Speaker 1: Well call the meeting to order. Thank you everybody. Welcome. This is a meeting at the Natick School Committee Call to order at 6:46 PM So we'll start with roll call. Mr. Patel. Speaker 2: Present Speaker 1: Ms. Lathers? Here. Mr. Brand? Speaker 2: Present. Mr. Speaker 1: Fesman? Here. Ms. Collins? Here. But it's Speaker 2: Dr. Fsma. Dr. Fesman. That's Speaker 1: Right. That's right. I'm sorry. I know, but Speaker 2: He earned it two years. It's been two years since. Yeah, but it doesn't matter.
Speaker 1: Okay, I'll, I'll do better. I'm sorry. It's okay. I'm used to seeing you on the other side of me. Maybe that's it. Yeah. So, and then online. Speaker 3: Hi, this is Catherine. I'm here participating online Speaker 1: And I'm present. So we'll start with the Pledge of Allegiance and a moment of silence to honor those who serve us here and abroad. Speaker 4: A pledge of allegiance to provide of the United States of America. And to to Republic for which it stands. One. One Nation under God, indivisible. Liberty and justice for all. Speaker 1: Okay. So we'll, we'll start with announcements. Does anyone have any announcements?
We have a couple from our student reps who are not here today, but if anyone else would like to start, Speaker 2: No. Okay. Speaker 1: So from our student rep Nathan, we have a notice about the blood drive on April 15th and a reminder of the polar plunge being planned on April 9th at the high school. And Anthony has sent the following. The student council is hosting a blood drive at the Natick High School Auditorium on April 15th, and the Red Cross will be there collecting donated blood and lookout. Signups will be up soon. So thank you to our student reps.
Any other announcements? Okay, we'll move to public speak. Public speak is scheduled for a period of 15 minutes. Each speaker will be permitted a maximum of three minutes during which time they can speak about topics within the scope of responsibility of the school committee. All remarks will be addressed through the school committee chair. Public speak is not a time for debate or response to comments by the school committee. Is there anyone present for public speak in the room? Anyone online? No. Okay. So we will close public speak. Our teacher representative is not here. Is he online? No.
Okay. Alright. Any updates from our MAPCO representative, Ms. Scott? Speaker 5: Yes. Today the director, ADI Lynch met with potential future students and their families and those meetings went well. Also, he's planning a future event where students from both Boston and Natick can get together them and their families for an outing and that will happen before the school year ends. And more to come. Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Alright, so we'll move to the superintendent's report.
Excellent. Speaker 6: We have an item on the agenda. The first one is the MVP grant, stormwater Mitigation project update and support request. And for that I invite Claire Relli, who is the environmental planner and conservation agent as part of the native community and economic development. I'm sure she could kind of round that out and help us understand what all of that means. But welcome and we're looking forward to hearing your, your materials. Speaker 7: Wonderful. Thank you so much, Dr. Stash. And thank you so much to the school committee members for having me here tonight. Some of you who were on the committee last year might recall
me here at a very similar time of year to present about a grant proposal that we were putting in and to request a letter of support from the school committee as this project specific location is at the facilities yard that is across from the high school on school committee property. Next slide, Linda. So this is just a little map to sort of orient us about where we're talking about. So the Nat High School is just south of the image that's on the screen. The project location is the facilities yard adjacent to the settling pond. This settling pond collects runoff from the larger watershed
throughout Natick. Water is directed there and then goes under campus drive into Doug Pond. Over the last year, we've been working with the team at Weston and Sampson on developing permit level designs for a stormwater treatment and flood mitigation feature at that facilities yard. We are on track to have those permit level designs by the end of this grant funding period on June 30th. I'll talk a little bit more about opportunities to engage in a moment. We've also, we'll be starting shortly, an assessment of the existing settling pond for future dredging. As folks might recall from prior drought years,
if you've driven past that pond, there can be almost no water in there. And it looks sort of like a mud flat. And because of the size of the watershed that drains to this location, a large amount of sediment is carried by the runoff and deposits in this pond before it goes into dug pond. We've essentially just waiting for the weather to get warm enough for folks to get out there in the water and take sediment samples and determine sediment depths. We're also currently working on developing three green infrastructure concepts for that larger, larger watershed that drains to this point. We've been working with the team at Weston
and Sampson as well as the folks in our public works division. There's also a community survey that went out at the early end of the project where residents or interested parties could report instances of flooding throughout the watershed. That could be then verified by Public Works reports that have been received for the Weston and Samson team to then model where improvements to the drainage system will have the most impact to existing flooding conditions today. And finally, something that we're actually gonna be kicking off next week with our public work staff is some internal training about green infrastructure development and green infrastructure maintenance.
Currently the town does not do any maintenance at the single sort of substantial green infrastructure installation in town, which is the constructed wetland at Kennedy Middle School. That maintenance is outsourced to a third party contract. So we're hoping to build internal capacity for maintenance of these types of systems as the town considers installing more of them. And finally, there's been a a decent amount of community engagement to date and there will be additional community engagement related to the project as we move forward. Next slide. So just a little timeline to show you guys sort of the progress of everything that we've completed. We are technically not quite in
April, but just about in April. So that was the month that I did highlight in green for this presentation. We'll be presenting next week to the Natick High School Earth Club, who's been an ongoing partner in this project and other projects that our department has worked on. The science teaching staff at the high school has also been invited to that presentation. The, as I mentioned, the pond bathymetry work is due to start in the next few weeks. And those internal maintenance trainings upcoming in the month of May. I would love to invite all of you to our two public engagement events that'll be happening during the month on May 3rd as part of the Earth Day around Natick activities. There'll be a walk starting here in Natick Center,
going down Route 27 through the Johnson School property, through the residential neighborhoods to the project location. And then returning up Pond Street to talk about the different features of the watershed, why the density of development impacts storm water management, and also talk about the the feature design that's gonna be going in hopefully at that facility's yard in June. We'll be finalizing those larger watershed concepts and the dredging feasibility study and we'll be wrapping everything up for our grant reporting by June 30th of this year.
Next slide. Just to give folks a scale of the amount of water that is draining to this particular location, we have about a roughly 180 acre watershed that drains to Doug Pond in this location. This stretches all the way to the east to the large wetland system that sits behind the community senior center off East Central Street and extends as far south as approximately the Rockland Street intersection with Route 27. So it is quite a large amount of area, it's quite a large amount of developed area and it's also an area of town that features some
of our older homes and less redevelopment than some other areas in town, which means that there's been less improvements to stormwater management throughout this area. Next slide. So the reason that I'm here in front of you all tonight, not only to update you about the progress of the project we've been working on so far, but also to ask for your support as we go forward for another funding request through the MVP, the Muni Municipal Vulnerability Preparedness Program for their FY 26 funding round. I know this is a very text-heavy slide, but I really wanted to give folks a picture of
what we were gonna be focusing on as we move forward. This grant project through a new round of funding, those permit level designs that we're developing as part of this project round will go through the permitting process. Currently we are anticipating permitting in front of the local conservation commission as well as potentially some state water quality permitting depending on the dredging components of the project. Based on that feasibility study that'll be completed as part of this phase, we'll also be finalizing those design plans post permitting to be bid ready. So by the end of this additional funding round, so June
of 2026, we'll be ready to put out a bid for construction of this stormwater feature. We're also gonna be expanding the model. So the watershed area was fully modeled by the Western and Samson team to essentially look at the capacity of the existing drainage infrastructure, the level of development in town, and determine essentially the weakest points of our drainage infrastructure when it comes to flooding issues. We're hoping to expand that model further. The model was originally developed off of the larger Charles River Water watershed model that was developed by the Western
and Samson team under another grant project that Nat is the fiscal lead on this model. Got into a lot more detail on the local specific level by working with our public works division to input specific data about catch basins, pipe sizing, things like that. And so we're hoping to expand that detailed model to include the outlet area of Doug Pond, including the DPW headquarters and the SAS Montrece Golf course, as well as the northern edge of the watershed. Expanding it in portions of Natick Center to include the Pegan Brook corridor, which folks might be more familiar with that stream
that runs along the train tracks. As folks are probably aware, that Stream has a very large flooding impact, primarily due to the undersized culvert that runs under Washington Ave. So we'll be assessing that corridor as well for potential flood mitigation strategies. And finally, just got confirmation earlier this week that we are gonna be working with the AP environmental science teacher at the Natick High School to develop lesson plans for their existing science curriculum that focuses on how we can use these outdoor classroom features that are present at the high school currently and are being designed and proposed for the future as part
of the curriculum in their teaching program. So currently on site there are a number of grass bio retention swales throughout the front of the high school property. Folks may see those sort of domed catch basins that are throughout the front lawn as well as the tiny forest that we installed in 2023 at the high school. Mrs. Tulley and I have been going back and forth and currently we're hoping to do some kind of water quality lesson plan associated with these features. But we'll be working with Charles River Watershed Association in the development of those lesson plans as part of this upcoming project. And next slide. I won't read too much about these.
