Rip it. All right, let's get started. They'll keep an eye on the attendees um cuz I think uh Megan Hagerty will be joining us too, but she'll be remote. Um so, it is now uh 7:07 p.m. I'll call the
uh July 1st, 2025th meeting of the school building committee uh to order. As typical, um just do a roll call and since everybody's remote, makes it a little bit easier. So, I'll call them as as I see you. Uh Glenn Hoffman here.
Nathan Hut here. Uh Carrie Hurley present. Uh Mark Luring here. Uh principal John Reen here. All right. And Sean Oor. Um
couple people running late so we'll keep an eye out for them as they come in. So um we've got our quorum. So, the first thing I'll do is open it up uh to citizen speak. Uh for agenda item number two, uh we reserve the first 15 minutes
of our meetings uh for any citizen that would like to speak. Um we ask that you just state your name and your address and limit your u your your your commentary to uh 3 minutes. So, uh keep an eye on the attendees and see if
there's anybody uh wanting to speak. and not seeing any. So, we'll move on. Um, pull up the agenda. So, agenda item number three is approval of our past minutes. Um, I got to admit I I really miss PMA Consulting for their
help in uh gathering the minutes. Uh, I've got drafts of of both minutes started. I just didn't have a chance to submit them to everybody to review. Uh so we won't be able to vote on them tonight, but I I will get them uh prior to the holiday. So, you know, prior to our next meeting, so we can get those.
Uh I definitely don't want to fall too far behind. Um moving right along to item number four, which is old business update discussion MSBA module one. Um so with MSBA module one uh I met with the
superintendent uh a couple weeks ago there there is a questionnaire um that he's working on that's that's one of the uh kind of milestones next one that's coming up for us. Uh, hang on one second. Megan's here.
Panist co-host. Just give me one second, please. So, as I was saying, uh, hi Megan. Um, so as I was saying for module one, as far as some of the subcomponents that we're doing, uh, one of them is an
educational profile, uh, that the district needs to fill out. Uh, so we've sub, we provided that to the superintendent. He's currently working on it. Um, Mark, I don't know if you have any other update from talking with the superintendent just basically
through school committee or anything like that. Yeah. Uh we I added you Sean on the um what we're kind of at a final draft. Uh Dr. Redden uh added a few things. Uh John's team added a couple things. Um I
pulled some stuff from the statement of interest and from the Aeros Streets kind of schematic design, you know, asked for some questions on things related to that. So I I think we have a draft draft. I think I tagged you in that Sean. um just say like it's good for for
a look over and then obviously um defer to you on like sharing out with just the the whole committee to have folks eyes on it and sign off on but I think it's mostly good to go. The only piece of that document that I think we were missing was the master facility forget
what it's called but like a master facility document that um uh superintendent Failen was going to follow up with Tom McCarthy on. But otherwise I I think it's complete recording in progress.
One second. Sorry about that. Mark, we had we had some feedback here. Um so um I apologize. That was that Google doc that you sent to me. Yeah. Yeah. I can also I can drop it in the chat here for folks. Um
what I'll do is I'll I'll take a look at I I did not see that mainly because it was a a Google doc. I was looking for attachments before. So I apologize. I didn't get a chance to look at that. So all right. So that's good news. So um so the questionnaire then there's we we
have a draft and I end ready to go, right? Yes. Again, the the only thing lingering is uh we had to attach some documents and so I attached the NASDAQ uh most recent NASDAQ report and the original DRRA uh space need study. Um
yeah, and then I think I'll um I also need to attach the aeros schematic design study. Uh but then again, Tom McCarthy, we need like a they call it a master facilities plan. Um those are kind of his section five of the questionnaire. section five,
right? And and that's separate than the other facilities one that um that that Tom's going to work on, right? Yeah, I think so. Yeah, it just under section five, it says, "Please attach this questionnaire any executive reports
or conclusions of reports or studies related to coordinated program review, master plan, facilities plan." And you know, in talking to John, he thought um Tom had something like that and was going to follow up with them. So, it's possible that there's this document
doesn't actually exist, but that's the only thing on my end that I think needs follow up on. All right. Um All right, that's good. Uh you know, the the other component in module one, uh outside of that, and thank you for the update, is the um is
the facilities um worksheet that that uh Tom has to work on. So, that's one of the online forms that they have. So, I I've got I've got in touch with MSBA this week uh for folks that are going to need access
to the MSBA's portal for the town. They they're um I don't want to call it restrictive, but they're, you know, you have to essentially sign up to get access and whether it's just read only or write. Um, so Mark, I I think with some of the work you're doing, you know, it' be good to kind of get you access
there and others as they as you guys as this uh goes along, if you feel you need access for anything, just let me know. Uh, the superintendent has to sign off on it and then uh essentially we submit it to MSBA, you'll get credentials and you'll be able to go in and do it. uh
the Tom McCarthy's one which is another uh one of those components for the uh facilities assessment uh outside of what Mark was just talking about is another one. So I'll get a um a logging credential you know get Tom sign up for
that. Um, one of the things just as just to let everybody else know too, uh, some of the questions that come up for the facilities one, uh, through a friend that work that had a, um, uh, gone through this process before, he gave me
some of the cliff notes that he had for what the questions were, uh, essentially I forwarded those over to Tom, uh, so he could take a look at them. I'll forward that to the remainder of the committee uh so everybody can kind of see what the questions are in relates to um you know
for for the facility and stuff like that. So um you know for module one you know the the the next kind of way point that we're hitting is July 30th which is that document that you're working on Mark.
