Reinfeld to get in from the waiting room. Um, please be advised that on November 20th, 2025 at 4 p.m. there'll be a strategic and capital planning meeting held through remote participation via Zoom. This meeting is being recorded. The meeting can be viewed live on Medford Public Schools
YouTube channel through Medford Community Media on your local cable channel, which is Comcast 98 or22 and Verizon 4345 or 47. Since the meeting is held remotely, participants can log in or call in by using the following Zoom link. Um, the meeting ID is
940-93587447. Um, questions and comments can be submitted during the meeting by emailing Jenny Grahamford.k12.mma. us. Those submitting must um include the following information. Your first and last name, your Medford Street address,
and your question or comment. Um, okay. I'll call the role. Uh, member Rouso, >> present. >> Member Reinfeld, >> present. >> Member Graham, present. So, three present, zero absent. Um, okay. So, our
agenda for today is just to um get ready uh to pre re present our capital plan for the upcoming year through our established budget process for capital planning. Um, and we're roughly
targeting the second meeting in December, which is December 15th. Although, if everything like ties up in a bow and we want to do it at the next meeting, we can talk about that based on what else is on the agenda. Um and by way of a little bit of background for
anybody listening um for the last couple of years we have um tried to kick off capital planning in this like no October November time frame so that we can collect all of the input um and have a cohesive conversation
about priorities, bring that forward to the school committee for like agreement and adoption and turn it over to the city. um council and the mayor's office um by early next year so that when they are looking at capital projects and as
pre-cash gets certified which tends to happen in the spring here in Medford um that they know sort of what is hot on our list of things to do um and then we can be talking about like sort of what's
on the critical path etc. Um, so this year, uh, with, um, Ken joining us in August, although it feels like, um, like a year from August at this point, Ken, um, he and I met and we talked a little
bit about some like some additional inputs that we have this year that we haven't had before because of the facility conditions assessment index that was created um, and completed over the summer where um, that assessment
had, you know, somewhere north of like 60 or $70 million of um capital projects outlined in the next um five years anyway. Um which is a daunting and
staggering number. Um but Ken has done a lot of due diligence to to kick us off. So, um, my thought for today is we'll have Ken pull up the spread the capital planning spreadsheet and walk us through what he's done to sort of engra that
facilities condition assessment um because he he fell into the rabbit hole of the spreadsheet and um it's pretty intense now. So I want him to explain that and then we can talk a little bit about like the things that are like you know sort of on the top
level of the plan and in the near term. Um and I do see Teresa has joined us um to um talk a little bit potentially about CPC oriented projects. So thanks for being here Teresa. Um, so Ken, I will turn it over to you if you want to
walk us all through this the spreadsheet and sort of how where all of the facility condition assessment stuff is and how it is all floating up. Um before I do that though, I will mention to this group that um a couple of weeks ago now
we were notified by the MSBA um that the three statements of interest that we put in for roofs and HVAC at Missuck, Roberts, and Brooks were all approved. So we went to the board meeting, those three projects are all
approved. So obviously that's like a huge component of that, you know, se 60 or $70 million. Obviously, um there's some work that has to happen between now and February um that we're sort of working on behind the scenes to to get
going, but um the priority like the order of projects there will be Roberts, Miss Tuck, and then Brooks based on the particularly the aging of the roof and the um HVAC systems. So, um more to come
on that. Obviously, those are like on the plan, but those are a little bit different because they're they're already sort of actively in this like MSBA funding pipeline. So, um all all good news, honestly. Like I'm so excited that we were able to get all three of
those into the pipeline um and not have to wait two more years to even think about talking about some of those things. So, that's great. Um Ken, I'll turn it over to you if you want to walk us through your spreadsheet. >> I'll show you. should be able to see the spreadsheet now on your screen.
>> Yep. >> Okay. So, um what I did was I took the facilities condition assessment report which is a voluminous document and I um was received the Excel versions of this and I imported it into different tabs.
So, this is the totals page which shows all this the items from the FCA and then there are tabs for each school which has all of their items on that uh sheet. I then went through and I kind of categorized everything in the um for
each school in a budget location, moving them to ARP, which stands for accelerated repair program. That's only for the Brooks, the Roberts, and the Missatuck, doors and windows, electrical, fencing, so on and so forth. I also marked uh a number of them as
operating, which are things I felt we might be able to accomplish through our extraordinary repairs account or through regular uh maintenance work. So, I categorized everything as best I could for those. Um, off to the right, you'll see operating tabs for each school. That
just pulled all the things that I categorized as operating into one tab. So, we could you could review those specifically if you wanted to. Um, I do have did a lot of work on the capital plan document tab, but really what I did uh after our meeting this week is I made
a prioritized list of everything from the capital plan and pulled those pieces of data to this one tab. Um, so basically the suggestion I have is of course the ARP projects are the most
important. Um, these are um, you'll see two numbers here. This is for the feasibility study and then the project itself. And these are the Medford portions of the amounts. Um I do have a separate spreadsheet that talks about all the numbers and everything and the
square footage and whatnot and the total project cost that is estimated for the heat pump and roof conversion. I'm sorry, the heat pump conversion and roof um um projects as well as some ADA work that might fall into there. Um, there is
a lot of discussion about what the budget number is for that. The MSBA quotes $150 a square foot, which is what I'm basing this on. Um, I did reach out to Hhabib, who did the facilities connection assessment report, and they're getting some information from
one of their estimators, you to see if the 150 really holds true or not. So these numbers here that I have for the um schematic design and the project for the uh ARP may come down some. Beyond
that I I pulled out uh a number of things from the facilities condition assessment report as well as from feedback from principles. Um the fire alarms are listed in the facilities condition assessment report for the U
five buildings as being aged out need to be replaced. To do a project like a fire alarm, we really need to have a study done. You need schematic plans done. You need code review. It's not something we could write a specification up for ourselves. I reached out to Habib and
asked them to give a give an estimate for what he thought those might cost. and surprisingly high. He suggested $225,000 for design for all five of those. Um, so I just split them out, you know, for each one. We would probably have to split these out over multiple
years to do the projects because these are the price tag of the projects. They're all north of $400,000 with the McGlin being almost double that. So they are big projects to do. Um, those fire alarm systems are particularly at the
Brooks, the Mrs. stuck in the Roberts are at end of life and they're getting hard to find replacement parts for them. Um, so that's what's in the capital. Um, this column here, I'm not sure if this is titled correctly. This would be the ARP money, the accelerated repair
program money. Um, you'll notice that uh the Brooks only has the accelerate the um schematic design portion because the schematic design would happen pretty far into FY26. So the project would probably be in FY a further year out than this.
