been done before. So we put the question to them today. We haven't gotten an answer
back. Um it's uh it's possible um but we don't know the answer of how they would uh would they fund and reimburse a system off school property. Um, one of the things as I was trying to, you know, kind of work through my job is to find
where what are the challenges, right? >> Um, one of the challenges for me, um, we're we're just finishing a school project now where we put geothermal under an adjacent parkland. And so it's article 97 talks about parkland, but
this is under. >> So we didn't have to go to legislature to get any special approval, but we had to essentially go through like a license agreement um with the whatever authority had control of that park. So the MSBA
wouldn't even entertain our schematic design until all of those legal questions had been resolved. >> Okay. >> So again me just trying to anticipate what are the challenges. I think it's a fantastic idea. I think that time might get us. I think that uh you know so but
what we have modeled for you right now is that we're going uh to submit to the MSBA in late August to be on their October 28th hearing so that we can come before the city for funding to be out to bid whatever. >> I know >> I think so the MSBA only meets every two
months. So if we miss that deadline and then we're two months later say >> we've missed summer 27. So honestly, I think it's a phenomenal idea because the biggest challenge with option two is it takes about 5 months to do all of the um
prepare preparation, put the wells in, get all your circuiting, all your piping back, restore, and we don't have five months in the summertime. So we would be impacting the school year or you know multi-phasing and then it adds cost to the project. So I liked your idea. I
thought it was fantastic. Um, so we did pose the question the MSBA, would they reimburse? Uh, but I think the other question is timing. >> Great. Thank you. >> Okay, >> Leo and member Graham. >> Oh, did I miss did I skip you? I'm so
sorry. Member Alad, >> thank you and thank you so much for this presentation. I had a couple quick questions. I know that you mentioned that option A, the AWP, is kind of the most um proven system type. Is there any reason as to why that specifically is? Is that just what's the most norm or is
that because what like the firm generally leans because that's what works best? >> So non-engineer answer and then I'll let you you take it. Um so it's a it's a water-based system. So it's um you know
essentially what you have for for the educational areas now. Uh so it's a fairly simple system to operate. Um the third option um which uses refrigeration and cassettes um there's a lot of different types. So what we'd end up
like different areas would need different solutions and so you end up adding a lot of technical challenges instead of a singular type system that's sort of unified across the building. That's my uh non-engineer answer. How did I do? >> Pretty good. >> Okay, good.
>> I'll piggyback on what Brian said. So essentially uh in modern electrification especially today we look for what's the most efficient and most um you know appropriate systems for certain types of buildings and in in commercial
industrial buildings today we see that ground source heat pump is the most efficient because the coefficient of power is 5.5 5.0 where the next one runner up is air to water source heat pump right about 4.0 I know plus minus
and so it's what's out there. It's not just like it's a trend but it's it's what's more efficient and more feasible in terms of you know installation familiarity. Um you know there could be technology that could live somewhere else but the challenges with that would be like for example I'll give you an
example the um there is a air to water source heat pump that is a CO2 driven. So instead of using inside the equipment using the A2L refrigerants they use CO2. um they're highly efficient especially in winter months down to -22 degrees
they can give you 180 degree water however they're proprietary so for public projects they may not be an option unless we can flat spec it and another part of that is that they're very expensive because of that fact uh where for example you can purchase a air
to water heat pump for $2,000 a ton you're going to pay $6,000 a ton >> the other challenge with that is when you have um anything that breaks replacement costs you know it's all factored in so it could be very costly so currently geothermal
um number one air to water two and then traditional VRF number three that's what's the there I don't even think there is a third fourth option there's hybrid options that you can combine any of the these combinations >> the someone could ask the questions like
well all electric is a uh an electric option but the problem with that is the efficiency Although compared to fossil fuel systems, it's uh greater, but compared to air to water source heat pumps, it's kind of like pretty bad. It's you put in one unit, you get one out one unit out, whereas geothermal,
you put one in, you take five units out. So, it's kind of a no-brainer there. That does that answer your question? >> Absolutely. Yeah, that was great. Thank you. Um, another question I had, I have two more. Um, you mentioned noise reduction um on the building. Is that an indefinite concern just or indefinite
con that was labeled or is that just for the development of the of the additional unit >> units? >> So with option three because we're early in the design process I mean we're just uh still sort of very high level. If option three were chosen the next thing
we would have to do is study the acoustics of putting rooftop equipment on the high roof because we're very closely you know the neighbors are very close. Um and right now you have a very robust um acoustically insulated area
for equipment. So option one, we don't have to study that. That works and it it will be no change from what you have now. >> Um and then the third question, I don't really know if this makes a ton of sense. Um to use the backup for for
