But you think we're through? >> He said either he said it's going to be either 11 by 11. >> So we're in the 12th right now, right? Or >> the 12th. All right. >> Depending on where we are in the world. >> Good evening everyone. Um I'd like to
call the November 12th council building committee to order. We have um some people online. Um Pat is not available to be with us tonight. So um Sean, >> hey,
>> we'll come back. John, >> I'm here. >> Chris >> here. >> Kirk. >> I don't see anyone else online. Carla, it's just me, RCTV, and you. >> No, there's a bunch of people. Kirk is here. We're gonna come back to Kirk. Um
Ed, >> do you see Chris on that one? >> Ed, can you hear me? >> I'm on conference room. >> Greg, can you hear me? [clears throat] >> Are there like two different meetings? That's what I'm wondering.
>> No communication. [laughter] I see Ka Ed. >> Justin, >> I think you're in the wrong meeting. >> How am I in the wrong meeting if you're in here with me? >> Yeah. Everybody else in the other
meeting. [laughter] >> Well, I'm in the special meeting. >> Is in the wrong. >> Josh is over this one. It says Josh is hosting it. >> So, did you get that from the link that was sent out tonight? >> I got it from No, I got it from the email. That's what I just did. The link that went out tonight.
>> The one that came out tonight. >> Let's go off the link on our agenda. >> This was the one. >> That's what I used. I used the one off the town website. >> Use the one on the agenda. >> All right. So, let me >> I'm going to go off the one off the agenda.
>> I'm going to activate the >> Can you hear me? >> I'm on the other meeting >> with everyone else. Not that one. >> Okay. >> Yeah. So, I'm going to join. Which one did you click on? >> Did you click on the invite that was sent out?
>> So Josh sent out an invite tonight. >> I went into my calendar. >> That's what I went on just now. >> But you're on the wrong one. That's what he's not on this one. >> So >> can Josh, if he's on that one, send the correct link. >> That's on the agenda that was published.
>> There's a lot of people in here. >> Or we can just switch to the other one. But whatever the public meeting is public meeting. >> Yeah. Josh, to get everybody on this one. >> Yes. >> Uh, it sounds like the link on the um agenda might be different than the
link that we got on the um >> the uh >> agenda the meeting uh like the calendar invite. So, I think we all have to join the one that's on the agenda. Can you send that to everybody?
Actually, maybe I can just post it in the chat and everyone. Yeah, if you're on the >> if you go to the town's website for today under kill them and then the agenda, that's the link that I used. >> Yeah, >> set them both up.
>> Right. >> Just a a small error. >> So that if everybody that's on this meeting, uh, if you can use that link I just put in the in the chat, that's the link. There's a meeting ID and a passcode there if you need it as well. I
I copied that right off of the agenda. and we're going to transfer over to to that meeting. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> So, we're not saying that was the wrong meeting. All right. >> I got [clears throat] on right away. >> Okay. So, yeah, more people populating
now. So, I see if it came in from the agenda versus if it came in from the email. >> Yes. All right, Sharon. Joe's coming in. >> Okay, sorry. [laughter]
>> Infinity sounds like >> that's what it sounds like. >> Sean Kirk press correct. Okay, that's who we want. >> Hi guys. >> Hi everyone. Can you guys hear me? >> Yes. Perfect. Sorry, there's two
different links, I guess, to the meeting. We're all on the same page now. Is there anybody in the other Is anybody still in the old room? >> I believe Ed is still in the other one. >> I don't see Kirk McCormack having switched over either.
I'm here. >> Just texted. >> Which agenda link were you guys using? >> The one published on the agenda. >> Oh, interesting. Okay. The >> official agenda. >> So, that's the official one we have to use because it's the public meeting.
Okay. Josh, can you send Kevin Kabuzi that link? >> Yes. Yeah, I'm copying it off the website >> cuz yeah, our emails were trolling up today. >> I'm always Carly's initials.
>> We're going to do troll colors today. >> Even Tom, >> it looks like Kevin and the other two >> the follow your lead. Um, >> it's just happen stance, but I like to [clears throat] [laughter] >> Kevin >> It's a Ralph Lauren Christmas over here.
[laughter] >> It is a Christmas. >> That's like a whole thing here. Got my cat. This is from Scotland though. This is from actual Scotland. This is um just royal stewart >> but my family stewed happened but the
tartan blanket company did not make >> a steward >> I can't I [clears throat and laughter] can't do that that has been a lost art my family lost that art came here >> 16 something circle the founding of the town of
writing >> actually yes wellman's yes and lyn running as part of Lynn and I'll >> start we'll start and we'll get um [clears throat] >> Okay.
>> Yeah. I sent an email to Ed and Kevin. >> Okay. >> All right. >> All right. >> Coming to order. >> Okay. Ready? >> I'd like to call to order the November 12th Kellum School Building Committee. Um we have people online, so we're going to do a roll call vote. Here comes
Kevin. Um, Pat Tommpkins is not here this evening. So, Sean >> here. >> John, >> I'm still here. >> Chris, >> still here. >> Kirk >> here. >> Ed, not yet. Ed's coming. Uh, Greg
>> here. >> Nancy >> here. >> And Carla's here. And and Ed is with us. So, um, we're getting him over here. Hopefully, he'll see her that he's the only one in the meeting. Um so quick it's a >> quick meeting [laughter] of course
>> quick review of the agenda. We're going to um do public comment um and um liaison reports. We'll do a financial review, a schedule review. Um we're going to have approval of prior meeting minutes and then we're going to
talk about future agendas and um a modified meeting schedule and then adjourn. So we'll start with um public comment if there is anyone and I don't think we have anybody from the public here.
So we will move on to liaison reports. I might prod people a little bit if that's okay. Um can we just do a quick review on like the church parking license agreement? >> Sure. >> And um maybe the staff number and all that.
>> Okay. Um, so the church party agreement is currently in negotiation. Um, so we have worked with council and we had another conversation today about u what specifically we're looking for um in
terms of spots because the church is reluctant to give us the full number the full complement of spots that we want. They they feel that may be a hardship. Um, the church has expressed an interest um for u a higher uh rent uh if you will, a higher price per spot than what
we had originally talked about. Um, so we are um scheduling a follow-up meeting with the church business officer, the parish business officer and um to kind of come to some agreement on that. And we anticipate that we'll bring that licensing agreement back to
the committee in December. So we're helpful to do. We were talking with the OPM today with Justin to nail down when do we need how many spots. So teacher spots um spots for people to start mobilizing
on on the site um and so forth. But we think what we'll do is we've asked for 70 spots up front. Um and so we'll just we probably don't need 70 right right at the beginning, but so the church has that utilization happening. And then we'll need that for when um the teachers
come. But then as we get forward go forward with the contractors um being able to park their vehicles on site, that's where we're concerned about having enough spaces. So, um, that's what we need to continue to negotiate with church board, but we have met with them. Um, and they they would like to
have a better price. So, we've talked also a little bit about how to construct that. Mike had some ideas about um, letting the contractors know in the bid documents that there will be limited parking on site for contractor vehicles. So, they'll all be there. >> So,
>> yeah. I think what we'll do is after that they're signed up, we can give them the option. Well, we'll have a better understanding with the church of what they want and >> Yeah. >> the contractor wants to pay for the extra spots than they can and we'll take them. If they don't want to pay for them, we don't need to. >> Right. Exactly. So, see, and they'll
also have a better sense of how many they need time so that we aren't um having a higher utilization of the parking lot than they actually need. >> [clears throat] >> So the the priority is for us to make sure that all of the teachers and and staff have their their country
[clears throat] for sure, but we also want to be able to have access for our contractors. >> And I think you snow plowed and stuff like that like >> correct probably want to be there earlier than the teachers and that might not be fe the church people get cleaned
before. >> Right. They're already plowing it anyway. They think he's clear, but we just want to make sure that they're having that their plow contract you, you know, prioritizes that lot for first thing in the morning so it's clear. [clears throat] >> So that's where we are. Um, okay.
>> Thank you. >> Um, you're welcome. Um, these will be the clerk that we're looking to hire for um the facilities department. We um are waiting for the MSBA to kind of give us a final blessing for that. um we need to
put an offer to that um individual and we're currently right now working to um refine how many hours we actually think we need and what that work schedule will look like. The OPM Mike and Justin have been awesome in and given us a detailed
spreadsheet um that looks at a number of different options so and utilizations of that individual over the course of the project. So, you know, sort of ramping up to to more time and then through time and then and then, you know, uh trailing
off. Um so, we are working internally um with Joe and Matt and I to review what that that looks like. Um we're kind of waiting on MSBA and then we'll kind of >> probably next meeting we'll >> I think so. Yeah. >> And I think what we did, we tried to kind of give you the the high end and
the low end, right? And we figure you're probably not going to want either of those. It's going to be something in between. something in between. Exactly. That's correct. So, we'll refine that. Um I've spoken with Joe and he and I are going to work some more on that tomorrow and then
next week. >> Awesome. >> You know, get make sure that we're circle back with Dave. He's been great. Um and so we can give him an offer when we want him to start and what that workflow will look like, that mount will like. I think the other thing certainly that
he's amendable to you can always adjust to it on the fly too. If you >> Yeah. >> If you go a little less and you feel you need more down the line, you can buy a little more. If you go a little more, you feel it's a little overkill, you can always back it up. >> And he's he's I think we'll be flexible for that. He'll be a 1099 of 40 as well.
