Speaker 1: Good evening everyone. This is the school committee meeting for March 17th, 2025. I'm gonna start with a roll call. Ms. Flas. Yes, Mr. Brand Present. Ms. Gof present and I'm present as well. I am going to recommend that or make the motion to go to executive session and we can do the pledge of allegiance to of sounds after that. Yeah. Oh. So I'm gonna make a motion to enter into executive session in order to discuss strategy with respect to collective bargaining. If an open meeting may have a detrimental effect on the bargaining position of the public body and the chair.
So declares, I do EAN, unit A, MB and rest of assistance, food service, prior professionals and custodial and maintenance. Speaker 2: Second. Speaker 1: And I'll do a roll call. Ms. Flas? Yes. Mr. Brand? Yes. Ms. Gors? Yes. And MIS. So we're now in executive session. We'll return at approximately six 30 for the open meeting. So we're going to return to open meeting, having gone to executive session, we did a roll call before executive session. I will now invite everyone to stand up for the Pledge of Allegiance and a moment of silence. Speaker 3: All the pledge of all allegiance to the flag
of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, liberty, and justice for all. Speaker 1: Thank you for joining. In a moment of silence, to honor those who have sacrificed for our our nation, any announcements from anyone on either side of the table or the public. Seeing none will open 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 to the school committee chair.
Public speak is not a time for debate or response to comments by the school committee. Is anyone here for public speak? I don't see any hands up online. Anyone in the audience? Nope. So we'll close public speak and we'll move to comments from the teacher, student, and macro representatives. We can start with the teacher representatives. We have two today. Just one. Okay. Or two. Speaker 2: We're gonna switch Speaker 1: Off. Speaker 2: No. Nope. It's good to be here, but nothing to report on today.
No comments from the teachers. Staff. Speaker 1: Great. Thank you. I don't see any of the students, but I do have an email from Anthony Luke, who's one of the student representatives. So I'll read it out. Here are the updates for this week from Natick High School. Number one equity co-op is this Thursday, March 20th. It's a special day for NHS as students will listen to panel discussing this year's theme, a community and celebration and attend class led by student presenters on topics for equity. Number two, there's been a discussion that budget override among some students at NHS Overall.
Students are hoping there are no budget cuts. As the high school seems short on teachers, class sizes are getting larger and teachers are taking on more classes. Number three on April 9th is a polar plunge to raise money for the Special Olympics. It will take place in the NHS faculty parking lot and more information can be found in the homepage linked in principals, blo, principal blocker emails, or by contacting Mr. De Antonio, Sidney Chandler or Bethany Logan. Their emails are N-I-D-A-N-T-O-N io a NAIC PS org. S-I-C-H-A-N DL r@students.na ps do org
and B-E-L-O-U-G-H-R-A-N At students do na ps do org. That's all for the, was it bad that I spelled them? It was just fast. Oh, was it fast? Did everyone catch that? Well, so, so the first principle blocker's emails. That's, check those out. Were you interested in the plunge? Is that just kidding? Just kidding. You don't need to answer. That's all for this week. And hopefully I'll be able to make the team the team. Fingers crossed. Okay. That's from Anthony. Any questions about that?
I mean, not that I have any answers, but, so anyway, so that's from the student representatives. And now we'll go to our macro representative, Ms. Scott. Speaker 4: Good afternoon, everyone. This upcoming Thursday is Meco Advocacy Day at the Massachusetts State House. It's going to be from 10:00 AM to 1:00 PM with registration and breakfast from nine 15 to 10:00 AM And also afterwards, light refreshments and pizza will be served as well. Thank you. Okay, Speaker 1: No problem. Thank you. Next, I'll take a motion
to approve the consent agenda. So moved. Anyone? Second? Second. Anyone want to pull anything out from the agenda? Nope. So with that, we'll take a vote. All those in favor. Consent agenda. Anyone against the, any abstentions? The consent agenda passes. So now we're gonna move to the main item on the tonight's agenda, which is a public hearing. This is our annual budget hearing for the public. It's an opportunity for anyone in the public to comment, provide feedback, or ask any questions about the budget.
I will say this has been somewhat of an unusual year just because of the override vote. So we've had, in addition to the public forum, we've had three other public forums organized by both the, the school committee, the select board, as well as the town administration and the NA Public Schools administration. We've also had hundreds of questions coming in through the override web portal. So there's been a lot of engagement. And I just wanted to appre to just express my appreciation for everyone in the community who has been so engaged as budget decision makers.
It's always helpful to have the, the, the feedback from the community so we can make decisions that truly represent our community. So with that, I stalling a little bit. Just to give a little bit of time for anyone who's interested in participating in public hearing, I'll open the floor. If there's anyone here in person or online. Speaker 5: We have to open the public hearing Speaker 1: With a motion. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Okay. So I'll take a motion to OBL the public hearing. Speaker 5: Do you wanna do it? I, I would move to open the budget public hearing Second.
Speaker 1: All those in favor? Anyone against any abstentions? So the public hearing is now officially open. So anyone online or in the public wanna participate in the public hearing. Just raise your hand. I'll call on you. You don't have to, but how, how long do we usually sit here with awkward silence before it gets, Speaker 5: I think it's usually 75 to 90 minutes. Speaker 1: Okay. I'll just wait. How about 30 seconds, seconds. We'll compromise. Oh yes. Dr. Mackenzie, Speaker 6: Donna Mackenzie.
And I'll ask a question. Speaker 7: Know the Speaker 1: Answer to, oh, that mic isn't on yet. Speaker 4: How about now? Yeah. Speaker 1: Perfect. Speaker 4: It's Donna McKenzie. I'm gonna ask a question and I kind of know the answer to it, but you have two budgets, correct. One with an override and one without an override. And I'm just wondering how he reached the rationale that it would be the interventionists who would be caught if the override wasn't passed. I think I know the answer, but just for the sake of people listening at home. Thank you. Speaker 8: Hi, thank you. This is something I've asked numerous uhanswered numerous times.
It was not easy. The procedural way that we came to this decision was to meet first as a cabinet, which is the My eight direct reports as a team, to go through that sort of excruciating exercise of where we could name positions that were the least student facing, which interventionists are very student facing. That goes to show that the prior million four that we had reduced was very much not student facing. And so there just weren't more resources left that weren't student facing. And so when we went through that process, there was a collaboration across the cabinet with agreement.
None of us want to lose those positions, but those felt like we couldn't reduce classroom teachers without really going over the allowed class size limits in our collective bargaining agreements. And so those were the positions that we could do. Most of our paraprofessionals are already assigned to students or to student sessions through their IEPs. So those weren't options. So it really was the only options in headcount other than the other ones we put there. After going through the cabinet, we went to our principals. We met with all of our principals, asked them, asked them to push back on it, them to kind of make sure that they were completely in the loop
and in agreement, which they were. We've made some little switches, but the interventionists weren't, weren't one of those. And then we met with our union to make sure we talked to them ahead of publicizing it in our budget book. So it was not easy. It was really the positions that weren't in front of kids holding classes with 24 kids in the class. And there's, they're not the only ones in that list of reduc reductions. And so there were other positions, but those were the ones that were quite student facing. Speaker 9: Say thank you. Speaker 1: You can say thank you. I'll allow it. Just kidding. Any other questions? Oh yeah, sorry.
Speaker 10: I add something to that. Sure. 'cause and you know, I think everyone watching or listening and everyone in the room knows this already, but in case anyone watches later, 'cause I didn't want the narrative to be out there that it's just the interventionist, which you kind of alluded to at the end. But it's also 12 classroom teachers and it's also staff support and other types of intervention too that we need for special education services. So I just wanted to make that point in case anyone watches this later. That is, it's more than just, those have been talked about a lot. But
Speaker 1: Any other comments from the public? Seeing none. And I'm stalling to give people a chance. I will. A motion take a motion to close. Move, Speaker 5: Move to close the public hearing on the budget. Speaker 8: Second. Speaker 1: All those in favor? Anyone against any abstentions? So the public hearing is still closed, is now closed. As I said before, obviously this is, has not been the, the only opportunity for people to provide feedback. We had various opportunities and people have taken advantage of those opportunities. And I just wanted to thank everyone for being engaged.
Obviously the Natick School Committee's email box is always open. If you have any feedback that you want to email us, you're always welcome to do that as well. I'm gonna propose that we skip to the MSBA, just because we have the chair of the school building committee. And then we go back to the budget discussion if everyone is okay with that. So we wanted, oh sorry. Actually it's superintendent's report. Speaker 8: Yeah, it's technically my report, but I'd invite you to kind of open up with some comments if you'd like to. Speaker 1: Sure, yeah. So there's a couple of things that we wanted to discuss today in terms of the MSBA process.
First of all, both Dr. Sp and Mr. Myler have some updates on the process. But I also wanted to, I wanted to start off by talking about the process for establishing the school, building the building committee. Last two meetings ago, we voted to appoint our chair, the chair of that committee, Mr. Myer. We have also been in touch among the administration, myself and Mr. Myer, with all the various entities that, according to the MSBA process, are going to need to appoint people.
So we're collecting members based on the MSPA process as, as we also know, there's gonna be one or two school committee members on that committee as well. I had proposed that we wait until March 31st to appoint those members so that we can do it after the election. The entire committee, the lineup of the whole committee is gonna be voted by the full by this committee and presented to the MSBA by the deadline. Or we should do it by the deadline of April 5th.
In addition, there are two or three members, community large members, and I know that we've had some discussion about that and some feedback on it. So I wanted just to tackle that head on right away so that we as a committee can decide how to proceed as, as you all know, we invited people to submit an application. The deadline for the application has already ended. We now have multiple applicants that both Dr. Sp and Ms. McGrath have looked through. The question is, now how do we select those individuals Mr.
Marler has offered, and he'll, he can say more when he gets up into the podium to review and, and discuss and figure out who those members should be based on their technical skills. And kind of creating a committee that has the full range of expertise that is required for this kind of project. Being a very specific type of project through both through, in terms of the MSPA process, which is very specific and very detailed, as well as in terms of just in general having expertise to manage the construction of a building, of a school building. So I'll pause there in led, let the committee react
to how, any, any thoughts about that process? I'm not looking at you. I know you we're making eye contact, but I'm not, do I intentionally, Speaker 11: I mean, I have thoughts about the actual process when we get into the deck. Speaker 1: Into the what? Into Speaker 11: The deck that, oh, okay. Posted. So, I mean I can hold for that. Speaker 1: Yeah. Mr. Brune. Speaker 12: Well just want, I just wanted to, you said a couple of things that were new to me. So you said that we're gonna have two to three community members, I believe, and one to two community. Community or one to two school committee members. Yeah. So from what I've read those,
maybe those are suggestions, but that's, none of that is written in stone. Obviously on a, for the school committee, you can't have a quorum. So we could have up to three. We could also have a representative. So we wouldn't have to have any, from what I've read. And then the community members are, there's no limit and there's actually no limit on, I mean obviously you gotta limit it, right? But there's, it's not like it's prescribed three members of the community. Unless I've, unless I've misunderstood what I read. Speaker 1: I can pull that up unless someone has it. Sorry.
Yeah, go ahead. Speaker 13: I will just chime in if you don't mind. You're absolutely right on that. You can have as many other category members or other members of the community. However, when we go through these types of processes, the more people you put on the community, particularly those that aren't engineers, construction managers, or have the expertise here, it gets very gnarly having conversations or even getting enough group together to try and move the committee forward. So we try and get a concise number of people. I'm not saying two or three, I'm saying we, we do is
what I'm interested in is looking at the individuals where the qualifications of the individuals that we have, what gaps do we have across the entire membership that we have on the committee. And try and fill those gaps so that we optimize the professionalism of the group. If we let it go, we could end up having an auditorium, people who want to show up. And that doesn't create any functional efficiency either. So there is a balance there that we need to try and strike. You saw two to three that may have come from me and what I put on there, I'm not limiting it to two, I'm not limiting it to three.