option one specifically. Um I know that there's the requiring of the backup heating system um or using some of the already existing systems. Is there any understanding or concern about performance reductions or interruptions when you have to incorporate a new system with an existing system like during the life cycle of the of the
equipment if that makes sense because I know that some people may have questions. I know that I do obviously that's why I'm asking um about what may happen if at some point later down the line the existing systems have to be then you know the the damage to them or just like the life cycle them have have
concluded and how that may impact the new the new systems. So uh we wouldn't want to keep the existing boilers because they're essentially at the end of their useful life. So we would be replacing them and again if we do choose
option one the team has to work through how do we manage recovery or uh what do you call it uh build preservation heat you know in a power outage. You know what do we want to do? Do we want electric boilers uh that are powered from a diesel fire generator or do we
want gas fired boilers you know that we would do like newer technology condensing boilers for that option but that's something we have to work through but in terms of uh when we're done whatever option it will match sort of the life cycle of everything else there
won't be a different uh difference there >> I hope that answered your question okay thank you very much >> thank you c >> can I ask you a followup question just for our knowledge. >> Yeah. Um different districts in Massachusetts have different expectation and what we're finding is that a lot of places when the conversation is about
preservation heat they often say that we hear you we think that's a good thought but we don't really use power for extended amount of time and you know often many towns around here that is true right they don't lose power for more than you know few hours at a time
and and so what is like expectation or experience here in this That might be a that might be that might be a superintendent. >> I would probably have to concur. There aren't there have not been many opportunities especially I know
especially at the schools that we are talking about. Um the one that was from 1970 is a different story and we are actively trying to work on that. But for our K to8 buildings um there that has not been an a concern or an issue thus
far. power grid is okay is is what I'm is that >> we can we can get out out outage history and this often comes up when we need reliable uh sources of power for things like uh fire pumps in the building um if you don't have a generator you have to
pro prove that it's reliable power source so that information is available and we can look at that but I would say uh and I live locally that generally outages are are not extensive enough that you have to worry about When we say preservation heat, it's not to preserve
the kids in the class because if there's an if there's an event that's causing an outage, it's probably not school, but you don't want uh the pipes freezing essentially, >> whereas you don't have to get too far outside of the uh the Boston metro
region where the grid is not as reliable. And this is a a serious consideration. >> Makes sense. >> Thank you. Um, Leo, the member Graham, >> the pros and cons here. Um, what would probably be like the most like favored
option in like other schools considering like the disturbances and like the cost efficiency? >> Can I take? >> Yeah. um they all have uh you know pros and cons for sure, but um there's more to it
than just cost and energy. The other component that I worry about is making a project that's successful. It's one like you I know you're talking uh about the new high school, a new building, new systems. That's a different conversation. When we're trying to get
into an existing building and have a project not interrupt the school program, I really feel like option one is is is hitting a lot. It's checking a lot of boxes. We're getting some significant savings in or energy uh
improvement. The EUI is is dropped about 40%. Um, and we're moving the building in the direction of electrification, which it's a mandate in Massachusetts in what is it 2050 that all buildings will be off fossil fuels. So, we're checking
that box. We're putting all that infrastructure in. We're maximizing the amount of solar on the roof uh with that option. So, I really feel personally that option one is the strongest because it it has so many uh pluses. >> Can I add anything?
Um so one of the reason they that they have us look into multiple options is is is because uh you know not all projects not all buildings not all types of projects are equal right so we're talking about the high school that that
might be a a new building it might be redoing the exist uh the existing building but the situation is different. So here when we look in detail where you might think that that we often use airsource heat pump to retrofit an
existing building it's not an exact fit here. The biggest reason being um the the unit ventilators they poke through the wall and bring in the ventilation. Uh it's often when the the heating systems in an existing building, right?
We have a lot of old infrastructure in this area. When the heating is functioning, but they want to add air conditioning, that option is the the least intrusive to the building, we can lay new refrigerant pipe. Right here, we have the advantage of being able to use
the the existing pipe to the hydronic systems. Hydronic means the waterbased systems, hot water, chilled water. So, and then I I think we've seen from the committee and a lot of the questions that that geothermal is often desired
because of its efficiency. Um the the problem is the cost, but in in many cases you can offset that cost with the incentives or the the tax credits. Um we also do uh uh higher ed
institutions like colleges or prep schools where there might be a donor who's interested in uh geothermal. So uh if the secretary would like to donate so that we that we can afford the geothermal option, you know, that can
make it more palatable. So the the big long story short is it's really depends on the situation and it's nice to have all these tools in our tool belt and explore them and that's what we've done. >> Thank you member Graham.