I did include phase two of the network refresh. This would be our portion. This is a rough estimate right now because we're going through some plans reviews with the um just from phase one which is the high school. Um and then the uh which needs some extra equipment and for
the rest of the schools. This would be our portion as this would be an project. So, -ate reimbures us 60% of the project. We only cover 40, which is a wonderful thing. Um, I do have intercom upgrades for the Andrews and McGlin. These are also an end of life and parts
are not available. We have had some significant issues with Andrews. Um, these are a public safety issue. We do have um uh this is how they announce everything u for you know from you know fire drills to everything else they talk about all these intercoms. Um these
quotes here are from a vendor. These are rough budget numbers. These will need some refinement if we move these projects forward with more design and specification, but that's a pretty good number there. Uh the playground renovation, we discussed the need to do a feasibility
schematic design for the three playgrounds. Um having a firm look at what options we have for different playgrounds, what designs, all that stuff. The tab provided this estimate here, which seems a lot of money to me. Um, so we may need some more refinement
there. Um, this would cover all three uh designs and and give you complete documents to to be able to bid those out. Um, one of the first principal items, Nick Tucci, has 10 cafeteria tables that
are in need of a replacement. He has 32 total tables. This would cover 10 of the replacement that he says are immediate. They do probably need to be scheduled out in f future years to replace the rest of them. and we should look at some of the other schools, but Nick um has 10 that he has trouble with right now.
The next uh priority I listed was paving. Um there is quite a bit of paving money listed in the feasibility study, but in order to put this out to bid, we need designs, surveying, all kinds of stuff. So, we do need to pay an architect to do all of that work. Habib
again just just supplied um a rough estimate of what that might cost for those. Again, we may decide to split these up of multiple years because this is an awful lot of work to be done. Um this is parking lots, driveways, sidewalks, curbs, stuff like that. A lot of work there.
Um a small item at the McGlin, the condenser for the fridge and uh freezer walk-ins units needs to be replaced. It's original to the building. Still uses R22 gas, which you can't even get anymore. Um that um should need to be
done. I don't know if we have room to get include that into the um current McGlin Andrews um HBAC project. We did have them quoted out and because quoting it out through them, through the project, everything else, it's many times more than that to
do it through them. We can do it much more uh efficiently out out of the project with a separate contractor. The next section is doors and windows. These are rusted door frames, doors need replaced, glass bloom, screens, all kinds of stuff like that. Uh these are
directly out of the facilities condition assessment report. Unlike the fire alarm and the pavement, this is a spec we could write ourselves. It's not a complicated specification to write and um um we can put that up. I see Paul has his hand raised. >> Yes. Um >> right. Hi Paul.
>> Hi. Um, >> everybody was like had a bar across their face, so I didn't see anything. >> Um, I'm assuming it's probably impossible to quantify, but you know, those doors and windows to me is there's going to be savings on heating and and
cooling and well, heating and cooling. Um, or are they in fact not in a state where we can expect anything like that? I don't think believe you would see a a substantial or even detectable change. Okay, >> these most of the windows these issues
are is there some part of the seal has failed between the multiple panes and so they're fogged and and glassed in there. Is that going to impact some part of the insulation property of the glass? I'm sure. But I don't know that it was something you'd perceive as a change. >> Okay. Thank you. >> This is the rusted door frames and
things like that. Those are becoming mechanical issues. But yeah, >> windows that are in need of like the the resealing is that um like what happens if we don't do that? >> So right now the glass has become
clouded. You can't see through it. Um and then eventually it will become an issue where the the gas will fail more and more and it become more more of an insulation factor of an issue. So, it's the windows are not broken. There's screens missing. There's other things
like that, but um it's not about um it's not about danger. It's about being able to use the window and see through it might mainly that's would be the main issue there. So, like if we looked at the Andrews and if I just filtered out doors and windows,
these are the kind of things they're talking about. I am always surprised how much a screen actually costs. I have anyone at home and I never I'm like I don't need one that bad. >> Yeah. >> I live in an old school. I am I see this
a lot. >> Yeah. So that's kind of what does and some of these estimates they're I mean all of their estimates they're applying a a factor to to square footage. So, you know, these these prices may come down a
little bit when we get specific to actual replacements and things like that, but um this is how they estimated things. Um railings to the Karen Theater at the high school. Uh we have not I thought we had we have not received the quote for this yet. So, this is a guesstimate at this point. Any number in gray is is a
gray number essentially. Um we don't have a real great number for that, but this is what I'm estimating at this point. Uh this would add railings along the left and right going up the staircases for uh patrons to be able to hold on to something as they walk up. Um we do have some damaged seating at the
McGlin. Um this would replace a a section of seating with new seating and allow us to use those as parts to continue to repair what's broken and to continue repair as we go down the road. Um Nick has requested a flooring and rug replacement at the auditorium and
library. This is a rough number from this I pulled from another school. This needs some more work as far as getting a a better number for this, but it's pretty far down the list. And then we have the intercom upgrades at the other three schools. I I I ranked the Andrews and the McGlin much higher because
they're cut two years older. So they're out they're in an out year now, but I left them down here. If there was things we traded, moved around, they might they might enter into the capital report. So that's kind of the highlevel list that we have. Um we can certainly
go through uh this sheet here which has the prior year uh things in progress items that were funded in other put in other areas. Um some finished projects that were in here. Um these were the new items section which I drove the
categories for. And then down the bottom is the accelerated repair program totals for each school and categories they fall in. I should have mentioned earlier the uh uh facilities condition assessment report categorizes things in two three categories. Priority one is immediate. They're saying we should do now.
