unmuted. Okay. Call the uh Kilum School Building Committee meeting of uh March 16th to order. Um I'll start with a a a roll call attendance.
Um I think Sean Brandt is not here tonight. Um John Coot. >> Yes. >> Chris Haley. >> I'm here Pat, but if Josh can mute um move the camera down a little bit. It's hard to see the room. It's like at the ceiling. So on Zoom anyway, but I'm here
Pat. Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh Kirk McCormack >> here. Um Ed Ross. Ed was traveling and I know he was um gonna have trouble um making it so I don't think he's here. Uh Greg Steppler
>> here. >> Nancy Tumi >> here. >> Uh Carl Nazaro is not here which is why I am here and Pat Tomkins is here. Um moving on. Um just uh moving on to public comment. There's any public
comment any online? No. >> Okay. David Delair, I'm here. >> Hey, David. Thank you. Um, next the liaison reports. Are there
any liaison reports tonight? >> I think Jenny may have an introduction maybe liaison like what would be the >> Sure. >> Yeah. Um, I just wanted to introduce you all to my colleague Dave colleague David Harris who's going to be um joining our
well he's been on the kilum team but he's going to be um a more regular presence and he's going to be really leading up the construction administration effort in our office. David is a very experienced architect
and a deep well of knowledge and I think everyone will love working with him. >> Yes. Thank you. Thank you, Jenny. Um, yes, I do look forward I I know I probably met you might have met me in the past uh at the beginning of the project, so that was great. Um, but yes, we're really entering an exciting phase
here where we're taking all of our multi- months of efforts and documentation and design and and working with the contracting team to actually make it through reality. So, this is incredibly exciting and I can't wait to to work with all of you.
>> Thank you. Thank you. I've worked uh I've worked quite a bit with David and we're lucky to have him on the team. Uh welcome aboard. >> Thank you, Pat. Appreciate it. >> And you've been on you've been on so much stuff. I didn't even think it was something new. Been hiding in the background. >> It's true. I I I've been lurking for a
while. >> You've been tapping his expertise. Um also, I want to say I'm not going anywhere. I'll be around. >> Okay. Um the next item on the agenda um we have some at the beginning of the project we submitted the um the KSBC
um the building committee member list to the MSBA. We've had a couple of changes um and we needed to send an updated list to um the MSBA. the the changes that we're making are um to Jane will be
replacing Matt and um as obviously as the town manager role and Carla is going to remain as the chair and remain as the school committee um appointee but she's she's not running everyone probably
knows she's not running for reelection so she won't be a member of the school committee so we were just going to note that on the on the report. That's something that we're required to send to the MSBA. So, I think it uh we need a a vote of the committee um to approve that and send it in. So, if anyone has any
questions on that or anyone wants to make a motion >> being recorded, >> move to make the changes to the MSB report indicating that Carla remains as school committee rep although not on the school committee and Jane Wellman is now
town manager. >> Acting town manager. Acting town manager. Just for the record. Acting town manager. You >> have a second. >> I second that. >> Any discussion? Any questions?
>> Okay, we'll uh go to the vote. John Coupe. >> Yes. >> Chris Haley. We'll come back to Chris. >> Kirk. >> Sorry. Yes. >> Yeah. >> Uh Kirk McConnic. Yes.
>> Did Ed Ross? >> Yes. Who's here? >> He's on Ed Ross. >> I don't see Ed online. >> Okay. And Greg Steppler was not. >> Yes. >> Greg Steppler. >> Yes.
>> Nancy Tumi. >> Yes. Motion passes. Um, move on to item five, Cier's financial review. I'll turn it over to Justin. Got all kinds of
technical difficulties tonight. >> We have microphones. Um, I can get them for you. We have found that there is better reception uh for the folks at home uh and on your Zoom call without the microphones. Um, we have put in a an
order to our vendor to come fix that problem. So, if if you feel like we should get the microphones, I shall get them. >> Okay. I just didn't see them. >> If the current status is that we think it's better without them, we'll roll without >> the microphone in the in that panel right there.