You guys all did receive a copy of this through the Novus agenda materials, but I just wanted to provide a little bit of information about why we're really diving in on this project and this location. So just trying to provide some sort of response based evidence about why we're spending staff time on this particular project. And so through another MVP grant project that the town was a part of called the MVP Metro West Climate Equity Project, the town heard from residents in lower income or environmental justice communities that access to public swimming and cooling locations was a real issue
during the summer, primarily because a number of the public swimming locations in town are closed on a regular basis during the warm weather months due to algal blooms be that lake chit dug pond. And from a cost perspective, those are the most sort of affordable places in town to access public swimming locations. So by improving water quality entering Doug Pond, we're hoping to reduce instances of algal blooms within the pond affecting the beach area. There's also required town action for a reason why we're looking at this area. The town is required under our MS four permit requirements
and as part of our phosphorus total daily maximum load for the Charles River Watershed to remove phosphorus that is in the storm water entering the Charles River Basin. These treatment features that we're proposing not only at the facilities yard but throughout the watershed, will have a focus on removing phosphorus from our storm water in order to assist the town in meeting those requirements and goals. Next slide. And finally, known future conditions. Climate change is happening all around us. We've seen it in not only the aggressive storms
that we've seen over the last few years, but also the extreme droughts that we've seen over the last few years. And our drainage system was constructed in a time when future climate and precipitation volumes were not taken into consideration. So not only has the development throughout town increased exponentially since our drainage system was installed, resulting in more impervious areas shedding runoff to these systems. But we also know that more rain is coming and more rain is coming more frequently. So we are really hoping that all of these designs will, well, they will all be designed with future climate projections in mind using the state's R
map tool and will also be designed to handle future storm volumes. Next slide. And that is all I have for you guys. I'm happy to answer any questions you might have. But what I'm hoping to get outta the discussion with you all tonight is hopefully an approval to sign a letter of support that will be included in our grant application as well as approval for the project to continue moving forward on a piece of land that is owned by the school committee. Speaker 1: Thank you for that presentation. Questions from the committee? Dr.
Speaker 8: Fugman? Honestly, I, I don't have a question. I have a comment. I'm just so excited to see how education is actually incorporated into the project, how this is actually a learning opportunity. I have a bias towards Ms. Elli 'cause she was a great teacher of my son, so I'm glad, glad she's involved. But it's such, it's so great that we're not only taking care of an actual issue but we're letting students see how that's done. So thank you for doing that. Of Speaker 7: Course, we've been really inspired by the work that we've been doing with the Earth Club over the last few years. And so really looking for every opportunity to engage with the students on these types of projects going forward. 'cause it does add a real importance,
I think, to the work that we're doing. 'cause they're the ones who are gonna be living with these conditions once we hopefully put them in Speaker 1: Other questions or comments. Okay. So you're looking for a letter of support from us. Has everyone had a chance to review the letter? Do we have any motions with respect to the letter? I'll move Speaker 2: Approval for a letter of support for Natick MVP application. Second. Okay. Speaker 1: Okay. So we'll do a roll call vote. Mr. Patel? Yes. Ms. Flats? Yes. Mr. Brand? Yes. Dr. Folkman? Yes. Ms. Collins? Yes. Ms. Brunell? Speaker 2: Yes. Speaker 1: And I'm a yes. So thank you so much. Wonderful.
We're happy to support you. Thank Speaker 7: You all so much. And I'll hopefully be letting you guys know in the May June time period whether or not we got our funding. Speaker 1: Fingers crossed. Good luck sir. Speaker 2: Thank Speaker 1: You. Thank you. Speaker 2: Okay. Sure. Yep. Okay. Okay. Speaker 6: So the next item on the report. My report is, is called Memorial eligibility phase. And we have two pieces under that. The first we'd like to go over is our recommendation to the school committee related to the school building committee for the memorial project. This has been a process that we introduced previously,
which now we've gone through, which was really run by our chair of this SBC, which is Mr. Steven Myer as well as Julie McDonough and myself. So I'd like to invite them to come and kind of, you have the materials and we'll go through the five individuals that were kind of from the community and recommended here today and their profiles, et cetera. We have two documents. One is the actual sort of outline of the people here and then how it fits into the MSBA letter that would need to be submitted. And I would like to remind the committee that that is due
to the MSBA on April 4th. Speaker 9: Okay, great. So just a reminder of why Steven and I are here together. The, when I was on the school committee just a few short days ago, you, I volunteered in the school committee, asked me to help Steven with the selection and recommendation of to the school committee of the community members for the Memorial Building Committee. So Steven and I got together, we went through a process. We had 21 applications from the community,
which was a terrific response. Lots of people very interested in serving the community. People had a variety of different backgrounds from town experience, school experience and and professional experience in in the realm of buildings. So we started with the idea, I think Steven was thinking two to three people. I was thinking four, but we come to you with five because we felt like those were members who could really contribute to the building committee.
And as you know, the building committee will also consist of elected officials and Steven might talk more about that, but also staff members from school in town. So I think that it is on Novus the, we talked to, we selected six people to speak with. And in speaking with those six people we, there was one person who decided that we explained the time commitment and the process and, and how a building committee works.
And there was one person in that process who decided that they did not have the time to commit. So we talked to these five people, determined that we did not wanna narrow it down. And I think you have the five people that we're recommending and what was in their application. So they are, they have a variety of experience. They have project management, engineering, construction, they're members of the community. Some are have students at Memorial currently.
Some have students who have, are now out of memorial. There's someone who does not have students in the system. So it's a nice variety of people with it felt like, and Steven felt like good experience that could really add to the building committee in a variety of different ways and levels of expertise, but also experience in the community. And they complimented each other nicely, which is why we kept the five that we're putting forward to you today. And I just, just from my own perspective, as a member
of rep on the school committee who was representing on representing the school committee on the Kennedy project, I really valued these community members who participated in Kennedy. None of them, they're the same, but they really provide a really unique perspective. They bring their professional expertise but they also bring their experience as a community member. But they come with no, no political agenda. No, no sort of, I was calling it baggage. But like they're not, they haven't been, they're not elected officials.
They're not representing a board. They are just providing their professional and personal experience to the building committee. So I think these five would serve you well. Did I miss anything? Speaker 10: No, you did a fabulous job. Of course. I will just add it by saying thank you to everyone who has applied for this, these positions. I thought the response was incredible and I wish we could take on more of them. Yeah. To be very honest with you, some of these individuals, professionals and in terms of not only the engineering
and the, and the construction and architecture, but they brought a very different perspective to the committee even. Is your mic Speaker 9: On? Oh it is. Yeah. Speaker 10: Is it on? Okay. Sorry. Hard for me to hear. That's why I wondered. Okay. And you know what we are asking for you to to do is to take a look at this and then to vote and approve the committee members that we have so we can get started. And within this as a reminder, we're asking you to approve the entire piece, which includes the different departments that have also contributed a member such as the select board.
Bruce will be that representative. Bruce comes not only as a select board member, but he was also a previous building committee member as well. So we have dual complimentary pieces that many of these individuals bring to the table, which is just absolutely wonderful. He's obviously a, a lead community activist as well. We have, we have a person from the finance committee, the planning board, facilities director, school principal. And I'm hoping you're also gonna vote this evening for a school committee representative.