So, knowing that we have that in hand now, you know, that's that's good news that we're good there. The facilities one that I talked about that Tom's doing, I I don't think it's due till September. Uh, so, you know, overall, we're in good sh We're in good good shape. And, you know, I apologize again,
Mark. I didn't see that document when you sent it. So, yeah, no problem. All right. in in regards to anybody on the committee. Are there any questions or anything, you know, u so far or where
we're at? Seeing none, let me keep moving about the agenda. Sorry about that. All right. Um, the next one we touched on a couple times is like the project
timeline. Um, so I I took some time and kind of went through um kind of where we're at with some of this. I'm going to share my screen. Just give me one second and just let me know when you guys can
see it on your end. All right. So this thing hold this wrong presentation. Sorry about that. Stop sharing for a second. Too many presentations open.
Excellent screen. There we go. Let me know when you guys can see it. Oh, good. Good. All right. So what what we had here uh just for some of our newer members, you know, um Megan and Na
Nathan and you know, John, um you know, for us, we were formed in 2019. Uh you know, we used the first couple years to kind of go through developing a program for what we're looking at looking for land. uh towards the end of 2021, we
identified Gal Road and worked towards town meeting in 2022 with the land swap. You know, the original land swap that we were doing. Um we took the land swap at that time that was used in all conservation land. I think it was a total of like 6.8 acres
and we revised it to bring it down. Uh so we revised it to essentially I refer to as land swap 2.0. We passed that in May of 2023. And then, you know, we worked with our consultants PMA and Arrow Street to develop a schematic
design. Uh while we're working on that schematic design, the governor in uh July of last year, the end of July, signed the bill for the land swap kind of into effect. And you know, our goal last summer was to basically aim for the
presidential election to have a debt exclusion vote for that that would allow us to complete the design for finalized construction and kind of move towards a new school in fall 2027. Um, so as it, you know, as the slide states, that was our previous uh
timeline that we had. our current timeline. If we look at this, uh, same as everything up till last year, except, you know, MSDA invited us in in December of last year. So, for us,
it was kind of like a a reset button that was hit at the time. Um, so, you know, we we got invited to MSBA and for us, we're unable to start. Hey, Aqua. Hi. How are Sorry, Aqua. So for us for
we weren't able to essentially start the process with MSBA until May 2025. Uh so you know with us right now as we were just discussing we're in module one because of eligibility. Um we're hoping to kind of get through
module one by the fall probably October uh just by the way the MSBA board meetings are going. Um so with that after module one module two essentially has two components to it. One is hiring
an owner's project manager uh in which case the process by that we have to issue an RFP interview OPMS make a selection and then get MSBA to you know essentially approve that. That then flows into the second uh selection of an
architect as part of module two. And with that that portion is done by MSBA's designer selection panel uh which will have three seat set out of I think 12. Um essentially with that it's just taking
more time. So the the intent of that module 2 is probably going to take about 7 to 8 months by the time we finish. So that's going to put us into 2026 at some point before we even allowed to start our feasibility study. Um the town
administrator uh Nick Milano when he gave a presentation to the select sorry Glenn sorry no all good so the town administrator gave a presentation uh essentially four
timelines uh for what he thinks or what he's seen for examples for module 3 for their duration um in you know in speaking with him you know the the duration is probably going to be about 2 years for what what it's going to take.