Trying to say, let's look at the pool of individuals that we have and make a good decision overall for the community. Does that help? Yeah, Speaker 12: I appreciate that. Speaker 1: And I would add all committee meetings are open to the public so people can participate. You're talking just about who are the regular members Who would be voting Speaker 13: Yes, if I may chair. Yeah. Yes. This is a very different type of committee meeting that we run. We listen to everybody that shows up or sends us information. One of the things, the key performances that we have here, here is active listening.
We can't have somebody who just speaks outwardly and doesn't give anybody else a chance to talk. Any members of the community that comes, they have an equal voice as to what's going on. It's just the final vote. So we, I classified things, if you remember, and I'll talk a little bit about it tonight, ad hoc members, which are non-voting members, everybody wants to be a voting member. No, we can't have voting members for everybody. 'cause it drives a quorum number. So it doesn't mean you're not gonna be able to participate. It doesn't mean that you're not gonna be listened to by any means whatsoever. And we're just trying to meet the needs of the community
and the needs of the MSBA and keep the efficiencies moving. Anybody who has experience of going to our meetings or all the buildings that were done in the town, you'll realize that they're very effective working team meetings. It's very different than a more of a politically run meeting that's sets out there. Okay. Speaker 1: Yeah. Ms. Phillis, thank you. Can Speaker 11: You clarify what you mean by it gets gnarly? Speaker 13: Gnarly? Speaker 11: Yeah. Just what, I mean what kind of circumstances are we talking about? Where the conversation gets gnarly if there's, I mean it makes it sound like cer if what, what kinds
of behaviors or qualification gaps prevent a conversation from moving forward? Speaker 13: Sure. We have people that are vested in one specific topic and they are trying to ensure that it goes through regardless of the information that's presented, whether it is accurate or not. And it just drags the community down or the, the project down itself. So gnarly meaning we get into different conversations that are just not constructive. We have individuals carrying on the same topic. 15 people start talking about the same points.
We try and get people to have innovative thoughts. If they're gonna add to the conversation, add to the conversation. But don't just restate it. 'cause then our meetings turn into three to four hours long and we didn't really achieve much. So gnarly is, can be applies in different ways. Speaker 1: And I add to that, I both reading and listening to the, our meetings with MSPA representative who were, was talking about the process, selecting the committee, she wasn't talking about specific situations. But in general, the, the recommendations we received is you really want a professional committee of people who really understand,
you know, this is a construction project that you're overseeing a construction project and you wanna keep it balanced enough so that there's good conversation and, and good decision making that the community can eventually support without making it too big or too political or too big. Really. Yeah. Ms. Mr. Brand, I'll come back to Ms. Fathers. So Speaker 5: Just, I know it seems like the focus of this conversation is on the formation of the, of the building committee. But I think it might help just for a little bit of context how, and I don't know if you wanna do it or if Mr.
Miler wants to do it. What is the, so for people, what is the level of interaction with the building committee through the process with the school committee can, because I'm, I mean I was sitting here when Kennedy got built, but I think it would be a helpful bit of context for everybody so that not just us, but the whole public knows that back and forth process. Speaker 1: Yeah. Sorry, go ahead. Speaker 13: Okay. I just want through you Mr. Chair. Thank you. I do a lot of this too. So, so what has typically happened in the past that seemed to have worked is on a regular basis the superintendent in
the assistant superintendent will be providing you with general updates. What's going on within the overall building committee team? Since we have them on the team members themselves, they'll be providing you with two types of updates. The curriculum definition, which is to drive the design of the nu the need of the building. How many classrooms do you want a gym? Do you not want a gym? Do you have a stage? How much of a state? There's a lot of different decisions that are curriculum based that they will be working on. We don't deal with that part. You would be most likely dealing and working with that with the administration to come up
with a definition of the educational need support of the building. Then when we're talking about the actual construction of the building itself, the design, the feasibility, all of the things that go into it, that's when it would be, you'd get general updates on a regular basis. And the superintendent and the assistant superintendent, we would come in with the OPM and give a general update when we hit certain milestones, certain milestones or pivotal points on, on discussions or, or key times where we're going to be making commitments to the vast majority of turning points
within the project itself. For example, completion of feasibility study. We're locking down the plans. We would come in and do a complete review as to what the plans look like right now. That would be a school committee presentation. In many cases that also turns into a public hearing. We would end up opening up and if the superintendent feels appropriate, a school and we would have an evening discussion with anybody in the public wants to show up and sees the feasibility studies and the designs before we lock them down so we can collect the broader input. So you'll get typically key pivotal updates
and then minor updates at the beginning of each meeting if you choose to do so. I don't come in and go to every school committee meeting. Please don't do that to me. I will come in at key pivotal decision points or key pivotal points within the project itself. Or if we run into a major issue, you'll be informed on that. Speaker 1: Just the reader and Mr. Gillis will be on that committee too. So obviously they'll always be able to provide feedback. I also think I, I personally appreciate the MSBA process for the committee because you also have a representative from the select board Fcom the planning board.
So besides the school committee, obviously we have vest interested in the project, but the other boards are, are also gonna have their own representatives and be informed through their liaison. Speaker 13: It, it takes a community to raise a school and that's a true statement. Yeah. For us to think that it's just within the school department is shortsighted and you'll hear, well you're covering some of my little mini presentation. Sorry. That's okay. Speaker 1: Are there any other questions or comments about the formation of the committee? Speaker 11: I mean, I do, but this, it speaks to, I guess my, the question is, I, I guess we can do it within the context of the deck as well.
I don't know where to ask the questions 'cause it's talking about, I mean I had concerns about, as I expressed selecting a the chair without going through a process of opening it up, looking at, you know, having the school committee take ownership for that selection process. The, the deck itself speaks a lot to really, it being the chair will be doing that next selection and review of the candidates. And I mean, I find that very concerning. I think it's a lot of, a lot of these choices are predicated on the perception that that Kennedy was such an enormous success that, you know,
if we could do that again, wouldn't that be great? And I, I mean I think there's some great things about Kennedy, but I think there were some huge misses and I wanna make sure that we understand what those misses are and that we don't make them, again, I've talked to a lot of people and I'm happy to give you some of my examples that I, that I find concerning. And so if, if the, if the process is going to the path of let's bring, you know, we had, so it was great the last time. I've gotten a lot of feedback that, that, you know, not everyone in the building had a lot of, you know, say in it. I've seen, I mean when I go through the building,
I mean I've had four kids going through it. There's, you know, some investments that, I mean maybe that's exactly what you're speaking to of people that wanted their thing, like the hydroponics lab and the planetarium that based on who we are as a, as a community and the money we wanna spend, we're really overspent like huge sweeping ceilings that are, you know, huge like open spaces that are really expensive to maintain. Whereas we have, you know, not enough space in the theater to do theater things. And we have the beautiful hallway that's supposed to have, you know, the awards, the awards trophies is basically a
storage area on the front of the school. Like I go in the bathroom by the theater and four years out, it's actually looking really in disrepair. And I worry that, like I look at some of the materials selected, maybe they were, I don't know why they were selected, but they don't seem, you know, they don't seem as con as like to the grade that you'd expect for the kind of traffic that it would, they look pretty, but they don't seem like it's the right selection. So I just, I have, I've gotten a lot of feedback. I've talking to a lot of people and I just, I wanna know what it is we wanna accomplish that. And technology, I mean the technology that was rolled out
that it doesn't feel like we ever had plans of, I know like the teachers weren't taught with some of the technology. We have many, many TVs in every room that I don't know I ever saw projections on how we would maintain and replace all of that technology that I don't even get the sense a lot of the teachers really want, like they want wall space to hang art versus necessarily having four, you know, four TVs. And I respect that. I mean I I I don't think like I've can state enough how much I've appreciated the collaboration with the administration that we're having and, and like the really hard decisions that you're making.
But I, I feel like I wanna make sure that the process that we're going through is totally reflective of our values of what we want out of our buildings and like, and being fiscally responsible and it's just has felt a little bit like an opaque process right now for me. Speaker 1: So I have a couple of comments about that. And then you wanna speak and I don't know if you wanna speak to that once. Well, sure. So just, just from my perspective. So the first of all, I, I respect your perspective on Kennedy. I don't, I don't agree with it, but it's, we can disagree to disa
or agree to disagree on whether or not the Kennedy project worked well or not. I also wanna separate the Kennedy process from this process. The steps that we're going through right now are dictated by the MSBA process. So I wanna make sure that we're not, you know, this is the process that we have to go through for the MSBA in terms of forming the committee. We now today can talk about how we wanna shape that. And, and I, so I wanna, I wanna focus the conversation away from Kennedy and more towards the next steps of the process
around Memorial. I don't, I wouldn't say that we picked Mr. Miler just because of the Kennedy worked or didn't, didn't work. You know, obviously he brings a lot of experience. This is gonna be your fourth building committee. I believe Speaker 13: This will be my fourth building and I've already spent 15 years of my life doing buildings in Natick. So, so Speaker 1: This is not just about the Kennedy Speaker 11: And I don't, and I don't misunderstand. Yeah, I mean great experience. Kenny had a lot of good things, but I also, you know, I I it is, and I wouldn't even bring it up except that this process is suddenly feeling like fast. Speaker 1: Yeah. So I wanna focus on the process Yes. For this as opposed to, to make sure that it's transparent,
the Kennedy project and yeah. Speaker 11: And when we get into the deck, I recognize the need to make sure they have the appropriate professional expertise. But I also, you know, wanna make sure, I mean if, if the school representatives feel really good about what they're bringing to from a flow and the getting the teacher's feedback and that we feel really great about it. But I do think we have, you know, are we, is this is the others in the community if they have some of the requisites, is it, should it all be professional engineers? 'cause I mean, I've been an engineer and the diversity of opinions in there, I just,
I wanna understand what the priorities are better. Well, did you wanna go first? Speaker 10: Well, I, I would just say, so a lot of the things you talked about with Kennedy, Kate are things that, that sound sort of educational curriculum based. Is that what you're kind of talking about a little bit? Like you described the use of spaces and the size of the spaces and the screen. So just so you know that the way Kennedy was done, and that's only my experience, is that there was a lot of, it was driven by the vision
of the two previous superintendents, right? They spent four years going around to all the schools, then they brought this vision of the middle school. And so they had done like five years of work and then, but to inform that vision, there were these day long retreats that happened that teachers from every, like all the, maybe it was just the middle schools, but I feel like there were more, and maybe someone remembers, but it was like, and school committee members were there in those retreats talking about the educational vision of
what the school needed to deliver. So I think there is a chance for school committee and the superintendent and assistant superintendents to sort of help with the vi the curriculum and the educational vision. But I think that the building committee is, I don't think you want them sort of driving the educational vision, but I do think there's something to be said for understanding like once the building's built in the way that it's built, that what is the maintenance gonna be? What's the staffing gonna be needed to maintain that? You know, we've, I've had conversations
with custodians at Kennedy who are like, there's a lot of windows now and we don't really have the staff to be able to do, you know, maintain this building. Like we wanna maintain it. But I just wanted to tell you about that piece of it in, in case you were worried about the educational vision and the, the composition of the committee. Yeah, Speaker 11: No, and I think thank I I it's a, it's the combination of the two, I mean the educational vision, it's the practicality. I mean I think you hit the nail on the head of the, you know, how reining it back in of like
what are the most important educational priorities. And I mean, I think, you know, make very good, there's very good practical decision making that I'm seeing. But it's, it's some of those I don't, I'm also just representing a lot of people who've talked to me about it and their concerns and wanting to make sure that, that we're being practical and it was a different time, different people. And I don't, you know, I don't wanna start off, I don't wanna go backwards and belabor the past, but sometimes it's good to just be reflective of a process of what was good, what was bad. I mean, we both work in engineering doing your retrospective
of the work after the fact can give you good perspectives into, you know, what you want next time. Yeah. And Speaker 10: I, sorry and I didn't even, I Speaker 1: Hope I didn't sound like I was discrediting what you were saying. I just wanna make sure that we are designing the process as we go forward the way we want, the way we want to design it. So I wanna figure out what is it that we want out of the process. I do think that from our conversation with Mr. Mueller, with Dr. Sp, whoever the next chair will be, you know, the idea is to make sure that there is a lot of feedback and I'm, it sounds like that's part of the issue that
with the Kennedy was the lack of engagement. Whether that's Val or not, I don't know. But, but I think that's what I heard you say is that some people weren't involved in their Speaker 11: I have, I've definitely received that feedback from certain places. Some was curricular, some to exactly your point is those maintenance costs, like are all the right questions being asked, which is not just the building but long term financials, et cetera. Which, Speaker 14: So, so having gone through a few of these myself, you know, the, the process from MSBA and the, the, the committee is deliberately flexible and supposed to be transparent.