>> I just had one more quick question. If we decide um during schematic design that we want to formally include solar in the like scope of this project, is that possible? >> Yes, it is. uh we can incorporate that into the total project budget and
present that to you. We did uh talk to the team here uh the engineering team has the capability to do the solar engineering design um so we can do that in house and add it as part of the project. >> Great. Thank you. >> Is there a motion on the floor?
>> Yeah. Motion to approve option one um to move forward. >> All those in favor? Option all those opposed. Option one has been approved. Thank you for the presentation.
>> Mayor, I think Ry mayor, I think Ryan may have had a question. >> Ryan, >> no. Since option one got approved, um, all the questions are not really important. >> Okay. Thanks. >> Thank you very much.
>> Thanks, Ryan. Thank you. Oh, Ryan's talking. >> So, thank you guys. >> You're very welcome. >> Appreciate it. >> Thank you, Cat. Sorry. >> Recommendation to approve updated Medford Public Schools handbook. I'm
going to turn it over to Dr. Galooi, superintendent. Three times the charm. So I have um I did consolidate everything from the past two meetings in terms of making sure that we know exactly what this vote entails. Uh it
will it reflects what was discussed in the May 18th meeting as well as the as the June 8th meeting last week. The two kind of hanging pieces to highlight uh for this evening and then I'm happy to take any questions would be um when it
comes to the elementary recess. So the following language was put in all of the four elementary handbooks. It says recess is an essential component of a child's physical, social, and emotional development and will not be withheld as
a disciplinary measure. Consequences must be logical, timely, and linked directly to the incident or infraction. This commitment is structurally reinforced and visible across three distinct practices currently outlined within the elementary handbooks parenthesy discipline code, recess
expectations, and homework expectations. Within the discipline code, there is a footnote or an asterct next uh for number three where it says um for serious conduct violations um it may result in the loss of building
privileges for example assemblies, recess, intramurals, field trips, extracurricular activities. that footnote on recess. Um, this next statement has been added in all of the handbooks that says, "Please note that the loss of recess requires school
leader, which is a principal or assistant principal approval." So, if there is an incident in which there is some sort of discipline um issue that has arrived, recess cannot be taken away without the approval of the principal or
the assistant principal. There is no change to the recess expectations as um it was in there before that it is the expectation that students have their recess. Um but if a child displays
unsafe behaviors while at recess, their time may be limited or taken away as a logical consequence, which is really just a time for the child to regain composure. There also is not a change to homework expectations as there is clear language.
Although we did bold the sentence in the middle of the homework expectations that says home homework incomp completion will not result in the loss of recess. We're hoping this adds clarity um to the position that we all hold dear around
recess time. I don't know if we want to take questions now, but the the other piece was around just clarifying for the academic dishonesty panel. Um I kept that also highlighted. So at the very
end of that policy, the section that says academic honesty panel uh under purpose we have added an additional um bullet point that says panel members will be determined annually and remain
consistent throughout the school year. The sub bullet says if the panel member is involved in the case an alternative design will be assigned. So this gets to the point that it is um someone different. It is a a neutral panel um
that will review if there is a need for this u appeal process. And then panel composition. We added a few clarifying pieces. So principal or administrative design meaning that could be the assistant principal or a content director.
Um designated panel teachers. So each year as previously stated um there'll be a composition of the panel and and those teachers will be designated uh as such. And then the last one we clarified so it
says involved. So the students the student that is involved in the case um has the option to join the panel discussion uh alone or with a parent guardian. And then a sub bullet to that says the involved student will have the
opportunity to share their perspective with the academic honesty panel members before a determination is made. And then I'm happy to take any questions. The rest of this long list of compiled handbook pieces were mentioned in the
previous two meetings. >> Member Reinfeld. >> Thank you for your work. I have no questions. I will motion to approve. Motion for >> approval by member Reinfeld, seconded by member Graham. All those in favor? >> I.
>> All those opposed. >> Handbook has been approved. >> Thank you. >> We're keeping you on your toes. Um, no presentations of the advisory council or nor the public. So, we're going to go to continued business. Um, MSBA project
update on PSR. I'm gonna turn over to Member Graham, chair of the Medford High School comprehensive school building committee. >> Thank you. Um I just wanted to provide a couple of quick updates and then I'm going to turn it over to the team to um do a very
brief presentation and ask for your approval of the revised ed plan. Um we the building committee, as you know, selected um a preferred option um last week. Um it's C 2.2A. 2A for those who have been following all the crazy
nomenclature. Um and um that does it's an ad rena option. It allows us to uh preserve the considerable um resources that we have in our gym and our pool. Um it steers
clear of the deed restriction that we um previously were grappling with and um it meets the educational plan. So that is super exciting. Um on Thursday, please join us at the beastro where we will have our last meeting of June. Um I
think we'll have some cake. Um and we will cover um an official approval of the PSR submission to MSBA. We'll also authorize the RFQ to go out for to bring on our CM which will happen in the October time frame. Um, and the other
thing that you'll see on Thursday is a framing of some of the like next phase of work happening around adjacencies and efficiencies in the building. Um and some of that early work um allowed the team to identify some space reductions
that we believe can be made without harming the educational plan um or the space or the intentions of uh of the building but alas can save us um some space and accordingly some dollars.