Um but what we're looking, you know, we just want to make sure that we have the coverage that facilities is looking for and with their with their schedules and also looking at the other project coming online. this this role will not be working on the recal project but when
when both projects are full bore you know facilities it's going to you know need that and that project will probably be mobilizing on site in March >> right just what there's a lot of work going on behind [clears throat] the scenes and so we're just trying to make sure the committee is kind of involved
with >> going back to parking the agreement with the church that would restrict parking to light vehicles contractors heavy vehicles because you >> personal vehicles >> if we if we're opening with the contractor and all the personal vehicle
>> we don't want them >> ripping up astral >> absolutely no no dropping off or you know deliveries there or anything like it's strictly >> okay >> personal vehicles >> that's right >> perfect thank you um Kirk do you happen
to have a any type of update on um the financial working group >> yeah I I do and I maybe it it makes sense is to go ahead and segue into the financial reporting because I did have a couple of questions that I had uh raised with Justin that that he answered about some of the the invoices. So, I don't
know if you want to go ahead and go formally into the financial review um because I just I did have some questions about some overlap and and involvement of the um the the modular project because apparently there's some approvals and some things going on that
may not fall within our purview. And maybe Justin can explain some of that because I had some questions about some of the charges. >> Can I can we just wait until we get to that point in the >> Yeah, that's what that's what I was asking. I didn't know if you want to go ahead and formally move into that or not. >> Um, let's let's just finish. I'm going
to put you on hold just for a few minutes and we'll finish the leazison boards. Anybody Anybody else? Thank you. Anybody else have a report? Well, we had a meeting u concerning the early sight package which hasn't been resolved yet except right now we're moving down the
path of having an early sight package. Right. >> Until we change. >> That's right. So, we we met and we the big discussion was about testing or not testing and how much testing to be done and we we agreed after that meeting to move forward with the testing. So, they
have actually been out there doing the sampling. We [clears throat] also agreed in that meeting, if you remember, kind of looking at the drawing, the right half of the drawing is where the new school is going and the right half of the site is where the new school's going. The left half is where the existing school is. And we were focusing on all the testing where the the the new
school is going. And we thought while they're out there and they've got the machinery and everything, does it make sense to do a couple additional tests on the other side? So that like if we have one type of material here, we have that same material over there, it's probably likely that everything is going to be very similar. But if we if we find
differences that you know it what we what we said basically is we have unknowns there and whatever we can do to get us a little bit better information is only going to help us in the future. So they they did a little bit of extra testing. I think we have a small change that we'll be talking about during the
financial review uh that they did on that. Um and to John's point, we're progressing right now with the intent that we can do an early package if we so desire. Um that's how the schedule is working forward. But I think the next big thing is um Jenny, is it a week or
two weeks out that they might start getting the test results and then like another week or so for the >> Exactly. They expect test results within about a week and then their formal report in another week after that. So we're we're working on scheduling a meeting for December 1st to kind of put
all our heads together with that information and make a decision about I think how to move forward. And if if if in that meeting on December 1st we decide we want to do an early package, we might need to do a another interim SBC meeting just to officially approve
that package to go out to bid basically. So um more more to come on that. I think right now I might be leaning towards not doing it, but let's let's talk about that, you know, down the line and we're going to talk a little bit about that when we get into the the even the estimating tonight. uh that when we get
into that >> now one one thing I think was left kind of uncertain was whether we would be doing any sort of testing near the existing bio tanks >> and we're not we're not right now because once that test comes it starts
the clock of when the work has to be done and that work is being done in the second phase of work so even once the contractor's on board it's not going to be touched for another year and a half so we will test it before we get to that phase, but it'll be probably a year into
the project when we're doing that. >> Why would we not test it now? >> Because you might have to then go out and have a separate contractor to do that to remove it because once that clock starts, we're not in in in our regular sequence right now. We're not going out to bid. I'm I'm gonna use
round numbers for about six months and then we're going to have about 18 months of building the new building and then we're going to start that that next phase that has the tank. So that's 2 years once you do the test. I I'm not an expert on it. I think you have to
resolve it within two years. So if we tested it today and we don't let the contractor get out there for beyond that time period, we would actually have to do a separate contract to remediate just that that tank right now. And to do that, you'd actually have to take the tank out of the ground and I'm assuming
that probably shuts the heat down to the building because so it's just >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> We're gonna test it. >> It's absolutely going to be tested. It's going to be tested well in advance so that we have an understanding. >> But uh we we don't want to start that clock until we have to.
>> No, not really. It's um opening you're opening yourself up to potential lawsuits. You know, if we find bad stuff there, we've delayed testing know the bad news is that's that's the
only problem. If you put your head in the sand and say, I don't want to know. We know it's bad or it could be bad, but I don't want to know about it. and something goes wrong, there's a problem, but it's a chance we take. Yeah, I understand. Yeah.
>> I don't view it as that that way, but that's >> Yeah. >> Um Okay. I I just um I just looked back on my calendar since our last meeting just to kind of let the committee know what kind of meetings we're having. Um
[clears throat] and this is not an inclusive list. Um, so we're having meetings on interior design. We had a meeting on October 20th with the MSBA um to talk about design status. We've had multiple meetings on the rise
design. So the big room, we've had multiple meetings on the big room and the flooring in Rise. Um, access control and door hardware temporary playground. Um
um we had a walkth through for trees. Um, so Nancy brought that up last time about um having that um survey that um there was a survey that was requested from our tree warden that was going to
cost between seven and $8,000 um to categorize the trees that were taking down and um discussing what kind of status or condition they were in. We walked the site with the tree warden um
with the plans um with you know Mike with Jenny with the the tree people and and Jane um and it kind of we left it as um showing Mike where Mike Hannifan
where the roadways were going in and we're going to see if we can save some of the trees um when you first go in the site on the right of the the driveway and then to the left of the driveway.
So, um and you know that we have different elevations and things like that to determine what kind of trees we if we would be able to save the trees. So, um Mike is going through there. We will be saving a tree that was planted there for a student. Um there are a
couple of more trees on the site that Mike said I can grab those trees and and put them in a different location in town. So, it was it was a really good meeting. Um, so just to kind of close the loop on that and we're not doing that um categorized. Yeah. So, thank you
for bringing that up, Nancy. Um, so um I attended that connected reading on it was a townwide event on Monday. So, some people came over and heard about kill which was great. Um, we had a a a meeting on soap and paper towel
dispensers which was riveting. um [laughter] and the designers meeting with um PT, OT, speech and language pathologists and we have meetings with the nurses to talk about their individual spaces as well. So, just so people have an just a little idea of
like where we're kind of going, we keep looping around and meeting again after the designers change their design because we request you and >> Jenny said it the other day. The fact that we're meeting with paper towels and stuff is actually good because that, you know, we've checked off a lot of the boxes and we're getting down to the the
very >> pretty fine fine grain detail >> where I want to be. >> Great news. Um, anybody else? Sorry, miss. >> We can give you a recap. [laughter] >> Okay. So, let's move on to um financial
reviews. >> All right. Am I using my mic or >> I think you can I can just speak and everyone can hear me. >> The mics are the same. Oh, >> okay. Nancy messing around. [clears throat]
>> All right. So, we have uh not spent any money on construction right now. So, we still have the 101521 uh 394 value um with no expenditures to date. We have spent to date for architectural and engineering 3.9
million uh with a balance of spend of 6.9 million. Uh for administrative costs, we have spent today 2.1 million with a balance uh of 6.1 million to spend. No furniture has been purchased yet. And
we have our um total contingencies still adding up or adding up to 6,128,171. And uh we have spent total 6 million uh77,568 with a balance remaining of $123,934,000
for uh unspent funds for the budgets. These are the uh budget adjustments which we've had a couple. Uh the first line here is for the uh budget adjustment made for LBA's amendment 19.
>> So that was the the testing that we were talking about. Right. >> Right. >> So I think last time we talked about it not to exceed >> and we actually have the number now. So um the second uh but u budget adjustment
is for LBA's amendment 21. Um, this was for some additional tree work or tree tree calibering. >> No, >> that was 20 21 is the other testing. >> Oh, I'm sorry. That's Yeah, I'm sorry.
>> I was going in order of my head. Um, and then we have a budget adjustment for uh modulases change order number one. This is the um document that Kirk was mentioning. We'll we'll come up to that when we go through the uh expenses.
And uh this value right here, this move to modular, the last budget adjustment is to make up uh for an invoice that was also part of the modulars. All right. So we have so this is LBA's uh this committed cost.
We have a new few new commitments. Uh LBA's amendment number 21. This is for some additional pre-soil uh soil pre-caracterization. Uh this is going to be an a vote of acknowledgement as this has already been
approved uh before this meeting these so just on that that's what I mentioned earlier while we had the testing guys out there doing the work with the equipment we felt it was prudent to to do a couple additional tests on the other side and because of
the timing they were actually able to get out there very quickly um we needed to get that moving so we we brought that to Matt based top of the the boat where it was under $50,000. I think it generally accepted and understood what we were, you know, what we were trying to accomplish with that
other meeting. So, we made the recommendation to approve that and that supported that. So, we appreciate that. >> Sure. >> Uh the next commitment is uh a contract C um value of $14,129.
This is related to the modular project, the modular relocation. This is for a repair to uh a fiber line that was uh nixed by an excavator while digging out there. Um I'll run through these and then if we want Kirk if he wants to ask us questions, we'll go to those after.
[clears throat] Um partners technology is another cost associated with the modulars. This is for some um I believe it's for the PA system which includes a uh amplifier and some wire repair. Um
[clears throat] and then modul's uh change order number one. This is for some additional fencing that was installed around uh the modular buildings. >> And then convergent um is the telecommunication services. >> What? >> It's alarms.
>> It's alarms. Yeah. So it's the monitoring of the alarm system, right? Y. So, this is um an invoice or another this is a house doctor contract that we just put in the 4,000 because that's what they're committing to this project.