>> It's up there. All right. >> Yeah, it's picking you up. >> Okay. I don't mute >> and it picks up everything. >> Okay, good. >> All right. Um, so we have,
sorry, zoom out a little bit. All right, we still have a construction budget of 101,521,394. We have um a sorry a total expenditures to date for uh architectural and engineering of
$5,65,421 with the remaining uh balance of $5,289,579. Uh for administrative costs, we have a bill to date of $2,376,44 and a remaining uh balance of 6,77,74.
Uh, no changes to the FFN budget and we have a total expendited to date of 7,981,465 with a uh remaining budget of $116,113,000677. >> And of course, we're going to be under budget, right? >> We're going to be under budget and on
time. >> That's right. >> That's the slogan of the job. That's how we roll. I'm just going to use my directional pad because my mouse is a little sensitive. I'm probably going to make everyone sick. >> All good. >> Okay. Jeez,
new mouse. Uh, all right. We have a few commitments. Uh, we have one that wasn't in the package. we we uh we were able to track it down and and kind of resolve uh a little bit of confusion on this last uh GIP uh GANP uh pay application. So,
this value, I believe, is for some reimburseables. Uh so, this would be the commitment a change order of two uh $2,93. I'll show you the change order right in here. I don't know if Joe is on, but this is looks like this is for a survey Hancock
Survey Associates and and um >> their markup. >> Their markup. Yeah. All right. Uh then we have uh Daily Times Chronicle which is a advertisement for the when we submitted the ads for the RFQ uh for
request for qualifications for subcontractors and general contractors. And then we have uh uh David's actual contract in hand to vote on as well. Do you want to vote on the uh commitments now? >> Should we do that now?
>> Yeah, let's do that. Okay. Uh move to uh approve payment of GANAP uh invoice number 682.29-R2 for >> Nope. Wrong one. >> This is the commitment. >> First we had to do the commitment. >> Okay. Sorry.
>> It's like >> I get it. Yeah, I know. Okay. So >> like getting married. >> Move to approve the GANAP commitment for $2,93. >> Right. Yep. A second.
>> Any further discussion? I'll go to the vote. John Coot, >> yes. >> Chris Haley, >> yes. >> Eric McCormack, >> yes. >> Greg Steppler, >> yes. >> Nancy Tumi, >> yes.
>> Pat Tomkins, yes. Motion passes. >> Move to uh accept the commitment to Daily Times Chronicle for $190.94. Second. >> Any discussion? Vote. John Coot. >> Yes.
>> Um, Chris Haley, >> yes. >> Kirk McCormack, >> yes. >> Greg Steppler, >> yes. >> Nancy Tumi, >> yes. >> Pat Tommpkins, yes. Motion passes. >> Move to accept the commitment for uh the
facilities clerk, David Delair, the amount of 46,000. Any discussion? >> Just as a reminder, that's for the full term of our contract. >> Yeah. No, it says writing clerk salary. That's not It's for the entire duration.
>> It's for the entire duration. >> Okay. Um John C. >> Yes. >> Chris Haley, >> yes. >> Kirk McCormack, >> yes. >> Greg Steppler, >> yes. >> Nancy Tumi, >> yes.
>> Pat Tomkins, yes. Motion passes. Move on to the invoices. >> Yep. Uh we do have a couple of um budget adjustments for the GANP contract amendment. This is for that change order, the $2,93
from soft cost contingencies. And then uh all right, we have uh so we have the one invoice from uh GANAP for $2,93. We have um LBA's invoice. Wrote it down.
I lost what I wrote down. Uh it's a combined value of $629,343. Uh all broken out into the individual costs for the MSBA. Um then we also have two invoices for Collier's project
leaders. Uh one being 6 $63,340 and $42,122. And then we have the Daily Times Chronicle, which is the newspaper uh advertisement for $190.94. >> Okay. Did we um China? My phone is
transcribing everything that's being said here. Shut that off. Did we Did we develop the um So, what do we what do we decide to call it? The financial commitments working group. >> We I thought we had we certainly have one for the permanent building. >> Yeah. >> Do we have one for >> Kirk was one?