So, you know, it says minimum one school committee member, you, you can have as many folks from the community as you want, as long as they're really gonna be committed. I have been in places where after the design was done, people just sort of dropped off 'cause they had nothing to do with construction. And we can always revise, revise the committee. But to, to Steven's point to the chair, like it, I guess there's a little hesitation about making it too big, but I don't, it doesn't feel like we're there yet. And Kate, like all of your points are, are all things
that should be wrapped into how do we do it a little better next time around. Like, sometimes you want higher ceilings and more open space to create certain environments, but if it turns out to be not too functional or appreciated because it's in a bizarre spot in the building that's not used, you know, th those things are worth noting. Or I mean this, I I, I don't know, I I've done a lot of different projects. So there are a lot of takeaways and then once, once you get started with it,
you never really stop thinking about how you can do it better and then you know, more affordable, more durable, more reliable, more functional so that you get better student outcomes. 'cause the whole goal is to have the building meet your programmatic needs and hopefully help improve student achievements. And I know the buildings don't teach, the teachers do, but when they're not an impediment in any way, things do tend to move in the right direction a little bit quicker. Speaker 1: So, sorry. So I wanna figure out how to move us forward. So one of the things, so at this point we're at a point
where we wanna figure out how to select the community members. Mr. Miler has ag agreed to go through that information and provide us with recommendations. I know you have a slide deck, so I don't know if, would it help the committee if we go through the slide deck first? What? Oh and there's a member of the committee with a hand up. Does it make sense to go through the slide deck first? 'cause that might answer questions or at least raise new questions and then we'll go through the conversation and Mr. Coburn will call on you after the present. The brief presentation
Speaker 13: Sounds good. And these are all valid topics to be discussed. I appreciate you bringing them up as we go forward. So what I realized very early on last week was I didn't know how much you were aware of what the process was with the MSBA and we're very much intertwined with the MSBA and their requirements. So when we take a look at this one little slide, I put this together, this is what they compose as to what the building committee should be in the towns. And this is their guidance. Now they're really not,
if you look at the descriptions here, like member of the mass certified public purchasing office program, who in Natick does that? Well we do have people that do that, but the reality is these are a combination of not just people but roles. And what we will end up doing is instead of turning around and saying, okay, we're going to ask somebody to come forward, who is the mass certified public purchasing person? I'm using this just as an example to, to accentuate my point, you're not gonna get that kind of a response. So what we do is we're going to take all of these positions,
which they require us to have covered because they are an invested partner with us. They own a lot of this activities and how we go forward. We do multiple check-ins with them. And the OPM for the most part is actually a representative of the MSBA, even though they're working from us when we hire, it's a combination role. So if you look at these manager, these roles, like you have a school committee member here, you have the administrator or manager. So they, they don't provide a great deal of definition around some of these. But it gets down to the bottom piece here
where I highlighted in blue we have members of the community and the MSBA specifically calls out architectural support engineering construction experience. They're looking to draw from the community to support the development of the building of this plan. To your original point earlier, this committee does not get anywhere near involved in the educational vision of what that school's going to be used for. We will ask the superintendent and the school committee to provide that vision and then we design a feasibility study around that to support it for the construction plan itself.
So you own that. We don't own that. What you tell us is what we will do. We will come back and say it's very expensive or it's not. But that's how we move things. Okay. So if we go to the next slide please. What we've realized throughout the entire process is Natick also has its own town government system and we can't do it in isolation. It does take a community to raise a school. So we find that it works best if we have a member of the finance committee on the committee. A member of the select board planning, board planning board is a critical role
because they tell us whether we are going forward to get certain permits, what's the probability, what do we need to take into consideration. They work with us to try and guide us so that we don't get to the end of the process and realize what we want or we're designing is not something that the town will permit. So we're looking to embody the town government into our committee so that we can try and move this as efficiently, effectively, and cost efficiently as possible. We involve as ad hoc representation in other groups.
For example, the Natick Police and Fire, they don't need to sit through every single meeting and they don't need to have a voting. But we will listen to everything that they say we have in the past. We will still do the same going forward. We don't ignore anyone in this process. And then we usually have the sustainability management in the past it's Ben, Jillian and we have that person come in also typically during feasibility study and provide feedback and input. And there's another larger, couple larger groups that are involved in that right now. So these are the people that we try and pull into the committee to try and make it more effective and efficient.
And then obviously you heard me talk about the OPM. We work with the MSBA to hire an OPM, an architectural firm and a construction company. And it's from a pool of individual to pool of companies that they have that we get to choose that they've qualified or certified for us. We still go through a bidding process, but we hire them as well and they're helping us lead the program as we go forward. They're critical, critical members to us. In many cases. The OPM is doing oversight with the construction. We're not allowed on the site of construction.
I will be there as the chair here and there, but only to see certain things they are to manage the program. 'cause it's dangerous place. You can't have people out on the construction site. So that's the committee that you look at. If we go to the next slide. Thank you. So this is the structure, this is the Natick view. And I think it's important 'cause you might see the MSBA as you saw in the first slide. And then you'll look at this and you say, I don't understand how this goes together. What we'll end up doing is mapping the MSBA requirements and the roles into a committee that's listed here.
For example, of course the superintendent is on the building committee, the assistant superintendent of the business office. He probably has the procurement piece. So it's looking at all the MSBA requirements and mapping it into a committee that's going to be successful. Not just within the MSBA, but also within the town government in the community. I'm not gonna go through this. Oh, we do have, for example, you may say, why don't we select the select board member? No, we ask the groups themselves to nominate a person who has the time to support us as we go
through this next four to five year period. And as Julie will attest, you will get pre-reads at every meeting. It might be 30, 40, 50 pages of information. We want to try and get into the meeting, review what's up for discussion, and then make any decisions we need to or identify additional areas we need to get reviews of. And again, I have the contributing non-voting members at the bottom, non-voting members. It doesn't diminish it. It's just really what it drives us into as part of the quorum. I can tell you that one of the biggest problems we have
is getting a quorum. After you get into year two and a half to three, we have meetings, we're all sitting around the table and we're one short of a quorum. And I'm calling people on their cell phones, are you coming tonight? And then what happens if we have bills to pay, then either I can get somebody to show up 15 minutes later and we have our meeting or I have to go forward and recommend on my own with the superintendent that we move forward with some of these things because we couldn't get a quorum. So having too many, having not an ability to get a quorum really is one
of our biggest risks going forward in the commitment. Sorry, I went down a rabbit hole on that one. Next one please. So if you take a look at this, I know it seems like a lot, I think you're, each of you are up for reelection every three years. I'm asking you to participate in a meeting for four to five years. That's a long time. It is. It's a lot of work. I will be meeting with the OPM and the, and the architect and the construction firm it at least once a week through that time. The committee, once every two weeks, once a month during slow periods. Sometimes if we have a real issue that's coming up
and I need the committee to get involved to provide an opinion, it might be an ad hoc meeting once a week until we can get through, we might bring bringing in subject matter experts so that we can make a valid discussion or decision. Okay. So if you look at this, the appointments that are listed by the MSBA is they want engineering folks from the community. They want architectural construction management. They define what they are and we have to list who are these people and what are their backgrounds. When we make the submission to the MSBA is what the team is.
We do have an other category. The other category comes through and they want to know why did you choose, what's the background and why did you choose a person who is not that to join the committee. They also want to try and keep this as an efficient and effective and meeting processes as because it represents their funding. Okay. Oh, very important. And this is, it's easy to say, hard to do. Okay. And Julie can attest to some of this. I'm sure one of my roles is to keep the committee focused. It's hard at times. Okay? It really is.
We're looking for people who are non-biased. Okay? Somebody do doesn't have an ax to grind. We are not looking for people who have a single commitment. They want to get something done because they're an individual vote. They're likely not to be voted where they're going. If they're not, if they're, you know, if they can't articulate a good reason to do so, they need to be good listeners. You need to listen to what other people are saying. Sometimes you have to listen hard and decipher and ask questions. Why do you say that? What's driving you to that point? They need to be well-spoken. They need to be, in my term, this is
what I've brought up in my career, lifelong learners. You can't turn around and be a member of this committee and say, I know everything. You don't. We're all gonna learn together. In many cases where there's new technologies coming forward, they need to be decisive and we need to be committed to the task of the committee itself. So when we make a decision, one of the first motions I will make on the committee when we make a decision, we make a decision as a committee. We don't have everybody skirt out and then start talking to who knows where about how the committee made the wrong decision. Let's talk it out in the, in the meeting.