So, um, you'll see that framing on Thursday and then we'll use that same process as the team is going through the efficiency adjacency conversation over the course of the summer really across every single nook and cranny of the building. Um, some of these things can't
really come into focus until you you know exactly where they're going. Um, so all of that will happen on Thursday. The other thing that we'll do on Thursday is um roll out an updated schedule for the next phase of the work which will include not just SBC meetings um but
propose some joint um hearings between the school committee and the city council in the leadup to um the decision- making that will happen um in the February time frame to authorize a vote. um and we'll lay in into the
schedule sort of the the sequencing and timing of the vote scheduling or you know the operational aspects of um bringing a vote to the voters um according to our stated timeline. So, um, I'm trying to juggle all of that
while not tripping on other meetings and, um, making sure that there's ample room for community input and feedback, um, along the way as we go into this next exciting place where we are all talking about the same one building. Um, so that's that's super exciting. Um, I'm
going to turn it over to the team to do a brief presentation about some of the ED plan changes. Um, and in particular, um, they're going to they'll talk a little bit about the MSBA's feedback, um, and sort of the resulting changes to the ad plan. So I will turn over to the
team. Hi. Can you guys hear me? It's Rosemary from SMMA. hear me? >> Yes, we can hear you. >> Okay, great. Um, actually, Kim, I wasn't sure if you
were going to review this part or um I think we hadn't quite discussed that part, but I can I can go into this if we can move on to the next slide, please. Um so as um as Jenny mentioned we had uh
received comments on the prelim preliminary design phase report from the MSBA on the 5th of May. Um and then um we along with uh Leftfield, the OPM and the district worked together to um send
responses um to the comments back to the MSBA um a few weeks later on the 19th. And so um the MSBA typically um provides comments uh to the to the team um
through two documents attachment A and attachment B. Um and if we move to the next slide please. Um, and you I just want do want to start off by saying that these comments um
were very typical um of what we see uh in terms of responses from the the MSBA. Um so while um attachment A generally contains
um comments on um pretty much the majority of the uh PDP report aside from the space summary program because that comes in attachment B. Um and most of the most of the comments really include
um just requests on clarifications or expansion of information. Um and then also asking the team to acknowledge um certain requirements or requests from uh
from the MSBA. Uh so you know we have here that um there were generally many comments um a bunch of comments on just clarification surrounding the budget or schedule um and then just some further clarification
um between connecting the educational plan to the space summary um and making sure that the space summary was supporting and fulfilling the needs of the district's goals. Um
and then we also as part of this process um needed to submit um uh an updated educational plan with the the PSR um submission. So, we will and you should
have received a copy of the um the updated educational plan uh the revisions that uh assistant superintendent Talbot and I had worked through. Um and these
uh those changes were um they'll be provided in one tracked versions copy and one clean version copy. Um, and we'll review some of that um, in a bit. Um, and then can we go to the next slide,
please? And attachment B does uh, contain all of the comments that the MSBA had on the proposed space summary. And remember, this is the document which itemizes all of the different spaces within the um, the proposed school.