>> Yeah. >> Yeah. Sorry to interrupt, Pat. Yeah, we we do have that I reviewed all these and everything seems fine to me. So, um but yeah, we do have that working group in place. >> Okay. Yeah, I just wanted to I guess give the working group an opportunity to do their job and tell us that they
looked at the stuff and it was all good. >> I appreciate that. Yeah, everything looks good. >> It's because they keep agreeing with it. So, you know, once they say no, then then then their presence become obvious. Yes. >> Yeah. Eric's reached out to me a couple times directly in previous previous meetings.
>> Yeah. you see them come through that go back and forth too. >> Okay. Um, as far as we can do we have the the amount so we can look all of like LBAS and >> I have LBAS large amount. Yeah. >> Yeah, you've got that. So we can do them
so we don't have to do all of those individually. >> No, we can do LBA as one. >> Okay, perfect. >> Okay. Move to uh accept payment for LBA's invoice number 23289 in the amount
of 629,343 $3435. >> Second that. >> Any questions or discussion? Seeing none. The vote. John Coot. >> Yes. >> Chris Haley. >> Yes. >> Kirk McCormack.
>> Yes. Craig Steppler, >> yes. >> Nancy Tumi, >> yes. >> Pat Tom Hopkins, yes. >> Move to uh accept the and pay the invoice for callers uh number 0001143662
in the amount of $63,340. >> Second. >> Any discussion? Seeing none, John Coot, >> yes. Chris Haley, >> yes. >> Craig McCauic, >> yes. >> Greg Steppper, >> yes. >> Nancy Tumi,
>> yes. >> Hopkins, yes. Motion passes. >> Move to accept and pay callers invoice number 000153 042 in the amount of $42,122. >> Second.
>> Any discussion? Seeing none, John Coot. Yes. >> Chris Haley. >> Yes. >> Eric McCcomick. >> Yes. >> Greg Steppper. >> Yes. >> Nancy Tumi. >> Yes. >> Pat Tomkins. Yes. Motion passes.
>> Move to accept the invoice and pay GNAP uh invoice number 682.29-R2 for $2,93. >> A second. >> Any discussion? The vote. John C. Yes, >> Chris Haley. >> Yes, >> Kirk McCormack.
>> Yes, >> Greg Stepppler. >> Yes, >> Nancy Tumi. >> Yes, >> Pat Tomkins. Yes. Motion passes. >> Move to accept uh and approve payment for the Daily Times Chronicle invoice number 260201
for $190.94. >> I second. >> Any discussion? John Coot? >> Yes. >> Chris Haley? >> Yes. Kirk McCormack, >> yes. >> Greg Stepppler, >> yes. >> Nancy Tumi, >> yes.
>> Pat Tomkins, yes. Motion passes. >> And that's all of it >> that I have. >> All right. So, that uh brings the total spent to date 7,981,465.37. >> This is a very boring meeting so far. Was all in agreement.
I'll have to say something outrageous. >> I believe you can do it. >> I think I try hard. >> We like boring. >> Does you want to move on schedule? >> Uh or do we have more? >> A little bit more. A couple more things. I'll try to make it exciting.