Let's figure out where we're going and let's support it so that we can keep it constructive. Next one, please. So what I propose is I need to take a look at the background of the 22 individuals. Fortunately we had a great response for people who are interested in doing this. I would say probably maybe a third of the individuals who applied were of the background of the engineers with the MSBA is looking at. Then we have individuals that are interested in participating, individuals from previous committees
and individuals who are from education. We have some teachers that are interested in participating, but they don't have that background to give the technical assessments. So we have a a, a great group to choose from, but we have to use the MSBA guidance and the roles that we're trying to get so that we get a good representation within the committee. What I'm proposing is that, what I usually do in this is I'll review the total and I'll come up with a top tier list first run. If one of you wants to participate with me
and take a look at that top tear list, then you need to vote on that. Okay? It shouldn't be a public list. It's us making a decision. I will be working with the assistant superintendent, the superintendent, on reviewing any final rep representation before it comes to you guys too. Okay. Then when I'm, once we make that final representation, you'll get a list of individuals that I would like to add to the community or that as a community representative, excuse me. And hopefully you'll vote on it. And then what we have to do, I'm sorry,
let me just finish this last point. The last point we have is that once this is done, then we have to sit down and map the roles of the MSBA directly onto the air form as to what the roles are going to be on the committee, and then submit it to the MSBA because they want to know who is who, who's got what role to follow and what their contact information is going to be. So the last piece here, and it's gonna be cutting it tight, is for us to make that submission to the MSBA as to what the team members are in their definition
of the roles and responsibilities. Hopefully that was clear enough. I was trying to cover a lot in a short period of time, but I'm happy to take any questions if you choose to Mr. Chair. Sure. Speaker 1: Any questions or comments? Yeah. Ms. Brunell, Speaker 12: Thank you for the presentation. Just to go back over, I, I got a little lost. When you said top tier, what did you mean by top tier Speaker 13: Out of the 22 people? What I, what I was planning to do right now, and this is just a plan, is there's one thing to read what people submitted. The next thing is to actually talk to them, talk about what the commitment is going to be, talk about
what the expectations are, talk about their background, their history, what are they bringing to the table, why do they want to do this? In some cases, my experience has been some people go, oh God, no, I'm not gonna do that. No. Take me off the list. All the times people say, this is great, this is exactly what I'm looking for. And in having that conversation, then we try and identify out of those maybe of the 22 and picking five to six, that might be the first run. You know, you heard me say two to three roughly, but let's say five to six and then talk to those five to six
and see if they're still interested after they sit down and talk for 15, 20 minutes or a half an hour. Once we get past that, I'm hoping to come down to a smaller amount of individuals. It might be two. I can tell you based upon the list right now that we have of 22 and very qualified individuals, it's not going to be two, it's probably gonna be three, could possibly even be four. If we can't make a decision on, on another individual, we have a gap. I think we wanna make the best decision to get the right mix differential mix of individuals into the committee. Speaker 12: Thank you. And then a follow up question,
you said you would bring to the committee a list of people that you would hope we would maybe verify or you know, vote in and are you talking about like for example, the select board members and the FinCon members? Or Speaker 13: You, let me clarify that. I'm sorry if I was a little confused. They're going to select their own members. You will have the names, but you really don't, you really don't change those names from those boards. That's up to this, the select board to nominate somebody, the planning board, the fin com to put on there. Okay. You are confirming the list
before it gets submitted to the MSBA, from the committee perspective, from the members of the community perspective, under the definition of having professional engineering, construction, you know, blah, blah, blah that we talked about. That will come from me as a final request for you to endorse that list so that we can move forward with the submission to the MSBA. In other words, we have vetted it out in a smaller group as a, which makes sense. Speaker 12: Okay, thank you. I do have comments about that, but I will hold those now. Speaker 1: Any other questions or comments? Yeah. Ms. Flas,
Speaker 11: The contributing ad hoc, non-voting members, is that, is there a specific set of people that, is that, that are designated as non-voting members? Or is that just people that wanna participate? Just Speaker 13: It can be, I break it down. I, I tried to, and I know I had a terrible, I actually had the flu last time I was here. I wasn't very effective non-voting members. I, I break 'em down into people that we need to have show up at different times that we will actually call them. For example, police fire it, Dennis Roach will be getting a call and he knows when we're getting ready to do the IT reviews,
he's going to be deeply involved because he needs to tell us what he needs to do this so that we can build into the construction. Anybody who's, and he's not a voting member, members of the public are non-voting members as well. So we have groups that we will reach out to that want to be in included or get some kind of prompt as to when we are going to do certain topic reviews, but they also have access to the agendas that will be published in advance. It is a public meeting and everybody who is in that meeting is a non-voting member, but will be listened to.
I can attest to you that that was the case with every other building committee that we had. We don't always make everyone happy. Everybody. You get, sometimes you have people who are in the public representing different pieces that they want in their DI opposing to each other and it gets heated between them and usually I have to mitigate and ask them to, let's take it down a notch. It's just, you can never make anybody completely happy. The committee needs to make a good judgment based upon what information we present to them and if there are any questions, we'll get more information.
Sorry, was that enough? Probably too much, Speaker 15: Ms. Goza, Speaker 3: Was that your answer? That was, that was Oh, that was okay. Sorry. Speaker 15: Okay. Alright. Sorry, I didn't wanna speak over someone. So just so that I understand, I think I have a much better understanding of what this building committee does. This building committee is gonna be executing the vision, executing a, a plan to create a build a building plan and design based on the vision that's communicated by the school committee and the school administration. Speaker 13: That is absolutely correct. We do not get involved in, we are not experts and all these individuals here are not experts in the
educational delivery to the children here. That is up to the school administration and yourselves to work that through and that includes what needs to be in the school. For example, one of the things I'm gonna ask the superintendent when we get a little closer to this, how many students are we planning to have in there? How many planning rooms, breakout rooms are we looking at? Because the MSBA contributes to its breakout rooms, or at least they have in the past. So there are different pieces that we're looking to feedback. I'm not gonna get into a debate with the superintendent on how many classrooms she has. I'm not qualified to do that and I don't plan to be,
nor do I believe I can. What I can do is say, this is what the school models in the Massachusetts board have. This is the school that we're going to probably go towards in terms of general design and the templates that they have. If we vary, it's gonna cost more, it's gonna take more time. So we take the construction pieces, the elements of the structure of the building itself and the delivery of how it meets that educational vision that is then shared by the administration. Do you agree with that? We haven't talked about this yet. Yes,
Speaker 15: No pressure. Speaker 13: I know. Speaker 15: Just a follow up question. Yeah. So this is actually a question for Dr. Sp and, and Mr. Ellison, the administration. So that piece I imagine of like building that plan for the elementary school would be something that would have substantial amount of work involved and that you would be bringing to school committee at various points to get input on. Yeah, I'm sure that that hasn't been designed, but I'm sure we'll be hearing about that at some point. Well, the Speaker 8: Cadence of this, the first piece is the SBC vote, which is April 5th, or the vote before
and the submission by April 5th. And then there's a series of other reports that go out in terms of enrollment in terms of the, I forget what it's called, the IC. It's a form essentially that lays out those original kind of underpinnings of what we want instructionally and that would be heavily linked to the SOI. But I literally wrote on here before we even started that we need to kind of backwards plan so that we get those things in front of the committee prior to any submission. Okay. So, yeah. Speaker 15: Will you indulge me with one more question, Mr. Chair? Thank you. So then I think something that I'm thinking of, and I'm wondering if other people are thinking of this as well. So we have multiple elementary schools,
but we'll only have the opportunity right now to be thinking about rebuilding one of them. So do you envision that that discussion would sort of involve the type of spaces we would eventually want for all our Element elementary schools and this would be the sort of the first one of those? Or is it really one building? Like is is there gonna be opportunity to kind of create that vision for the future, for the next buildings? Speaker 8: I know, I know assistant superintendent Immaculate wants to say something. I can kind of see, but, and I'm gonna invite him in. What I would say is, boy, the buildings that were designed 20 years ago were even in 1966
when Memorial was built. They probably thought it was very novel and perfect. So I think we're gonna build something that meets the needs of us now and is very forward thinking. But who's to say down the line, it's gonna be perfect. I can't imagine. I think things evolve. I do think our building right now does not meet our needs. I do think we have much more small group. We have a vision of putting pre-K in there. All of the things in the SOI, I do think we have to consider what elementary school looks like in our district. And there's some key kind of values around how our elementary kids learn that should be infused in this plan.
That's as far as I'll go without saying like things evolve, but I, I can't imagine that that's not something that when we apply it to the one school, we'll be building, we wouldn't think would be very long standing and would apply to future bills. Speaker 15: Okay. Thank you Speaker 16: Miss McDonough. Speaker 10: Just, I think that there's a point in the process where the school committee actually signs off on the educational plan, right? Yeah, I think, I think that happens, right? So that's like, I remember that from last time. So we all read it, we all voted for it, you know, so just that's before the building even starts. Yeah,
Speaker 13: I, I will say the last time that was the case, it's not for me to speak for the super nuts. So I was delaying. Speaker 8: Yeah, I actually have the form in front of me and it's the deck we've shared numerous times here and I'll be happy to email it to people. But the school building committee is due on April 4th. The educational profile questionnaire is due on May 5th. The MSBA enrollment methodology is also due on May 5th. There's an enrollment meeting and a maintenance and capital planning meeting in August. And then the feasibility study agreement, which is that whole package of eligibility is by Halloween. So this is on a, a form
that I've shared in many other meetings. Yeah. And it's all outlined there. And that's literally from the emails I've received from the MSBA and all of the templates are included in there. They'll be initially cross mapped to the SOI, which I'm understanding the school committee had eyes on and approved going in. So we'll continue it from there. Speaker 16: All set. Speaker 8: Okay, Ms. Bruna. Speaker 12: So I guess I just wanna give a little context because I do feel like I'm being a little bit of a pain in the butt right now. But I will, going back to the SOI
that was originally presented to us a couple years ago, I had major issues with that SOI, and I was convinced by the committee at the time that there will be so many times for input that, that it would be okay to acknowledge that it wasn't perfect and to continue to move forward with this process because the ends basically justified the means. So in good faith, that's what I did. And then when we came to this process, I was, I was grateful that we were selected with the SOI. The SOI evolved a bit over the times that we presented it,
but I will say my guard is up right now because I, there have been so many times in our school building projects in including the closure of Johnson, where people said, don't worry, we're gonna listen to you. And then as it went on and on and on, suddenly there was no more listening. And so as this process begins, I am very interested in making sure that our process is the process that we have been very conscious
and deliberate to create. And I agree with you that much of it is dictated by the MSBA, but even in your presentation, the slide four, when you say you crosswalk it to the MSBA, you and I both know that those members can be a little different, right? It doesn't just have to be those people that you highlighted in blue. Some of them are explicitly those people, but some of them can be different people. And I'm not disagreeing that who you've put forward here doesn't map out to the MSBA, but I just am very, I just wanna be very conscious
that we get to make choices all the time. And I, as a school committee, I wanna make sure that we're making those choices deliberately. That we're not just saying, oh, our hands are tied. We have to do it this way. Because frankly that's what the last administration did and it wasn't effective for me or any of my constituents Speaker 13: For you, Mr. Chair. Sure. So again, I'm try, I'm listening, I'm doing my listening hard and I'm trying to pair out your thoughts and your comments. And I think it's a little, might be a little bit mixed between the school vision of what the school needs to deliver.
That's not me, that's not the building committee. But if you're talking about whether the school needs to have a planetarium in it or not, that was reviewed with the school committee and it was approved through there because it used to be in the old high school and there was felt the need in the community to have that and it, whether there were people against it, there were people for it. Okay. I can tell you for a fact I did go to a lot of those. 'cause as the building chair, I was interested in hearing the conversations myself. So I sat in the audiences of those and I would hear about them in
the building committee members. I would constantly refer that that is outside the scope of this committee. We don't get involved with defining what goes in there. We do get the information from the scope of the educational process and the enrollment numbers. The enrollment numbers get negotiated with the MSBA, by the way, you don't get a choice to pick what your enrollment numbers are going to be or the size of the school. It's a combination of discussions with the MSBA to try and make sure that you have that information. So let's pair out, I can be sure to tell you,
I will absolutely stand here and tell you, we heard everybody, we didn't agree with everybody, but we explained why. And I can tell you their d opposing positions are always the case in these type of di major discussions or changes within the, the town of Natick. And that's a good thing, by the way. It's not a bad thing because we come out with a better product at the end. Speaker 1: I have a comment that I'd like to make as well, just from my own perspective. Over the past couple of months as we've been talking to the community about the override, we've been getting a lot
of pushback from people saying, but wait a minute. Five years ago you did it wrong. The budget was wrong. You know the numbers. And one of the things that I told Fcom and that we collectively have been saying to the community is, we are the committee right now. This is the committee, this is the superintendent, this is, these are the assistant superintendents. This is our process. And we, we will need to go to the voters to get this building built in a debt exclusion vote a couple years from now. I think we need to own this process
with trusting each other. I think we can tr trust, you know, Mr. Mueller has, I think, earned our trust and certainly our administration has earned our trust. And I hope that we trust each other as a school committee. Ms. Burnell, you beautifully made a comment at the most recent forum when someone raised that issue of like, you, you know, the commu the community elected us. It's our process. So I wanna make sure, and I'm not saying this to discredit anything that was said before, I really am not. I truly respect everyone bringing their perspective and their experience. But I just wanna say to us as a committee,
let's own this process. It is our process. If we didn't like the previous processes, that's other people were there. Were sitting in those chairs in those seats. I'm excited about this. I'm looking forward to this process. I'm excited to work with the superintendent and the, the team on an elementary school vision. So I just wanna make sure that we, we bring some excitement. I mean, yes, of course there's a lot of concern. It's a huge building, a lot of money. We cannot take this in in an easy way. But, but at the same time, let's, I I just wanna ask us as,
as a fellow member and not as chair, let's trust the process. We, let's own the process so that we, it's up to us and let's, let's go, let's move forward with a positive vision for, for this process with that Ms. Feathers and then Ms. Bruno. Speaker 11: Yeah. And I think, I mean that's what we want to figure out what the right process is. And I think I wanna, so for example, is there a reason why the 20? So what I'm hearing and 'cause I really want this to be as transparent as possible. 'cause the transparency will give us the best outcomes and make sure everyone is always well informed. You had mentioned that the list of 22 wouldn't be public.