'cause that's our last slot that we, we have open. But we have a full community to move this forward. Including we have the state, not the state, the Natick police representative as well, which we typically add as an ad hoc, non-voting member doesn't mean anything as a non-voting member. We listen very carefully to what they say and it's a person that comes through when we're discussing the security of the school system. So I think we can take any questions at this point in time. Speaker 1: Questions from the committee, Ms. Lathers and then Ms. Collins.
Speaker 9: I noticed in looking through that at least four members of the four of the five members are in the Memorial District. I'd find it very concerning if we were really overrepresented by one district in town that by people who live in that district and will benefit from it. So do you know the distribution across town of all of the members of the board? Speaker 10: I don't know the distribution across the town, but I did look up the locations when they gave us the, I don't know how you got the addresses of these individuals. Speaker 9: No, they say in their commentary they do that they have children in the district, four of them in Speaker 10: Memo. We were looking for representatives of those
that are within the community that are within the close proximity of the memorial because there are abuts that we need to also take, take into consideration and represent. But if you look above and we talk about Bruce and some of the other individuals, they're not within the, the memorial district that I'm aware of. So there are many other members of the community that are not in that district. Speaker 9: I'd really like to know those numbers. I just, I feel like it's good to get the abutters input but also it's a little bit of a conflict of interest since they benefit from property values by the development happening in their, in their backyard. And I think that's something that has come up on this
board previously through Speaker 10: You Madam Chair. Extensive research has been done. There typically is no property value increase when you have near a school. And this has been well documented. There are some people that buy houses that buy because of that they'll pay more. But there are other people that will shy away and not want to have house that close to the proximity of a school as well. So many of the real estate pieces have said that it's kind of a wash. It actually doesn't necessarily increase the property values of those of the abutters. Speaker 9: I wasn't referring to the abutters. I can absolutely see that. That's not always but correlated to the, the brand new school for the entirety
of that part of town I think could have an impact. It's, I just that, I don't know where the fifth person is, but it's just interesting they're all selected from that district. Do you want to know just the people who have kids in the system or do you want to know the, just the full range, the 21 people. 'cause that's easy to figure out from their application. Most of them said that they either where their kids were or some of some of them didn't. But I, you know, I can tell that they currently don't have kids in the system. So do you, are you only interested in the ones
that have kids in the system? Just in general in the board looking that there's representation from all parts of town? 'cause you're, you know, we're gonna be, it's competing resources across different projects, different schools, different districts, different parts of town. And so I think, and I think different parts of town represent differently. So I was just looking to see do we have a good cross section of the town represented? Speaker 10: So we take a look at it of the five individuals we're talking about tonight, the members of the community, they are five of 17 members.
So we do have a lot of opportunity to have people from throughout town. And I did not check on the other members that were supported by the other groups within the town government. But I think we have a very good cross cross section of representation across the board. Speaker 11: Okay. Speaker 9: Ms. Collins, Speaker 11: Following on that, am I remembering it properly that MSBA decides which property actually gets built upon? No. Where a school MSBA does not decide that.
Speaker 10: So I mean Speaker 11: They, through their review Speaker 10: Through you Madam Chair Speaker 9: Yes, go Speaker 10: Ahead. One of the first things that we start to do once we get some funding is we will do a site assessment and a site selection. We'll come out as a recommendation. While we may believe, and it is probably true that the site selection will be on the exact same site, we will look at other properties that are available across the town just as we have done with other buildings that we bring forward in the town. Speaker 11: So this committee, this committee or that committee will make the decision,
Speaker 10: We will make a recommendation to go forward to this committee. Speaker 11: Okay. That's, so it, I guess what I'm trying to understand is there are five members of the public who may or may not be in the Memorial district, but it's not a majority of the subcommittee that's making a recommendation to this committee. Speaker 10: We were very Speaker 11: Careful where final site would be. Correct. Speaker 10: You are absolutely correct. When we looked at this, we tried to balance to make sure no one group or special interest group that's here had a majority.
We wanted to have, for example, members on this group also represent the net zero committee. We've tried to very carefully to try and pull in as many differences we could into the committee so that we could get a diverse opinion and support. Speaker 1: Okay. Speaker 11: And the next question I guess is to you Madam Chair. I, I don't know. Okay. And I don't know where the sentiments of this of our school committee live. Lie, if there were no anybody interested from our committee, is it possible that we take one of the five here
and make them the school committee rep on this building committee? Speaker 1: So you're asking if we would not choose an additional person, but we would defer our choice to one Speaker 11: Essentially Yes. Being Speaker 1: Recommended? Speaker 11: Yes. Speaker 1: I mean I, I guess we could do that. Yeah. Okay. I guess we could do that. Mr. Miler, Speaker 10: You have the option of either choosing one of you to be the school committee representative or a designee. Okay. So that's your choice. Just like the other boards, like the select board had a choice to either select one
of the members or a designee. They chose to put somebody on the board, but it doesn't mean you have to do the same thing. Okay. That's Speaker 11: That's what I was just trying to remember correctly. 'cause you know, it's been a while since we built school. It may not seem at some people, maybe Julie doesn't feel it, but I just wanted, so, okay. Thank you. Speaker 1: Question Mr. Patel and then Mr. Brand. Speaker 12: Do you know how many repeats from the Kennedy from the community members? So how many what Penny? The five community members, any of them repeated from the, Speaker 10: I think we had three, if I recall Speaker 1: Applications though, it's Speaker 10: No one. Oh Speaker 12: Applications. No. I mean in total of the five that have been selected, were any of
Speaker 1: Them are? No, they did not serve on the Kennedy committee. Speaker 10: No, they did not. Unfortunately they didn't carry forward. The other piece that we were looking at this was, we were trying to use this as an opportunity. Get people who haven't also been involved in town politics to try and seed the future for people's interests to come forward and, and participate in town politics. So there were many different things we were looking at to try and come up with a balanced approach. Sorry, Speaker 12: Just a Speaker 1: Follow up question, just a follow up for Mr. Patel. Yes. Sorry. Speaker 12: How many total voting members with all of this? Speaker 1: 15. Speaker 10: 15. 15. 15. Which is much higher than we have had in previous
school construction projects. It's gonna be a challenge for me to facilitate and to use the word again, it's a little gnarly at times it's gonna be a little challenging. Speaker 1: So you're saying you don't want like six school committee members added to your list? Speaker 10: No, number one would be a quorum. And at that point in time the MSBA doesn't look for the school committee to run these projects. It's looking for a subcommittee. Right. And that's why we exist. But then it becomes no building committee. Yep. Speaker 8: Mr. Brand Speaker 13: Mine is a comment. This looks like a, an all star team to me.
And I just want to comment that particularly with the five people who you, you selected. I don't wanna say I'm surprised 'cause there's a lot of great people in in Natick, but I would say maybe I will pleasantly surprised that so many people who seem incredibly qualified are willing to step up and take on this huge responsibility. And when I, when I saw this earlier, it, I just, it's great work. I'm very excited that so many people were willing and so many people have great, what, what appeared to be great qualifications for this very specialized task.
So thanks for doing all the work to get all this put together. Both of you. Speaker 8: Okay, Dr. Fugman, I have a question, a comment first in terms of timeline. When is the deadline by, when do we need to submit this list to the MSBA? Speaker 6: April 4th? I did ask MSBA if they ever allow a delay in that deadline. And while, you know, it's always good to hand things in on time, if it's kind of a matter of a few days, meaning our next meeting would be April 7th, we could hand it in if people needed more time that evening. And I would need to write that to them today to say that
that was a request of the school committee. Speaker 8: Yeah. So that, I just wanted the committee to be like conscious about, you know, we can, it sounds like we can do it next meeting, but it has to be next meeting and not be not after. And then the other comment, the comment I have is, I, I also really like the committee as a whole, when you look at all 15 people, I know we're still missing one name, but I, it feels like the right balance. So I, I counted there was about five people on the committee who are not residents of Natick at all. You know, professional members. There's five community members, there's,
you know, representatives of the different committees. And honestly, what I like about the five committee members is that I don't recognize any of their names. And that's, I think it's a good thing. And I'm thinking they're not on any boards. I don't think any of them are town meeting members. They don't sound familiar to me. Not that I know all 180, but none of them sound familiar and none of them sound familiar in terms of Facebook conversations. So the, it really means that these are people who are not really involved. And so to your point, it's great to get people who are not in, who haven't been involved to get them involved in this project and they all have the right qualifications, which is great.