And part of that everyone has to understand is we're not just picking up where we left off with Arrow Street and PMA. Uh we have to study three options. So the first option is a renovation of the Cunningham school. The second is a new middle school and the third is a the
second is a new elementary school and the third is a new middle school. Uh so with with with that work it's going to take some time to do. After that's done we have to get approval from MSBA for approved uh schematic design and then go
into uh module four which is that schematic design. It's mislabeled here as feasibility. The reality is that's pushing us further and further out uh as we're looking at this and I'll forward these slides along for everybody to take a look. So the the
examples that the the town administrator had provided uh was Canton uh Gal Galvin Middle School. Um they were invited in March 2022. Um they started module 3 in the fall of that year and then module 3 completed
essentially a year and a half later in April of 2024 starting module 4 in August 2024. So you can see these timelines there. Uh similar for Quinzy um they started their
eligibility period 2021. They got invited to the feasibility um almost immediately right after and then about 2 years later they completed their feasibility study into their schematic authorization. Uh and then their vote for that followed
in October. So I bring these all up. These are these are the other ones with Denim and Marorrow. I won't go through it to kind of bore everybody with the things, but the durations here are all advertised on MSBA's website. Um, so I bring it up because mainly for us and
the bill that we're looking at for the land swap, uh, as I mentioned to everybody a couple times, we have a reverter clause in there that basically says if the town does not appropriate money for the construction of the school before June 30th, 2028, essentially all
the land reverts back to conservation land. So um when I look at that um those apologies. So if we go back to this timeline that's here um you know
when when we passed it at May's town meeting 2023 uh the reverter clause essentially puts us in while we're in uh module three of feasibility study. So, it's either we have to shrink this schedule down to get
us to a vote uh sometime into 2028 uh or or look at other options. So, you know, for me, this is one of the things I think for us as a committee uh we need to start taking a hard look at um for this. So, you know,
enough talking on my end. I'll kind of open it up to everybody and let everybody, you know, discuss this. Aqua. Oh, thank you Sean for sharing this with us. Most of the activities you've highlighted here has already been done and documented by you at the committee.
What prevents us from sharing that work which was done not just by the committee but by professionals probably of same caliber as in NSBA would require so that not only do we not lose the land we can
take advantage of the ever growing inflation which is going to move the cost of this project significantly higher than it should be. Yeah. So the part of as Mark talked about right so is
part of this educational profile that he's submitting under module one uh there are attachments that were allowed to attach to there namely the space need study that we did with DRRA or the school committee did with DRA back in 2018 and then the uh reports that we've done
so far with Arrow Street and PMA up till last year but there being essentially a strict program. They won't let us just take that and run with it, right? They are going to make us look at an an
addition or or a renovation to Cunningham, Dr. Redmond School. They're going to make us look at what it takes to build a new elementary school and study that. And they're going to make us look at not under not under an MSBA guideline.
So yeah, as I've said multiple times, this is a hard reset that we've hit and so we're essentially starting over. Should we also, my apologies to my other committee members and asking two questions at a time, should we also as a
committee review the financial benefit of this NSBA? If it's going to delay us another 7 8 10 years and throw us back into looking for land, meaning we have to buy land, is there really a financial benefit at that point or should we just go borrow money as
town and and do what we need to do? Well, part of it we did look if you recall with PMA last time of if we went on our own or if we went with uh MSBA and looked at that at that break even point it was about 5 to 6 years.
Yeah. Yeah. From when we and we did not in my recollection we did not consider losing the land cuz we have to go buy land the price I believe would the recovery time would be much lower. Correct.