>> No, no, no need. >> So, we have uh we have a couple of uh project forecasted costs here. Um I'm not sure where we're going to land with the uh church parking lot. That's the $11,900 is for the church parking. Uh
and then we have uh forecasted a uh cost with the gym floor. We had a discussion earlier uh last week about possibly adding a humidification system to uh the gym to prevent any sort of uh issues with the uh wood floors. Uh so we're
just carrying a line item there in case we do decide to move forward with that or not. Um, we have uh forecast here for the tax consultant. We met with a tax consultant last week. Um, got some good information
from them. Uh, I believe we're going to be voting on this value. We have it approved. We don't have a contract with uh them in hand yet, but this is this is an initial value they gave that they feel they won't exceed as far as how that what they're going to provide for us as services. Um, and uh then the next
line item here is forecasted PCO cost. We're not in construction yet, so that's zero dollars. >> So, just real quick. >> Sure. >> So, just real quick on on the parking, I think at this point, we're going to be meeting with Lindsay hopefully in the next week or so to kind of try to figure
out alternatives. We're not going to say that the church parking is off the table, but we're we're looking for alternatives as as backup plans, if you will. So, we're going to be working through those. So, one option might be to just try and fit everybody on site, whether it's with with some blocking in of people or parking, you know,
attendant or something like that. Another option might be with with a shuttle of some sort or or things of that nature. So, we've just got to look at those options, but the the first option would be to keep them on site if at all possible because that's going to be the most cost effective uh option, I think, for everybody. Uh, and then on
the gym floor, I think the 50 was approximately the value we thought for the humid humidification, but it was also more if we we don't go with it because I think we're that's where we're leaning to not go with it. If you had issues with the gym floor down the line, this would be some money set aside
within the project that if in the first year you had to come out and redo the polyurethane or something like that that you had you had some funds available to to to cover for that. >> Yeah. And just so everybody understands, in the summertime it gets really humid
and our heating and cooling system can take that humidity out of the air. In the winter time it gets really dry and the system is heating. It doesn't have humidification and um humidification can come with its own uh pitfalls and I think we we kind of talked about it as a
group and and feel in general there's enough humidification between the people in the room and things like that. you know, everybody gives off a little bit of uh, you know, humidification every time you talk or things like that. And that along with just the the general um potential pitfalls with humidification,
we decided we we didn't want to go that way. >> Yeah, I agree. >> And then and then the tax consultant, like I said, I think we're looking to potentially ask. So the first two, there's no vote needed. We're just showing you those are forecasts. Those are risks that we're we've identified and to kind of cover those risks, we've
tried to put a dollar value in there. The the other one I think we're trying to move forward with the tax consultant to you know so we're looking to get a support as a not to exceed value of hundred,000 that hopefully we can come back to you at the next meeting and say the town has been able to issue a
contract for X dollars and again it might be the$100,000 might be something less. I have a feeling no matter what it is, it's going to be kind of like our contract where there's a value, but they're billing on a time in materials times a times their their labor rates to to get you your your your invoicing.
>> Yeah. Just to um add a little bit um on to all these items, the the parking the um and Carl has been with town staff been kind of leading um the the negotiations or discussions with with the with the church and it's certainly
not off the table. It's very difficult. It's it's quite a ways out there and it's very difficult for the for the arch dascese to to basically lock in and make commitments. So, um it's definitely not off the table. But still, I think >> yeah, it's not off the table, but
they're they're talking about what they're going to do with these two properties. The Christ the King Parish has two churches, and they're they're talking about what they want to do. And >> every time we talk to them, they're like, "We want to give you an answer, but we're waiting for, you know, the
discernment committee to give us information or waiting for now it's the um arch dasis to give us some information." So, um, we're willing to pay them and, you know, work work really well with our neighbors, but, um, they're just, you know, we are in
communication with them, but they're they're just >> it's just hard to get >> it's hard to get a commitment from them. So, we're >> getting one. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> So, and we probably won't for a little while, but it doesn't mean >> And we're not getting a no either. So, yeah, it's on the table. >> So, we're looking So, we're looking at other options.
>> And then you covered the gym floor and Yeah. So the I think the tax consultant um if we have a we can get a vote for a not to exceed amount >> basically we'd be approving and authorizing town staff to negotiate and
enter into a contract not to exceed >> with that tax consultant. Right. >> So moved for $100,000 not to exceed. >> Okay. >> What um what are the other options on the parking? I mean offsite options. We get through the motion. Get the second.
>> Oh, sorry. Was there a motion? >> Yeah, I moved for the tax. >> We'll come back to the parking lot. >> You got to get a second. >> So, you moved for the tax consultant. >> Yeah. Tax consultant not to exceed 100,000 for and for the town to negotiate. >> Yeah. >> Contract. >> Second.
>> Okay. Any anyone have any questions or any any discussion on that? >> John, you good? >> Um, we go to the vote. John Coot, >> yes. Chris Haley, >> yes. >> Eric McCauik, >> yes.