>> Kirk, can I ask? >> Yeah. Kirk, do you want to do you want to review the invoices or do you want to because those commitments are the same as the invoices as far as value. Did you want to ask your questions now? >> Um, yeah. So, if you want to, Justin, I
just had a couple of questions that I emailed you about regarding like the damage to the um the the fiber optic cable. It was unclear to me what was going on there and why that was something that should be um compensated as part of this project. Um I'm not sure
exactly. I I saw your email response, but maybe if you could explain it to the committee, it would be helpful because that seemed like something that if there was damage there that maybe was done by the contractor. I'm not sure which contractor it was. Maybe that's something where an insurance claim should have been submitted or they should have been held responsible, but from your email, it sounds like there
was a lack of asbuilt information and so the town decided that it was a valid change order. But I was just wondering how that related to this project and if you could just kind of explain generally how that fits in to to what we're being asked to pay for is for as this committee at least as far as this
committee is concerned. I'm going to turn you So, I'm going to turn you over to Jane because she has a little bit more u knowledge about the process, but as far as I understand, there was a um the plans didn't show exactly where that fiber conduit was on
the asbuilts that the town has, >> right? And uh that was due and I'm not sure if we want to get into why the asbuilts weren't on there, but that was due to um the the the excavator the dig the guy digging was directed to dig in
that spot. So that's why there isn't any sort of um going after his insurance and and having him be at fault because he was told he was instructed to dig there. They took all the precautions as far as calling dig safe and um you know it's just one of those things that it was he
didn't know was there was unforeseen >> right he wouldn't have liability because everything was marked that was known and so it was >> yeah I no I I I understand that I'm just I guess I'm wondering budgetarily why why that is part of this project um
because it from again the description that I said it just said that it was over by the by the tennis courts and so I'm I'm just unclear as to how that is a killum school. >> This is due to the modular move. So, this was all due to the modular move. As they were preparing the site for the
modulars to come on board, it cut the fiber to the to the high school. Um, and so it had to be repaired immediately in order to have, you know, service and and everything to the school. Um, so our IT department, all of our staff mobilized immediately. They're immediately out
there. Everybody knew what was going on. Um that was communicated all the way up to Matt and myself immediately. Um and so our contractor went out and and took care of that work immediately and then it was can what what happened to lead to this. So we did you know an internal
look that with it with facilities and then um it was my determination that it should go to the project because it was related directly to the modular work. Um, and if the IT department were to take it on their budget, it would be
their entire fiber budget for the year. So, that was that and to bring it forward to this committee for approval. So, it's really at the committee's discretion. Um, and I would I know Joe Huggin is on the call and Joe, if if there's anything said that's you have uh a little color you'd like to add to it,
now is a good time. Um, that's a fair encapsulation. >> Yeah, that pretty much sums it up, Jane. Um, they did do Dig Safe. They did their due diligence and um the fiber line was installed when the high school was renovated and it was never we never had
any asbuilt showing the location of it and they nicked it. >> Okay. I mean that that all makes sense to me. Um I guess a a bigger question or request that I have a couple of other requests that I have. Um, as far as the
financial working group is concerned, um, it would be helpful if um, we got this information and I know that it's tough because you're getting things in all the time. It's, it would be helpful if we got this information in a little bit sooner so that I would have more
time to look at the the information and send questions. Um, because all that makes sense to me. Um, >> so I don't know if if we could maybe get the the invoices that we're asked to review maybe, you know, an extra [clears throat] business day or two
beforehand, it would be helpful. Um, another bigger picture issue is that the the invoices that we got, I I got a package on Friday and then it was revised on Monday afternoon. I think I didn't have time to review it. So, there's some
invoices on there that I just frankly haven't had a chance to review. I don't know if the other members of the financial working group have um but so having a consolidated packet with everything and and just a link that says here's everything we're going over during the meeting. Um and then the other thing that I think would be
helpful when it comes time to vote on this stuff in a few minutes would be just to have a cover sheet on top of that consolidated packet that just lists vendor invoice number and amount because it was hard for me to follow some of this stuff. There were a couple of invoices that looked like they might
have been in there twice. >> And so just having a consolidated summary of what we're going to be asked to vote for would be helpful for me. >> That's I think that's that's great, Kirk. And I I appreciate the questions um and the opportunity to give you a robust response. I think that's a great
process piece. >> Yeah. Thank you. >> Typically, we do have cover sheets that explain this information. Uh it was these two invoices were kind of put in after the rest of the invoices. >> That's right. I did put them in the folder just so they could have that information to review ahead of time, but of course they will always have a cover
sheet explaining what's on. >> No, thank you for that. And I and I appreciate the um indulgence of the committee and the OPM because we are sometimes getting in we get invoices all month long and so we try to present them to the OPM and and bring them to the
committee and get as many approved as we can. um because we don't want to if we don't have to wait another month for our vendors to get paid and that is a priority. Um and I think that there's going to be some operational changes. Um and the meeting times might and you're
going to talk to that later. >> So Kirk, that's that's great information and and that was what I was hoping was going to come out of your group anyways that you guys need time to review it prior. Um, so to have kind of established set times, time frames from
before the meetings. When we get to the end of the agenda and we're talking about future um, uh, next meetings, we're going to actually be um, proposing to modify our meeting dates to the third um, week, the third Monday of the month.
So um, it looks like you're asking So our packet comes out 48 hours prior. It looks like you're asking for one to two days prior to that with >> Yeah. And it doesn't have to be the consolidated meeting packet. I'm just
specifically talking about the invoice packet or any change orders or anything like that. Just so that so that I and the other members of the working group have a chance to email questions like I like I did. Um follow up and just make sure because the explanation makes perfect sense to me. But when I sent the
questions on Monday, I'd only had the packet for, you know, a couple of days. And so I think that if if there's an extra business day or two baked into that just for the financial working group stuff, it could maybe streamline the the overall meeting because the other invoices that I looked at, they
all seem to be in order to me, but I just did have a couple of questions. >> Perfect. Okay, so two [clears throat] sounds like two things. Um, two business days in addition to the 48 hours, right? Or two business days before that. um if
we can get a consolidated invoice packet um to the group. Is that possible to get it to the group with a a consolidated list of what we're voting on? >> Yeah, I think the only thing that we'll have to look at from that perspective is that we tend to try to meet with the XLT
first and then we kind of and then based off of direct or recommendations from the XLT, that's what we bring to the meeting. on. We're just going to have to time it so that we make sure that the XLT happens. And I'm going to say that we have at least a half a day or a day
from that meeting to get everything over to the financial group. >> Yes. So, I mean, in the XLT, we're not really talking about invoices. >> Sometimes we do, but mainly >> we might be talking about bringing like for example, we talked about the uh the church stuff, whether it was ready to
bring to tonight or not, and we decided that we needed to go back to them and and so like would we have included that in the package or not? We might not have known until after. >> So, so I guess the goal is by XLT to have that packet ready, >> right? at XLT if we added something it
should be a quick ad that we could turn around >> or take away something >> right by the end of the day so that that would give them if it goes out to them then >> well they only need the invoices that's all they're looking they're good for is invoices and change orders >> whatever commitments commitments
commitment yeah >> so [clears throat] and I understand that that invoices are coming in all the time and so I totally get it if we get a packet of invoices and proposed change orders and then something else comes in and it's important to review that. I just asked that maybe we get a cover letter
that has that flagged or or redlined or something just so that we can see what the change was because the packet that that I got on Monday was different from the one that I got on Friday and it was difficult for me like it took a lot of time to go through and find what was new and what wasn't. So just something to to take us by the hand and show us what's
new so we're not looking through the same stuff twice would be helpful if something comes in last minute. Yeah. >> So, if I can ask Josh to also because we did this, I believe you've done this with school committee. I've always said like when you send us a new packet, I can't go through a 200page packet to
figure out what changed. So, um Josh, if we can kind of make it a point along with Justin, a point of flagging if there's a revised packet to just specify what was actually revised. >> Okay. Just so people know. That would be
that would be really helpful. >> Perfect. Yep, we can do that. >> Thank you. >> Okay. So, so it sounds like by XLT, which we have a week prior, um, we want to be able to turn it around
that day or possibly the next morning to the working group. >> So, the working group can have all the invoices, the financial working group have all the invoices on Wednesday morning and then they have Wednesday, Thursday, Friday and then Monday with the meeting Monday night. We don't have
to count the weekends, but certainly we know public. >> Okay. Do uh do we want to vote on the um commitments first? >> I have a question. >> Oh, sorry. >> Did the damage to the fiber optics occur
before the modulars arrived? Yes. Or after? >> Before before? >> Before. Okay. >> I was actually there when when it happened. I was walking by and so I was like, "Sorry." Yeah. It was before they were there. It was sight prep. Can we have a guarantee that Kllum is no longer
responsible for the modulus over high school and that we will never ever get build for [laughter] >> project [clears throat] closeout. We're at closeout right now with the modular project. Um and so uh we have paid GIAP
entirely already. Um, and we're just, I think, finalizing the closeout documents so that the underground structures will be noticed. We we'll know where everything is, you know, unlike when the high school was redone and the fiber wasn't.