Actually, I do have a quick question. Why five? Was it really that hard to eliminate among them? Not that I am asking you to eliminate, but I'm just curious. Speaker 9: Yeah, it was, I mean I, the model I was using was, we had had four for Kennedy. And so like I said, I think Steven was thinking two to three and I was thinking four, but then we called six, one dropped out and we just couldn't choose. And Steven felt like he could manage with the five and they all did bring different types of experience. They had MSBA experience, some of them, they had small building, big building public buildings,
you know, so it was just they, the net zero person who's an architect and spoke nicely about working together on a team and understanding how that dynamic works. So I felt like they all brought a lot together. Speaker 10: I, I agree. And what typically happens, whether we like it or not, is over time, a year or two from now, we'll probably see one or two say, I can't do this anymore. And we, the committee starts to shrink. So I'm fine facilitating a large group at the beginning
after realizing with the last committee that we had people start opting out because they just can't for personal reasons. And there are other physical reasons why people have chosen, they can't do it anymore. Very good reasons. So we're gonna start with the additional five and I'm sure we'll have some people drop out, but we don't traditionally add people back in because they miss too much of the, the groundwork and the work that was done earlier on in the committee. And it's a very hard for anybody to catch up. Thank you. Speaker 9: Questions from the committee, Ms. Lathers? I just have a comment, a couple comments.
I I don't wanna, I don't wanna slow this down and I'm not intending to slow this down. I am very frustrated with the opacity of this process that I went through and I think I expressed that I also, you know, as academically as an engineer professionally, I've always been engineering adjacent product management, project management, working closely with engineers. And I find that there's always good to have a translation layer, someone that has enough experience but isn't, you know, directly as technical. And I really did, did say that I, these all look like very technical members of the community and, and I think, you know, and I, and I, I don't know what ended up the decision making went
through the process, but I think having, there's room for that and I would've liked to have seen it. I also, because I'm am it, I, I don't know the rest of the candidates and I don't know, but I don't feel like I can take owner. Like I think this building is the responsibility of the school committee and I don't feel like this process has given us enough ownership of that responsibility. We're stewards of the money that would go through it. So I mean, I also then am thinking if there, if there are volunteers, I would be very supportive of putting two members of the school committee on,
on the building committee so that we have sufficient, you know, representation in the voting. Speaker 1: Okay. Just to ask, I I, I'm assuming, but just for clarification, was communication style part of your evaluation when you spoke to people on the phone? Did, was that taken into account whether people might be good communicators able to provide that bridge to the community? Speaker 10: Yes. So remember, well maybe you don't remember, I should say that first. What we end up doing is we end up going through the first feasibility study
and then we start to do initial design once we get some funding. And then that corn that kind of comes together to, with the initial design, which is related to the strategy that you guys work on, the elementary strategy goals and objectives. It's the other thing that you guys are responsible for. Through the, through, through the state, the superintendent and the administration is coming up with the educational plan that matches and the needs that faces that needs to go into the building. We interact on a regular basis, that's why they're present in the committee. And we say, okay, this is what the MSBA will give
and support for certain things within an elementary school. These are the things that we would have to go alone as a town. And I'd actually lost my train of thought as to where I was going with this. But from the standpoint of the community, we then get together, we will have initial design, we will have multiple communi community based meetings where most likely myself and the OPM will present the, the fe the actual feasibility data and why we went through with an initial design. The superintendent or the administration will also go
through the ED plan that's supporting that. It'll come together and we solicit feedback from the public and we usually have two or three of those sessions, depending upon attendance that's going on so that we can collect that information. So before we go into final design, does that help answer your question? Yeah, Speaker 1: I think I was speaking to or hearing Ms. Lather's concern that, you know, that, that informally these community members on the building committee will probably be asked, is this what you're referring to? We'll just be asked by friends and neighbors, you know, what's happening
and you know that they would have an opportunity to kind of bridge some of that technical discussion informally at the grocery store, in the pickup line at school or what have you. So I was assuming that that was sort of part of the evaluation that these people are, are likely to do that. Speaker 10: That's absolutely correct. And the whole purpose of bringing on the other boards is to make sure that the boards are kept up to speed with what the current thought is. And it may change, but we want to keep them active so that they can update their boards as well as to what's going on within the building committee. Speaker 1: Okay, thank you. Speaker 9: Just to speak to what you're saying.
Yes, that's part of it being really focused on keeping the community up to date and being doing as, as a primary. I just, it's not always the people, the technical skills that have that desire. It sounds like only the people with these skills were even spoken to as part of the process, which I, I voiced earlier. I was, I know it was a rush process, but you know, 15 minute conversations beyond the six that specifically qualified doesn't seem like an o doesn't seem, seems like it was important. And I don't, and I, I think there's also a translation there. Like in speaking a number of people and,
and being in like you Kenny, for example, I think an ex need is expressed and engineer builds something. And as someone that sits in between a business and engineers like that, the translation of, you know, there's lots of memes out there of like, I asked for this and I got this and I just wanna make sure that, that there's no loss of communication between the two and that, that the board has that. So a board that's picked solely across by self nominated, I mean all the boards nominated their own people so they're not accessible based on having the, the broad set of skills and then having community members
that are mainly picked only for their deeply technical skills. I don't have assurance that that that intermediate met, which is part of why I think it, if we have two members of this board where that's what we, you know, we're out here trying to communicate, I think that would be valuable. Well hopefully, oh, oh, sorry Ms. McDonough. I mean I think the school department and the school committee need to do a lot of that work because how the building is used once it's constructed. I would depend on the education and professionals to be able to do that. I think I would say that these folks were not just picked
because they were structural engineers. I think the way in which we spoke with them, we touched on all pieces of what it means to be a part of this committee, which is not just talking about structural engineering. So I feel confident in, in the group that's put forward that they will do and, but I think the school committee has to be involved and all. And you will involve all of the staff too, in how this building is constructed and used and there will be a lot of opportunities for community engagement and involvement.
Speaker 10: That's correct. In fact, the last building we had more engagement with the community than we have ever had within the community. We had, I think it was about nine different community sessions to solicit input at different phases of the public. We also typically, and I'm hoping that we will do the same, be creating a website and we will give drone footage. We usually have that other construction and process, we try and pull the community in so they can see what's going on by going to the website as well as getting updates. Speaker 9: Okay, thank you Mr. Brand.
Speaker 13: So with the potential for some irony, I hope this comes out, this comes out the right way. I'm an engineer and I, and I would, I would like to, and I know this wasn't your intention, Kate, but I, I don't typically need somebody to translate for me. So I think the fact that they're technical people does not necessarily mean that they're not good communicators. And so I just wanna, I take your point and I think it's important, but I like, I do wanna also just make the statement, I am an engineer and, and do a lot of communicating in my profession.
And so with that, and I know that wasn't, I know you're not your, that's not your intention. So Speaker 9: I just wanna, I don't say I a hundred percent not my intention. I'm saying just didn't feel like that was evaluated for those skill sets didn't feel like a part of the evaluation criteria. Speaker 10: And as a reminder, I am not only an engineer and a biochemist, but I am also a person who went to school for business and I lived my entire career working with MDs, MDs, PhDs, sometimes two PhDs and an md translating clinical data back
and forth between them and the rest of the business. I was a leadership in my, 'cause that's what I did for a career for about 35 years before I retired and started this Speaker 9: Dr. Fugman. Speaker 8: So I'm not an engineer, but my son is a freshman college doing master, doing mechanical engineering. So practically engineer, I think it counts, it passes through. Totally kidding. But no, I just wanna express a just different perspective. I think this is a really strong committee because it's laid, it follows really nicely with the MSBA process.