>> Greg Steppper, >> yes. >> Nancy Tumi, >> yes. >> Pat Tomkins, yes. Motion passes. John, you had uh some thoughts on the the comments on the church parking lot. >> Well, I just wondered, you know, apart from on site, what are the options in
terms of >> Burbank there or >> I don't think Burbank's an option right now. So, our parking agreement with them is relative to pickle ball and um and recal does not incorporate other
parking. Um so, that's not a conversation we've had and that's a a lot more cars. So, we could we could broach that conversation, but I'd like to have one thing done before we start something else. Um and we would be paying for these spots as well.
Secondly, um we could we have parking at Vine Street that's not very much used. We were going to give that to Austin Prep for some overflow parking for their students. Um but they didn't have an appetite to pursue that. So we could have people park down there and run a
shuttle. Um another option is to stack cars on site and have a parking attendant help move cars around. This is This is parking for the teachers and and for the construction people, >> just the teachers. The the contractor
will be responsible for their own parking. So, >> yeah, it's it's good to say they're responsible, but they've got to they've got to park somewhere. You know, we've got to sell them in the contract documents. Um, you've got to park on site, but it's a primed site once you
start putting foundations in. And we've got to make sure that they have the option of parking somewhere. Um, we have I think we have to think about >> Well, I I I expect that during the peak of construction, if we have a 100 workers a day, they're not going to be
parking on site. I I have a feeling that they're going to have to find alternative parking now. They might reach out to the church and see if there's some some spots that they could get from them. They might reach out to other local establishments or they might find an empty lot and have to have a bus or something like that. I I have seen
that happen before. It's not ideal, but um there there's we just don't have enough spot space on site that we can say confidently that the contractor is going to be able to have 100 people a day all parking on the job site. >> I think I think our approach need needs to be first we have to solve the teacher
parking. >> Exactly. >> And in our process of solving the teacher parking that we can put some options out there for the contractor that >> that can alleviate that situation. But I don't know that we'll get there between now and the time we do the job. Well,
contractor parking is a cost item. I mean, that's something the contractor is going to build into into the bid. Um, and I think, you know, we we need to think about think we need to think about that as well, not just teacher because if they if they've got to bust
people in, that's money. That's our money that they'll be spending. >> That's true. I think if you go back that's you know when we first started this project we actually looked to an alternative to moving the students off the site you know to some temporary location
>> so that we could actually demo the school early and and and allow the contract a full reign of the site but we just it wasn't it wasn't feasible for us to be able to do that. So, um, we we understood that there was going to be some cost. And to your point, uh, certainly your money, but it is part of
the overall, um, package that we've we've got. >> That's right. >> Okay. Any >> You're saying things I've already I've thought of, John. I'm I'm right with you. You're you're you're hitting the nail on the head for sure. >> Okay.
>> Okay. Do we have anything else um under the commitments? >> Uh >> just a cash flow. >> That was just Yeah, just for the rest of the budget. Um we just have cash flow to review >> under budget. >> That's right.