>> Well, we should have known. >> Correct. [clears throat] >> If the roof leaks, they're not responsible for that. And >> no, one step, right? I think one step. So I think there might be one or two more cycles of billing just to close out the things retainage and
>> but to your point hopefully nothing new >> right there's a couple of invoices going >> well then we're not right >> to say you know we we we can't be responsible for these things >> absolutely >> forever cut it off >> exactly did it now
>> we have some more invoices that are coming in still for the for the work that's been done on the modular project on the modular project But um if unless something can be proven to be damaged as a result of the move um I I don't see why and I those classrooms are
open and functioning. Is that correct? >> Yes, they are. Oh, yeah. >> So yeah, everything seems to be working okay and and we used a lot of in-house contracts that we already have from our existing service providers to hook everything up and wonder. So those contracts, those service contracts are
maintained by our existing contracts and would fall under that work now. So that going forward that operational expense would come out of school ground budget or town budget as appropriate. >> But yeah, it's noted like that it's going to end. >> Yeah. It's like an 18-year-old, right?
You're cut [laughter] off. >> Is that it? >> Yeah. No. Only only project [clears throat] related costs. >> Yeah. >> Great. >> Um Okay. Do we want to vote on the uh commitments before we go into invoices?
>> Sure. >> Okay. Yes. You need >> back up. >> So, these are the um let's see LBA amendment 21 that needs to be voted on. Okay. Um
>> that's a vot. Okay. Um make a motion uh to acknowledge the 5,500 expense uh by LBA uh amendment number 21. >> Vote to approve or vote of knowledge. Is
there a second? >> Anybody want to second that? Second. >> Thank you, Ed. Uh, any discussion? Okay, we're time for the vote. Sean, >> yes. >> John, >> yes. >> Chris,
>> yes. >> Kirk, >> yes. >> Ed, >> yes. >> Greg, >> yes. >> Nancy, >> yes. >> Carla, yes. And the motion passes. Thank you. >> Now, do you want each one of these separate again for each one of the next four?
>> Balance of them are all related to the modular. So >> yeah, >> I can give you a total on it if you'd like. >> That would be good. Let me start the motion. They give me the total. Um make a motion to uh approve and pay the following um uh uh
>> commitments uh for 14,12948 to Contract Corp. uh 2,27088 to Partners Technology, $24.99 to Modelise, and $4,000 to Convergent
for a total of >> $22,899.36. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Great. Seconded by Kirk. Um, any discussion? Uh, time for the vote. Sean, >> yes.
>> John, >> yes. >> Chris, >> yes. >> Kirk, >> yes. >> Ed, >> yes. >> Greg, >> yes. >> Nancy, >> yes. >> And Carla, yes. And that motion passes. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay, Justin. >> All right,
move on to expenditures. >> Now that we have the commitments, we can pay them. >> Great. [laughter] >> Great news. Um so our first uh invoice on the list is uh LBA's services invoice number 22654
and this is broken out into the different cost codes and probate codes. So the total of that is 614 658 >> and um the next one on the list is for Collier's project leaders invoice number uh 11071.
[clears throat] This is for services of September for a total of $30,765. Then we have the contract corp for $14,12948. That is the um the fiber repair we just
have talked about. Um also partners technology for 2270. And then we have another uh invoice from LBA invoice number 22803 for a total of
>> 5754 $480.90 >> and that was for services for October. And then we also have another call here's uh project leaders this is also services for October for 59,165 and then the last three are the
commitments we went through for moduliss uh being 9,000. Wait, that's Yep. This is their wreck number four uh for $9,624 and then wreck number requisition number five for $35,720 and then the uh cost of conversion to do
the um telecommunication services for modulars. >> Okay. Motion of all the LBAS together. give me the total >> um to approve uh the invoices from LBA
uh 22 uh invoice number 22654 for the total of >> $614,6581. >> I'll seconded by Kirk. Any discussion? >> Uh time for the vote. Sean, >> yes. >> John, >> yes. Chris,
>> yes. >> Kirk, >> yes. >> Ed, >> yes. >> Right, >> yes. >> Nancy, >> yes. >> And Carla, yes. And that passes. >> Thank you. >> Uh motion to uh approve the invoice
number 111071 from Collers for 30,765. >> Second. >> Seconded by Kirk. Any discussion? Time for the vote. Sean, >> yes.
>> John, >> yes. >> Chris, >> yes. >> Kirk, >> yes. >> Ed, >> yes. >> Greg, >> yes. >> Nancy, >> yes. >> Carla, yes. That passes you. >> And do I should I do each of the other
ones, the contract and partner separate or can we do all the modular ones together? >> So, I would say if you do Levali and collars and then we can do all the others. >> Okay, that sounds good. >> All right. Make a motion to uh approve
invoice number 22803 from LBA for the total of $575,480.90. >> Second. Is there a second? Seconded by Kirk. Any discussion? Time for the vote. Sean, >> yes. >> John, >> yes. >> Chris, >> yes.
>> Kirk, >> yes. >> Ed, >> yes. >> Greg, >> yes. Nancy, >> yes. And Carla, yes. That passes. Thank you. >> Make a motion to approve uh the payment of uh Collier's invoice number 1112283
for $59,165. >> Second. >> Seconded by Kirk. Any discussion? Time for the vote. Sean, >> yes. >> John, >> yes. >> Chris, >> yes. >> Kirk, >> yes. >> Ed, >> yes. Greg,
>> yes. >> Nancy, >> yes. >> Carla, yes. That passes. I >> make a motion to approve the uh modular invoices including contract corp for 14,12948,
partners technology for 2270.88, 88 module lease for 9,624. Uh module lease again for 35,720 and a conversion for $4,000 for a total of >> $65,744.36.
>> Second. >> Second. Seconded by Kirks. Any discussion? Time for the vote. Sean, >> yes. >> John, >> yes. >> Chris, >> yes. >> Kirk, >> yes. Ed, >> yes. >> Greg, >> yes.
>> Nancy, >> yes. >> And Carla, yes. That passes. Great. Thank you. >> All right. Excellent. Uh we we discussed uh these two items. This is the um the parking contract as
well as the uh cost for a clerk. These are forecasted costs just to have some values in there for any for upcoming costs that we anticipate. Uh these values aren't necessarily what everything is going to come to, but we're just carrying a value that is we feel is close to what um these two
contracts will come to. This is one of the ways we I'll say kind of mitigate risk or identify risks. when we [clears throat] get the contractor on board the total of all open PCOS for example will be on here every every month and on the cover sheet we kind of
for have a forecast column it it shows how much of the contingency you would spend if that came through so I think for example Jane was talking about the clerk I think the 400 was maybe the higher end we had a low we had a lower end that was half that if you will and we're probably going to fall somewhere
in between so but we're we try to be conservative So I would say [clears throat] we we don't always nail it exactly but if we don't we try to be maybe a little higher rather than lower if you will but again sometimes 400 becomes 405 instead of you know but um
it's just a way to keep tracking track of things that aren't finalized yet but we we know about so we want to have an understanding of it. >> Well and I think um madam chair if I may that um the parking number will likely go up. This is based on our initial um
approach. >> The fewer the fewer spots and the lower numbers. >> That's right. So, I think it may be lower. Well, we'll see what happens, but I we're in negotiations. >> That's all I want to say. [laughter] [clears throat] >> Can we go again? Why we need
>> We have you you supply your contract. We have yeah we we we a lot of people we call it clerk of the work we call >> the architect has some kind of representation >> the architect will have somebody on site several days a week not every single day but several days and somebody available
at all times obviously >> I'm not convinced we need anybody else so I I think what what would this person do >> which is not being done by your person >> so I think that's part of the discussion about the the hours and things like that but I think the the re what What what it
is is it's not doing I'll say the project side. It's doing the talent side. It's it's it's somebody from the town to be meeting with us and to to be working with us. For example, as we get into change order reviews, um they might be the the first line of defense goes to
this committee, somebody to be reviewing it because they're going to be sitting in on the weekly OAC meeting, which is the order architect contractor meeting, and they're going to be, you know, we we're representing the town, but they're a direct representative. But usually in those meetings there is a representative
of the town that attends those um and is is there to make decisions on a day-to-day basis on things that are happening that need to be on site any time. Um because our facilities department is already understaffed and because we're doing a second large
project at the same time. This one's arguably much bigger. um the facilities department really needs the extra support in order to be able to make sure all the decisions are being done on the town side the way that they need to be done. Um and you know I know that Mr.
Huggin is um available on the call and so he may be able to speak to it better than than Mike or I have but it is it is his request. Um Joe has um ushered the town through building projects before um and so it is uh he he
is a department head who is informing us that for the best in the best interest of the town this is additional staff that we but we wouldn't take them on as a permanent staff. it would not be, you know, available for pensioning or anything. That's a 1099 employee. It's a temporary position for the purpose of this project.
>> So in in past in other projects, MSBA projects there, you know, if if there's an adequate amount of staff, part of that staff's um salary could be allocated to the project. So we we don't have that number of staff members. So
this was the um this was the the ne next best solution. We have Joe, we have Kevin Kabuzi there. >> Why would this person not be retail? >> Retail is a smaller project. So >> well why could this person not represent
the town on two projects? I think the intention is to have the focus of this person be on one project intentionally so that Joe can attend Killllum and and manage the recount portion for this work.