So I guess I'm wondering 22 individuals have applied and it sounds like, you know, maybe four or five would come forward. Are we gonna have the opportunity to see all of the applicants or that's all just curated behind the scenes? Speaker 13: No, I, I would advise No, you should not have that because there's personal information on that that I don't believe is appropriate to, once it comes into this form, becomes a public form. And I don't think we should do that. So we should be managing it separately as to, we have people reference children in there in their comments, whatever they wrote. I don't believe that we should be making those forms public.
Speaker 11: I don't. But the list of, even the list of names of who is applied, I Speaker 13: Don't to what may I I'm sorry. Go to what end? What are you, where are you trying to, what are you trying to get from that? It's, I do you, Speaker 11: I think when people reach out, I mean, some people have reached out as to who, you know, people that have applied. If they've applied and we know who they are, we can thank them for being interested to understand their perspectives better. I mean, are these people that have applied who, you know, have voted for us or who have campaigned for us,
or who talk to us frequently? I mean, these are, you know, people that wanna be part of the process and wanna participate. And so I don't, I don't know why we wouldn't wanna know who has demonstrated the interest. You know, I had someone, oh, I didn't know, did you know so and so, so-and-so AP applied? And I mean, I personally would like to know, you know, who on that list has made an effort to be part of the process? And if they're not the ones selected to, you know, to be able to talk to them as well, to thank them for their participation. Just was curious. Speaker 13: I I do not believe that that's beneficial to do.
So we are are looking to make that recommendation to you for endorsement for, for individuals within this group. Again, this is a nonpolitical team, this is a professional group of individuals to try and manage this. If you're looking to say, oh, this person voted for me and it's a constituency of mine, I don't, I want that person on it, that's, that's when it starts falling up. So I worry about that. In all fairness. Sorry, Speaker 11: I didn't mean to make it that at all. Like it's a professional group of people who are volunteering and volunteering to put a lot
of time in over a five year period. And so, I mean that's something to be commended and I just, Speaker 13: We absolutely will. Speaker 1: Ms. Brunell, Speaker 12: Sorry I couldn't get my button pushed. Okay. So I agree with you that we have to trust the process, but we haven't created a process, right? So when we did this superintendent's search, we spent a lot of time just deciding what our process was gonna be. The MSBA actually doesn't give us a process. Their only recommendation is that you go to town council to see who in your town can appoint the members.
So they don't even want any part of it because they want you to go to your local council. I don't think we need to do that, but it, you know, it's, so I a hundred percent agree back to that page four. I think we as a committee, well I, okay, I've made three notes. First it's been really helpful to understand that the curriculum piece is different than this, the school building committee. I did not know that until tonight. So that is very helpful. And I think that, I think I would like to hear from the administration at some point how, how much we need to be to get done before May 5th. It seems like there's even a larger report that has
to be done with a feasibility. Speaker 8: Yeah, I mean if you're kind of asking me, this is a really tight process from the MSBA, you know how much we've been doing on the override and I'm not making excuses a hundred percent. It's taken 80 hours a week or whatever it's taken. Yeah. So this is the next step. So we're gonna backwards plan off of the next thing that's due after this SBC, which is due on April 4th. And the next two reports are due very shortly within a month. So we are, you know, we, I just made a commitment to backwards plan and get that in front of you in time to see it and weigh in on it. And I think there's another exercise of seeing the SOI
that was submitted and asking what still resonates and what doesn't and understanding from others who've gone through the process to make sure we don't go too far off of what we submitted and got approved. But I think we're committed to bringing that up. We want that engagement. I don't, I think we've shown that all along in our work with the school committee, but it is a tight timeframe and I think that's very, the committee needs to know that. Speaker 12: Yeah. Thank you. Okay, so there's that piece. My, the second note that I made was page four. What does the committee look like? For example, how many school committee members do we want on this committee? Or are there mul? Are there multiple people of us are there
that want even be on it? Also, you know, that that makeup, the list of of names that are on there doesn't include the net zero committee. And I would say that that is a committee. I think our school committee should consider making a voting member, given that we have the planning board, the finance committee, the, the select board. If we're, you know, obviously the MSBA has a huge green schools initiative. There's, there's financial incentive to do that.
So you're, you know, it, it makes sense to me to have in 2024 or 2025, it makes sense to me to have a member of the net zero committee as a voting member specifically. And then I think we would have to decide how many members of community members. So those are process questions I have. And then I also have a process questions about Mr. Myer's plan. And when I say that, Mr. You bringing the top tier candidates, I appreciate that you said that, you know, you would read those with a few of us.
We would, we'd have to do that without a quorum I guess if we're not gonna have it here. But I, yeah, I just think that we should have more involvement. Especially because on the application it said that the school, those applications were going to be decided on by school committee members. Speaker 13: May I through you, Mr. Chair? Yeah, please. I've gone back and forth on my opinion of the Net zero committee. I very much support the Net zero committee. I can tell you that there are several members who applied, many of them are not meeting the qualifications, but there are some that are meeting the qualifications to be selected.
And there, there is, there is one that I'm aware of that I would consider top tier. I do not advise you putting in a member of a net zero as a voting member because typically net zero individuals get involved in the feasibility study, the start, but then they disappear because they don't want to be talking about in strong testings on cement. It's just has nothing to do with them and it's wasting a lot of their time. I'm just giving you an example. So what we do, and I did commit to the chair of the Net zero committee that I would let them know when we talk about different topics so that they could come
and they could review and get involved. But there are some top tier candidates that are net zero. We cannot also have a quorum of net zero showing up on our committee because that becomes a problem as well. So it's, it's, it's funny looking at the number of people that are applying, it takes a little bit of effort to kind of dissect to say how do we make this an unbiased committee? Also the net zero, many of the concepts are already covered within the MSBA through the state of Massachusetts. And they have requirements that we do this. So it's, it's almost a redundant,
it may not be redundant on facilities that are being built in town that are non-school based that don't go through the MSBA, but in this case they will find out that the MSBA has many of those incent incentivized programs and they're interested in trying to push the schools in that direction regardless through their model school development. So it's my opinion that we run the risk that we will lose people if we put people on there that aren't interested or can contribute throughout the entire process. Speaker 1: So I'd like to recommend that we move towards some decision making
or at least kind of plan the that direction. I just wanna point out, Mr. Mallard did put forth a plan on how he would select the individuals. That's option A. I also heard him say another idea is to have us select one school committee member to work with them on the selection. That's plan B. I'll entertain other plans too, but I just wanna make sure that we're moving towards specific solutions and if this was negotiations we'd be moving from, what is it issues to? So to options, yeah. Ms. Flats and then Mr. Grant, Speaker 11: I, I think in my opinion, two members
of the school committee should work with Mr. Miler to, to start with the 22 candidates and do a selection process from there. Option C, Speaker 1: Mr. Brand, Speaker 5: I was going to ask what we were trying to achieve tonight if, or is this just a, a discussion given that there's a constrained time, but for Mr. Myer, what is your ideal total size? Like when we were doing the superintendent screening committee, we had a discussion like this where we're like,
what's the total size that becomes, what's the, the ceiling where it becomes unwieldy? You don't wanna have 25 people. Oh God no, please. So like what is the, so 'cause then we can back into it. Yeah. Some of the, I'm looking for context ultimately, but Speaker 13: Sure. And so that's a little bit of a loaded question. So let yes, let me answer it in two ways. Okay. I would prefer, and then I'm gonna tell you why I, I'm just gonna give you an opinion. I prefer it. That should be about 13 to 14 members in the committee. That's a good size committee. I mean, if I look how many people around the table?
4, 8, 12. So it's about the size of this committee. Okay. If we get larger than that, it gets really hard to try and hear everybody, hear everybody's opinions and keep the meetings within a specific amount of time. It really does. Alright. Now that said, well you have also heard me say, I'm not gonna turn around and say, okay, instead of 12, I've got two extra people that would fill a gap of knowledge across the committee, technical knowledge, and they would add value across the process
through feasibility, construction and commissioning. I would like to extend that to those so that we can get that experience in. So I'm gonna give you the range of, let's say 13, 14. But you know, if we, in this case, we have a lot of qualified individuals. If we didn't, I'd probably say 11, 12. Alright? So I don't wanna lock out expertise. I want to seize expertise and unbiased individuals that can drive value for the town because we're, we're charted with not just bringing the school up, but also to try
and do it in an economically feasible way. So we don't cost the tax payers more money. And money in construction projects goes up when you don't have the ability to get decisions in a timely manner. Time is not your friend in a construction project. So we need to move fast and forward at times. Listen, know when we need to delay if we don't have consensus and then we move forward. Go ahead. Speaker 5: So just a, a quick follow up. So I understand that April 4th is when we need to submit and we have a meeting and we aren't gonna decide as a school committee who our rep
or representatives are until I the 31st would be our last meeting prior to that. Right? So, Speaker 10: Which you, I don't even think you can meet on that day. 'cause it's a holiday. The Speaker 1: 31st. Yeah. Speaker 10: Are you meeting that day? Yeah, it's e el fitter. It's a day off of school. Oh. So, Speaker 5: So we have to have a meeting sometime between throwing out Speaker 10: Some calendar dates. Again, good Speaker 5: Job. We have to have a meeting sometime between the 25th and the fourth. Right. So there's not a lot of time. So like, I guess my question for Mr. Myer is when would you, ideally, because it's possible that you make an offer to somebody.
Sure. And then they say, you know what, I can't do it. Something comes up. Whatever it is. What is your ideal deadline for identifying the, the two, the three, the four, however many people it ends up being? Speaker 13: Yep. That's a, that's a very fair question. Thank you for asking that. I held off last week starting the process in, in terms of calling anybody and talking to them, knowing that you might wanna put someone either the chair on, on a review board, you know, but it's up to you guys to decide to do that. It must happen this week to meet the timelines,
which means whomever wants to do this with me needs to be available throughout the day, the next five days, so that we can try and get it done. It'll be phone calls, it might be, it might be meetings, whatever we need to do to try and get it to meet the timeline for the MSB submission, or should I say, to come to you for a vote to meet the MSBA submission requirements. Speaker 5: Great. Speaker 1: So it sounds like just process wise, we wanna figure out how this, you know, the process, you know, we have three options in the table. We wanna figure that out tonight, and we wanna figure out a new date
for the reorg meeting, which we need to have anyway. And then what I proposed, and I think everyone agrees, is let's wait till after the election to choose the, the school committee member or members. But it sounds like those are the two steps. So I would like to invite motions for, I mean, we have three options for any of those options or multiple options and deliberate and vote just so that we can move forward. Yeah. Ms. Brunell, just a Speaker 12: Quick qual, I'm just thinking this through Option three with two members, even though that's not a quorum, I
it would technically be a working group of the school committee. So you would have to have posted public meetings in order to look at those. You could do it in, you could do it in executive session, I think, which is what we did, right? Yeah. So if we do just something for us to consider, Speaker 5: But just if I may just, if sorry, you, you'd have to post those meetings and if it needed to be done by the end of this week, the first meeting wouldn't be able to happen until Thursday. Speaker 12: Right? I mean, I, I hear just, I, I heard that comment and I think that there is some more wiggle room. I, I understand your concern,
but I think that there is flexibility. Speaker 1: Oh, Mr. Gillis. Speaker 14: So in an, just for a level of awareness, there's some flexibility with this form in the sense that it's not casting concrete. You can update it. So let's see if we can get it submitted on time. And as the, as the, you know, project proceeds, there will be times to make changes. Speaker 1: Ms. McDonough Speaker 10: No, I'm, I mean I, I would like to,
I I'm gonna go ahead and make a motion Sure. That I participate and help Mr. Miler with the selection process. Speaker 1: So one person. Yeah, that person Speaker 10: Being your, I'm just gonna, I, because I, okay, I'm making that motion. Okay. Speaker 5: Who is I? Can you make that a proper motion? Speaker 10: Say that second. Julie McDonough. Speaker 1: So the motion is to have Ms. McDonough work with Mr. Miler on the selection of the committee members. Second does the second. Speaker 11: And that doesn't require any, that doesn't require if it's just one, it can just be working directly with him, but two would require posted meetings.