Banks bank finances. Yeah. Gary Hendris. Um I had a two questions as well and one was in a similar vein as Aqua which is we're you know a few months
since we had that kind of um review with PMA and I'm just curious as I continue to watch this timeline extend and extend and extend and we continue to be in a climate where construction costs
continue to grow um even since probably that comparison was done. Is it worth possibly taking another look at? Is this the best most economical? And I just I feel like so much work has been
done and it feels like it's just being completely lost. So that's my first question. Yeah. And then if we were to just stay the course and um accept that this is the
way people want to go, which is the MSBA route, um I'm curious if there's a way to go about um extending the reverter clause,
right? Um so so to answer your first one um as far as like a an additional analysis to like should we go with MSVA or should we not go with MSVA um the
I'm not sure who would perform that you know what I mean because when we did it before we had PMA uh on board as our OPM so we had abil ability to kind of leverage them to look at this stuff. Um I know they were looking at certain escalation costs that were built into
that. I I know you know with recent things it it it becomes a little bit harder uh to to do that. Um, I I I think the the reality of to pull the plug, for lack of a better word, right now to
switch to um not going with MSBA would be hard cuz well, not hard. I mean, we could do it, but I think it's it it's a discussion that, you know, us as a committee would have to really think hard about uh for that. Um because
um we we would have to resurrect all the all the stuff that we have, recontract with everybody that's there and then bring this entire thing back to a vote and hope for and we would
need the select board to um um put it for them to put it to a vote. Four out of five of them would have to approve it. So, I think we'd have a hard time just knowing how we did last year before we even knew MSBA getting the select
board to uh approve it for a ballot question. I think if we were to not go with MSBA, forego the reimbursements again, you know, knowing there's a play against reimbursement and escalation costs, um I think it would be hard.
That's just my opinion, but yeah, I welcome others to um Well, there's the other element that Aqua added about the cost for land if we cannot achieve hitting this in time for it to revert.
Yeah. You know, that is a real concern. Yep. And so that kind of plays into your second question for the reverter clause. Yeah. So the I I think the reality is like for a reverter clause it will require
another home rule petition. Um so it would basically I I I assume it would be an article at town meeting. We would need to have a uh Megan's back. Yeah, it would we would have to have a a
vote. It'd be similar to the land swap just not with land. It would just be a home petition. I think it would be a twothirds majority for what we would need to do for it. Um, but essentially it would take the legislation that's drafted or that's already signed by the governor and change, you know, the
reverter uh language from 5 to 10. All the other language would remain the same. Um, so I can talk to people if that's what everybody wants me to do too and like start looking into that if if you know I mean if that if if the
concern is that we're like people if the concern is to leave MSBA because we're concerned we're going to lose the land. However, if we could extend the reverter clause, would that still allow would that make people more comfortable to stay with MSBA knowing that we're not
going to lose that land? So, um, not sure. And Nathan, you have your hand up, too, so go for it. Um, well, I'll just say exploring what feels like a pretty straightforward
extension request because the, you know, just the reality on the ground has shifted through no no one's fault. It's just how this works. that feels like it's worth exploring um at the next possible town meeting
because getting clarity on that ear, you know, very early on will clarify the path forward. If if we're going to we're going to lose the land before this process is over, then I I don't to me to me it's not a process
we can go forward with. Um Sean, I was wondering um on the timeline that you shared um on the slide the um that it was it looked like from invitation from MSBA to approval of
funding was approximately four years. Uh approximately yeah approximately four years maybe a little less than four years. That is longer I think than all of the examples that you gave. Although I think there was the one that was about four years, but the rest
were somewhere between two and three years. And I'm wondering is this timeline a conservative estimate that if we hit the gas on some of these we can is within our control or is this a realistic estimate of how long
it'll take now? Yeah. So when what I was looking at it and just to to walk everybody through it of so module one right now our goal is like my goal was to hit August the uh MSBA's board meeting in August. Um but
we still have to get um the questionnaire in that's going to feed into MSBA doing some work within module one that they're going to need to do. I don't believe we're going to be able to hit August. So, I think we're going to be more towards October by the time we
submit our documents and have them approve it at a board meeting. Um, so I'm I'm looking at probably towards the end of this year. Um, the the OPM on boarding I was assuming 2 to 3 months by