So I'm looking at that second document, which is the MSBA chart that we filled out and they have the different perspectives kind of built into the committee. So it says, for example, member knowledgeable and educational mission and functional facility. That's the superintendent, school principal. We have MR Holding there, we have the different committees and then the, the one bureau around community members, it says members of community with architecture, engineering and or construction experience. So it sounds like that's how they thought about it, that
that is kind of the community members would represent the architecture and engineering perspective along with everyone else who's not there as an engineer, who's there for other reasons. And again, you have a committee of 15, which means we're talking about 10 people who are non-community members there as well. And then I like the fact, I appreciate that you wrote the, that you included the bio for each individual because they're not just engineers, they're also, you know, one is a pa you know, they, they talk about their children, they talk about, you know, they're members of our community, they live here. And so obviously they're, they're not just bringing
that engineering perspective, but they're, you know, we have now parents on this committee and I think that's great. So I I, this to me, this sounds like a great committee to move forward. Speaker 1: Yeah. Thank you. I, I agree. I think it sounds like a really strong slate of folks and I appreciate the process was systematic and that you guys really shared that with us tonight. Thank you. Speaker 9: And I just wanna reiterate again, it is just about my not knowing what you are not feeling like you are looking for the skillset that I really
wanted to see on the committee. And I hope you found them. I hope you found them and I believe that you did based on the conversations, but in only talking to the people that tick the exact boxes, sometimes you leave opportunities on the table. Speaker 1: So are we ready? Thank you Ms. Fathers. Thank you. Are we ready to move from review of this slate of, of candidates that was brought to us for this building committee and to talk about school committee representation on this committee? Okay, so we have a choice of having school committee members on this committee. We have a choice of appointing a non-school committee
member to act on our behalf. I'll propose this as a process that perhaps we share how many people we think might wanna be there. And if we have a preference, if, if anyone's willing to volunteer from the committee, I'm not gonna volunteer. Maybe we can just put some of those numbers and names on the table and go from there. Does that seem like that would work? Dr. Foxman, it looks like you have an idea. Oh, Speaker 8: I was just agreeing, but although, well actually since you called me, I I think it would be good to have just one just because we're already up to 15 and it's already not very manage. I mean, you were already saying it's a struggle.
So I think having one plus it creates a balance between other, the other boards. And I also have another comment and I don't wanna put anyone on the spot, but I would, I'm wondering if we can designate someone who's not on the committee and I'm wondering if she'd be willing to do it. I would recommend Ms. McDonough, but I don't know if you're, not to put you in the spot, Speaker 9: But you're on camera, Speaker 8: But you're on camera. Yeah. Speaker 9: I, I appreciate that suggestion. It's a question. It is a question, but I am going to decline. Okay. Thank you for the faith.
Speaker 1: Okay. Speaker 10: By the way, I also tried to convince her to, if not be the designee, be a member of the public, but I was not successful as well. Speaker 1: Okay. Mr. Brand and the misconduct, just, Speaker 13: I'll be real quick. Just I, the, I think one person's the right number for me it's the a lar not just 'cause not only because it's a large group, but because all the major decisions are still gonna come back to the committee. Even if there were two or even if there were three members of the school committee. It's not like it's a majority and it's still a vote. There's a lot of different voices, a lot
of different perspectives and the biggest things are gonna come back to us anyway. So I just think in the, in the spirit of efficiency one is, and I trust whomever it is that we would choose or designate to properly represent us as a, as a body. Speaker 1: Okay, Ms. Collins? Speaker 11: I agree. I'm gonna push to just have one. We already have three other members who are employed by the district on this committee, so, okay. I, I, I think one is a better number and I actually have one of them. Speaker 1: Okay. Let's just, okay, let's just, so we've got, we've talked about one.
I I think I'd be comfortable with one. I'd be comfortable with two. Anybody else have any thoughts before we sort of bottom down on, do Speaker 9: We have anyone that's interested? Speaker 1: Well, yes, that's, that's number one. Could let's start with one. Let's one, so do we have any committee members who would like to serve on the, in this capacity? Speaker 11: Ms. Brunell has her hand up. Speaker 1: Ms. Brunell, Speaker 3: I am interested in serving on the committee. I'm coming in and out as I'm driving or I'm not driving. My husband's driving, but I would like to serve. Speaker 1: Okay. Any other committee members who would like
to serve Mr. Patel? Speaker 12: I'm also interested in serving, but I also believe that we should consider two simply because I think it's less than 25% democratically elected people on that committee. I think more is better. Speaker 14: Okay. Speaker 1: Alright. And then, so we have two members who are interested in serving. We had also talked about the possibility Dr. Foxman suggested a non-member. Does anybody else have an idea of a, of a non-member who might be a, we might consider appointing in addition
or in lieu of a school committee member Ms. Collins? Yeah, Speaker 11: I think that Speaker 1: You, you can't say Ms. McDonough again. Speaker 11: I know and I do wanna remind Mr. Miler that his communication skills are probably not as, think as high as he thinks if he wasn't able to convince Ms. McDonough. But putting that aside, i I I think that this committee should appoint Ms. M Morran. McMorran. I don't exactly know how she remember in net zero committee, which is near and dear to this committee's heart. Speaker 1: So you're talking about Speaker 11: One of these five, one
Speaker 1: Of the the five. Speaker 11: So it would, it would make a committee of 14 instead of 15. I'm sure you can work your way around a tie. It shouldn't occur. Speaker 1: Okay. I'll, I'll take Ms. Lathers. And then did you say Ms. Brunell has, she did. Okay. So Ms. Lathers, Speaker 9: I think if we have members of this community that are willing to step up with all we do and put in the time for five years, that it would be really disrespectful to ignore that. Speaker 1: Okay. Speaker 9: Because I'm not one of them. Speaker 1: Okay. Alright. Okay. So we have two, two members. I think we need to decide if we're going to have one
or two members, we have two members who are interested in, do we wanna just do a straw poll in the room? Oh, wait a sec. Ms. Brunell has her hand up. Sorry, before we get there, Ms. Brunell? Speaker 3: Sure. I was just gonna make a motion to have Jamie and I serve on the Memorial School Building Committee as school committee representatives. Speaker 1: Second. So we have a motion that's been seconded. Ms. Collins, Speaker 11: I would move that Mr. Patel be appointed. It's a great way to get his feet wet. Speaker 1: Okay. Speaker 13: Second. Speaker 1: Okay, so we have two motions.
One to appoint two school committee members, Ms. Brunell and Mr. Patel. And one to appoint one school committee member Mr. Patel. Mr. Brown, Speaker 13: Can I make one more motion? Will you take one more? Sure. I would move to a point Ms. Brunell, to be the single person to represent the school committee. Speaker 9: Building Speaker 1: Committee. Am I second? I Okay. I Speaker 13: Didn't second. You need a second? Anything Speaker 1: Second? Okay. I was okay. Alright, so we have three motions on the table. Which one takes precedent? Ms. Collins? Speaker 13: The first one. The first Speaker 1: One. Okay.
So the first motion in Speaker 13: This case, they're, because they're, they're competing. Speaker 1: Okay. 'cause they're equivalent. Yes. Ms. McDonough, I think. Speaker 9: Steven, can you just describe to me what you just said? Because I think you have to think about if there's an even number on the committee that there could be a tie in how that's voted. So I think Okay. How did you describe that to me? What would happen if there was a tie on the building committee? Speaker 10: Oh, a tie. Oh, that's what you mean on Speaker 9: The building committee. Building committee. A tie. Yeah. So there, there's the Speaker 10: Chair would make Speaker 9: The decision. The chair meaning you or the chair of the school Speaker 10: Committee. The chair meaning me would make the decision. Okay.
Speaker 9: So Speaker 10: And if there's a tie this evening, you would make the fi cast the final vote. Speaker 9: Yeah. So I just think that's something to consider. And 'cause the school, the building committee takes votes that our are, that are directional in nature and they're sometimes a recommendation to the school committee. But it's, it may be something to think about. Speaker 1: Okay. So, alright, so let's take the, the motions in order. So our first motion was to appoint two school committee members, Mr. Patel and Ms. Brune to the building committee. So we'll vote on that. Yes.