Priority two is in the two to five years. Priority three is five years or beyond which I didn't uh total out here. And the bulk of it is in the ARP. back to the FY27 prioritized list.
Um, I just I had a couple of questions. I'm sure everybody does. Um, one of my questions uh is about number three, the phase two of the network refresh. >> Oh, this. Yep.
>> Um, so this the 350 is what remains in order to complete the project. our portion. >> What's that? >> Our portion. >> That's our portion. And was that already allocated to us?
>> That I don't know. I'm not aware of that. I know that um the project was originally like $1.5 million total and it was too much rate in one year and Dr. Cushing had split it into two phases and we've been allocated money in this
fiscal year and we had a little last fiscal year we can use but I do not know if anything is in a future year if this money is already allocated out as far as part of free cash or not. I really do not know. I don't know if Noel knows he's he's on
the allocation was a onetime allocation. Um but I have I think I would have to go back to my notes to >> Sure. >> Um to know so this is our portion >> of phase two. That's Yeah. Yeah. >> And the rest would be paid for by
>> correct. >> Okay. >> That's 40% of the cost of phase two. >> Okay. I don't feel like maybe we didn't talk about phase two because I don't remember a number that big. But >> so the is it was one number before and
then late in June it was split into two phases. >> Initially it was proposed as one big phase. >> I do remember this. >> Okay. Yeah. Okay. >> But I don't know how that impacted any allocation of money though.
>> That I don't know either. >> Okay. And my other question was about the the playground renovation feasibility piece. If you could talk a little bit more about that. I know Teresa is on the call as well.
>> Sure. Um so um we have three more playgrounds to renovate. The Brooks, the Roberts, the Mistuk. we need to do um kind of a design and feasibility study of what we want to do and how we want to do it and and that sort of thing and whether or not you know there's alternate locations perhaps with some
nearby areas that we could do some other playground work. Um this was a number that Hhabib just threw out there as a potential cost for that type of a study. Seems high to me. I have not had a chance. He just gave it to me today. I didn't have a chance to have another conversation with him about it.
>> Okay. I think our McGllin study was $50,000. Um, but it was just it was a design study. It was not a feasibility study. So, it was different. >> And may maybe that's what we need is just a feasibility study and maybe it's
50 per and it's 150. Um, this was just a number he put out there just over email quick, you know, trying to get some quick and dirty numbers from when we discussed it this week. >> And, um, I wanted to thank Teresa for joining us as well. I don't know Teresa this this came up and we were talking
about um whether the CPC would fund such a feasibility study like across you know the three the three remaining schools and just to get a better understanding of any thoughts that that you have that we might want to consider as we think
about potentially putting together a CPC application >> yeah for this >> y certainly thank you for having me Dupont I'm the community preservation act manager for the city. So, I help support the program and the and the committee that funds these programs um these types of projects. So, I also
agree that the 350 number is a bit high, especially if this would be all under one contract rather than we do one school one year, you know, the next school blah blah blah. So, I feel like that number is probably closer to about 200,000 um just based off of past prog uh
projects and you know, acceleration in costs that we're seeing across the board. Um, in terms of timing, uh, please forgive me. I is, am I understanding this correctly? Is this for fiscal 27 outlook or things we're trying to accomplish this year? And I
ask for, uh, grant deadline reasonings. Um, our annual funding round has already passed for fiscal 26 funding. Um, >> yeah, this would be this would be for your next funding round. >> Okay, perfect. I just wanted to clarify that because I didn't want to get any hopes dashed if this was something that
we were looking to do quickly. Um but yes, this would be a welcome application for fiscal 27. >> Okay. And I think, you know, one of the things um one of the reasons why we've been talking about this potentially as a feasibility study um the last year um
when we did our capital plan, we identified that there are in fact three playground renovations um still to go and we identified that the Roberts is our priority. Um, but it is objectively the most complicated project that we'll
see because it is the tightest on space. And at the time last year, the conversation was around like we should not be just trying to like make a new playground until we address the fundamental space issues at the Roberts
um in some more like fundamental sustainable way. So at Brooks and Mistatuck the situation is a little bit different. There is space and how the space is used certainly could be uh
could benefit from modernization and the equipment is quite old. Um so all of that is true but at the Roberts in addition to all of that being true they're very space constrained. Um, and that is something that we're going to
have to grapple with, which would be part of the feasibility study here, like what else can we do to support that school community? Um, and h how might we go about thinking about it? So, that's part of that
feasibility study. >> I I would I would >> I'm sorry. I would highlight that uh CPA would be eligible for any portion of the feasibility study that would be for outdoor recreation space
>> that serves a public benefit. So if there was some some thoughts of redesigning the actual interior to accommodate more exterior space that that element of it wouldn't be eligible, but you know, we would figure that out in the the the dollar amount um
calculation. So, just wanted to put that out there as a caveat. >> Perfect. And um the inside is quite full as well, so there's probably not a lot of opportunity to do anything like that, but >> um you you never know, you know, how this all shakes out when you get the
right people looking at the problem. So, um that's helpful to know. >> Um Paul and Erica, do you have questions about this tab? >> Yeah. >> Okay. Paul, do you want to >> um I actually have a question about the
um definition of outdoor um because one of the things um as part of the the school building project for the high school um wallam although they had plenty of land I'm a little confused why they decided to do this um decided to have their their it
was not a playground it's a field actually on top of it's just an elevated field for which parking is underground. Um, and without eminent domain and taking somebody's house nearby, um, there's no magical,