the time we issue an RFP, review it and come back and make a selection which was kind of similar to what we had before when we did it ourselves. Uh, and then similar for the architect one. I was figuring again because that's on the designer selection committee that we fall into MSBA's kind of scheduling. We
carried about three to four months for that. So about 7 months total and there it's not as precise, you know, down to the month as I was doing it here. Um the 2-year portion of that, yeah, this may slide back a little bit, you know, if we're if we're, you know, somewhere back
in 2026. Um, but you know, the reality is for getting to this vote, I don't think we'll be able to pull it back far enough to hit that May 2028 or or June 2028 timeline that we had there. Um, and you
know, I can I can walk through more of these. Part of what I was looking at to for those other ones, I'll go to it was mainly the start of module 3 to the completion of it. you know, year and a half here, you know, starting in fall
2022, figuring completing spring 2024. Um, again, 2022 here to 2024. So, it was about a 2-year duration for some of those for the uh feasibility study by the time they started it till they
completed it. Um, and again, I'll forward these on to everybody uh to to take a look at. Um the the you know I I put this together mainly just to um highlight the concern I think as you guys are starting to see as I've been
aware of or keeping a track of for a while is you know getting to the necessary action to avoid that reverter clause is is concerning. So, um
I you know I I think for us for the most part we're looking to just identify that tonight. You know, we're going to have another meeting in 3 weeks and you know between now and then you know everybody in the committee is fine with it. Um we can start investigating you know what it
would take to put an article together, what what are the voting requirements for it? you know, the the mechanics to get a revert to change the reverter clause from 5 to 10 years. So, if that's what everybody's okay with, I I can
extend, you know, talk talk to whoever I need to about that. Yeah, Mark and then sorry. Yeah, I agree with the statements of others that that that to me should be the first step before thinking about abandoning MSBA just given the the
funding implications of that. Um uh so yeah, agree with that. I think the other question I'd have is what type of construction work would qualify as constructing the new school building
that would negate the reverter clause. Right. I imagine you don't have to complete the entire school building by the end of that 5 years. So, right, is there is there something in there where
right we've moved the road moving the road in and of itself and clearing the site that would be sufficient or um or maybe not. You know, I'm no I'm no lawyer to know kind of what that is. But I think if we are looking into avenues related to like how do we get around
this five-year revert clause, I just raise that as kind of another avenue to look at. Okay. Yeah. And just to be clear, it's not that we'd have to complete or start construction. It's allocate funding for construction. So I I think with that it
would be, you know, similar to the point you made, Mark, of like moving the road, you know, if we allocated funding to move the road, does that check the box? Uh, and you know, avoid that because we're moving the road to to construct a
school. Um so the I'll I'll add that to the list of things that I'll ask of like what is the threshold by which we need to do to you know avoid that reverber some of the services or all service
required now are services we already retain like the OPM is there pre does anything prevent us from saying this is our preferred OPM we've already gone through the process. Fortunately for us, I had a number of other committee members.
I was comfortable with the last opinion. I thought they did a great job. Why change them if I mean they may not be the best in the world, but that would save us five six months of running around looking for something we already have. Yes. So that that that so again for us
because we're into this entirely new like process that's governed by the MSBA. We have to play by however MSBA tells us to do it which says for OPM we have to send an RFP out. People have to respond. PMA is not excluded from
responding. So they can respond to it. Most likely they probably will. And then we as a as a as a um a committee will interview all those OPMs and make a selection. So you know PMA submits and you like PMA, you vote for PMA. Again,
it it the good thing with the OPM is we get to decide. It's not a designer selection committee where we only have a couple seats. It's our entire committee makes the decision on the OPM. So on that can we truncate? Can we is there look into it and I know I know
what they are but just to add to moving the road. We cannot move the road if we're not sure where to build the school. We can't just move the road while we're still thinking of where to build the school, right? Is that we could so so if you recall so the the
parcel lands bisected by the road. So we have to move the road to kind of merge the two parcels. So that's when we were talking with um Arrow Street and PMA before when we were going for all the funding last last summer, the intent was to have an early site package to move
the road. So construction wise, that's our first portion of the project that we'd be doing. Move the road, combine the two parcels, make one big land mass, and then build the school on there. I I am on board and aligned with that. What I'm saying is if MSBA is saying we
should go do all these other things, we can't be studying while moving, you know, then we're preempting the output of the study, right? I'm just trying to see how we get that lesson done on time.