Speaker 5: I think that's right. Speaker 17: Yeah. Speaker 1: Any other either motions or, or discussion? Does Speaker 12: Anybody else want to be on that? I mean, are are you saying you'd rather just do it with one person or are you saying that you wanna be a part of it and that you only want to be one person? Or are you open to working with somebody else? Speaker 10: Well, it feels more complicated to do the two people, but I guess that's up to the committee, just in terms of the process. Speaker 1: But the motion as it stands, unless amended is for just McDonna. Yeah, Mr. Speaker 5: I don't know if this is a friendly amendment, but maybe it helps if we did the one, if it was just mc ms.
McDonough and then we added to it that if we have a meeting on the 24th, do we, if we have an executive session that maybe there is an update from that person in executive session so that we can protect the identity of any of the, of the folks so that it's not public, but that at least we hear about it. I don't know if that's even possible. Speaker 1: Yeah, the concern is that with executive session you have to select a specific reason among the 10 or so that, that's Speaker 5: Not one of the reasons. I don't, it wouldn't be a reason. Got it. Speaker 1: I don't, we can check, but I don't think there's usually it's like negotiations or,
Speaker 5: Let me run to the State House real quick. Yeah, please get a new reason added. Yeah, Speaker 13: There's a point order question. Please. I believe the executive session also has meeting minutes that do need to get published after a period of time eventually. Yep. So therefore I would ask that you don't do that to reveal all, any of the angels in their personal information. Speaker 5: Then consider my friendly, almost friendly. Withdrawn. Speaker 1: Yeah. Not that friendly anymore. Just kidding. Ms. Brunell, I just wanna Speaker 12: Flag this. I mean, this is a public committee, it's a public process. So if people have submitted their applications, certainly I don't want anybody's kids' names,
personal information out there, but it seems to me that in a public process, a committee that's committed to that, it's okay that those names are known Speaker 1: Mr. Brand. Speaker 5: I know it's not the same thing. So I, I hope this doesn't come off the wrong way. The superintendent screening, the superintendent process was also a public process and we did not reveal the names of the many people who, so, I don't know. It's not the same thing, but Right. But Speaker 12: We had minutes. Right? Do you know? I mean, I'm just like, not Yeah, Speaker 5: Yeah, yeah. I'm not gonna sure make this issue for sure. We had minutes, but we, we, those are one of those reasons
that we couldn't to protect the identities. So Speaker 1: Ms. Flas, oh, is there, Mr. Marler, in my case, Speaker 11: We were mostly protecting 'cause they're we're already employed somewhere else and might not want, I mean, there are reasons. I mean, this is a volunteer position that someone has volunteered. Participated and Speaker 1: Just, yeah. Mr. Sorry, Mr. Marler. Speaker 13: Yes. Just as a reminder, usually when we're going to make names or lists of names available, we publicly disclose this and they agree to it before it happens. I would say that if you wanted to do that, we have to slow the process down. We need to ask all the members to agree to in writing
that they ag that we can bring their names and personal information up in a public forum. Speaker 1: Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. I, we would have to look at the form itself to see if that, I don't know if people who submit applications know that their information was gonna be public. Certainly they wouldn't share their names of their, Speaker 13: It could be employment issue. I mean, you just don't know. So I would say you really shouldn't do that unless you get approval from the individuals themselves, which Speaker 1: Is true, even with the superintendent process. We asked all the finalists to give us permission before. Yeah. We made their information public. It's due process.
Yeah. But I think that's separate from the mo I mean, we can discuss that if people wanna discuss that further, but that's separate from the motion. So I wanna focus on the motion before we move to any other topics. Speaker 10: Yeah, I mean, I just, I just wanna, I mean, I'm, I'm very happy to do it. I just, I want to assure the committee, just as I leave that the committee and the superintendent are really gonna drive this process. Steve and the building committee are not gonna drive the process. So it's totally up to the school committee. So all the concerns that you have, I believe that,
and I think there'll probably be more discussion this time than there was with Kennedy. 'cause it was very much like, here we go. And maybe, you know, I should have done more, but I can cover that next week in my closing remarks. But I just would, you know, I, I think there can be a better process this time. And I, I don't think the members of the building committee are gonna be like the, the linchpins of this. So I just, you know, they play a role, but it's not, it's not the biggest role. The big, big pieces are things, all that school committee's gonna make decisions on the OPM.
They're gonna approve the architecture firm. They're gonna approve the educational vision and plan. I mean, that's an extensive document that you really dive into. So, Speaker 1: So you're saying we all have to fly around the world to look at schools? Yeah, I'm sure it is. Any other discussions about the motion? Seeing none, we can reread it. Something along the lines of, to nominate Ms. McDonough to work with Mr. Myer to select the members or to make recommendations about the members of the, the community at large, members of the Memorial School Committee School building Committee.
Did I get it right? She did. I think there was like five emotions in there all jumbled up. But Speaker 10: I didn't say Speaker 1: Any of that. All those in favor? Anyone against any abstentions? So Ms. McDonough and Mr. Miler will work on selecting members. Any other topics about this, about anything related to the Memorial Building project before we move on to the next agenda item? Speaker 15: How, I have a question? Yes. Just how are we gonna pick the date for the meeting, Speaker 1: For the reorg Speaker 15: And, and to vote this because it needs to be done
to inform an April 4th decision, right? Speaker 1: Yeah. And we just need a new chair, vice chair. I mean, like, we need the whole reorg too. Oh, Speaker 15: That's yes. Yes. Speaker 1: Because the whole, okay. All of that was gonna happen March 31st. So that I recommend that does ms, we will start with, Ms. McGrath will send us some dates, but yes, it has to be between March 26th and April 4th. If people wanna start looking at their calendars and send Linda directly, their availability for those few nights that I'm sure will make things easier.
So the nights of Wednesday the 26th, Thursday the 27th, Friday the 28th, Monday 31st, April 1st, April 2nd. April 3rd or April 4th are all options. Speaker 5: Just one quick note. The 26th is the night that people who get elected get sworn in. Oh. So if we did it that night, it would have to be after that. Yeah, that's quick. But it would've to be after that. It, which i, I don't remember what typically that happens around six or six 30. Speaker 1: Yeah, Speaker 14: That here in town hall. Speaker 1: And of course we'll have to check in with any new members as well.
Speaker 18: That's also the Brown Parent Forum, Speaker 1: The 26th. So it sounds like we'll eliminate the 26th and the 31st from contention. Yeah. Anything else about Memorial before we move on? So thank you so much for joining us tonight. I hope it was a interesting conversation and we look forward to the next steps. See you. Speaker 13: Sounds good. I'll see. Will you let me know when the date is that you'll meet? I'll try and be here for the final vote. Speaker 1: Great. Will do. Speaker 13: All right. Thank you very much. Have a good evening, everyone. What? Speaker 1: Oh, sorry. Before we, yeah, thank you. But, and Dr.
Special also has a few updates. Yeah, I, Speaker 8: I had three things under MSBA. I promise you the other two won't take that long. Thank you so much for being here. You can clearly stay if you wanna hear this stuff. So I just wanted to inform the committee. Actually some of this is relevant to the conversation we just had. I got a lot of emails from the MSBA in the last month and kind of teasing them through, there were three main pieces. One is this whole eligibility phase that we just discussed. Another one is that we are part of a, what's called a five year survey for the MSBA. It's a periodic assessment that's conducted by MSBA to evaluate the condition
and the needs of the public school facilities across the state. So not just Natick, but all of our school buildings. The survey helps the MSBA maintain updated data on school buildings and informs decisions about future funding for capital improvements, repairs, and new construction. I'm sure it kind of relates to how much they're going after for budget and things like that. The key aspects of this survey, I'm happy to share with you the data that we actually share as part of the process. It's a facilities assessment, a statewide review, funding considerations and building systems. So everything from HVAC to tech systems. You can imagine Jen Mullen from facilities,
Dennis from the IT department, Sue from, and our principals from kind of all how many classrooms there are, how many students we serve, et cetera. So it's really procedural. But I wanted to let you know, because we'll have a virtual meeting next week. It was really a very quick, less than a month turnaround to get this done. And then we're gonna have them touring our sites on March 24, 25, and 26 in conjunction, obviously with school administration. So just wanted to let the, the committee know about that. The second piece I wanted to let the committee know about is that we were invited to a meeting to,
to talk about a new process. It's called A POE or post occupancy evaluation, which is about Kennedy. So a lot of here where we are, you know, really brought to the surface that there's a lot of lessons learned or things we might reflect on and look back at. They, they're offering, it's going to be a permanent and required module in the future called module nine. But right now it's for these projects that are already completed, it's optional. There's only been 24 done right now in the state. So we said, yes, of course we wanna do that. I think it's important, especially since this would be a
mandatory part of any future building projects, why not learn? And also it would be, I think a very informative report for the committee to get. And I think fairly low lift on behalf of the school. So we said, please, not this spring. We're very busy, but can we do it in the fall? If the committee wanted us to try to bring that forward, I think they'd be open to it. I'm not sure what advantages that would have at this point, but we ha we have to figure out if we can kind of handle the, the workload of the spring. But at this time it's scheduled for the fall. The key pieces of this part, building performance evaluation.
So it assesses the functionality and efficiency of major systems, hvac, lighting, acoustics, et cetera, identifies any issues related to construction, quality maintenance or design flaws. It goes through educational effectiveness, reviewing whether the facility supports the intended educational programs and teaching methods evaluates how well the learning environment aligns with district needs. It gets user feedback from school administrators, teachers, students, and maintenance staff about their experiences in the new or renovated facility. Identifies challenges or other areas for improvement, goes
through energy and sustainability performance. So comparing actual energy usage and efficiency metrics with those that were projected and identifies opportunities for optimization or retrocommissioning if needed. And then goes through a set of lessons learned. I'm happy to send this to all of you in an email. I really pulled it together right before the meeting, but I wanted to let you know that those are two processes that I think are gonna help inform our work going forward and that we did say yes to. We didn't, we didn't have a choice on the five year summary survey, but we did on the POE and we're gonna go forward. Speaker 1: Any questions or comments on those updates? No.