Speaker 13: Before we vote Yes. Can we debate? Oh, Speaker 1: Of course. Debate. Thank you. Speaker 13: So can I Mr. Brand? So I, I would vote, I'm going to vote no to that one for the reasons I stated before, or I believe that there should only be one rep. Speaker 1: Okay. So we have all, we, I think we can speak to all three motions if anybody else wanted to speak to any of those three motions. Thank you Mr. Brand for reminding me about debate. Mr. Or Dr. That's right. I was gonna say Mr. Patel, but your hand was like a shade higher. Speaker 8: I, I don't know how I'll vote on the second and or third, but I I also will, will vote against the first one.
Again, I think there's gonna be a, a very big contribution of the school committee, of the full school committee to this project. There's a specific role for the school committee to play and there's a different role for the building committee to play. Having a representative is of the school committee is a good idea working alongside the representative from select board, from FinCon, from planning bo from the planning board and the other positions. I, I, I think that that is enough. I think that having two members, first of all
creates the, the kind of potential for tie vote and, and just makes a committee bigger for no good reason. Speaker 1: Okay. Oh, Mr. Patel was first. Yes, Speaker 12: I would prefer two, but if not two then I would, if this is gonna be one, I would it be Mr. Burnell. Speaker 1: Okay. Ms. Brunel, Speaker 3: Thank you. I was just wondering through you chair to Julia and to Mr. Myer, how many votes were eight to seven or whatever the, whatever the split was in, in the Kennedy project, how often did you come down
to a narrow margin Speaker 10: Over five years? I have no idea because it also depends upon who was able to make the quorum that evening. It's just nothing that I can self-reflect on at this point in time. But it does happen. Speaker 9: Yeah, I feel Speaker 3: I remember it happening. Okay. It does, I guess I thank you. Just knowing that the idea is to work towards consensus, I would hope the major decisions wouldn't come down to that spot because that would have so much, I don't know that it would be so much contention
around major items. I think that we would work well together. I'm not sure if I'm cutting out right now 'cause can you guys still hear me? Yes. Speaker 1: Yes. Speaker 3: Your screen is frozen so I might be cutting out, but I'm ready to vote. This Speaker 1: Ms Speaker 9: La how often did everyone show up? Because it sounds, I mean, it sounds like did, did pe mo everyone come to most meetings or were you usually short a person so you could easily end up in, Speaker 10: In the beginning we had everyone showing up. As we get to the third and fourth year, we, we had a hard time and this is why we talked to every candidate
that was interested in this, about the commitment piece. It's huge. And when we get to the third or fourth year, then we would find that we would barely make a quorum. And in some meetings, maybe more than in some meetings, I would be sitting there 15 minutes into the meeting calling people on their cell phones, trying to get confirmation if this, they could show up. So managing these meetings in the very beginning when it's really interesting for people to get involved is one thing. Trying to manage a large committee as we go forward is challenging.
And I will just reinforce, just like we did with everyone else that's been on this list, it is a substantial commitment that goes throughout the year. And you will get a packet that we are expected to review and become familiar with before you come to the meetings so that you can vote appropriately so that we don't spend a portion of the time in the meeting discussing what was in the packet when others have already reviewed the packet. So it does require a commitment to do this. It's a great committee, it's nonpolitical and some of these members that asked to be on here said,
I'm interested in a nonpolitical meeting. This could be great for me. Speaker 1: Okay, thank you. Okay. So any other debate? Okay, so we'll vote. So the first motion we'll vote is the motion to appoint two school committee members, Mr. Patel and Ms. Brune to the building Memorial School, MSBA school building committee. So we'll vote Mr. Patel? Yes. Ms. Flas. Mr. Brand? No. Mr. Dr. Fugman? No. Sorry. Ms. Collins? No. Ms. Brunell?
Speaker 3: Yes. Speaker 1: And I'm a no. So I think that's four nos. Four nos. Four nos. So the motion fails. So the next motion, so we have two additional motions. Who is the next one? Mr. So the next one is to appoint a single member to the Memorial MSBA school building committee and to appoint Mr. Patel. So we'll vote that Mr. Patel? No. Ms. Lathers, do we vote? Do we still vote? If he doesn't wanna do it, are you withdrawing your nomination? It's not Speaker 11: His motion. It's Speaker 1: Not his motion.
It's not his motion. Withdraw. Okay. Okay. Thank you Ms. Collins for being on top of us. Okay. So, I mean, I mean we can go vote if we vote him any new withdraw. I don't know what the answer. Yeah. Yeah. Ms. Brunell, do you, are you still with us? Ms. Brune? Speaker 3: I am barely going through New Jersey. Speaker 1: Okay. So Mr. Patel has indicated that he does not want to accept the nomination. That's not what he indicated. Is that true? That's not what he indicated. No. He Speaker 11: Indicated he's not supporting Speaker 1: Not supporting the motion. Speaker 11: It does not mean that he would not serve if
we didn't ask him that question. The person Speaker 15: Who made the motion withdraw the Speaker 1: Motion. Who made the motion? They can ka. You did. Oh, okay. Oh, okay. Speaker 11: Mr. Patel, would you serve? Speaker 12: I I would request you withdraw the motion. Speaker 11: Would you serve? Speaker 12: I would, yes, Speaker 10: But, oh, motion Speaker 11: Then I will not withdraw the motion because I believe in it. What? Speaker 10: Yeah, it is gonna be okay. It is gonna be a Speaker 1: Fun voting committee. Alright, so we'll continue voting. Speaker 10: It Speaker 1: Will be, guys are not making this easy. It Speaker 10: Will be an enjoyable committee. My stoic approach will not carry through the entire five years, I promise you that. Speaker 1: Okay. So let's, let's start, start again.
So voting on appointing Mr. Patel to this committee. Mr. Patel? Yes. Ms. Flas. We started again. We erased the previous one. Speaker 11: No. Speaker 1: Okay. Mr. Brand? No. Dr. Fugman? Yes. Ms. Collins? Yes. Ms. Brunell Speaker 3: Abstain. Speaker 1: Okay, so we're at, Speaker 10: I wish Speaker 3: This I, okay, I'll say no Elise, if that makes this easier. This I'm Jamie. I'm so sorry. This is a painful beginning. It's okay. Speaker 1: So we have three and three. Speaker 11: And you have not voted
Speaker 1: And I have not voted. Oh. So I'll vote. No. So it's four votes. No. Okay. Our final motion on the table to appoint ms, sorry, Speaker 10: Just point of order please. Can you please repeat, just so it's clear in my head. What was the vote for? Speaker 1: That vote was to appoint Mr. Patel. Speaker 10: Okay. Speaker 1: To the building committee and it failed. Okay. 4, 2, 3. Speaker 10: Thank you. Speaker 1: Okay, third vote. This one's a winner. Guys, this is to appoint Ms. Brunell to the Memorial School Building Committee.
Mr. Patel? Yes. Ms. Lathers? Yes. Mr. Brand? Yes. Dr. Fugman? Yes. Ms. Collins? No. Ms. Brunell? Speaker 3: Yes. Speaker 1: And I am a yes. So that's six votes in favor. Ms. Brunell has been appointed to your committee. So now I think we need to vote the whole Speaker 11: Move to appoint the committee as designated in the handout with the addition of instead of TBD, Catherine Brunell, the school committee member. Second. Speaker 1: Okay. Any discussion of the motion? Okay, so we'll vote that Mr. Patel? Yes. Ms. Flats? Yes.