there's no TARDIS and time lords to make us have more room without more room. Um, and so one of the thoughts that I know that I've been bantering around is could we put parking under, not underground,
just having the playgrounds above parking. Um, so I guess my question is what is the definition of outdoor recreation space with if it was elevated above at grade parking? Is that something that hasn't even been
considered >> in terms of how you know we have to be careful under community preservation act law about what is the definition of outdoor recreation space. some municipalities, it's kind of um I don't want to say ambiguous, but it does kind
of differentiate from municipality to municipality. Some just say it's a blanket any uh publicly owned parcel that's under chapter 20 uh 97 protections. In Medford, our school playgrounds serve as public playgrounds. They're not isolated
or um you know, exclusive to school use um during non-school hours. So in in Medford, that type of a project um we wouldn't be able to fund any of the creation of the parking or the surface
in which the playground would well actually maybe possibly the surface of the playground if I'm envisioning um your your uh scenario correctly. We couldn't create the parking, but we could make it pretty at the end of it uh with, you know, recreation space,
recreation use, public amenities on top. Does that answer your question, Paul? It does. I know it's very I mean other than I think there's a few places that have gone this route because it is in fact more expensive but >> um I'm sure it's not nearly as expensive as eminent domaining a a building.
>> Yes. >> So um >> thank you. >> Of course. >> Erica, do you have questions? >> Yeah. I mean I think most of my questions are going to come up when we start prioritizing and moving things around. Um because I'm looking at the
paving and I'm wondering which of those issues are accessibility issues and which are kind of general wear and tear. Um but they're not posing an an immediate accessibility issue, but I guess that's what the study is going to be addressing. U member
Russo actually I also had the question about parking underneath um a playground space. And what was my other piece was yeah around the playgrounds and the last the last the McGlin playground was a
very community oriented program. Uh and so whether this these quotes were around updating what's there or really rethinking the space and that seems like it could be a the definition between that feasibility study and the design
study. So I think most of my questions are going to come up when we start prioritizing because my big one is around what are these things that maybe they might not be big and urgent but if we wait they compound later so I'm ready
to keep going I think >> okay >> to answer your question about the paving so the Mcllen and the Andrews they've already addressed the ADA issues I remember >> I'm not aware of major major issues at the other three elementaryaries. These
are mostly parking lots, curbs, you know, worn out sidewalks, things that are starting to There are some areas where there's heaving and other things that are causing things, but um a lot of it is more in the wear and tear category. >> And can none of these paving projects
include repaving Freedom Way? >> Correct. No, that is now I just found out yesterday that with Tim McGyvern that that is now a the street >> and that they have not done any improvements, but they're planning something in the next few years.
>> It's no longer a school driveway. >> Correct. >> At first, I didn't know if you could hear me. Um, I would to the paving piece though say that the Matuck, we have to wait to see what the study brings, but I would say that the Misatuck has a slight
um, prioritization over the other buildings, especially around the pathway from the staff parking to the school. There's quite a gap um, that does pose, it's blocked off right now because it
does pose a safety issue. Yeah. >> And then the front um walkway uh does have some work to do with the missuck. So I would say that that has a higher prioritization than the other buildings, but the study will I think illuminate
that more more. And then I also in addition because I also had the Robert's um pieces that member Russo and member Reinfeld have already elevated but I also have a question around the timeline because the Roberts unlike the other
three buildings there is no option for outdoor play when this work is happening. So the McGlin was able to go and use Hormell they were able to work something out. There's also field space, you know, in the back. Both the Brooks and the um
Misatuck have adjacent space to go to and the Roberts does not. So, I also would have a question around timeline to see if there's a way to have the least amount of impact to
student recess. >> And Mr. Tuck may have trouble getting to that outside space, adjacent space. The playground's kind of in between them. >> That's right. >> Yeah. I mean, you know, I think one, you know, one thing that the Miss Tuck and
the Brooks have is that you you could do one and not the other. So, you're not like obliterating both playgrounds at the same time. Although there probably are some like real like cost tradeoffs because I'm sure it's easier for them to
come in, take it all down, put it all back together. Um, having said that, I don't the scale like to me I think what we what I'll be interested to learn about in the feasibility design process
is the scale of what we were able to do at Mcllin was made possible by its space. Like some of those pieces of equipment are very large and would like consume
the whole >> Mhm. lower playground at the Brooks, right? Like one piece of equipment would sort of be the whole space. Um, so I think the qu, you know, the scale of those playgrounds is certainly a
question that will be really interesting to like ask and answer and to like balance that with the the needs of those school communities um in general, you know, so that we're like so that those playgrounds are just as
accessible. Um, I think at the McGlenn, we enjoyed that the space was not the problem, right? like there there wasn't really a space issue that we had to grapple with. Um and so we were able to do some really interesting things. So um
but my assumption is all of that would become clear during the um >> during these design processes. Um, and so Teresa, I think the other question procedurally that I had is
way back when we just simply did resurfacing of these playgrounds and when actually the McGlin design study came to be the thing that we did first. Um, we
were advised that each school had to go in as its own independent request to CPC. And I think what I think what Ken's trying to say here is we would like to do one study so there
can be some economy of scale across the three across the three properties instead of having to like be in a situation where we are funding like kind of one at a time and like starting from scratch with potentially a new vendor