Yeah, I think I've figured out all that No, no, no. It's welcome. Oh, Mark, you have your hand up. Go for it. Yeah, sorry. I just I wasn't sure I awkward. Are you saying we we should look at avenues in which to move the road while we're doing this other
investigation or that we're not? I am thinking Mark uh that it would not be logical to say we're studying many other options and yet spending money on moving global. I I guess I I guess I disagree because I
think you could again other than a situation which you are just doing an addition on Cunningham where then the parcel is not necessary for the purpose of a school necessarily although I think we can all think of like there are lots of needs in the town and you know
potentially you know right now the road kind of as Sean's saying cuts the two parcels entirely. So if that parcel is ever going to be utilized for something related to the school's fields or ancillary educational space, whatever
it might be, I think the moving of the road kind of creates the the separation within the parcel and maximizes the constructibility. And whether that's in, you know, an elementary school, a middle school, an upper middle school, or something else, I I'd imagine most
situations that kind of is feasible. But again, we also have like four year. Well, not we don't have four years. How many we had? I guess a couple of years before we need that. And I would hope that we'd be if we're not completed with kind of all the
analysis, we're at least further along and have a a good sense at that point that like, oh, actually things have changed now. An addition project makes complete sense versus where it didn't uh before. Um, but yeah, in my mind, I I
just think we should keep something like that in our back pocket to say there might be some risk, but the risk of not having the land far outweighs the risk of uh maybe slightly needing to So, we're both about saying the same thing. If you argue it that way, in my
mind, I'm not a lawyer, then you separate moving the road from building a school. Therefore, allocating money to move the road cannot be said that is the same as building the school. I don't know if you see that much. If we're saying we move the road, just
moving the road, then we divorce it from part of building school. Again, yeah, we're getting a bit into the legal thing, but I guess my my request for the the chair would be let's look into that. Let's talk to a lawyer. Again, I'm we we are not lawyers. Uh
your your logic isn't isn't totally like crazy. I I understand what you're saying, but I I position that's what I would say. I'm fully for this and I'm just thinking how do we make I think both of us have the same thing. Yeah. I mean my my take on it is you know for the three options we're looking
at as as Mark alluded to right two of them we have to find land to build a structure right so even if we move the road and we said we're moving the road to create land for a school then we could allocate it for either of those two options. You know
what I mean? Because the reality is, as you know, most of us who've been here the whole time, there's no other land that like when we when we work with these consultants and they're going to study, we have to build an elementary school. They're going to do all the same work we did and they're not they're going to
come up with the same answer of that's the best. I haven't made another land since the last time. No, but but the reality is, you know, for me in regards to that parcel, uh it's like all roads when they look for land around the town is all going to lead back to
there. So, if we had to move the road, it's I I think that parcel is never going to go away of like not being for a school. So, um yeah, it's it's it gets tricky. So what I'm hearing is,
you know, I I'll talk with um some folks to find out one how what are the mechanics to extend the reverter clause, you know, what's the thresholds for votes and you know what
we'd have to do. Um town meeting I know is planned for October 22nd or something like that. I'm looking at Megan to see but um we'll see. It's It's in October or something like that. October 27th. 27th. Thank you.
Yeah. So, October 27th. The with that, you know, just knowing the rhythm and the cadence for town meeting, it's like we would have to have these if we're doing an article or anything like that, something ready to go, I would think by
August. and um so that and essentially you know thinking mid August or something like that that gives the warrant committee the ample time they're going to need to review this even though it may seem simple it's probably not going to be if if we did it um so I I
would say you know let's let me do some homework on this and you know we come back to it at our next meeting um and I think that will if it's doable back to Car's original you know two points that she made. If it's doable that we can
extend it, I think that weighs into people's decision, do we stick with MSBA or do we not stick with MSBA? Uh cuz, you know, to your point, Aqua, is why are we doing MSBA if it's too long and lose the land? But if we can extend it, then I think sticking with MSBA still
makes makes some more sense. Agreed. Okay. All right. That was a lot on the timeline. sub. Um, any anything else from anybody? Uh, while we're just talking overall timeline and stuff like that.
I'm looking at the people that were here since 2019 and they start saying 2029 on there and stuff. That's u Yeah, I hate the timeline. Just gonna go on record with that. It really bothers me.