Um and then uh and so the majority of these comments really just asked us to um uh acknowledge that there were comparisons
between what we were proposing and what the MSBA guidelines recommend. Um there were requests to relocate certain spaces to different space categories. Um such as moving the we initially had some of the meat program under special education
and um we moved there was a request to move that to the other category to be housed with the rest of the early childhood center um program. And so a lot of these comments really help us um
help clarify to the MSBA um and to us what the MSBA may start to think of in terms of what is reimburseable square footage. Um and so as part of this process, we also sent an updated space
summary um which documented these changes um as well as um a few um as well as some changes that were um uh decided upon by the uh the SBC at the
April 27th um SBC meeting um in which we'll we'll review some of those things with you. um in a couple of slides. Um and once again, the space summary will be updated again for the uh PSR submission at the end of this month. Um
and uh that will be um that also included the the PPP report comments as well. >> Thank you, Rosemary. I think that's my cue now. I appreciate that. So the next just the highlevel um pieces of the changes to
the educational plan are clear distinction between current and proposed teaching methodologies and curriculum delivery. A lot of this was just um format. So headings were added for clarity so that it was very clear to the
MSBA what were current and what were proposed. um incorporation of expanded clarification for proposed curriculum delivery narratives and explanations as requested by the MSBA. So again, they
just wanted real clear clear examples. Um for example, um building schedules, how lunches could possibly run. One of the things we are going to have to do is move from two lunches to three lunches. So they wanted to see some examples and
some clarity. Um and some more information for example on the seal of biiteracy uh addition to descriptions for non-chapter 74 technology curriculum program needs media and technology
digital art scene shop/stagecraft etc as requested by the MSBA and additionally minor revisions to language surrounding blackbox drama and engineering robotics courses nonCTE to incorporate decisions from, as Rosemary
said, the April 27th SBC meeting. Those last two bullet points really kind of come down to our how we approach this, which is reduce redundancies and approve efficiencies. And so, as we said at the
SBC meeting as well as to this committee before, our goal is to make sure we're creating flexible, adaptable, multi-use spaces that can grow with the needs of education as well as the needs of the community. We don't know what education
is going to look like years from now. And so, really creating spaces that are multi-purpose and flexible was the key. Um, MSBA requires that each space is used 85% of the time each day. So, when
we're looking at something like a black box, we're not going to remove the black box, but having a standalone black box may not check the box to be used 85% of the time each day. However, really
monopolizing on large group instructional spaces would be the key so that we could create a blackbox within a large group instructional space for the use of blackbox purposes, for performances,
um for presentations, um for science, uh activities, what whatever someone wants to use a blackbox for. Um, next slide. I hope that if there are any questions, please let me know. Then the
other piece that uh I presented along with the team on that April 27th meeting was our approach to what we had three buckets and we said repurpose. So as discussed, creation of flexible spaces,
redundancies, where were there overlaps and where did we need further evaluation and then reduce. So where are their spaces that we actually could afford to lessen some of the square footage office spaces? So this right here is just a a
list of what was proposed um and voted on during that meeting. And I'll just quickly kind of go through them unless um someone does not want me to. But uh this was both an efficiency and a
reduction. So there were in essence three spaces. There was a science resource room, an engineering and a robotics lab. And we felt that we would have more efficiency because of our co-op model to create use that science
and robotics lab as a 12th science lab that allows us to equip it the way we need and allows the use for the science resource room as well as a robotics or engineering space as well as a science lab, a 12th science lab. Um, this one I
know I've explained a little bit to this body. I apologized for um the use of my labeling and titling and I'm about to do it again. But right now the some of our subsparate special education programs each had their own toilets. What we did
here was not remove any toilets, but what we did was really have conversations about where what are the programs that need their own toilets within the classroom. And it's not that we were removing um genderneutral toilets. It's just the
toilets for the program. So, uh project transition and access should have toilets in those programs. The remaining programs can have toilets that are adjacent in the hallway u shared use. That's what this refers here. That was
an efficiency. Uh remove remove the MEEP evaluation team leader space. There was already a team chair office space. That's a redundancy. We don't need to have two. Reduce music practice rooms from six to three. That also was a
reduction, but we don't need to have six. We're perfectly fine with using three. Right now, students don't have separate spaces to practice. Three would be sufficient. reduce media and tech labs uh to 12,000 square feet which is the same size as
the computer science classrooms and that is a reduction. We felt that that was that size was comparable to science classrooms and fine keep one maker space um and rename it in innovation lab. This is the flexibility we're looking for. Uh
there were two maker spaces on the list. one will this one will stay as a maker space and but we want to call it an innovation lab not a maker space. Um then take that other maker space and
repurpose it as the art photo lab. We felt we did not need two dedicated maker spaces. We keep one, we take the other one and we make it the art photo lab. That is an efficiency but it is also a reduction. There were, this was another
uh redu uh excuse me, redundancy. There were three wellness rooms uh in addition to restorative spaces within each house. We felt that that was redundant and we felt that the restorative spaces for uh restorative
circles, for mediation, for prayer are much more important um than wellness rooms for uh our students and our staff. reduce stage craft scene shop. This is just uh lessening some of the square footage. I believe this is still larger
than what the current uh shop is. Um I've already discussed the blackbox and calling in in the large group instruction. Um and then there were a whole bunch of offices and so a lot of the uh approach we took was what can we
do to keep this farthest away from students but minimize what we always prioritize are collaborative spaces and that goes for the adults in the buildings as well. So we are pri prioritizing conference rooms and places to gather and work collaboratively. So