each time this happens. So could you talk a little bit about whether we would be permitted to do one project that would span all of those buildings? >> Certainly. Um I do see that the committee would very likely want to see these come in as separate projects only
because they would evaluate each project for the merits of the public benefit that it would serve. So would the uh missuck having and I'm just spitballing here and I don't speak for the committee. I can only speak from my experience with them. They would evaluate the missuck project and then
pit it against the Roberts and they would pit the Roberts against the right. So, but you know that's how they would have to evaluate each project. Um, so that's not to say that they wouldn't fund all three in the same funding cycle, but they I I would foresee them
requiring them as separate applications. Um, just because again they they would have to evaluate it as a standalone project in their eyes. Um, I think that they would obviously understand the the cost savings there would be with lumping them all together and I I believe that
that would be factored into their consideration strongly. But um and I may very well be wrong here, but if that's what the past committee has wanted to see um and me having experience with our current committee, I think that's what they would want to see. Unfortunately,
>> did you have a question? >> Nope, it got answered. >> Okay. Um and Teresa, is that an answer? Like when do we seek that answer? um that so that does come through our eligibility determination process which
is basically like a pre preapp um however you know this since this something is being discussed now in a public setting certainly um we could bring it to the committee now just to get their gut check you know it's not an actual application just a this is what we're thinking how would you respond to
this and that can be um you know considered on our December 9th meeting or our early January I think it might make sense to ask you all to consider that in your maybe your January meeting because then we'll have
like passed this through um the the school committee in terms of its priorities. Um and I think having that answer would just allow us to do the work to like build the documentation that's needed in the right way the first time instead of sort of having to
scramble at the end. Um, so I think that would probably be very useful. >> Yeah, I I can um I can put together like draft a memo based off of this conversation and kick it to this team for you to review. Um, and then we can go from there. Happy to put that on our
agenda. >> Okay, perfect. Thank you for that. Um I I also think that um you know when that meeting happens um you know we're going to do them all.
So you know it's it the the money saving approach. I mean whether we do them one year one every year or we can get them all done at once. Um and I realize what else is on the plate is is a big key part of that. um or what what other potential uh projects are sitting there.
But um just you know thinking about how the money gets spent. I mean we're going to we're going to keep coming back. So hopefully >> um yeah, >> right. Yeah. And um yes, probably did
that. >> Okay. So, Ken, if I am understanding the list correctly, this was your suggested priority for these projects for the next year and it totals about $2.5 million of
allocation for the FY27 or sooner time frame. Is that right? >> Prioritiz my initial prioritization. Yes. >> Okay. >> Um so I think Erica uh raised a question about prioritization. So I I guess the
thing that um maybe Erica if you want to ask your question and we can figure out whether there are priorities that need to shift here would be the next conversation to have. I >> I had a pre-quest on that which is looking at our fiscal year um 26 capital
plan. Are we on track or are there things that are getting bumped? Obviously, the phase two of the network refresh, we know that got split across the two fiscal years, but are we going to come up to May and go, "Oh, no, we have to adjust the capital plan because
how are we doing in in our 26 plan?" >> The only one I know of that was a slip was the network. >> Okay. >> I know HVAC got delayed, but we're still in this fiscal year. Yes. So great. >> Well, the HVAC project will extend into
>> Yes. >> But we had that had been planned. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> We still have a few other smaller items on the capital plan which some of which are in the operations. There's some air conditioning replacements and stuff. We're working on those, but they're small projects I don't anticipate not
being accomplished. >> Yeah. Okay. And then this prioritization list is based on what is most likely to fa fail or present a clear and present danger to folks >> as well as the study money getting setting up for the next year,
>> right? >> You know, so like if the paving couldn't make it, you know, we need to do the study for the paving, but if the doors and windows didn't make it, we could do that in the next year without having a study. Some of the these bigger projects, you need to do a study and then fund it the next year. So it's kind of like setting up
stuff for those, >> right? And because we did a chunk of studies this year and we're now seeing what comes out of that to do that work this year. So >> yeah, exactly. >> That makes a lot of sense. >> Yeah. But I'm open to, you know, there's there's a lot here. So it's kind of
like, you know, there's there's some, you know, fire alarm was the most important thing I thought of. Yeah. So like I think the the top level narrative is like we need to dig deeper on a
number of fronts in FY26 so that we can begin doing the work that so we're like in a fine enough position right now if we do these studies because it's going to take time and years to do the work. Um but that's true of fire
alarm and paving. um and playground renovation. And then there's some other things where like in FY26 we should be completing projects like the intercom upgrades and the you know doors and windows and that kind of thing. >> 27 you mean? >> 27.
>> Yeah. Yeah. 26. I can't get to it that quick. >> Uh and then I guess my other question is is how squishy are these numbers when we go to other potential vendors? Right. I know you kind of got quick and dirty answers from Aibb who had just done
these studies. I don't think we're committed to always working with them. >> So, do we anticipate this is going to stay around? >> These study numbers are rough. >> Yeah, >> this was, you know, just hitting him up
really quick and getting some numbers. These may alter a little bit. I don't think they're going to change by an order of magnitude. >> Okay. But, you know, and we may also decide that, well, you know, it may not make sense to do all five schools of a study of a fire alarm because we're only
going to be able to fund a couple of them in the next in the fiscal year after that. So, it might make sense to move some of the study to the next fiscal year to stagger out what we're doing so that the study doesn't become stale, particularly on fire alarm with his code changes.