And what if I just I have to say it. It just really bothers me. Yeah. All right. You know, well, part of part of it, too, you know, for that timeline is, you know, similar to what we're doing. This this initial module one that
we're in right now, they gave us 270 days. We're coming up, I think, on 90 days so far, and we've got probably 80% of it crossed off. So I think for us as a committee the work is keep our foot on the gas you know put pressure on MSBA,
get them to um move as quickly as we we can and you know you know push them as fast as we can to get this done as quickly as possible. You know what I mean? Um, but I still think even with, you know, using the term with our foot
on the gas, I I I just don't think we would still hit, you know, the 2028 timeline to get funding allocated and stuff like that. So, not to beat that dead horse. I'll I've got my homework assignment. I'll uh I'll reach out to
some folks and start doing that. Um, so leave it leave it at that. If there's nothing else, I'll move on to the next agenda item. Seen a lot of head shaking, so that's good. Um, so new business uh discussion, school building committee
roster. Uh, so uh we submitted to MSBA the updated school building committee roster. Uh, so uh, you know, at our last meeting, uh, you know, John Cohane was still on from the select board. He's stepped down and Megan Hagerty has now
joined us, you know, newest member of select board. So, hey Megan, thank you. Thank you for joining. Um, also, you know, as we mentioned, there were non- voting members that we put into that roster. So, uh, you'll see emails now that have a couple extra names on them. Dr. Redmond is one of our principal
representative. Um, um, uh, Superintendent John Failen is on there. Amy Dexter from, uh, town administrator, town finances is on there. um and and Tom McCarthy and Nick Milano. So Nick is
mainly on just for I think to to fill that roster spot, but I'm not anticipating him attending meetings and stuff like that. Um so in regards to the overall roster, uh just see if anybody else has any questions or wants to say anything in regards to
that. Welcome. Yep. All right. Nice to be here. Yeah. Nice. Nice to have you, Megan. Hi, Megan. Welcome.
Appreciate it. Yeah. Um, so the the other one that I had for item 5B, which is a discussion vote, um, school building committee, town budget. So, I've been working with uh Amy Dexter and town administrator and PMA to get their
final invoices. What we're trying to do is figure out how much remaining balance we have that's been allocated to school building committee. Um, so all of our allocations basically, as I mentioned at previous meetings, we're allocated essentially out of free cash. So, with
us entering the when we complete module one getting into module two, the funding for that is the $ 1.5 million that were allocated at the town meeting in February of this year. Um, so the remaining funds that we're going to have left over in this budget, we can
essentially get back to the town and allow them to utilize it for other uh purposes. the there is a couple hiccups going on with PMA's invoices that um they they're working on it right now. So, I don't have that final number. I'm
working on getting it for our next meeting. Um but again, just keeping everybody updated on kind of where we're at with that and you know, the intention of it, you know, just whatever cash that we have allocated to us or free cash that was allocated to us, um you know,
hand that back to, you know, the town so they can utilize it algorithm. A few minutes ago we talked about some states and the question was I think you raised him. It would have been nicer when we had support.
Why not save the money? It's already our money and our mother studies so that we don't have to run this. Yeah. So that is one of the discussions I want to have. So what whatever that money is that's left over. So, for example, we still have a contract with
BSC Consulting to do boundary surveys for some of the land swap land that's on the access road that we voted on at the last meeting. Um, my discussions with town administrator, I stated exactly that. I I would like rough numbers. I don't know what the numbers are, but if there was 200,000
that was left over, yeah, do we need all 200,000 or could we operate like 50,000 and give back 150 and just hold on to something? But I agree because the money that's allocated under MS for the 1.5 million is for the MSBA study. Anything we want to do outside of that, it would
be nice to have a supplemental funding for that. So I agree with you. It's just a matter of once we get that number as a committee, we should talk about that. Okay. Anybody online? Any questions in regards to that? All right.
Um, so outside of that, uh, our future meeting dates, uh, you know, the rhythm we're trying to keep right now is every 3 weeks. So that would put us 3 weeks out from today. Well, on the Monday. I apologize about the Tuesday meeting.
Again, wish I had my OPM to help schedule some of these. Uh, but we're looking at uh, July 21st as our next meeting and then August 11th, the following meeting after that. So um you know I think with some of the discussion
points we had um today in in regards to timeline clause stuff like that um those those two meetings will be you know important to attend. So if you guys could just pencil those on your uh your calendars so you make sure you're
available for them. Um I think it would be good you know some good discussion. will lead into um kind of where we need to get to for our articles if that's you know the the desire of the committee uh for for the town meeting. So any questions in regards to our next
meetings hearing none seeing none. All right and then item seven is I would u as always entertain a motion to adjurnn. I move a motion to adjurnn. All right. Awkward talk about moves. Is there a second? Second.
Mark second. Any discussion hearing? None. Uh we'll do a roll call vote because we're online. Uh Carrie Hurley, yes. Uh Glenn Hoffman, yes. Uh Mark Luring, yes.
Uh Nathan Hut, yes. Uh Megan Hagerty, yes. Uh Aqua Abang, yes. and sh work. Yes. All right, we're adjourned. Uh, have a good Fourth of July and we'll see you guys in a couple weeks. Thank you very much.