>> Yeah. My understanding is Kevin and Joe are going to be doing that >> for recalc that same job for [clears throat] recount >> right because we thought of the idea on our committee. [laughter] >> [clears throat] >> I I don't think if it if it was a shared
cost, I don't think it is advantageous to have this one person being in both sites at the same time. >> I think it would be definitely advantageous. Same problems come up on both. >> They do. They do. And I think that the intention is to have that one person be
committed to the Kllum project because we don't have the resources to commit, >> you know, Joe and Kevin um to both projects and also run the 10 buildings that they're running with the usual things that pop up every single day that
they manage. Well, facilities doesn't normally get involved until the building is turned over to the town, but they are facilities managers, not construction managers. >> So, t typically the facilities don't get involved in construction. So, I'm I'm
just, you know, I'm just fuzzy about the organization here. So I think what I would say is on a typical MSBA project, what we see is somebody from the town attends the weekly meetings. They're they're usually kind of the forefront on
the PCO reviews, proposed change [clears throat] reviews, >> and in between the meetings, they're the the person that we're bouncing ideas off of. Do you know do we think this is something that we need to have an emergency meeting on or do we think you know we can bring this to to to Matt
Connor or to the XLT group or so there is sometime this 400 is for full-time and and I'm not sure that I understand that we need full-time but there's somebody that needs to have some sort of connection like I I'll give you an example for the last year and a half
that's been Carla and like when we're in the design phase if we have a problem we have a concern we Carla and she says, "Oh, can you call Pat or can you call Jane or and and and typically on a project when you move into the construction phase, it it's
usually either the head of facilities or the head of finance because the two biggest things you're talking about are construction in the building and dollars and cents. So, it's it's usually one of those two people. So, I think what we're hearing and what I'm hearing, I guess,
from is that the the the town employees have full-time jobs and then some and then we're adding recal on top of that and now you're adding this on top of that. So, somebody still needs to do that part of it and and you're looking to have a a 1099 person do that.
>> Yeah. The library was Joe. >> Yeah. Yeah. But that shouldn't be that facilities. The library was an existing building. So it's different. >> Yeah. >> Will this person be on site? Where would his office be on site?
>> We're going to allow if if he they want to be on site in the trailer, we'll have a spot for them in the trailer. You know, again, whatever whatever needs to be done, that's what, you know, it [clears throat] >> Okay. I'm just my view is we're just top heavy on in terms of people looking at
this job, you know, because there's that >> [clears throat] >> small job. So, it's a big ticket out to 400,000. You know, you could do a lot of finishes in the building for 400,000.
Improve the building. So, I want to make sure it's really necessary. >> Yeah. >> That we really can't live without this person. >> I'm not convinced, but okay. Okay. Justin. >> All right, we'll uh move on to our cash
flow. Uh right now we're once we apply the uh invoices that are have been approved tonight will be right in line with our estimated incumbrance of 6.6 million. I know [clears throat] this graph is usually intimidating to
me. So I like the picture that shows this kind of shows as we progress into the project into construction this trend will follow this green line as we go along. Looks like we're we're right in a good spot
and just under budget, right? >> Always where you want to be >> on time. under budget. >> We're saying that because Pat's not here. [laughter] >> Um, >> that's what he says. >> So, that's that's what we have for a financial update. I just wanted to see
if there's any questions. Any further questions before we move on to schedule? >> Nope. >> All right. I didn't have the uh schedule up. Sorry about that. I lost my schedule. Sorry about that,
guys. Hang on one second. Yeah, thank >> you want to share that. >> Yes. >> Okay, I'll stop sharing. Sorry about that, guys. >> To Madam Chair, amend my comment earlier. It's not 10 buildings, it's 18 buildings. [laughter]
Make a pardon, Joe. >> [clears throat] >> I'll let you off this time. [laughter] >> Jane, right? >> It's at the eight schools. >> I I think it might be the Yeah. No, I was sorry. I apolog It's late. It was
late. >> Okay. So, right now we are, if you notice in your packet, you had a 60% uh DD submission which will be submitted to the MSBA. We will be taking a vote on that. But uh right now we're in the schedule portion of that 60% C uh CD
submission and then we'll be moving on to the 90% CD phase which will um I believe we'll be voting on that 60 90% CDs at
uh in February uh February 9th. So today we're doing this the 60% seed submission and then on February 9th we'll be doing the 90% and then not too long after that it'll be 100% which isn't the same volume of submission. I think it's more of an acknowledgement by the MSBA and then we'll be off to the races with
construction. Any uh any questions on schedule? You >> say that date was for the 90% >> uh February 9th. Then the other things we're still considering
are the two early packages. So I think last time we talked about early package one it was switch gear and generator >> right and now I think we're going to be so our early package number one was uh was to obtain switch gear or the idea
was to obtain the switch gear and generator because of the long lead times that are every project is experiencing. Um uh right now we the generator that is now part of the design is is a more easily and readily available item. So, we're just going to be procuring the
switch gear as part of that early package. >> Part of that was the generator going to last smaller from from DD. >> So, the smaller generators are just more off the shelf basically. >> And we've [clears throat] met we met
with LBA's consultant on the electrical as far as the equipment, not just switch gear, but there are some equipment items that will be procured with that >> and that's going out. So it's IC 20 uh 27 26.
>> Yeah. So we'll we'll be looking to finish those bid documents in the you know present in the next bill building so that those can be go to bed. >> Right. >> Similarly early early package one uh early package two is the earth work that
we're continuing to evaluate and confirm. Um, at the same time, the other thing that you'll be seeing next month, uh, is the start of the pre-qualification process. Uh, so just start thinking about that. We're going to need somebody from the committee to
volunteer to be the the community member of that pre-qualification team. Typically, um, there's one person from the architect, which I assume is going to be Jenny. >> I hope not. >> You hope not. [laughter] >> I think I think it'll be David Harris. >> It might be David. Okay. So David
>> there'll be one person from us which is is Justin um he'll have support from Harani and myself as well. Oftent times towns will have two people so that it's like half of us and half of you. I will let you know that we're going to unless somebody wants to we're going to go
through all the pre-qualification process for you and kind of give you a a cliffnotes on it. And we we might actually even have a a a vendor that can help us out with that that we're going to be talking about. But typically, it's two people. There's usually probably
three meetings. Uh it's a meeting to kind of at the beginning saying, "Here's all the packages we got." And we kind of divide up and say, you know, David might say, "Hey, I I'm familiar with all these HVAC contractors. I'll do the HBAC." Justin might say, "Oh, I know the
electrical. I'll do," you know, so we kind of divvy that up. >> [clears throat] >> We go to our own corners and kind of do all the background work and everything like that. Then we come back and we we meet and give you a preliminary review of it and say this is where we're at. And usually that preliminary, we're highlighting anybody that we think might
be below an 80 rating. Uh 80 is the minimum that you have to have as a score. And kind of bringing that to everybody's attention so that everybody can start paying a little bit more attention to that. like pretty much anybody below an 85, you know, or or that's trending towards an 85 or less, that's who we're going to kind of focus
in on. Make sure that you have that understanding. Make sure that we all go back and do our due diligence on everybody across the board, but especially those those, you know, potential question marks and then we come back to a final typically a final meeting where we're looking at the list
and we're giving it a thumbs up. that subcommittee again typically I I maybe subcommittee is the wrong one that that working group doesn't have authority. They're going to come back and recommend it to this group to approve the list. So they're not approving the list. They're just making recommendation to this group.
>> We um just went through this with the recount project. We did a pre-cal and we did it ducks. Is that the thing you're doing? Yeah, it was it was great. >> Yeah, they are great. It really made it such a a little bit of a clunky
interface I thought when because I also I did I pre-qualled a couple of the categories um and they split it up among different members of the building to participate because we >> so bid docs we use them for bidding a lot and they're very good at that and
this is a newer module the pre-quall so we you had a meeting with him right >> right we had a meeting with bid docs um I was in love with it from the beginning and he was hard selling me for about an hour. So there was no uh no resistance from me. But uh yeah, I would say to compare the two easily um bid docs is is
a is an organizational and they they provide services for um you know uh references and and everything. >> Project dog is more of just an organ organizational tool. >> So those are two typically in the past
we there's I I would say three ways to bid a job. You do it the oldfashioned way where we can like literally bring them in here and open the envelopes and everything. >> That's what we do every day right in this room. Is that the old fashioned? >> So you can do that and you know we might have 150 bids right between the with all
the file subitters and everything like that. Um more recently I I don't know that I've done that in a while. Project Dog was the first company that came out. They did it electronically. They got approved by the state to qualify to meet all the mass, you know, code requirements and everything like that.
and they were the the first generation, if you will. Bid Dogs came in a few years later with a few more bells and whistles because they came in later. Uh, and one of the the the newer bells and whistles is a sprinkle module, which I think there there's some cost to that,
but I think the cost you're going to spend there is going to save time on us. And we're t you pay us on an hourly basis. So, if you if we're spending $10,000 to save $20,000, I think it's money well spent, that type of thing. So, uh I it should greatly streamline
that process. >> So, >> yeah, >> I think so. Yeah, we really we saw that and we only got one elevator uh pre-quall the whole time. So, it's we're leaving up to the GC. >> So, I say you you'll get one. >> Yeah. >> You have to reject it. You go out again. >> You'll get one or done
>> and you'll reject it and then you >> That's what happened. Everything else was great. And the reference piece was really fantastic. Yeah, they do a good job with that. >> The other thing I will mention, I know LBA has done this in the past and I know we've done it in the past. One one of the things we are able to do is uh and
we've actually I've actually gone back to the state to confirm this that if I have a reference on my carol contracting that I did on another project within the last uh 18 months, I can reuse that same reference like so it saves us a little bit of time. I think that's one of the
things that Bid do probably does is they they're getting these references regularly and they're they're able to use that same reference for for an 18-month period. So that you know that's the economy of scale is how they're being able to do it at an affordable price. >> Okay. Okay.
Um any any other questions on schedule? I think we wanted to move on to um maybe some renderings and then move our way into the 60%. >> Uh I am right here first.