Okay. I see that Ms. Wilson, Martin is here and I'm as, or virtually, I'm assuming that's for the little JSOI. So should we go to that item? Mr. Gil says yes. So we'll move there and then we'll finish tonight with a discussion of the budget. Speaker 14: So I think Jillian will probably be ready to join us any second. But in, in the packet, what is the SOI for the accelerated repair program? This is to repair the HVAC system at lilja. In short brief summary, l's,
HVAC systems just a couple years newer than Brown's, which has had some, some issues. And Brown doesn't qualify based on age and some other criteria, but Lil just does. And so Jillian F found, found this to be an applicable, an applicable project that we should submit that's also in alignment with some of what we want to do in town. And I think what and have the state help pay for new heating
and air conditioning system at, at the school. And she's here to elaborate. I see her now. So feel free to chime in, Jillian. Speaker 19: Thanks. Yeah, there's not much else to say. MSBA, in addition to building new schools, they also have a repair program. My understanding is that Natick hasn't really been a regular participant in that program. But as we've talked about before, our schools and other buildings in town have a lot of capital needs coming up. And so we thought this could be a great opportunity to help fund those capital needs that the town has
and avoid paying for them all out of local dollars. So Mr. Gil and I worked on this together with support from the facilities team. And we're looking tonight for the school committee's vote to support the, the submission of a statement of interest for LIF for the accelerator repair program. It's focused on heat pumps. And one thing that didn't get mentioned yet is that the MSBA process requires you to designate a priority SOI. And so as you can see in the draft application
that we shared as an attachment memorial remains the priority SOI and this wouldn't conflict with that. And we actually reached out to MSBA to make sure about that. So happy to answer any questions. Speaker 1: Any questions on SOI? Yeah, Ms. McDonough, is this, Speaker 10: Is this a situation where the town contributes a certain amount and then the state contributes a certain amount? Or is it a different process than the building? Speaker 14: That's correct. Speaker 1: The town will have to contribute. Speaker 14: Oh yeah, yeah. The MSVA will pay a portion of it. Speaker 10: And is that a similar process to a new building
where we would vote on it or is it a small enough amount of money that it comes out of the town's operating? Speaker 14: Well, it could be either Speaker 10: Or FCI capital, it, it, Speaker 14: It could come out of the capital or it could be a project big enough where borrowing would be involved. But I'll defer to Jillian on the, on the budget of it down the road. Speaker 19: We don't anticipate needing to do a, a debt exclusion for this kind of project. We would think it would be something coming out of the capital budget, but it would be less than what we would've had to pay on our own if we didn't get support from MSBA.
There's no guarantee that MSBA will pick us. There's a lot of schools that are applying for this program. It's a new program that's been, it's a program that is a modified version of an existing program that's now focused on instead of just replacing things with like, for like technology and it's focused on heat pumps and other things. And it becomes available every two years. So this was the first time that it was available and we thought we would throw our hat, oh, Speaker 10: Okay, thank you Ms. Speaker 11: Fathers. And then Ms. Pero, presumably if we were to be accepted, we'd go through a process
where we look at the financials and how much and how it would be funded and approve it then and could back out then if it was not Speaker 14: Feasible. A absolutely, I mean, the vote, you have to demonstrate that you're willing to pay your portion with votes and a lot of other documentation the same way with the, the core projects, the accelerated repairs just a, a narrower focus. There were, you know, there's three options we could choose from building envelope HVAC and the other one's escape in me. But you know, it's a more narrow, narrow
focus to basically maintain a building and keep it running well for the next 20 years of its useful life. Typically. Ms. Burnell, Speaker 12: I just wanted to thank Jillian for doing this for Matt and for Dr. Stash for helping with the project or because this is something that, this is like leaving money on the table if we don't apply to things like this. And I know it's a huge amount of work, especially in the context of the override. Like I just can't get over how much work people have done in the last two months. So this also I think shows our
professionals due diligence to constantly looking for ways to save the taxpayers money and then also putting their, their mouth or putting like their work behind what they're saying because this Jillian, this must have taken a long time to complete. Like I read it, it took me a long time to read. So it must have taken you a long time to write Mr. Gillis. Who? Jillian, I'm not sure who wrote it all, but thank you. And it was also very insightful to me because to be honest, I don't think we've gotten the level,
I don't understand the capital plan. I'll be fully honest on the town side. And so that's nothing here that the school committee deals with. But as a constituent, I struggle to understand the capital plan at times. And I would really like our committee to get our hands around our capital needs because reading about the boiler at Brown in this report made me a little nervous. And I think that I would like as a, as we reorganize as a school committee in the coming meetings, I'd really like us to make sure that we have capital plans in the same way that we've improved our quarterly reports
and all our financial stuff. I'd like to get the capital piece involved in that full year thinking. So thank you to everyone. Speaker 1: Any other questions or comments? So, oh yeah, I have a question, but go Speaker 14: Ahead. So yeah, no, the request is to have it voted because it's the same process the last time. So voted tonight by the school committee Wednesday by the select board, assuming they're both approved, signed, and then submitted to MSPA before Friday's over. Speaker 1: So my question is, I'm thinking about other building projects. If we submit this SOI, if it's rejected,
do we have time in terms of the life of the boiler to, and is it worthwhile in terms of the MSPA process? Would we go through this process again if we get rejected this year? Would we go through this process again next year? Speaker 14: Something I think Jill and I would talk about, but as long as the building was still eligible for state money, I think we probably would apply again. Like, Speaker 1: You know, but that would mean that the boiler would not be replaced until we get MSBA approval. That, I guess that's my question. How urgent is the replacement of the boiler? Speaker 14: I guess I would, I'll defer to Jillian on that. Speaker 19: Yeah, I'll jump in. So the
boiler at Lilja and, and all the HVAC systems at lilja, I actually looked up the 1998 annual report from the town when I was working on this application. And it was actually dedicated to Joseph Keef and Dr. Keefe. And he was mentioned in it, he was the superintendent at the time and he said how gja was like the first school to have full internet access for everyone in the building. So I bring that up just to say that we're at the end of the useful life for all the
HVAC equipment in the building. Just like we are in the end of the useful life for the controls in that building that were built using like very old software that you wouldn't use anymore. So those items are at the end of their life. They're not past that yet. Right? They're still functioning and they're on the capital plan, they're on the town's five year capital plan. And we have Brown currently as a priority because one of those boilers isn't operating to the full extent. And the way that we set up our schools,
and this was done at Kennedy as we have redundancies in our HVAC system. So if the brown boiler that is has some sections of it not operating right now is to fully go down, we would have another boiler available. So we're not in a position where we won't have Keating at Lja Elementary if we don't get the MSBA funding and we would fund it through the capital plan. Speaker 1: Okay. Great. Speaker 19: Sorry, that was a long-winded answer. Speaker 1: That was a great answer. I appreciate it. So any other questions or should we, does anyone wanna make a motion? Speaker 10: I'm gonna make a comment
'cause it'll be interesting to see like how the capital plan is impacted if the override doesn't pass. 'cause that's been multiple forums is that the capital plan will be delayed. So I think this is a good example of how things like this will be pushed out and pushed out and it just, Speaker 5: That's Speaker 10: Puts us in a tough spot. Yeah. Yeah. So you can make the motion, Speaker 5: I can make a motion. Sure. I would move to approve the Lilja SOI for the accelerated repair project. Speaker 10: Second, Speaker 1: Any discussion? Any questions? No comments? Yeah. Mr. Gillis,
Speaker 14: There's actual specific, it's MSBA, so there's actual specific language that has to be read. Linda, do you have have that or if not, Speaker 5: I'm gonna, Speaker 14: Oh, I'm just, my computer just plugged me off. Gimme Speaker 5: A second. Wait, I might have it. Do you have it? Speaker 14: It it'll have the address of the school and Oh my goodness. Yeah, it's a nice, nice lawyerly paragraph. Speaker 5: I have to read that whole paragraph. Yeah. Okay. Hold on. Go. Holy moly, this is worse than any executive session thing I've ever seen.
Wait, there are words in here. I've never even Okay. Speaker 1: Read it all. Speaker 5: Theatric. So I, I'm gonna try to, this is it the resolved paragraph. Speaker 1: You wanna stand up to do this? Speaker 5: Okay. No, having con resolved, having convened in an open meeting on March 17th, 2025 prior to the SOI submission closing date, the school Committee of Natick in accordance with its charter bylaws and ordinances has voted well. Hasn't the motion I'm has voted to authorize the superintendent to submit? Is this what I'm supposed to read? Okay. Submit to the Massachusetts School Building Authority,
the statement of interest form dated March 20th, 2025 for the RA school located at 41 Bacon Street, which describes and explains the following deficiencies and the priority category for which an application may be submitted to the Massachusetts School Building Authority in the future. Regarding MSBA priority number five, replacement, renovation or modernization of school facility systems such as roofs, windows, boilers, heating and ventilation systems to increase energy conservation and decrease energy related costs in a school facility.
And Lilja Elementary HVAC systems are 28 years old and at the end of their useful life, Natick public Schools needs to replace these systems within the next two years. Or risk failure that impacts educational programming. Further classrooms in the main building currently lack critical cooling, which impacts students' ability to learn and hereby further specifically acknowledges that by submitting this statement of interest form the Massachusetts School Building Authority in no way guarantees the acceptance or the approval of the application, the awarding of a grant or any other funding commitment from the Massachusetts
School Building Authority or commits the town of Natick to filing an application for funding with the Massachusetts School Building Authority. That's my motion. Linda, did you get that? Got Speaker 1: It all. I missed it. Can you repeat that? Okay, so that's motion. It'll take us. Kate, do you want a second? Speaker 5: Well, the second is the easy part. Can you read it again please? I'm okay. Speaker 1: McDonough, did you, oh no, we got something ready to vote. Okay. All those in favor? Anyone against any abstentions? The motion passes. Okay. Thank you so much both Mr. Gillis and Ms. Wilson. Martin, Speaker 20: Thank you.
Speaker 1: And with that, we're ready for the very last item of the meeting, which is our budget discussion. Just a quick review. So obviously we've been talking a lot about the FY 26 budget probably since November. As I said before, we've had many forums. Oh, we have, well we've had three forums plus the public hearing today, many the conversations this year. We've also had a budget, a work group, which has been meeting with the administration to improve the presentation of the budget. We have the budget book. So there's a lot that we already have, a lot that we've already gone through. Usually it is the norm of the school committee to wait until
after a different meeting than the public hearing meeting to vote on the budget. So however, we didn't really get any, we got a great question, but that was answered as part of the public hearing, but we didn't really get any additional feedback tonight. So what I would like to recommend is that we discuss the budget further. I know there's been some discussions at the work group that may wanna be of topics that we may wanna raise. And then at the end of the discussion we can decide whether we wanna vote tonight or whether we want to delay the vote to a different night.
I will say, and I think a lot of us already know this, that the Finfin income did in their public meeting urge us to vote around later just because they're trying to develop their recommendation and they rather have a recommend review a a number that the school committee has already voted on. But obviously we need to do our due diligence and so we can have the discussion now and decide at the end if we're ready to vote on the budget. With that, I'll just open the floor to a discussion about the budget. Where do we wanna start? Yeah, Ms. Goeth, Speaker 15: Can I just ask a question? Sure. Do we also have to vote the fees tonight
that we talked about last time? Or is that, could that, is that for a future meeting? Speaker 8: I think that the budget is the overall number and if the subcommittee and or the whole committee have recommendations of how they would change the composition of the fees that we originally offered and suggested, we are very open to that and we could commit to any of those changes and we'd need time to obviously then revise the detail behind it. But the budget is there. There's 215,000 in fees. The composition of that, I know Mr. Gillis has a few different options based on the
subcommittee's input that could be discussed here. But the budget is the whole budget number and then how it's, how it's actually broken down, I think can wait. Speaker 15: Thank you. Speaker 1: So just to clarify, so what we would vote for is the total, the bottom line number that we would ask town meeting to approve. So that's what we would be voting for. But, but having said that, as Dr. Sp said, we can certainly engage in conversations about the specifics within the budget as well as renell. Speaker 12: Sure, thank you. So I, I learned late in this process that there are committees that vote and sorry Mr.
Gilis, this is gonna be a new comment. So there are committees that vote by the call center and they, and they also vote the big number. And part of that is just, again, due diligence because sometimes people think like, oh my gosh, the school committee just voted $95 million. Like, do they even know where that money goes? So to show that, that you, the school committee does know that we have these nine cost centers, this is where the money goes within those cost centers. I think Mr. Gillis has done a fabulous job over the last two years of helping us get those cost centers in order.