>> Um yep. So we have uh we're right in line with where uh our estimated and our actuals are pretty close. We're we're uh we're definitely not going over our estimated encumbrance versus encumbered to date. Um this graph shows a little
better. We'll start trending. God, I'm so sorry with that mouse. We're starting We'll start trending upward as we get um contractors and board come uh May, June uh timeline. Uh that's it. Anyone have any questions
on um project budget? Okay. >> Okay. >> I'll just say it's going to start going up pretty soon. >> Yeah. >> The the cash flow. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Have you sent I'm sorry. Have you sent
the most recent cash flows to um Sharon to the CFO? >> Uh I believe we've sent it over to her yet. >> Okay. Thank you. I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman. >> Okay. Appreciate your commentary. Do we want to move on to uh item six,
schedule review? >> Sure. So uh right now we're working our way the the 90% um I'm sorry the the final bid documents will be completed by the 25th
I think we just discussed earlier. So, we'll be we'll be um LBA will be finalizing the documents uh later this week and we'll be providing to the uh building committee to approve those documents as well as a approved
list of qualified contractors and general contractors uh uh for our next meeting that's on the 30th. Um we'll be submitting it to the MSBA the following day that package and
just to highlight some dates that are coming down the line. Uh once we've approved the final bid documents, we'll uh issue those on the street to have our qualified contractors and subcontractors bid on that project. Uh once we have
bids in hand and we'll be uh awarding contract uh come the end of um May. Justin, maybe just real quick on the pre-quall. >> Yep. I was just going to touch on that. >> All right. Go ahead. >> So, um,
right now we're working with the pre-quall committee. Uh, right now our team and and LVA's team are currently reviewing all the submissions that we've received and going through and, uh, ranking all the contractors and subcontractors accordingly. We didn't get we only got one uh, proposal from
elevator contractors. So, we've reissued that. That's currently out right now. Um and uh so next week and the week the following that we're going to have meetings with the uh qualification committee where we'll go through all of the submissions and and the scoring and
and create the finalized list of each one who who makes it into the the cut so to speak. Uh then on the 30th we'll bring that list to the building committee meeting for the vote for approval. And >> just in general and that I think everybody may have been on the email, but we had almost 150 applicants submit.
Um, elevator aside, we had, I think, at least five or six for just about every other trade. I think some of them had as many as a dozen. So, I I think that that's really >> interest really good interest. I I think the elevator is not a surprise to everybody in the industry. Um my
expectation is that it might we might only get one again in which case then it would be assigned as a non pre-qualified filed sub bid and we would potentially get a bid on that and then have to evaluate from there. So there's there's a process you have to go through with
that and most projects go through that process. >> Yeah. >> So >> Yep. >> But uh >> yeah that was very encouraging. Yeah. a number of um submissions from GC's and subcontractors >> and I think uh there's a meeting of the
pre-qual committee this week, there's another meeting of it next week and then we'll be coming back to hopefully get an official thumbs up on the full pre-qualified list of of vendors. Uh just in general, in my experience, there might be one or two that get
disqualified because of various reasons. Um, sometimes it's they didn't submit the right documentation or things like that. Um, one of the big ones is their DAM certifications and sometimes they submit the wrong version or an outdated version and we do have the ability uh based off of the IG's interpretation
that we can ask if they have an outdated one. Do you have an updated one? Things like that. So, we can we can that's that's part of what we're going through right now. So, uh, the LBA team and the college's team are doing a lot of, uh, leg work behind the scenes to get the scoring done to evaluate the, um, uh,
reference checks and the credit reference checks as well. And, uh, um, we'll hopefully have, uh, you know, 149 or 150, uh, approved contractors to you in in just a couple of weeks. >> Yeah. Um, quick question. As we're coming down the stretch on the bid
documents, can callers and LBA talk to us a little bit about um the quality control um for the documents, little things. You know, Massachusetts public work is very unique in that we take responsibility for
certain elements of scope between trades where in most cases the full the building is the building and the general contractor owns everything. If there's a discrepancy between let's say the one of the filed sub biders and a non-filed sub
bidder, we can be even though it's something may you may consider clearly shown in the documents if it's you know not in one of those sections. So just tell us a you've also got general conditions. those filed sub biders all have to adhere to the general conditions
and you know oftentimes I see things where the the you know electrical spec will say that the general contractor has to pay for the temp power and then the division one spec will say that the electrician is um so maybe you guys can talk to us a little bit about the