So you're looking at, you know, this is what Hhabib suggested. You know, that's $2.6 million of work across five buildings and it's pretty invasive work. Um, you know, you couldn't do all that in one summer. So you we may decide that okay, let's do the two, let's do the
Anders and McGlin this year so that we would be scheduling in FY28 to replace the systems and then FY28 we study the three elementaryaries to do those in FY29. We may schedule that out a little bit. But I was trying to get everything out there that's a possible study.
>> That makes sense. Do we have a sense of which ones are going to be most urgent or are they all equally urgent in this model? I see the study as a way of saying, okay, which are the priorities to make the upgrades? >> By age, Anders and McGllin are two years older than the other two. The Robert
system has some problems. >> We're able to >> just what I want to hear with the kid at the Roberts. They're things we need to work on, but they're not, you know, they're not critical things, but we're noticing that we're having trouble finding parts for that system. >> And that's a similar system that the
other two elementaryaries. So, by age, Andrew and McGlenn are older, but I haven't had the issues there. So, >> different they're different systems. >> Okay? Because the other thing that I would love to be aware of big picture here is if we're studying things and
we're that we're doing work in lots of different places so that it's not oh well the McGlin is getting all the love and care. Um so to be able to stagger things in that way I think is a good faith gesture to the community.
obviously driven by urgent need, but >> it's also the ability to get multiple projects at one building done at the same >> Yeah, exactly. >> You can only fit so, as we learned with the HBAC, you can only get so many guys working at a time, you know. So, >> right.
>> And can you scroll down again? I just want to remind myself what's at the bottom. Intercom doors. Okay. Thank you. >> And um I think the other question I had about paving was these prices
assume that we're going to contract out to do this paving work. Right. >> Correct. >> Okay. And ha has there been any conversation with DPW about their
ability to take this stuff on instead or No, not yet. >> There has not. There's not discussion. No. >> Okay. Um I know there they have their own backlog and I'm quite certain it's enormous and it does not include
um schools lots. So um so that that may be a non-starter. But >> are you referring to streets or for municipal buildings? Well, they they have a backlog for roads and sidewalks
that is like $20 and something million dollars >> and a lot of that is probably farmed out to contractors. >> Yes. However, we did just like >> Yeah. >> fund a crew, right? And so that poor crew like there's a lot of expectations
about what that crew can reasonably do, you know, at any given time. Um but I just didn't know if there had been any conversations about >> has not but I can I can certainly have that conversation with with um Tim McGan as well as you know let's just say you know we asked them to do the Brooks you
know parking lots and stuff given the size of their crew how quickly could they do that in a summer you know because it's also you know maybe a lot farming it out may allow us to get it done and not impact the school as much but that's comes at a cost of course but I can certainly have that conversation with them
>> or just maybe be helpful to understand like where that fits. I also wonder though if um if using the city would allow us to avoid procurement and bidding and all that other nons I don't want to say nons I said nonsense but I mean all those other steps that
>> hurdles >> hurdles thank you uh although I mean I don't know >> you'd have to procure the materials but that's far easier than service you know construction not dealing with you know
so yeah And I'm sure they probably have state contracts they can leverage for asphalt and granite and other materials that they purchase. So >> all right. So the money question and although member Graham you look like you're about to say something.
>> My only other question was whether um the Karen theater railing deserved a slightly higher billing than that. And I I just >> it may put into the extraordinary repairs account, >> right?
>> But there's a you know, if I look back at the um the operating money, this was all in what I I'm sorry, wrong one. Operating here. I I categorize $247,000 worth of work as operating work. So
that's like probably two years worth of the extraordinary repairs plus other things that come in. So it's possible we could look through this and prioritize the work that's in here. Slide some of the smaller items into the operating budget like the railings, like the uh
condenser replacement if it doesn't go. Some of those things could squeeze into there more easily. >> Stretch out that two-year time frame to three >> potentially. Yeah. Yeah. >> Okay. Got it. >> No, that's helpful. Yeah, that was going to be my question about what could get wrapped into the operating and the point
I think to the point of the Carolyn theater. >> We're looking at a new high school in the not too distant future. And so if this is a repair that needs to happen, it really doesn't make sense to put it off and only have this happen for one
year. >> Yeah, it's not a repair. >> I feel like it's do it soon or don't do it at all. Yeah, the railings itself are they don't exist now, >> right? >> It's not a it's not a repair. >> Sorry. Yes. So, yeah. Yeah.
>> Um well, and I think to that point, Ken, maybe the question is whether there's an opportunity to do that in the FY26 extraordinary repair bucket >> potentially. There's a lot of other stuff that's in there, too, though. So,
I'm getting quotes and things on that and we're still waiting the quote for this this railing. >> Okay. >> I'm trying to get the company to give us that. It's been difficult. So, >> okay. >> Um, so that would be the other sort of maybe variable to think about before we
>> move it out. Yes. >> Okay. Um, Paul and Erica, what other questions do you have about prioritization? um not prioritization, but I see that um
Mr. Tucci has put in things here that I feel like why would that not be a thing that all the schools um should probably need at the same time. And I'm not suggesting if they didn't ask that we should just do it.