office spaces do not need to be large. This here lists all the office spaces from mine to directors to principles to a myriad of people. Um just reducing to get to a level of efficiency that is
needed. Next slide. And keeping educational spaces whole. Um again this is the same thing for the project manager accounting man of just a list of administrative offices. we don't need uh large spaces. There was an
additional CTE co-op office. We did reduce that. I have it labeled as efficiency because next and next year um through bar found through the bar grant funding that we just received. Um
we will be adding in a college and career position and that position will also encompass co-op. So we don't need to have both. We are one school. We do not need to have two offices. So that was reduced. Remove office space for the
director of CCSR. We don't need a dedicated office for that. Um remove house office administrative assistance. So what we saw in the space summary was there was additional space um within the
greeting area. I might forget what that's called. and then additional small classroom um office spaces. We want our school administrators um administrative assistants to be part of that welcome to people in that larger
area the way we have it kind of um bullpened now. And so this was just reducing smaller separate offices. Um we don't want people working in silos. That's what you see here. It's the same thing for HR. They had separate offices
we and for payroll. Um we feel that the bullpen style is much more collaborative, much more efficient for workflow. That's what you see here. Reducing these standalone siloed offices. Um remove duplicate. So we also noticed there were two uh office spaces
for transportation. We just need one office for the transportation uh supervisor. um bullpen as well for our content directors. Um and then there was a bunch
of storage reduction. So what we saw was the clothing closet um we reduced that a little bit uh because it's actually a little bit quite too large. And then Medford Family Network, we looked at the
storage space that Medford Family Network has, which is still more than they currently have, and it's more in line with the storage that Kids Corner has. Um, so that there's some equity built in there, especially since they'll
be sharing some spaces. We felt that that uh made sense. Next slide, please. And then there were a few things um that were listed. So the removal of the popup
gallery. Uh we felt we didn't need one um isolated location. We talked about putting these throughout the building and that was uh better for displaying student work. Food pantry can be part of the clothing closet. Uh and so that was
an efficiency and a reduction. Um the early childhood multi-purpose room could be a little bit smaller to keep in line uh with the other spaces similar to that purpose. Stroller parking was a separate location and in a lot of the schools that we visited we saw that it was part
of the grossing factor in that where um people are coming in there may be a larger hallway. That was our suggestion to do here as well. Uh remove central office AV room entirely. We don't need we already have a room uh on the space summary. This one was additional. It was
a redundancy. Um pair of professionals have a workroom included here. So we reduced that to we just reduced that a little bit in size. Uh which is sufficient. And then because teachers are also going
to have to be and administrators lots of people are going to have to be sharing space. Um this was removing open office hoteling because we already included it in the adjacencies of the the bullpening. Um this includes there will
already be those like phone booth style type um and conference rooms provided as breakout options so people can make private phone calls. It was just a doubling um on the space summary.
That was a lot. I tried to zip through it without be would be be thoughtful. If there are any questions, thank you for the updates. Let me know. >> Member Graham. >> I just want to make a motion. >> Oh, okay. >> I just want to make a motion to approve the changes to the ED plan.
>> Motion to approve um before the rules called. Alachi. Um yeah, I I just wanted to make a quick I think we have a kind of urgent thing that we noticed in the education plan, but also um one less um maybe super
important things. Um two of the biggest space reductions were both was in the robotics um like science lab area. Um I was just curious um I'm in the robotic shop. There's nowhere in the shop that we refer to as the science lab. So, I'm
just curious what space is being talked about. >> I'm so glad you asked that question so that if there's like um this confusion in the community, we can clear it up right here. This is not the robotics lab that's part of the CTE program. So, they
have non chapter 74 and so they had originally labeled it a robotics lab and we're not >> which would be like an additional for people that aren't in CTE if they want to kind of experiment. We're not saying we're not going to do that, but what we're doing what we're saying is that we
can do that >> with the >> in an innovation lab and not just so >> I understand. Thank you. Sorry the terminology. And then um one of the things that was thrown a lot here was blackbox instruction. Um just for people that were in the like in the community,
maybe people like me. Um what what are you meaning by that term >> of a blackbox? Yeah. Well, I know what blackbox means metaphorically, but I mean in terms of um you were saying you like specifically um like the the um
reduction in the photo lab was not photo lab. Um I I can't find it right now, but you you were saying that you wanted that specifically changes the educational plan about blackbox instruction. Could you elaborate on what you meant by that? >> Yes. So, a black box is a standalone
room >> and correct me Dr. Talbot if I get this. It's a stand Thank goodness for the tours because I I've seen them in person, but it's a standalone room >> where all the walls are are black. They are painted black. Most of them are
equipped with some scaffolding above so that >> uh there is like the back of the house part of theater >> where um people can also kind of like hone in on those skills. So it is equipped with the lighting and some of the technical pieces. Uh during the day
there are some varied uses for that room. It is another large group gathering area. It is it can be used for performances or for speaker series. Um it also could just be another
large group area. Um there are no natural light in most blackbox theaters for the that intended purpose. Um so what we're saying is to be more flexible maintaining
I believe right now we have three large group instructional spaces >> and we want to keep that third one >> and the either any of those three spaces could be outfitted
to turn into a black box if need be. >> And those three spaces are LGI innovation labs. >> Yes. Okay. >> Yes. And um uh understood. Great. I think that's all. I think uh Leo has a pretty pressing thing from the um instructional
plan that he noticed. Um so if if I know that you wanted to vote and I know it's quite late, but if we could quickly do that, that'd be great. >> Is it okay to take Leo next? >> Um >> yes, >> Leo. Then we're going to move the motion.