quality control you're doing with these documents. I consider those things to be like unforced errors. Yeah, >> like we're putting together 120,000 square foot pushing$und00 million project and as we get through the process there will be things that are
missed because what that's everything is being done by humans and people got to understand that's partially why we have um contingency but things like the things I just described that I I see all the time on bid documents kind of like unforced errors. So, so what are you
guys doing to make sure we don't have any or as few as possible unforced errors? >> So, I can maybe talk about what we've been doing up to date maybe, you know. So, at at each level, every time we had schematic design, design development 60%
90%. the documents have not only go gone to estimators but LBA has done an internal quality control on that and we have also looked at it and actually Jenny was just talking to us earlier today that we had given them comments at 90% they had given us comments back and
we didn't close the loop like of a 100 comments 90 of them are closed but there's still 10 that are you know may maybe not what we answer what we asked maybe they didn't just say yes they said yes but so we got to follow back on that so we're going to continue to to work through that. Um, we also have a third
party um, code review that's been done and and we're working through that right now. So, those those comments have been provided to the design team. They're working through those comments to get those back to us right now. We'll have a meeting with the third party code consultant. We're also in the process of setting up a meeting with the building
inspector. uh we're hoping to do that this month and and get them the 100% bid documents, understanding that there may be addendums and things like that prior to what they would call a permit set, but we want to give that to them so that they can get into it and the fire department can get into it, things of that nature. So, we're really asking for
everybody to to take a look at it just like you said, like you know, everybody has their own experiences and what they've done and what they will, you know, hopefully will never see again. You know, like that happened to me once, I'm not going to have it happen to me again. Um and as our site manager gets on, as our team gets gets more ramped up
into the construction phase, that's part of our our review as well. So it's a again kind of a you know everybody on board all all doing that you know pushing towards that and if anybody sees anything you see something say something kind of like the airport right >> um but yeah I think I think that's what
we are doing >> I would I would say much the same that um there's many different levels of review so we have our internal collars reviews our documents MSBA reviews our documents the commissioning
agent and the third party. >> There's five different professional groups that have taken a really um close look at our drawings and like Mike said, different people look at different things and different people catch different things. So um like you said,
Pat, it's guaranteed to not be perfect. >> Y >> but um I do think we've done a thorough process. >> Absolutely. >> We also plum the depths of our lessons learned class projects. you know, just say, "Hey, remember this one?" >> Yeah.
>> Kind of bring that forward. >> Yeah. I'm sure you bring a lot of that to the table. >> Yeah. >> One thing I say to my team all the time. >> I always say to my team, >> David's been David's been doing CA on schools since 2008. Anyway,
>> yeah. >> That a fair statement, David? >> That sounds about right. >> We We worked on a school in conquered in 2008. >> Yeah, that's right. >> So, there's a lot of there's a lot of >> There was a couple of jobs before that, too. Sure. >> Okay. Um, I lost my We still on uh
schedule or is that >> So, I think that's it with schedule. Um, >> does anyone Does anyone have any any questions on the schedule? Is there anything I mean, you kind of covered everything coming up? Uh, Josh, >> we skipped item four, the 90% MSBA
submission on the agenda. I'm not sure if that requires a vote. Oh, okay. Which one? >> So, the MSBA submission comments. These are the uh we submitted the 90% submission 90% uh documents to the MSBA.
Um they provide comments and then this is to submit our comments in response to their comments. >> So, we have to respond within 14 days. So, they they send the comments over um and the design team is going through their their portion of it. We're going through our portion. And if there's anything we need from the district, uh,
our team will be reaching out to you folks to get get any information. So, we can that. >> And the document that's in our package is the MSBA's comments, not your not the response. >> I don't think we've got the response totally done yet. I think we're still working.
>> And you don't you don't need a a vote from the committee to submit that response. Okay. >> It's just part of the, you know, part of the process. Okay. Thank you. >> Great question, Josh. Um, >> okay. No one has any questions on schedule. We can move on to approval of
the prior meeting minutes. >> Move move to accept the uh meeting minutes as submitted uh for uh February 9th, 2026. >> Second.
Does anyone have any any questions or um comments corrections to the minutes? Go once, twice. I'll go to the vote. John Coupe, >> yes. >> Chris Haley, >> yes. >> Kirk McCormack, >> yes.