Mr. Brand? Yes. Dr. Fugman? Yes. Ms. Collins? Yes. Ms. Brunell? Speaker 3: Yes. Speaker 1: And I am a yes. So Mr. Bier, thank you so much for your patience with us. You have your committee. Speaker 10: Thank you. Have a good evening everyone. Speaker 6: Thank you. Speaker 16: I'm sorry. Speaker 4: Surprise, thanks. Speaker 6: Okay. Okay, so moving on. The other item that we had related to the MSBA eligibility phase was really just an overview. Last time we talked a little bit about some
of the things that we're due in May. And so I, we, the team backwards planned for the benefit of the committee. So you can kind of see where we're headed in the next few meetings. And, and I'm trying to also, I'm using the word decouple a little bit of what's due on this educational program now and how it shows up again in the feasibility phase. Because the piece I'll show you in here, but the piece here on educational program that's due in May is I don't think is a big debate item. It's more of a bigger item around vision and around what our elementary schools gonna look like. What our classrooms are gonna look like is much bigger
in the feasibility phase. Does that make sense so far? Okay. Next slide. This deck you probably figured out, I just keep adding to it so that we don't get lost. And so that the references from prior times are here. You can see in that we just did the April 4th one, which is the school building committee. We'll submit it and Linda will send a copy to everybody and we'll tack it onto the, to the agenda. The next things that are due are it's short process, it's another month. And we have the educational profile questionnaire and the MSBA enrollment methodology. Let's go to the next slide. Here are just to kind of
zoom out the actual MSBA modules. There are nine of them. The first one, which is where we are, is the eligibility period. This is the only one right now that has some dates defined. It started February 3rd. It goes through Halloween, 10 31 25. During this time, we're establishing need sub submitting that EPQ, which is education profile questionnaire and the enrollment. And the ultimate goal is to gain MSBA approval to proceed. Then we move into forming the team and the feasibility study. And of course I don't even wanna go much past that,
but for the framing there's nine modules. And let's go to the next line slide. Okay. So in terms of school committee meetings tonight, which is March 27th, we're gonna pro, we just did the SBC. We're gonna provide an overview of those forms that are due on May 5th. There's two of them on April 7th, we'll come to you and present first drafts for the school committee to have a discussion and feedback prior to finalizing a final draft, which we'll bring before you on April 28th. And then it would be, our hope would be that it could be voted that day so
that we could submit it on or before May 5th when it is due. Okay. The next slide please. So I'm gonna talk about the educational profile questionnaire. This really is a confirmation of the district school facilities, the types of rooms that are currently in use in the school. It's very much aligned. And the same thing is the statement of interest, which you already approved last spring. Okay. It's saying what's there and how we use them. It also talks about, based on the SOA, what the district proposes to study during the feasibility study, which again wouldn't even start until we finish this phase,
which includes teach teaching methodology, TE needs, proposed grade configurations and or school consolidations. Again, tied to the SOI. The EPQ serves as a key component for enrollment conversations. So we have the sample form there, it's something we've shared before. And there's the webpage where if you wanna get it in into more detail, you could read all of what MSBA has to say about that form. So the feasibility study which comes next, has a really deep and analytical and vision building section that we would do together. That is much more than sort of reporting out on what the current state of the facility is.
The next slide next, this is also due on May 5th, is an enrollment methodology. It's really an MSBA driven calculation. This isn't actually a form we're filling out, it's actually online and quite a lot of data goes into it. We already have it almost all the way drafted. So we'll bring it to you on April 7th, if not before. So you can really take the time to read it. MSBA a's enrollment methodology generates a baseline enrollment projection that uses historical enrollment data. This is their calculation and methodology. The district completes an enrollment questionnaire.
That's what's due on the fifth, that educational profile with the grade configurations and shares local issues that may impact school enrollments for the proposed project. So that's something that we're allowed to submit kind of a letter or a narrative around. Again, we'll show all this to you on April 7th as a first draft. Based on the district's supplied information. The MSBA generates a baseline enrollment projection using its methodology. We're allowed to put in a letter if we kind of see it differently. And Matt has done that before. So if we have such a letter, we'll also prepare that for the committee's consideration on April 7th.
Upon agreement of a design enrollment, the MSBA and the district continue to collaborate to further develop the total square foot of the proposed project. So again, I've linked the enrollment methodology webpage, if you wanna go and read more MSBA stuff we're, but we're giving you those highlights of what the enrollment methodology is. Next slide. So how does, I already just told you that the educational profile questionnaire is very, very, I think very basic and it gets much more in depth and value added and kind of stakeholder voice in the next section. The feasibility study, the enrollment really shows up.
This is the most formal enrollment data submission is this one. On May 5th. There's not a lot of opportunity to revisit it. It's then referenced and used in modules three and four, but it's not resubmitted unless a major project scope change occurs. Okay. So I'm really trying to just frame what these mean in, in the context of all nine modules and what we're, what we'll be submitting and to let the committee know that we're planning to give you ample time to discuss it on the seventh to provide recommendations for any changes. And then I hope to vote it on the 28th. That's it.
Speaker 1: Thank you. That was a lot of information. Questions from the committee, Ms. Collins, Speaker 11: Just to comment, the next time that the MSBA or the state gets enrollment data right, will be the first time. So I, I behoove this committee to look carefully at what they suggest because they've never been right as far as I know ever anywhere. So, you know, I would hope that we can have it with time to review it and, and make a letter if we need to rather than being up against a deadline. Speaker 6: I appreciate that. I know Mr.
Gillis is going to have, actually Mr. Gillis and Ms. Bel are kind of leading the, these two different reports and we're gonna review them in cabinet next mon actually next Wednesday because Monday's a holiday. So our cabinet meeting is on the second. So we really hope, I think that we could likely get something to you. Well if not by Thursday, possibly by Wednesday. I do wanna emphasize and we'll, we'll do the screenshots from MSBA. It is a formula in MSBA, it's very dr, but oftentimes we're gonna disagree with them to, to Ms. Collins' Point. And that would be addressed in a letter. Speaker 17: Okay. Speaker 1: Other questions about the process
or timeline? Speaker 17: Okay. Speaker 1: Thank you very much Dr. Bash. Of course. Speaker 18: Off to, Speaker 1: Sorry, I said we're off to the races. We're off to the races. It's exciting. Okay, so we have one last order of business and that is to discuss an agenda item regarding potentially formalizing a subcommittee for the budget and finance working group that's been ongoing since the start of the school year. Do you remember exactly when Dr. Fugman, when that working group started?
Speaker 8: I think it was sometime the summer along with all the other goal related working groups. Speaker 1: Yeah, so at that time we had put a working group together and this group has been working with administration in various capacities and now we're coming together again to evaluate how that's been going and to see if this is something that we wanna formalize. That this is something that the administration has found it valuable and if so, what parts of it and, and have that, that's how I foresee having this discussion. I don't know if anyone else has other aspects
that they would like to include in the discussion before we start. Okay. Alright. So I was wondering if we could just perhaps ask both the committee to tell us or the, not the committee, the working group to tell us what, what the experience has been like so far and then perhaps we could also call on Dr. Stash to give sort of the perspective of how it's gone through the administration. So I don't know who from the working group wants to speak to that Speaker 11: One else said she had to send off the Speaker 1: Connection. Okay. Alright. So we just have Ms. Flats and Ms. Collins in the room. Ms. Collins,
Speaker 11: I think it's been useful. I do continue to worry about the administration's time. So I guess if, if they find it useful then I'm willing to support going forward the idea of a finance subcommittee budget, working sub, whatever we're calling it. But I don't find support in this motion as it's written or the policy because anything that's going to add to our policy book should go through the policy subcommittee and this is not, Speaker 1: Yeah. So we haven't spoken to the materials that were, that were put up there.
Okay. Yeah, so right now I think we're just looking for some feedback for how it's going and whether or not we even want to proceed with this. Yeah. Ms. Laers, did you wanna add anything? Speaker 9: I think I, RJ agree. I mean I, I would definitely like to hear about the administration, what's valuable, what's not valuable. And then I certainly think we can have more conversations around what the scope of the committee is. You know, when I look through it I even have, you know, feedback 'cause we didn't have a session and I agree with you, you should go through the policy subcommittee. You know, I think so I defer in terms of pre-reading of materials to kind of smooth through the rest of,
on some of these budget things. If that's a value to the administration, would love to hear more. I mean we can bring everything to this committee. I also think some of the things in here, you know, when Mr. Gills brings some detailed financial reconciliation memos to the main committee, I feel like there's a few people that generally ask the most questions. So if easier to get those done in a subcommittee and you know, and get agreed on, you know, that can be a time saver overall for these meetings and provide flexibility in the other meetings. But really I think it's a matter of whether it but makes both these meetings run more efficiently. Kathy, I know you've always been concerned that
by doing too much in a budget subcommittee will mean that not as much is known here, but I think the budgets have become so clear that I think they're really understandable and so it, I don't have that concern really. And so, so I think for me it's does it make this easier and does it make the administration's life easier and does it provide flexibility to get more timely updates off schedule of these meetings? Speaker 1: Okay, thank you Dr. Stash. Speaker 6: Yeah, I appreciate the opportunity to weigh in. So I think I agree with everything Ms. Collins and Ms.