I'm not suggesting that we do that tonight because I, but I do, I, I will suggest that for future budgets moving forward, but it is state law and it is our Natick policy that anything to move between these cost centers, the superintendent would come back to the school committee to say like Mr. Gillis has done, to make a recommendation that we move money between the cost centers. So I wanted to give that context because there are, there were, in our budget working group meeting, there were two major groups of conversations that came up,
or two, two conversations that came up. But none, neither one of those would change the $95,491,904 number that has been recommended that I'm seeing in the budget book. I just had a slight panic that I read the wrong number. Okay. All right. So I guess I am, Do you want me to share those two topics right now? One is, one is, is fees and I, given that it's late and it's, you know, we're, we've committed to the $215,000. I am, I don't, I don't know if the committee wants
to dive into that or not. Happy to do that or just take that up another time. The other one is field trips. We have heard from committee members and discussed it at the working group that at this time, given that we are talking about eliminating staff from our public school system, we do not recommend that the school committee cover field trip fees for all students in Natick to the sum of $80,000. We definitely recommend that that reserve fund stays for any student that needs financial assistance to go on the field trips.
But at this, this time, the budget working group's recommendation is that, I just moved my page accidentally, I just closed the document, is that Dr. Stash come back to us with a recommendation about how that $80,000 would be spent, but that we free that up from going to field trips. Again, if we vote this $95 million, I'm not sure that we need to vote that, but it, I'm seeing people nod their heads about that. Speaker 10: Does, does that require conversation with the PTOs? Like, I mean, not before we vote the budget,
but just obviously, definitely Speaker 12: A heads up. Yeah, Speaker 1: So sorry. Speaker 12: And I think they would understand that very much given that, again, we're talking about eliminating positions. Speaker 1: So your recommendation is that we discuss that. We decide that tonight. Sorry, I missed the last part of what you said. Speaker 10: So Speaker 12: I think that we, my recommendation is that we focus on the big number tonight and we allow the staff to come back to us with the recommendations of what will happen with those tiny around the, like nibbling around the edges, sort of tweaking that we've done. Speaker 1: Just one quick correction, I guess to what I said.
So I think what we would wanna do tonight is to vote on two numbers, both the, if the override passes the 95 million et cetera number and the, if the override fails number, the 92 million exit. So when we talk about two, the number we should, it's really two numbers this year. Ms. Lathers, did you wanna I Speaker 11: Was just gonna agree. I mean, I think the failed trips will be an easy one and Mr. Jones had a lot of good options for the fees that can be discussed later, basically. So I think someone should put a motion who has actual number in front of them,
Speaker 1: Just putting it out there. Obviously that's a conversation that we could either have on the 24th or we can have after 25th, but then we would obviously know if the override passed or not. Just, I don't have any specific thoughts either way, just, but obviously whether we vote before the 25th or the or after would make a difference. Yeah. Mr. Brent, Speaker 5: Do you want, I mean, we don't have to do it yet. Do you want a motion for the big number right now so we can discuss that number if or if anybody wants to discuss it? Or do you wanna discuss first? Speaker 1: I would suggest one motion for both numbers. Oh, over write over override.
Speaker 5: Okay. Can, can somebody say the other number out loud so I can write it down and then I can say it again? Speaker 1: You're good at reading stuff today. Speaker 5: I know I haven't had to read numbers yet, so getting that Matt. Speaker 14: Yeah. Otherwise Speaker 5: I can get Speaker 1: It. Oh, one set it. Speaker 14: So the no override number is, is as Catherine said it, $95,491,904. And if the override fails, we'd be looking at a budget of $92,871,904.
Speaker 5: Okay. I would like to make a motion. Isn't it an approval to, to recommend, what do we do? What am I doing? What's the verb? Speaker 1: We approve request. Oh, Speaker 5: To approve? Yeah, we, the school committee approves Yep. Of the, okay, so I'll make a motion to approve a two budget numbers it of of one if the operational override passes of $95,491,904 for fiscal year 26. And if the over operational override does not pass a budget number of $92,871,904
for fiscal year 26. Speaker 1: I'll take a second. Speaker 5: Like you wanna wait Speaker 1: Second, second. Oh, there, I, so here's a question. I don't know if it needs to go in the motion or not, but just to clarify for context, I have the town meeting moderator in me and and chair meeting. We're Speaker 11: Running for town meeting moderator. Speaker 1: No, no, no. Oh, but it's the voices in my head, you know, of this. We are, are voting for the amount that we would be requesting for town meeting to approve. That's Speaker 5: Right. I'll take that friendly amendment. Oh yeah. In the secondary. I agree. Okay. Linda's got it.
Speaker 10: Yeah. I am not gonna support that motion. I'm not gonna support a motion that has the, the cut of the $2.8 million. I, I do not think the school committee should put forward that budget. I think the school committee should put forward the $95 million number and that's the amount that we need to run the schools next year. And that number is the number that should go to town meeting. Not a number that is $2.8 million less Speaker 5: Can I just does it. So I agree, but because the motion is tied to
if the operational override fails, so it doesn't give anybody, there's not a wiggle room. It's not a choice for town meeting. It is a choice. Well, I mean the, the vote is a choice, but I'm saying like they can't pick the other number. Speaker 10: Town meeting can do what it wants to do. Speaker 5: That's true. I guess that's Speaker 10: True. I'm not saying they will wait. Speaker 5: Right. Speaker 10: No, I understand. I'm saying the FinCon might recommend the 92 million, but the school committee, but town meeting has the ability to do what it wants to do. So I feel like the school committee should put out what we,
Speaker 5: What we need. Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean obviously the town meeting has power over the entire town budget. Speaker 5: Yeah, I would revise my motion. I'm not opposed to that to just take out the second half, but I don't have to do that yet because it looks like other people might have thoughts. Mr. Brunell. Speaker 12: I philosophically, I a hundred percent agree with you. I, and I do know that town meeting can do town meeting is the appropriating body. We have said what will happen if the override doesn't pass.
And so as I'm conflicted, but as a school committee member, basically I feel like I've given as much information as I possibly could. I think we all have to voters and then up to the voters to decide. And I, I can hear Frank disagreeing with me right now in my head. Speaker 1: See, you have it too. Speaker 12: I do, but I, I just, I don't know. I understand what you're, what what you're saying, but I also don't want to,
I don't want to be speaking out of both sides of our mouth, like we've said, we've said what we need and if it, if we don't get it, we've said what will happen out of like to have integrity and to have to ensure that our staff who would have to be let go would know what will happen the week after the vote. And then to put it in the hands of town meeting, basically like ask town meeting to do something different. Feels like we're dragging people along. Speaker 10: So I don't wanna give FinCon the impression
that they can put forward the town meeting a $92 million number. Oh, I see, I see. I it's, so the question actually, now that I'm thinking about it is why is FinCon pressuring us to vote today when they're gonna recommend a budget to town meeting that really won't be finalized until after the vote happens on the 25th. So I don't, I don't understand that. I haven't watched the FinCon meetings, but I don't want them to think they can put that budget forward. Speaker 1: Ms. Flas, Speaker 11: I, I see that. When is town meeting?
Speaker 21: April 27th. April, Speaker 11: There's, yeah, I actually, I think I completely agree with you Julie. Like we should be putting forward the budget. That is the budget we want. And when the override doesn't pass, we'll quickly turn on putting forward the other budget. But there doesn't seem like there's any reason why we would Speaker 1: Sorry, Speaker 11: Assume the cuts without, I mean, and even take, put this on the agenda for the reorganization meeting right after the override. I mean I don't, Speaker 1: So just first of all, just technically we can do what you said, but just to clarify, 'cause this is something Ms. Collins brought up.
There's a reorg meeting whenever that is and then we have to close that meeting and then open a new one. But same day. Yeah, same, same night. Yeah. I, so I'm just gonna speak on, on, on my behalf. I, I am in agreement that we should be voting on the number we feel we need and what we need to run our schools is $95 million. If the voters don't approve the override, then we have to, you know, we may need to deal with the $92 million, but that's not the number that we need. So in, in a way voting just a 95 do million dollar number
feels like this is us making our request of both town meeting and really of the voters. 'cause we're telling the voters we need $95 million because Yeah. Mr. Brand, sorry, Speaker 5: Do you, can I either Speaker 1: Pausing for dramatic effect. I know, I know, but Speaker 5: Go ahead. Can I, you're still waiting. Can I either edit my motion or withdraw it and do a new one? What's easier? I'll edit my motion. Speaker 1: You wanna add something? Yeah. Dr, Speaker 8: Can I add one thing before you do? Of course. I appreciate it. I would just ask the, I would ask the committee that if the you vote forward one number
and I do understand the logic of it. I've repeatedly said in forums and in other places that I would like the teachers if the override is not passed to know. And I would need the approval of this committee to move forward on that. If we only vote one of these budgets forward, I think that we, I would like to allow those 41 individuals into a great job market as opposed to holding them sort of hostage for the politics of the town to figure out the ultimate number. And I, that's the last thing I wanna do,
but it's also the right thing for the people. And it's why we made very, a lot of very brave choices in even the publication of things. We took a lot of heat for. Frankly, I took a lot of heat for let's say some of the choices that we made and I stand behind those because I think it was right by the people. So I would ask you to consider that in your motion. Speaker 5: So does it, before I make the motion, would it make any sense procedurally to make a motion today for the big number and if we need to change that we make a new recommendation
at the special meeting whenever that ends up happening. If, I mean that's, we could do that. Speaker 1: Ms. Brune. Speaker 11: I, I think that especially 'cause of that meeting is now we're not gonna be Speaker 1: Record. Okay. Now we're being recorded. Now we're good. Perfect. Welcome back everyone. Speaker 11: Oh, we're still making our motion. Speaker 1: Okay. So I was watching our home. We are short in the process of developing a motion to allow the reduction in force if the override fails, just so that the staff involved are able to begin their search for their next step in their careers arrears.
And now wait until further decisions. Okay. Speaker 11: I wanna add something. In the event that the operational override fails move to authorize the superintendent to implement the reduction in force outlined on pages 31 to 38 of the FY 26 budget book in advance of reconvening of the school committee to vote a revised budget, which will also include increases in fees. Second, Speaker 1: Any discussion? Any questions? So we'll go for a vote. All those in favor? Anyone against any abstentions?
The passes I just wanted, can I just add before we adjourn, just to close this specific item, just my words of appreciation for Dr. Pash. For Mr. Gillis, Mrs. Elbo and really the whole team for a very long budget process. It feels like it's been years and it was only November when we started, but it's been a very thorough process, very transparent process, a political process given the override. I also wanna thank the, the rest of my other committee. I think we've all worked really hard to not only give the budget due diligence process it,
provide the feedback, provide the priorities that we gave as a, as in this year in particular through the subcommittee, the budget work group. But we've also really worked hard to engage the community through the various forums and conversations. So it's been really a good process. The decision now moves to the voters for the override. And I understand that on my absence, the committee voted to support the override. So I'm allowed as chair to say that as a committee, we, we really asked the, the community to support giving the town
and the school systems the budget that we need in order to continue our, our services. And either way, vote. March 25th is the election. Early voting started today and we'll continue through this week and Saturday here in town hall and otherwise. Any, any other comments on the budget from anyone else? I'm looking, I know what you're about to say. Go ahead Matt. Speaker 5: Well you said if there were budget comments. I don't Yeah, Speaker 1: Any other, so there, it doesn't look like there's any other comments. Oh. Speaker 5: So would you like a different comment? Sure. Move. Motion. Motion to adjourn. Second.
You add an adjective into that please. Motion to quickly. That's an adverb. Speaker 1: Did you, oh, you're just voting or do you have a comment? Oh, those in favor? Speaker 5: So we second it. Somebody has a second. Oh, Speaker 1: Who seconded? I Speaker 5: Kate. Speaker 1: Okay. Did so those in favor those against any abstentions. The motion passes. We adjourn. Good night everyone.