>> Greg Steppler, >> yes. >> Nancy Tumi, >> yes. >> Pat Tomkins, yes. Motion passes. Uh, next item, just the future meeting dates. So, we've got the meeting coming up on the 30th and then um our April
meeting will be on the 20th. What's our projected um I know you covered this and I'm just asking you to repeat something you already said. What's our projected date that the the bid docks are on the street and what's our projected bid date? >> Uh let me just make sure I give you the
exact correct information. So, while he's doing that, just a quick thought on the the the next meeting, the 30th. I think the primary point of business will be just approval of the pre-quall >> Mhm. >> list. So, I think we were questioning if
you wanted to do that more remote or like or if you still want to have an inperson or hybrid uh just because we figured it's going to be probably just I don't know. Well, there's nothing else really from the design team that that we're planning on presenting that that meeting really, right? >> So, it's really I think it's really
>> that's an excellent point. I would lean towards Can you do um 100% virtual still? >> Um >> meetings. >> Yeah. Or a public meeting. Yeah. Okay. >> Uh yeah, you just have to allow public comment and all of that stuff. >> Okay. So, um maybe we'll we'll make that
final decision the week before at the XLT meeting, but if there's nothing on the agenda except, you know, uh public comment and that vote, we'll probably do it um probably do it remote. >> Yeah. >> So, the um bid documents will be uh
published online uh April 7th. Then we'll have um filed sub bids due on uh May 6th and then general contractor bids due on May 19th
and then we issue award on uh May 22nd. >> So our we'll have a our May meeting will be timed to to for a vote. >> Yeah. >> And just so everybody knows I think we are going to plan a sidewalk for the contractors. I think it's that Friday
the 17th, I think. So, a couple weeks after the documents are on the street, but still three or four weeks even before the file submitter, so that if they have questions, we can get them asked and answered and and not have to delay bids or anything like that. >> Okay. >> All right. Thank you.
>> Greg has us should the next um for the next meeting's 3:30. Should that be 420 as opposed to 421? The 20th is a holiday. Is that correct? >> That is Patriots Day. >> Patriots Day. >> It's on on on my agenda. It's 4:20. Am I
looking at an old agenda? >> You are. >> It's 4:21. >> So, it's 421 because of the uh apparently Patriots Day. Any of you going to the Red Sox game? >> I am. >> Oh, yeah.
>> She won't be in any any state to be able to build a community. >> I don't know what you're implying, Mr. Chairman. the marathon. >> The Red Sox will be great. I will not be running the marathon this year and no promises about next year. >> So, Greg, I think that was intended. Um,
I know that creates a problem. Do you know if that's a conflict with like a select board meeting? >> It sure is. >> It is. >> It is. >> It sure is. >> So, select board would be in here. We would be next door neighbors. >> Okay. Although
>> it's listed at the select board meeting. >> Uh, hold on a second. I know I know Mr. Haley is on the call. >> His hand is raised. >> There it is. Because I don't think we have that scheduled right now. >> Yeah, I was going to say my streak of attending every single meeting for the
last five years is not being lost on a Kllum school building joint meeting. So that's getting whatever is getting moved. So, >> well, because we were talking this morning about the 14th, >> remember?
>> Anyway, yeah, we'll talk offline. >> So, we'll we'll figure out when that meeting is. Right now, it's on the agenda for 421, but that might change. Does anyone know when the recal meeting is? Recal meeting would be sooner. So we
could go to the um the 22nd >> recalc 19 for general March 31st. >> It's the first. It's March 1st. Oh, April 1st. >> Yeah, April 1st. But that's isn't that
Passover? >> I thought we moved it because it was pass. to the April one is >> it might just it might be incorrect in my calendar. >> Yeah, I have it. >> I think we moved it because it was um Passover. I'll confirm that with the OP. >> So, let's say that the um right now the
the meeting is penciled in for the 21st, but it's likely to move. We'll do everything we can to make sure everyone has as much notice as possible. And if there's any um if anyone has definitely has a conflict other than Chris that we know about um
on the 21st just ping Carla and I and Josh. Mostly Josh. >> Okay. Anyone have any any any anything else? Any um agenda items for the next
meeting or other new business? I'll accept a motion to adjurnn. >> Move to adjurnn. >> Second. >> Um, John Coot, >> yes. >> Chris Haley, >> yes. >> Kirk McCormack, >> yes.
>> Craig Steppler, >> yes. >> Nancy Tumi, >> yes. >> Pat Tomkins, yes. Motion passes.