>> Uh we weren't planning to show any renderings, but I had just sent some out today for for Carla and Josh and and uh I guess Justin liked him. so much he just put them in. >> I had to share. I just wanted >> We're asking people to to vote on the
60% package tonight >> and we're going to be talking dollars and cents in a minute, but we wanted to >> let you see what the dollars and cents are are going to be representing. Yeah. So, >> yeah, these will be on the website soon. >> So, I think we shared these last week,
the exterior ones. Um this is the view from the fields and this is the view from the drop off of the main entrance. Um this is inside the library. The some of you have not seen the interior ones yet. So
um this is like an overhead view from above flying above Charles Street. >> We can add the the taller trees than there now. [laughter] >> The one the one day long And then this is on Habil Street.
This is the view of the cafeteria. This is um one of the K through five uh classroom corridors. The classrooms are on your right and the library is on your left and it looks really bright on your left. That's actually just the borrowed light coming in from there's like a
>> light well in the in the um library. functions as a light well. This is the main entrance and the main stair. >> I wish there were more, but that's it. >> And I can also share with you a couple of uh of uh interesting factoids about
our set that we submitted. We had 3,000 pages of specifications, 605 pages of the binder, that's the report, and 460 drawing sheets. I don't know if that's going to continue to grow exponentially, but uh there'll
be more next submission. >> Three volumes drawings at this point, right? >> Three volumes. [clears throat] >> Um >> did you ever see the documents for the original government school? >> Yeah, it's like 12 drawings. [laughter] >> Wow. >> The profession has changed so much.
>> Yeah. >> Were you guys going to talk about you're going to talk about cost now? >> Yep. So uh within that packet we have uh let me share my screen. Um so within that that 60% CD submission we have [clears throat] our cost
estimates and then uh from LBA's uh cost estimators and then our cost estimators and then they've reconciled their values together to come to what this sheet uh provides. Um, right now we uh are
currently looking at estimates that are in the $92 million price range for construction. So that's a savings of about or right now looking at the values is a savings of $9.5 million. Um, we will
>> How was that, John? [laughter] [clears throat] >> Great. I can tell you know me. >> Be quiet. >> I [clears throat] was involved in the big dick. >> So was I. >> Yes. And and you know it was all one when it was 6 million six
million dollars. >> Hopefully this is not the >> this [laughter] is not we'll we'll say frankly this is not [laughter] >> so and I mean approaching a little bit of caution with these numbers. This is still the 60% CD and not that it's not
accurate or anything, but we are going to keep the budget of uh of 101 as we move forward until we get, you know, we really don't know what the value is going to be until we get those hard numbers come big time. >> I think in general, I think uh I'm going to toot a horn for LBA a little bit
here. I think a big part of this is that they're listening and they're giving you everything you're asking for, but they're doing it in a a thoughtful and and and you know, costconscious way. Yeah. >> I I think the other thing we did is we appropriately
a year a year and a half ago established maybe higher contingency. I won't say maybe they contingencies that we thought could be real depending on tariffs and depending on you know co co seemed to be past us at that point but like inflation
that you were seeing from co wasn't and that inflation is slowing down and you know we might be approaching the market at the right time with this project. So um those those contingencies the estimators have been cautiously
optimistic and they're willing to reduce those a little bit but time's getting shorter and the the the value is getting shorter. So that's why we're seeing some savings there as well. Uh so I think that's all good, but um as Justin said, until we get the the the contractor to
actually put the number on paper and inside a contract, we don't know. So the MSBA is probably going to ask us, not probably, they will ask us if you're $9 million under, why are you not adjusting? And the answer is because we don't we're not fortune tellers. We
don't know exactly where it's at. So we're going to continue to do what we're doing. We're going to continue to give you a great building and great value and hopefully the savings is even bigger in in eight months. Yeah. Or six months. >> And I I I like to add to it too that um
and kudos like Mike said to LBA on um they've held the scope right whenever we're in our meetings. we're always hounding them about price of everything. Um, you know, we've taken some things like the generator out of of the project. Um,
the larger generator um and and their design documents seem to always be more complete than they have to be. So, that is um I think that's playing a huge part of it as well. And actually the estimators even said that they, you know, at DV they said that these were
advanced well beyond what they they see from many DV drawings. At 60 they again that they were advanced and I do see processes >> Chris. >> Thanks Carla. Uh so quick clarification on that. out of the 9 million potential,
do we does the MSBA cover a portion of that or is the 9 million all readings? >> So, it's not a a a very simple answer there. So, I'll give you I'll give you the best answer I can right now. If this
was the bid number right now, what would happen is you would be reducing you you you'd be reducing the construction value by 9 million. Say >> we would then have a decision to make. Um the MSBA is going to take back their
portion of that. We could either keep our portion in the project and roll it into contingency, which is always my recommendation. Again, we don't know what we don't know. It's better to have it there and not need it than not have it there and need it. So, we would
recommend typically to keep your portion in the project. What I would say in general is we're above the cap on the cost per square foot. So, while you get a percentage back, you know, based off of reimbursement, I would expect without
running the numbers that a a large majority of that would be direct reading savings. So I I think there if it's 9 million it it might be 8 million reading and a million MSBA. It might be seven and two. I don't think it's a 50-50 split. I think it's definitely more on
the reading side >> because of the cap >> because because we're above the cap already. So the the square footage of the building isn't getting any smaller, but the cost is getting smaller. So the cost per square foot goes down and and because we're above the cap, we're just uh a lot of that is excluded right now.
>> Yeah. So that that's a good that's a good thing for for for >> wring and even better [clears throat] even better because it's it's renting money. >> Thank you. >> Um okay. Uh so just a couple more things
to to to talk about on this on this sheet. We do have a couple of alternatives down at the bottom here that are priced out. One is for the off-site work on Charles Street and the other is the off-site work on Haveril Street. Um so that that was one of the things that
we were um discussing in um some of our meetings is um is there other work that um I I should say that the only other work that I could see quote unquote adding to
this but it's a town it's not a killum cost it's a town issue um is the roadways that aren't the site work that's not adjacent to the actual site. So the um the project is the confines of
the the the Kllum school, right? Um the roadways on Haveril and um on Charles Street, those sidewalks are going to be part of our expenses for the project. if if the town wants other site work done,
that's the town's issue, right? The town's looking into hopefully getting grants if if they're out there and stuff like that. Um if I if this possibly goes to Fincom and Town Management and they say that is a
priority for the town um and we would like to get it in under the Kllum project, that's a totally different discussion. Um, so we just kind of like lobbed it into the town's bucket and let them kind of figure it out. Um, so
>> but we did we did do the design and we did price it just so that we had an idea of where where it was at and little things like the Charles Street work for example where we were taking a lot of the parking onto the site >> but there was a discussion about having
parking up Charles Street. So that's kind of what some of this is is is part of that bigger grander plan, but it is outside of the the the site immediately. >> Okay. So then this is these are documents that are in the actual uh submission binder. There's one more item
with cost. This is the um the VE log. Uh right now we're not uh currently recommending any items for uh V, but that doesn't mean we're not going to have any, you know, choices that we might make uh with this list that might continue to grow as we develop the
design as well. Um I to I think we're at like 8 822. Um we do need to do a vote for the the binder submission. Um sorry, this is not on the first page and I'm going to make everyone sick real
quick. If you want to just hold on there just before you jump off the just so everybody understands we just because we're not over budget doesn't mean we don't look at the value engineering. We always want to take a look at that. We always want to have a list >> so that we we have the ability if we like even if we get to bid and we go out
to bid and we're over bid >> you know we we can look at the value engineering and is there something we can adjust can we award to their contract and adjust it or do we have to go back out to rebid. So it's always important for us to do the MSBA asked us to do this. Um I whenever I do a job I
like to categorize you can kind of see it there. Category one, two and three. You know the way I explain is category one is the stuff that those are the easy, you know, the lowhanging fruit. Those are the things that are not going to affect education and they're not going to affect durability or long-term maintenance or something like that.
Those are kind of the no-brainers. The the category three is the opposite. The category 3 is the things you never want to do. Those are the things that are going to really impact either the educational ability of the of the staff and the and the students. It could impact uh long-term uh maintenance of
the building, things like that. Um we hope that we never have to get into that at this point where we've got a luxury that we don't even have to get into the category once. So, you know, we're really good. And then category two is if it's not an easy and it's not a hard, it kind of falls in that middle category.
Um, [clears throat] one of the things do we want to just touch base on the the work one of the 900? Um, >> oh yeah. Yeah. >> So, just we we talked earlier and and I don't want to sidetrack this and get
into the early package discussion too much, but one of the things that um [clears throat] the design team actually asked the estimators to do is look at the the project. So the the base the way we've been pricing this work
previously is we have unsuitables under the building. Take the soils out, truck them away and bring new soils back in. And that's what we would do for example under the early package. During some of the early package discussions, we had
discussions about trying to minimize that export and try to to save cost, especially if this testing comes back and we have levels of contamination or something like that, that means it's going to drive that export cost even higher. So the thought was uh we had
come up with an idea if you took that site and and broke it into thirds say and you removed all the dirt from the first third and then you to the second third and rather than taking the dirt from that and taking it off you you you push it down to the first third and then [clears throat] you you you kind of
follow you know follow the leader and we asked them if you did that what would that save and both estimators came back saying it could be upwards of a million dollars. Is that right? As much as that >> because and it's really the the the export cost is really >> Yeah. And we're currently assuming
because we don't know that half of the soil would be um a landfill. Yeah. So that drives that. >> Yeah. >> So existing soil might have to be modified, right? Because it doesn't >> So the existing soil is it basically
meets structural grade and they they they said that they wouldn't want it in the top 12 in or 18 inch >> 18 in. Yeah. So, um, he said, our geotechnical engineer says he he wants it removed and replaced. But there's some organics underneath. >> Yes. >> So, you have to remove it, take out the
organics, get rid of that, >> put the fill back in lifts, compact it, >> and then the last 18 in under the slab or footing would be imported, structural fill. And our geotechnical engineer was kind of didn't have too many fines. No,
no, they were they were right at at at nine in in the on the 207 was a 10, you know, 0 to 10 on on that. So that was >> um so it's encouraging, but just again not to get too much in the early package
discussion, but food for thought for you, John, because we'll be talking to you in in a week or two on this is if we do the early package, the early package has a very short time frame. They're going to come in and just do what we said, take out the dirt and put it back in. If we allow the contractor, the
general contractor to look at this, one might say, "That's what I'm going to do." One might say, "No, I'm going to do this hopscotch method." One might say, "I'm going to do the the geothermal wells for like it gives [clears throat] them the option." And in that situation, you might get that savings on bid day. So like the the potential here is if we do the early package, we might be losing
an opportunity for some some potential savings. >> Yeah. But you know, it's not just money. is it's time >> and that's why I would say if there's four general contractors I don't think all four of them are going to make that
but we don't need all four of them we just need one of them to to take that risk right you know and >> we have to obviously make sure if they take that risk that they still meet the schedule >> yeah because on bid day we're not going to know if they took it or not right we're just going to know yeah >> you know it's a means and methods thing
so >> all right >> um so we a couple more votes more topics here, but so just to bring us to the front page of this document. So we'll need to have a vote to officially submit this to the MSBA.