But um I um I'm just sensitive and and I know the other school committee members are. just sensitive to, you know, one school getting things and other schools needing them but not getting them. Um, and the conversation after the fact of, well, they never asked doesn't really
hold a lot of water with the people who will be complaining. Um, so, um, I just think that, um, you know, I mean, I I feel like as long as I've had kids in the schools, the complaints that the
rugs are ancient and dirty, and there's lots of issues there, but, um, >> yeah, how many donors choose projects are there for rugs? >> Exactly. Um, so, um, you know, this is like one more thing for Ken to put on his very long to-do list, but there are
certain items that I mean, a rug in an elementary school in a kindergarten has a lifespan. Um, and we shouldn't wait for complaints to decide it's that time. Um, you know, to just put them on
a schedule and I don't know how I have no clue how long it actually is. Um, and um, I also worry about people buying rugs for donor's shoes cuz fire code stuff, you know, we can't just have anything in a class. Um, and of course,
if we're not buying it, it's I mean, it's I don't think it's fair to say, "No, no, you got to buy only these allowed kinds to people who are doing a donor's choose to get a a new rug." Um, and I feel like we're talking about a rug, even though we're talking about
many millions of dollars here, but they're expensive. um the the ones that meet fire codes for schools and all that stuff. So, >> I think that's actually maybe a bigger conversation for the next term, which is we have lots of entities that buy things
on behalf of classrooms and um schools, right? Like our PTOs are very active in that way. And one of like my huge frustrations um from my time on the PTO before I went
before I uh was elected to the school committee is we would purchase things and turn them over and then they would not be maintained, right? Or we would turn them over and then they would the with some like handshake agreement that
never was fulfilled. Like there was a year where we bought a new rug for every classroom teacher and the ask was can they just be cleaned every year in the summer and then they never got cleaned. Um so I think there's like a bigger
quest. There's like something a little bit broader there about how to collaborate with people who are trying to help us in a like like full circle kind of way, right? like that they they because nobody wants to buy
things for us that we shouldn't have, right? But they don't but people don't know. And so how do we create an easy like pathway for that to happen and to understand like what is coming into the universe of like essentially our like
expectation of maintenance that we need to know about because I don't think we have a good line of sight of what those things are. And then there's just all kinds of questions about well like I don't know where that came from or I don't know who's supposed to do that thing and um we could like sort of
tighten up all of that process a little bit for sure um upcoming. >> One thing to keep in mind about the McGlin is the seating and the rug replacement has a direct correlation to the amount of outside rentals we have in there. you have a massive rental in
there every single weekend that's adding a ton more wear and tear to that building than any other building. Um, >> so that's maybe looking at our again looking at rental rates and community
schools and that's that's a Rob question as well, but I think that's I think that's fair and I know I know some of the rental groups have contributed to like the lighting system at the McGlin and we're looking at a donation for the
audio system from a group of caregivers but Yeah. And I think that is like another thing for us to consider talking about in the next term in terms of like what you know what are people paying for
rentals and how are we like how are we managing all of that in a consistent way and does it cover like it's one thing to cover you know the cost of like the maintenance and the custodial who are on
site when they're air. That's like one cost, but then there's like what it cost to heat and and power the building. And then there's like, you know, yet another cost about wear and tear and all of these things happen faster when when we
have like heavy rental use. And I'm not suggesting we shouldn't want our schools to be used in this way because I think it's great. um it just has to not disadvantage like the mission of the schools at the same time. Right. So there's a there's a there's a big
conversation to have there as well. >> I'm I'm actually very excited to have that conversation. >> Are you? Uh, I am just because I think we do appreciate a lot of the partnerships and definitely schools are
community spaces, but I do think we need uh some clarity added to the use of our schools and down to the how and the when and the how much and the why
definitely needs to be a conversation so that we're adding more clarity to that to that I think the McGlin has seen a lot of um wear and tear. I think there's like there's also like protective coating that is on the stage
um pretty much 247 to protect the the wood of the stage. But I think just that overall conversation definitely needs to be had. >> Yeah. Um, is that building and ground
subcommittee? Is that a separate is that an offline conversation? Is that this group? I'm not sure. It's this group. >> Well, I I don't I don't know what group it is actually, but I also think the groups
are subject to change. >> Yeah. I'm just thinking about what we're organizing for. >> Yeah. Next. >> Yeah. think we should have that conversation and figure out who you know how the upcoming committee wants to >> organize. I mean because there's an argument for splitting strategic and
capital planning into two given the strategic planning process that's about to come online. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Anyway, that's a separate conversation not on the agenda. So I guess we're back to the the priorities here. >> So are there any other questions or
objections? No, I think just to identify which of these, right, if we're looking at staggering some of these studies to highlight which ones come first and then if there's another
study that needs to happen maybe that doesn't have that doesn't have that time urgency constraint, then the schools that aren't getting the urgent ones get the other study and
flip-flop in subsequent fiscal years, >> right? >> There. So, are there other like So, I think there's some numbers that we're still trying to refine. So, I think I'm thinking December 15th is still the right date for us to bring this forward.
Um, but not sure if there's anything else that you all are thinking about that we need to talk about before we feel like we're ready to bring this forward um to the committee. Um, and or if we need to try to like shoehorn
another meeting in to have more discussion. So, I don't know how you all are feeling about where we're at. I mean last year we had two meetings and the second one before we presented to the the whole committee and the second one was about projecting out saying these
are the things we've chosen for this year and in context here's what's coming and why we've prioritized these. So I think that needs to happen. I do think it would be good for this group to be on the same page in presenting that,
but I am also aware that December 15th is less than a month away and we've got Thanksgiving and all sorts of other things. But >> um we did have we do have >> we do have this committee to meet to I
think discuss uh intradistrict policies. on December 8th. And I'm sort of wondering if like we use that time to have a second conversation about this
and we move the inter district into January and figure out like where its proper home is um as potentially the subcommittees change because I don't really foresee that we could pull off an intrad district policy in December 2025
at this point. So, do we want to >> I mean the only the reason that was out is being loud. >> Oh, sorry, Erica. What were you saying? >> No, no, no. Did you Did you hear the siren? I muted because Okay, there was a roaring siren heading down the street.