Um, so I was looking through like I was just kind of going through the pages. um for the emergency response plan for the high school. Um the medical response time I just want to make sure like it's um categorized under Armstrong and I
didn't know if it should be switched to Catalo because like I don't want say something happens and they go back to this and it says the average time is 5 minutes and then it goes back and say something happens and it goes to 10 minutes. I don't want them to go back and kind of see this. I don't know if
that makes sense, but um I didn't know if it should be switched or not. >> Yep. Thank Thank you for pointing that out. The new contract with Catalo, we can make that adjustment. >> Thank you, Leo. >> Member Graham, you have a motion for approval. Seconded by member Reinfeld.
All those in favor? >> All those opposed? Paper passes. >> Oh, Ryan, I'm sorry. >> Sorry, Ryan. >> That's all right. That's all right. Um I um Is this on? >> Yep, it's on.
>> I have one question. Um really short. Will the maker space on the library be used as the innovation lab or the art photo gallery? >> So we had two maker spaces in the space
summary. One we're maintaining as a maker space. The other one we're turning into a digital photo lab. So yeah, I'm asking the digital photo lab is that in the library is that like
near the library >> in the library. This would be a separate space. >> The current maker space library. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. >> Yeah. So we'll maintain one of those maker spaces. We haven't talked yet about adjacencies and where things will
be located. That's part of the next phase of work that we're going to do. >> All right. Um, one more question. Uh, when will that phase be done? Would that be done uh near the beginning of the next school year or Yes.
>> Well, we're going to start that a little bit next year and moving forward. Yes. And that's where we'll get to decide now that we have one concept. Now we'll really get to decide what we want in that and where things will be located
and what it will start to look like. >> All right. Thank you. >> Yeah. Thank you, Ryan. >> You're welcome. >> Um, the motion was called. Do you have a another question? >> On it. >> We did. Yeah. I was My motion is to take
202616 out of order because it relates to this MSBA conversation. >> Motion to take 2026-16 out of order by member Reinfeld, seconded by >> Member Lead. All those in favor?
>> I. All those opposed. 2026-16 offered by member parks. The member Reinfeld resolution to collaborate on space alternative study with the city of Medford. Whereas the Medford Public Schools District is responsible for district strategy and direction for the future of public education related
district-wide services in the city of Medford. Whereas Medford School Committee has approved the educational plan that guides the Medford comprehensive high school building project. Whereas Medford High School Building Committee is a mandated body charged with authority to evaluate, narrow, and recommend design
options for the Medford Comprehensive High School Building Project. Whereas the Massachusetts School Building Authority has asked the MCHSBC to carefully evaluate the scope of the project with respect to the continued presence of certain community-f facing services
currently housed in the high school building such as central administration, the welcome center, kids corner, and the metro family network. Whereas understanding alternative locations and associated relocation capital costs for these spaces is essential to the school committee and the city of Medford to make informed decisions that align with
the educational plan and optimize the use of school and community resources. Whereas the high school design team will be finalizing the project design in October 2026 with the guidance of the MCHSBC and all decisions related to the project scope including but not limited to
programming design systems and execution must be made prior to that time. Whereas it is in the best interest of the Metro Public Schools District to have this analysis completed and presented to the school committee for consideration and confirmation of alignment with educational plan and other ongoing
district-wide studies prior to proceeding to the MCHSBC for consideration. Now therefore, be it resolved that the Medford School Committee request that the city of Medford share the results of the space study that examines possible alternative locations and associated costs to relocate central administration, the
welcome center, kids corner, and the MFN with the school committee and time frame that aligns with the schematic design development. Requires the Memphis School Committee to issue a formal response to any findings and recommendations for such a study prior to submission to the Medford High School Building Committee.