Slather have said. I've found it valuable. I feel Matt is not here tonight. Mr. Gillis is not here tonight, but I do think he would agree with the things I'm gonna say. I mean, thinking about the budget book that this committee helped us decide which of the models to use the guidelines that this committee discussed and then became part of that budget book. Those are some of the short recent things we've kind of done. I already know we're wanting to meet with this committee to talk about what will be in front of this committee, this committee, the greater committee next, which will be a recommendation on fees.
And I think that's been a good place to have discussion and kind of tease out how we might propose to this bigger committee, what the fees will look like in the future. So I'm seeing like a good way to bump some of our real time, you know, decision points up against this committee in ways that can be a good robust conversation. And then come to a, a recommendation here with, you know, several members already having weighed in. I think when we consider the report of findings that I presented back in February, I almost want that will in
and of itself become an action plan that has to do with finance and budget. You can think about the recommendations around a capital plan or even how some of the things we've recently been discussing, which is around just that financial responsibility moving forward in the wake of this past override. So I think that would be a very good piece of work for this committee to work on. And then also just Some of the conversations around financial reporting and what, how frequently this, I see this work really evolving. So we may not have it all figured out yet,
but I think having a small subcommittee to do that deeper work to match kind of the structures, the cadence, the frequency of, of the way we bring the budget conversations into this bigger committee, to have some people doing that collaboration in a subcommittee makes a lot of sense. So I don't know if it's one of these things people say schools are always evolving and, and maybe this committee never evolves its way out of existence. It might not, but right now I do think it's needed. Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you. Okay, Ms.
Hollins, we take a off, pardon me before doing that. Okay. Could I ask Mr Brand a question? Oh, okay. So I just wanted to speak to the materials that were shared in Novus. I I think that, you know, some people have said this is, well I, I guess I said it's a was just a jumping off point for sort of considering different parts of the discussion. But I just wanted to clarify with Mr. Brand as chair of the policy subcommittee, do we typically have policies that define subcommittees? Speaker 6: I do not Speaker 13: Believe we have a policy that defines specific subcommittees.
We have a policy B-D-E-B-D-E-B-D-E, that and BDF, that define the rules of a subcommittee. So Okay. That's what we have. I don't think there is a, there's for example, I don't think there's a specific policy for the policy subcommittee or the curriculum subcommittee, which I believe are the only two subcommittees that we have right now. Speaker 8: Okay, Speaker 1: Thank you. Just for Speaker 13: Clarification, task force and other things. But, Speaker 1: So it would be unusual then to define a policy or define a subcommittee by a policy given our past practice? Speaker 13: I would, I agree. Speaker 8: Okay.
Speaker 1: Okay. Just checking. Speaker 13: I'm not, I'm not a lawyer. Yes, but I would, I agree. Speaker 1: Just, just checking from a policy, subcommittee point of view. Ms. Lathers. Speaker 9: So it sounds like they can be separate anyway so we could Speaker 1: Yeah. Establish Speaker 9: The subcommittee and follow up with a policy if it's necessary. Speaker 1: Okay, thank you. Do you have a motion? Speaker 11: I do because that's exactly where I was gonna go. I'm, oh, we're thinking what? It's not a bad thing Kate. I move that we established a finance and budget subcommittee of up to three members to
work with the administration. Speaker 13: Second Speaker 1: Discussion, Speaker 8: I'd like to offer friendly amendment, which is to tag at the end. Something along the lines of the school committee will revisit the role of this budget subcommittee in a year. I know we don't do that for the policy subcommittee, but I feel like it's an established subcommittee. I'm not concerned that we won't want to have a budget subcommittee next year. I'm just wondering if, to your point, we may wanna discuss its evolving nature this year in particular, it wasn't a subcommittee, it was a task force, but it served a very particular purpose in a very particular context around the override
and you know, other issues. And coming out of the override this year, this coming year will also be somewhat unique. Plus it's your first year, first year of the superintendent. So there might be some things that happened this year that might be different moving, moving forward. So, so just kind of adding, Speaker 11: I would be amenable to that friendly amendment Speaker 8: And I think Mr. Speaker 11: Brand Speaker 13: As would I Speaker 1: And could I make a Speaker 8: Friendlier Speaker 1: Friendly Friendly, I was wondering if we could define that time of revisiting it. Yeah. Yeah. To be maybe in the summer when we have our retreat or I'm just concerned.
Speaker 8: Summer of 2026. Speaker 1: Yeah, well I was thinking even this summer, oh, to sort of set the, I feel like we're in a little bit of a funny cycle because we usually start things off for the school year in terms of plans of things we're going to do. So I'm wondering if revisiting it next March would be awkward because we would sort of be in the middle of doing things for the school year. I mean, I could be wrong. I'm just wondering if it would be good to set it in the summer. I see some discussion Ms. Collins. Speaker 11: I'm sorry, I, I presumed, I guess that you were saying the summer of 2026 when we re
Speaker 8: I was gonna say just a general year, like about about March, but I'm perfectly okay with the summer as this summer as well. I don't know how much will happen between now and the summer, but we can always check on it this summer then always check on it. Okay. Later again. So I'm, I'm okay with doing it this summer of summer 2025. I Speaker 9: Was gonna say summer of 2026. 'cause I think we've done most of the work for this year, so I don't think we'll have a lot of data points. Speaker 1: Okay. So then summer of 2026, would that be an acceptable to start the yearly reviews? Speaker 11: That would be fine Speaker 1: Mr. Strand. Okay. Speaker 11: And there was head shaking and rocks moving if we're here. Yes,
Speaker 19: That would be fine by me. Speaker 1: Okay. Any further discussion? Okay, let's vote on, do you mind reading your motion again? Is that possible Speaker 20: Finance and budget subcommittee? No, up to three members to of administration my throat Speaker 1: And Speaker 20: Oh and thank you. I like that. And revisit the idea behind this committee in the, the summer retreats of 2026. Speaker 1: Okay. Alright. So ready to vote. Okay. Mr. Patel? Yes. Ms. Lathers. Mr. Brand? Yes. Mr. Dr. Fugman? Yes.
What's wrong with me? Ms. Collins? Yes. Do we have Ms. Brunel on the phone? No. No. And I'm a yes. So that's six in favor. We have a budget and finance subcommittee. Speaker 8: And can I make a comment or maybe it's a question I'm assuming soon and I think it's up to the chair. We would have a meeting to 'cause this, the reorg meeting, just, which just happened was just the specific roles. But some point we wanna revisit who's on this, all the subcommittees and liaisons. And that might be a good opportunity to also figure out who's on the budget subcommittee
now. Now that we have one. Speaker 1: Yes. I'm so glad you brought that up because I thought of proposing that at our next meeting we would review the subcommittee assignments and I think the process that we used last year where people sent their interests in what subcommittees that are activ, like liaison ships they would like to be part of. If they would send that through me and then we can, I think you collected that in advance, right? Just to try to make sure that everyone's interests were going to be represented and then we can have a discussion at our next meeting about shifting membership.
Okay. All right. So then that's what we'll do. Okay. Same. Alright. Thank you. Alright, so I think that's our full order of business. Speaker 13: Can I make a motion to adjourn? Speaker 1: Yes. And I can second. I would second. Okay. Alright. Voting to adjourn. Mr. Patel? Yes. Ms. Lathers? Yes. Mr. Brand? Yes. Dr. Folkman? Yes. Ms. Collins. Ms. Brunell? Yes. And I'm a yes. So we're adjourned. Thank you everybody. Goodnight.