Um, we as I recall, we scheduled the intradist enrollment policy in order to beat the kindergarten registration so that we had that information in place as soon as people started asking questions about why are they registered for a school that's not in their backyard.
Am I right about that, Dr. Galooi? That was our motivation. Um, I'm not qu I I think there were a couple pieces of motivation. I think some of this did come out from the enrollment and overcrowding um subcommittee report that I gave in
May um because some of the interdist transfers were around at least that I was a part of as as when I gave that presentation um was around because we were not able to have full capacity of afterchool care. So a lot of the interdist
transfers were uh childcare related for after school and then there was the piece around um interd district transfers for keeping families together for specialized subs separate programming
right but was was kindergarten registration was that our deadline or did I just hallucinate that was that the was that a deadline it doesn't sound like >> you may not have I don't remember that hard. >> Yeah, I don't remember kindergarten registration either.
>> I mean, certainly before we start, you know, that those interd district conversations tend to happen closer to the end of the school year. So, I think we have a little bit of time. Um, I'm not thinking of anything that has to happen. >> I think it was just kindergarten
registration, but I think there is a window there. >> Well, I know later. If that's not urgent, then I'm fine to use the December 8th meeting for this since it's on the calendar. >> Okay, perfect. Um my calendar is really
miserable, so I'm glad to not have to find another hour. Um, I would just ask that we um when we're ready for the presentation at school committee that we give a you know 90 second primer on um what does it mean
to be net school spending eligible and all this other stuff because uh if anything there it's important but it's also not exactly intuitive. So um just just a note for the presentation when we do get to it.
Yeah, I so I am thinking um in terms of next steps um Ken and I can work on sort of forming this into like maybe two two things, right? One is like
here's what was previously funded and a status. Second is here's the recommendation and how it lays out for FY27 forward. Um, and then maybe there's like another
part of like describing like one maybe if we do it one time, we don't have to do it every year. Like those those things exactly, member Russo like here's our pro like as a reminder, here's our like little
visual process and here's what these things mean so that if we can get that right one time, it's going to work for all the times, right? that people have these questions. So, I'm wondering if those are maybe the two things that need to happen
um before the ETH. I don't know if anyone wants to volunteer for number two. >> What was number two? um like outlining like what is what is our capital planning process and what are these like important like terms and
definitions just so that >> was it the process and these are the buckets where things come from and why they can go in one bucket and not in another >> I was looking up the policy >> I remember Jerry gave uh Mr. McHugh gave
us a lovely briefer on that. >> Yeah. And I'm just thinking like if we write it down in a something visual one time, it will be better than if we talk about it 10 times. >> I think that I can handle that with um
Will and the finance office. >> Um look at the policy. Um we did not update it but there is one date I believe or maybe a couple of dates that are not uh when we did this last year there was
a date or two that were sort of not possible or feasible or whatever the words were. Um so just keep that in mind when you look at the dates in the actual policy that you might not want to freak out about how wait we can't do that
can't meet that date. Um I think it was the getting the the the target date we have is February 28th. Um and >> for the budget, not for capital, right? >> Uh no, this is the capital improvement
planning policy. So, I think last year we ended up way ahead of the schedule because we I think the policy says have a committee of the whole and then have a vote and we did
that all in one meeting. Um, and so we were done in December last year when I think we weren't scheduled to be done until before that. >> Yeah, the budget calendar definitely shifted because of over >> Thank you. That's right. The budget was the thing that moved >> because it was there was a sudden
infusion of funds that we maybe didn't want to rush through allocating. >> Great. Thank you. >> So, do look at the policy then. >> I was like, I think we actually I think we beat the I think we beat the clock on
this one. Um, okay. So, Ken, I'll connect with you and we can like ship this out and then um put that visual together and then we should be in good shape. And I am
thinking we can probably do this in one meeting again instead of trying to have a committee of the whole and then a meeting to take the vote. Yeah, I think we won't have Teresa's the CPA's best guess at how they would treat the
treat these applications by then. >> You can put that just in the comments, >> which is fine. I just I think that's if that's the if that's the one piece we're missing, we're in good shape. >> Yeah. And if I if I may, um, I I can
have an administrative conversation with our chairperson to see what her gut is too, if that is at all helpful. Um, I think it would need it would still need to go before our committee for a vote on an official stance of how they would accept the application, but if that's at all helpful and get a
>> It is for mapping purposes and it can get tweaked if the official vote doesn't match. But I think I think two gut checks is a great >> Okay. >> start. Perfect. All right. I'll get that from her and send along an official memo from from us and and from me and the chair person.
>> Thank you. >> Any other questions or comments? >> I I just want to comment on how much I appreciate the administration's work on this. Um I'm just remembering when I joined the school committee and
um the differences between now and then are beyond stark in what we are in in what we understand about the state of things. Uh and you know isn't I don't know is half the
battle but knowing is certainly required to even go to battle on these numbers. Um, so I'm beyond thankful and very excited um to find this money. >> Yeah. And extra thanks to Ken for for
diving in and jumping on this. It's this is a delight of a of a view of what we're doing. >> Absolutely. >> You're welcome. >> Medford Public Schools is very lucky to have Ken Lord. >> Absolutely. Um, okay. I think that's it. It's only
5:11. It's >> okay. >> Said he sent >> I have a little time before my next meeting. >> I Is there a motion to adjourn? >> A motion to adjourn? >> Second by member Rinfeld. Seconded by member Rouso. I'll call the role. Member Rinfeld.
>> Yes. >> Member Rouso. >> Yes. >> Member Graham. Yes. Three in the affirmative, zero in the negative. Motion is journed.