requires the Memphis School District to update the educational plan to reflect any proposed changes as applicable and present this updated plan to the school committee for formal and timely approval. Member Rinfeld and member Parks. Yep. So, this is this is in relation to
the conversation that was just referenced that and the work that's going to be done over the summer to explore some of the non-reimburseable components of the project and to help since I know the city uh is going to be looking at alternatives to see what the
tradeoffs are between keeping things as part of this project bundle. Um this is a resolution to clarify the role that the school committee is playing in terms of um the educational plan. The building committee elected an option for design
that allows us to meet the educational plan and just to make sure that that check-in is continuous and ongoing and does not hold up the process because of formal approvals needed. Um, we just saw how the space summaries affect the plan
and we want to just make sure there's a mechanism and a very clear mechanism so that every party knows what to expect and who is evaluating um components and that the school committee can provide the feedback to the building committee on how um things
align with the mission since the building committee's mission is to create um the mechanism for a high school that aligns with the educational plan. Feel like I went around in circles. Member Parks, do you have anything to add to that?
across all of the different um groups um committees, groups, bodies that are involved in this project, whether it be the city of Medford, the school committee, the um public school district, the um comprehensive high
school building committee and all of them and how they work together. >> Yeah. And Exactly. And I think it's also a formal commitment to be collaborative in this process and not pitting education against physical space and whatever it is. We we're working together on this and this clarifies some
of the mechanisms for that collaboration. >> Correct. Okay. Is there a motion for approval? >> Motion to approve >> by member Graham. Seconded by >> member Rouso. All those in favor? >> I. All those opposed. Paper passes.
Motion to revert back to regular order of business by member Rinfeld. Seconded by second member parks. All those in favor. >> All those opposed. Motion passes. 2026-12 offered by member Rinfeld and member Rouso. Policy second reading
update to policy. Motion to wave the reading by member Graham. Seconded by member Reinfeld. All those in favor? All those opposed? Read reading is waved. This is a policy second reading to the update to policy JJH, student travel. Motion for approval by member Graham,
seconded by member Lead. All those in favor? All those opposed? Motion passes. New business 2026-14 offered by member Reinfeld. Resolution to amend the AI guidance in the handbook and policy JND-
AI as follows. current language educators you use use of gen AI should be as a tool to support the teaching and learning environment but is not to be solely relied upon in place of educator review and judgment new language educators use of gen AI should be as a
tool to support the teaching and learning environment but is not to be solely reply relied upon in place of educator review and judgment. This is particularly true when assessing student essays and other qualitative work. Educators should not use AI tools to provide feedback or assign grades to
students. Is there a motion for approval? >> Motion to approve >> by member Graham. Seconded by >> member Rinfeld. Those those in favor. >> All those opposed. Motion passes. >> Jenny did member Graham. >> Can I motion to wave the second reading
since we approved this in the handbooks previous? >> Motion to wave the second reading by member Reinfeld. >> Second. >> Seconded by member Graham. All those in favor? I. >> All those opposed? Second reading is waved. 2026-15 offered by member Reinfeld where the superintendent
appointment where the whereas the superintendent superintendence should say appointment has been approved on a July 1 to June 30th schedule whereas the educator and administrative view cycle of med in Medford is aligned with the school year whereas other districts align their superintendent evaluation
with their educator and administrative staff reviews. Now therefore, be it resolved that the superintendent will provide a draft of her annual goals over the summer to the school committee and that they will be presented and discussed publicly in September. Be it resolved that the official evaluation of
the superintendent will happen between May 1st and June 30th each year with any midyear revision to goals occurring in January or February as needed. Is there a comment or a motion for approval? Member Reinfeld. I can just comment
briefly that because of the odd nature of the interim appointment, we were off schedule from what is kind of typically done. Uh, and this realign it and puts it on the regular cadence and also does not require new members to evaluate the
superintendent in their first month of office. And >> thank you. Motion for approval by member >> I think member Olady has a >> member. >> Yes. Thank you very much. I just had a quick question slash an amendment um that I want to propose. Um I know you
mentioned um having um midyear mid-year revisions if needed in January, February. I just would ask that we amend that we add some type of periodic um updating of the goal setting. Um that's generally what's been happening already, but I think having that in the resolution would be productive just so that community members know um kind of
where we're kind of stacking up based off the goals that were set um from the prior the prior period. So that's my amendment. Uh I have the language if needed right now if >> I I accept that amendment. That's where I was going to give you a revision. So
hopefully that's an update and revision. But >> uh the amendment I have is be it further resolved that the superintendent shall provide periodic reports of the school committee on progress towards the annual goals to inform any necessary midyear revisions. >> Motion for approval by member Graham,
seconded by member parks. as amended by member Lead. All those in favor? >> I. >> All those opposed? Paper passes. If meetings are needed in the summer, they will be July 20th, 2026 and August
24th, 2026 via Zoom only. Those will be cancelceled if we don't need them, I believe, per the policy. And our next regular definite scheduled meeting is September 14th, 2026 here in the all memorial chambers, Medford City Hall and via Zoom.
>> Motion to adjurnn. Motion to adjurnn by member Reinfeld.