Anyone? >> Yes. >> And and if I could say, I would say we're right now about 9 million. I'm going to be considered $9 million under budget, but we're going to recommend keeping the the the current budget based off of the current agreement with the
MSBA of the of the higher number. so that you have that flexibility because if we were to to go to the lower number and then the bids come in higher then it's all Tom money that has to pay for that difference. So you always want to try and keep yourself at that higher number. >> We don't have to submit that um the 60%
estimate. >> We do. >> Do we have to vote on that? >> So it's part of the part so that that sheet that you saw is a summary. Behind that is two different estimates from two different estimators that are probably 100 pages each or maybe maybe more with
a lot of details. So that's all part of this package. >> Okay. So just the vote on um so vote to submit this 60% construction document binder to the MSBA. >> I would say and keep the current budget >> and keep it with the current budget. I
would say package not because it is the binder and then just drawing the documents. >> Okay, the package. Okay. >> Um move to um accept sending the MSPA 60% construction document package with
the um with the estimates. No. And keeping the uh current estimate at the same level as it has been to the MSBA. I'll just amend that to say budget rather than estimate. Okay. Budget. That's right. Budget.
>> Second. >> Second. >> Seconded by Ed. Right. Any discussion? >> Okay. Time for the vote. Sean. >> Yes. >> John. >> Yes. >> Chris. Chris.
>> Thought I said yes. Did I not say yes? Thank you, Kirk. >> Yes. >> Ed, >> yes. >> Greg, >> yes. >> Nancy, >> yes. >> And Carla, yes. And that passes. >> Great. >> All right. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. Um, the last couple of things that I just want to review are um the RFPs. Um, see my screen. You can't see I'm sharing that part yet. So, let me just open these up. Basically, last month I
mentioned um that we were going to be uh work we worked on some RFPs that we want to issue for um get some things going. So, one of them is is a uh tax consultant. Um this the vote that I'm looking for tonight on
these is just to uh move forward with issuing them and obtaining pricing. We're not necessarily accepting any pricing. Um but so this would be moving forward for a tax consultant that would work with us to establish and obtain [clears throat] um any and all energy related incentives
for the project related to design andor construction. And then uh the another RFP is for uh construction testing and inspection services. This is not the same as the testing that we're currently
doing on the site. This is for when we're in construction and there will be um the need to test, you know, the concrete being poured for the foundations and the footings and the and the slabs. Um the material that the building is being built on um and even up to fireproofing and [clears throat]
other uh other building products. Um so that would be to bring on a testing agent. And then the other RFP is for our code review consultants uh to do the steel
peer review as well as the um the other code uh peer reviews that was requested by the town as far as the fire protection I think fire alarm and uh >> life safety. >> Life safety, right? >> An ADA. Yep.
>> Okay. Let me see if I can [laughter] make it. There's three different RFPs. Tax consultant, >> tax. Oh, yeah. I've forgotten the one with the materials testing and leave that one up. The construction planning code review service. >> Yeah. >> So, move to um to accept the submission
of a RFP for a tax consultant for the Kellum School building project. >> Second. >> Can we do all three? >> Sure. >> At the same time. Yeah. Oh, okay. uh a request or an RFP for the materials testing and construction inspection
services and the um last one sorry >> you did the tax one first sorry >> I did the tax first materials and then the third is the code review plan construction plan and code review services so the motion is to uh send
request for proposals for those three fields >> we had a similar discussion we about not putting the review peer reviews all under one company
but having it separate separate structural is one and mechanical or whatever it is is another there is no company out there which is competent of all of those disciplines >> right so these are three separate requests for proposals that would go out so three separate art
>> I think he'sing I think the third one should be separated. >> Oh, I see what you're saying. >> The third one should not have, you know, it should not go out to one company to do all of this because >> there isn't a company that's competent in >> That's true. Best quality when each
>> company that is specializes in a particular part of the job, part of the construction does their own review. >> Yeah. And I think we talked about that. I'm going to refer to it as the design services. We we could suggest the same
thing that we should hire a plumbing engineer and an HVAC, but we don't. We hire one person and let them manage all their experts and pull their experts together and and that that's what we've done in the past. I'm not saying we have to do that here. That's what we've done in the past, and it's been very successful for us. So, that's what we're
>> I'm suggesting you don't get the best quality to do that. All right. And I respect that. I don't know that I agree with that, but I respect that. And you're for recal you're doing it all separate. >> Doing it all separate. Yeah.
>> How many are you doing? >> I don't know. But it's you know >> we've got a separate person to do the right now. It's just the structural that we've got. I think that structure is required by law. structure the only one
>> and you you do not you do not want a mechanical engineering company doing structural view >> I think some of the conversation we had from Peter Collins um who's our OPM with Turner Towns and Hiri um when we had
this conversation is that there are firms now that do specialize in all of they have specialists and they specialize in just reviews they have specialize in reviews but they don't they don't have the best specialists No, no competent structural engineer is going toward and work for a mechanical
engineering company. You know, you just don't get the best quality people. You just don't get it. >> Is that your understanding of the marketplace? Now, >> our understanding is that we have teams that specialize in just doing document.
>> They do specialize, but they're not best specialists you can get. >> And we're we're bidding under a public procurement. And you're not hiring the quality. you're hiring the lowest bidder. So, the people that you're talking about to me probably either a aren't going to look at like you're
you're not getting a worldrenowned structural engineer to do a a $3,000 peer review. You know, >> I think we got did we like five companies that came back >> at [clears throat] least four? I can't remember those. Five. >> Limb was the one that we went with and
that was the lowest but they had worked with BHA the architect on that project previously. So if it was one that was >> the committee's desire to separate that out, it just it's it's tripling the work. It's it's three more. It's three advertisements is three sets of three
sets of reviews. >> Do you want to separate the structural out of it to get separate reviews just for the structural because that's really the critical piece I would think the ADA and the >> it's the thing that is by law. So it is separate. It is different. >> Yeah,
>> it's a life safety issue. Structural, you know, beam falls down, you're in trouble. >> That's why the law requires you to have a structural peer review. They don't require you to have a mechanical. >> No, the only reason why we're doing the other is it was requested by the town. Yes.
>> I I'd feel comfortable having an RFP for the structural separate from the the other review. That would be something to consider. >> Company wants to bid off the >> They can help. Yeah, that's >> and keep the others together. Um, yeah,
it's fire suppression, >> ADA, >> code review, >> code review. >> That makes sense. >> Yeah, code code and ADA kind of go together. >> Maybe not. >> I I just worry that you're going to get
less bids because somebody's going to say, "It's not a complete package. I'm not going to bother." But >> Okay. >> Yeah. But if we want to separate the structure, that's fine. Again, we're here to do your to do your bit. You tell us what you'd like. >> When do we need to do that?
>> It really needs to be done at the 90%. So, we really need to get the inspector. The structural one is the one that is required. That's the one that it really needs to be at the 90% package. So, >> we will be sending out 60% documents to give them the heads up. >> Yeah.
Does anybody else on the committee would have anybody else in the committee have an opinion on that? >> Yeah, Mike, would it be feasible to issue an RFP that that opens the opportunity to bid for one or both of the pieces so that firms aren't selected out?
I would say >> I I you if you if you're doing that you you you still have to say how you're going to award it because >> right the rule for award >> like you you can't say oh well you were the low guy on the structural but not on
the overall so I'm going to separate the structural because I want you you know like so I I don't know >> bid protest >> yeah I I think I I I I've never done it that way. I I think I would either go all in or all out. Like I would either
split them or I I you know just to because I I don't know how the mass procurement would work. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> It is good idea though. >> No, that's fair. >> Yeah. It's >> on a private job I would absolutely do that. I would just send out an RFP and say bid on whatever you want and then we
could kind of pick and choose. But on a public job it's it's harder. >> Yeah. The job you're on now is this how you did it? >> Yes. The last three jobs I've done, we've done it that this way. And and I I'll say I think in Haveril we
did the structural and we did fire protection only. In Whitman, we did ADA and structural and fire protection. Correct. >> And was the one firm that did those three things? >> Yes.
>> WSP. I'm sorry. On both projects. >> Um I can tell you guys I'm not sure. >> I have an opinion. >> Go for it later. that thing.
>> If I were you, I'd listen to Mike cuz he does this all the time in this field, in this place, and he does the exact same procurement over and over. That's my opinion. >> That's where I'm at, too. One second here.
Same. >> Was that? >> Yeah. I just want to picture. Is the room muted or is just no one talking? >> I know it's rare, but >> Thank you, Josh. [laughter] >> Just double checking.
>> Sorry, I was looking at >> Sure. You don't have to call EMS or something. [laughter] >> The Northern Lights block. [laughter] Yeah. All right. So, um, what's the what are you good with going with them or not?
You still want to separate them out? >> I I want to separate. >> How about >> I'm I'm fine with going with this. I think we have a smoking gun here because he's going to be the one that reviews everything anyway. So, I feel good about that. So, um can we just do a straw poll
here with the committee if you would um if we want to break this out this um structural piece [clears throat] >> the structural piece out um there are three. So, our our motion which we haven't seconded yet is for all three
RFPs to go out >> as as written. Um and that is how Collars is recommending it to us. Um John would like to take the structural one and break it out into um
at least to pull the structural piece out and then have the other um code review ADA >> fire >> and fire safety um pulled out separately as another RF uh P. Um so
>> this is Kirk I was just going to say this is Kirk. I'm in favor of of going with the way that Mike suggests that we do it. >> Okay. So, let's do that. Let's do a straw poll on Do we want to go on on the recommendation of callers?
>> Um, so I'll just do a quick one. Sean, >> yeah. Yes. >> Yes. Uh, John, >> no. >> No. Uh, Chris, >> yes. >> Kirk, >> yes. >> Ed, >> yes.
>> Greg, >> yes. Nancy, >> yes. >> And Carly, yes. Okay. Sorry, John. We're gonna um >> So, you need a second on >> So, we need a second on NY's motion. >> Second by Ed. Okay. Any further
discussion? >> Okay. So, we're moving to voting on the motion as proposed. Sean, >> yes. >> Um John, >> no. >> Chris, >> yes. >> Her >> yes. Ed,
>> yes. >> Greg, >> yes. >> Nancy, >> yes. >> And Carla, yes. So, that motion passes. >> Okay. Um, >> are you all done, Justin? >> Yes. >> We did everything we needed to, right?
We got the 60%. >> Did we want to talk about the 2026 PSBC meeting schedule? >> Um, that's coming up. Okay. Sorry. Nope. We're gonna um we're moving to approval of prior meeting minutes. So for the um
10:14 meeting >> um does anybody have a motion? >> Motion to approve the um to the uh September 8th, 2025 building committee kilm school building committee meeting.
>> Um that there it's actually 10:14. >> Oh, why do I have 10? I've got the wrong >> Okay. I'm sorry. 10425. Sorry about that. Weird. >> Huh? No. In the package, it's um
>> Yeah. 8. >> Uh I thought there was I could be misremembering because I go to a few I thought when we looked at the nine meetings last month, we had a correction. We held up on >> We did that women.
>> Was it women? Sorry. Um, is it just the wrong >> I was going to say if we look at the minutes they'll they'll tell us if if we approve the ones the last time. >> So the I'm I'm looking at the shared folder right now and I see 1014
minutes labeled 1014. >> Okay. Maybe >> no um open it 98 but the agenda says 1014. Um, >> so that would probably mean the that date never got changed.
>> It's just a date. These minutes are from the 1014 meeting when I read it. >> Yeah. Yeah. So >> they [clears throat] reference in past tense a meeting on September 25th for instance. So >> yeah. >> Okay. So um so that correction >> with correction
move to accept the uh town ready meeting minutes for the permanent building committee's kilum school building committee with the correct date 104 2025. Is there a second? >> Seconded by Sean. Any discussion?
>> Uh time for the vote. Sean, >> yes. >> John, >> yes. >> Chris, >> yes. >> Her? >> Yes. >> Ed? Yes. >> Greg, >> yes. >> Nancy, >> yes. >> And Carly, yes. And that passes. Thank
you. Um and then the next item um our next meeting is going to be uh Monday, December 15th, but we have gotten a request from LBA to and and just to make it easier for them
um to be able to bill on a more timely manner, um they're requesting that we move to the third Monday of the month and then our XLT meetings will be the second um Monday of the month. So Josh
put up these um if everybody looks up um the proposed dates and we're just going to have to um yeah there's a change for Columbus Day, Martin Luther King Day, and President's Day. Is everybody good
with that schedule? Moving into the third Monday of the month knowing that wouldn't conflict with um the senior center project. >> Okay. >> There's two of these meeting dates that
um we would request move to specific days to align with the design schedule. >> Okay. So one is the February meeting which uh we would request be on February 9th. Um that aligns with when our 90%
said is finished and then you'll approve it so that we can move on. And then the other one which I'm not sure how to handle exactly is we need to meet on uh March 30th to approve the 100% um bid documents. And I don't know what
the right approach is there because it's kind of like right in the middle. I would say when we get there maybe decide if if it's moving one of those meetings or if it's adding a meeting >> would be yeah >> better to decide now so it's on people's calendars ahead of time or
>> I don't think we're going to until we get there but >> why don't Josh why don't we just add in a line four and a half there >> and just add in the March 30th meeting >> and we can cancel one >> that works >> perfect >> and then while we're just talking
meetings. The only other thing there, we're we're looking to meet with John and Pat, like the Earthwork group, if you will, uh, on the first week. >> And if at that meeting we decide we want to move forward with the early packages,
we might need to meeting >> like next week, like on the 8th, say. Um, so I think right now we're saying the 15th. >> So >> December, sorry, December 15th. Uh, so if we do it December 8th, we're probably
not going to have the invoices, but it I know we have to do the switch gear early package anyway. >> So I I don't know if we do the 8th and the 15th or if we wait till the first and figure out if we have to do the eth or if we want to just keep
>> right in the height of budget season, >> right, >> my friend. Okay. Um, >> and I'm saying the e I just because I think it's that week basically.
>> It's gonna be [clears throat] >> Okay. What when do you have your um you have your recal meetings on the first, right? >> First Wednesday. >> First Wednesday. >> All right. I mean, if if we make this um
December meeting on the 8th instead of the 15th, should we just do that or not? I think for the switch gear we may need to anyway, right? >> Yeah, I think so too. >> And then we'll just start the new
schedule in January. Do we have to produce? We have to produce bid documents for the early package by the >> Well, that's difficult to do because in order to do it by the 8th, we have to get the package out the week before and before that is Thanksgiving. So,
we don't have a lot of runway to produce that. >> Well, they're producing the documents. >> Okay. the design. We've got the the package together. It's it's just [clears throat] putting the advertisement out and then >> Okay.
>> and then making it available to >> Yeah. where we're doing we're doing the the heavy lifting on this. [laughter] >> Okay. >> So, if they got So, it's December 8th for our KSBC meeting. Good. >> Yes. >> Okay.
>> So, Josh, we're not going to do December 15th of 2025. So, next month. meeting we're going to do on the 8th instead of the 15th. >> And then our push back. >> Yep. And then our XLT will be on December 1st. >> Okay.
>> What time was your meeting on December 1st? I thought it was in the afternoon. >> We haven't found out of time yet or forget I'm thinking about the purses. >> So it might be it might be worthwhile to maybe try to take the typical HLT meeting time for
our meeting and doing XLC afterwards. and say talked about I know just just food proof of thought like >> do XLT at 11 something >> yeah or early afternoon or something
like that or whatever right like give us a chance to meet with the the we can cut the XLT brush off process >> right Josh we'll do the XLT meeting in the
afternoon on the December December 1st >> on the 1st. Okay. >> Okay. >> And what what is the schedule for issue 90%? >> Um 90% is in issuing in in January.
>> Uh we will issue them >> for for review. >> Oh for review. Um standby um January 15th. Oh, you review them. [clears throat] >> We need to review. Yes, obviously. Yes,
we need time to review. >> Yeah. >> So, >> we didn't get any comments back from you on the 60%. So, we didn't get any feedback from you on the 60% documents. >> I know, but I didn't do it because my previous comments were ignored. So, no
point. >> They were ignored. >> Yeah. >> I don't But that's that's another issue. Um, we need time to getting the documents, >> being able to vote on approving as it were. >> Yep.
>> And we need two weeks or something like that. >> So, January 15th, I'll give you the documents and then February 9th you will vote. >> Okay. Right. So January 15th
>> ideally. So January 15th, the documents are issued >> to you and the estimators. The estimators are coming back to us on the end at the end of January. We're reconciling the first week in February. So if we have comments, it would be great to have them to discuss during the
reconciliation. That only gives you two two and a half weeks. If you need a little more time, then that's fine. But ideally like if there if if those comments have cost impacts or something like that, if we can share that with the estimators and they get there, it's always
valuable. But I do hope uh that where we're addressing the comments that you previously made. We are getting to 90%. So hopefully there's not a lot more comments coming. But uh we we certainly want to take all comments that we can because
no matter how how good we all do, nobody's perfect and we're always going to have something that we have to address later. >> So I have two things in my schedule. I have February 9th. That's when we're meeting to vote on the 90% and then it goes to the MSBA by the end of the day
on the 10th. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> Perfect. >> Okay. Um, do we want a motion on the um schedule? >> Oh, do we need a motion? >> I don't Everybody's good with that? No,
>> it's just information. Just information. >> Okay, perfect. All right. Okay. Hearing nothing. >> Yep. I have a motion to adjurnn that. I can't do a second. Seconded by Ed.
Non-negotiable. Yep. Sean. Yes, >> John. >> Yes, >> Chris. >> Yes, >> Kirk. >> Yes, >> Ed. >> Yes, >> Greg. >> Yes, >> Nancy. >> Yes, >> Carla. Yes. Thank you everybody. We're ajourned. >> Thank you.
Okay.