Perfect. Thank you, Susan. I'm going to start with Mike Picardi. >> I don't see my absence. Stacy Rizzo. >> Stacy, can you hear us? >> I'm here. just in case you didn't hear me. >> Ah, thank you.
>> Susan Gracei >> here. >> Dr. Kelly, I'm going to note as absent. Carl Spenson >> here. >> Christopher Bowen >> here.
>> Rich Visque. Don't see him. Don Samela. Oh, Rich Visque >> here. Ah, perfect timing. Don Cerebella I'm going to note as
absent. Nick Rystrom absent. Mayor Keefe >> here. >> Thank you. Tom Skarowski was going to be absent. John Stematopoulos absent.
Anthony Cogleandro >> here. >> There you are. Boxes keep moving on me. Don Martelli >> here. >> Joshua Miranda >> here. >> And Chris Camela
>> here. Awesome. Thank you everyone. We definitely have a quorum. I'm going to manage the buttons and Brian if you want to share and take over from here. We'll do. So, we have a relatively short uh agenda tonight.
We're going to do a very high level um update on the 90% construction document update. Ultimately, we'd like to seek um committee approval to submit the 90% CD package to MSBA. Uh, and then we have two little housekeeping budget revision
requests to go through afterwards. So, um, I'm going to jump right into the 90% CD update. Let me try to get this full screen for a second. So, this is a good news, bad news update. Uh, where's full screen?
So, the three main pillars of what's in any of these MSBA submissions, we've gone through a bunch of these to date on this project. most recently the 60% construction document update design development um into MSBA. The three pillars are the scope, the cost, the the
budget and the schedule. Um there's no changes to the scope. Everything that the committee has seen, the design subcommittee has seen is still intact in the documents. Um the design is intact. Uh on the cost side, we uh as usual have
two estimates run. The Conigley 90% CD estimate is showing at about 8.8 million under the uh the full approved budget and the PMNC peer estimate is showing at 12.3 under the budget. Um those two
combined are what keep me uh confident that we're on the path to achieve the $10 million reduction this committee has talked about and I think overall are good news. Uh the less good news is the schedule part of the update and um what I would like to say is there's a few
people not on this meeting including Dr. Kelly um that I've sort of debriefed um on this and have been involved with discussions, but the real short story is that we're at 90% projecting that the project's not going to be able to make the August September 2028 occupancy date
and that we are going to be forecasting that the movein is going to have to happen at the holidays at the end of 2028. Um most likely meaning first day of class just after the new year. And in a nutshell and uh I invite the other
people from the team to sort of follow me up here and if we want to go into more detail, we certainly can. But in a nutshell, this is related to the complexity of resolving ground improvements to the soil conditions at the Wonderland site. Um we cleared
permitting in just about the time we thought. We got the bid documents for earthwork and structure um out a little bit around where we thought and started receiving a lot of questions uh about how the soil improvements mostly from a
structural perspective are going to be implemented uh for this design that was bid. And that sort of set us into a couple of months of an expanded testing program that we brought a bunch of proposals to this committee to authorize of uh basically digging more holes,
doing more sampling. the amount of time it's taken to get resolution on that and the amount of time that that's resulting in and what I would call soil management before the contractors are just getting out there and digging and pouring foundations um really wasn't accounted for properly
in the schedule that showed a summer move. So, we've lost a handful of months in this going from bidding to resolving the approach to ground improvements with the subcontractor um to having a definitive schedule and
we don't believe that schedule at this point is recoverable for a summer move. So budget's in good shape, the scope's in good shape. The schedule got to the um I know all summer you were hearing me say schedule, schedule, schedule is
mainly in terms of permitting. This the soil conditions are a little bit into the unforeseen category. We had to get full permission um to utilize the whole site. We had to get this bid out and since those milestones have happened is
when we've lost some months here. So, um, I'll take a step back from that, um, update, see if anyone from the team wants to, uh, chime in and see if anyone has any questions or wants further detail. >> Brian, this is Mayor Keef. Uh, I just
wanted to kind of, you know, obviously share some of the perspective as, you know, you you shared with us the this instance just a couple days ago in preparation for the call. Um, unforeseen, but not fully unexpected. Uh, I would want to I would just kind of
re-emphasize whenever you're dealing with a three-year project, there's always going to be little blips in the radar that can cause a domino. Um, so I, you know, me being a little bit more optimistic, certainly not, you know, I'm very happy that three of the four pillars are positive. This one being a
schedule is a is is is one that we're going to try to work backwards from. And I know that Coniguli and Leftfield and everyone on the ground is going to try and pick up days so that we can avoid having any further disruption andor potentially maybe get some pleasant
surprises. But it's not unheard of to have a three-year project and one you know when when Brian brings up soil um this is on a large site the as we know the the the size of the space being extra cautious on where the soil gets
moved so that it it when you're taking soil off the site it's going in the right categories because as we know any soil changes in in Revier or any any uh heavily uh urban traffked area is going going to have to have conditions with them where they go. Some of it can go
into regular fills, some of it can go into other fills, some of it needs to leave the state. And that's just how that we dealt with it at the DBW and in prior lives that dealt with it with other large scale construction. So, that's well known in Massachusetts and any, you know, um, you know, area around
here. But um I just wanted to make sure everyone's aware that the good news is the the finances still seem to very much line up uh and very favorable because this the bidding environment has been extremely favorable. Um, so, uh, tough
tough one and I I'm, as you mentioned, I'm sure there are going to be questions, but this is this is what we we sort of unpleasantly expect just like when we were playing this high school 10 years ago, and there's always been a little something to come.
>> Thank you, Mayor Keefe. just any um any other comments from the the team or the uh or the committee? I I will say I think that Mayor Keefe alluded to, we're going to keep leaning into this. We're going to try to try to
better the projections we have today, but um we feel the responsible thing to do at this point is to uh acknowledge that that summer move has just got to the the bending point, past the bending point to the breaking point. And um we'll do everything we can to uh to
better the schedule, but we think the right thing to do now is to uh is to disclose to the committee that that summer move uh at this point does not look like it's achievable. Uh if there are no questions, we could move on. Well, uh actually, let me just
prep ultimately that's the only impactful update in the MSBA submission. We would ultimately like to seek a motion to submit the 90% package that includes that schedule update to the MSBA. uh we're ready to
get that to them tomorrow, but we want a committee blessing. So, if there are no questions, we'd entertain a motion to submit the 90% construction document package to the MSBA. >> Brian, I make a motion to submit the 90-day package, please.
>> That's good. >> I'll second that. >> Thank you very much for the roll call. Um, Mike Picardi is absent. Uh, Stacy Rizzo, >> yes. >> Susan Graalisi,
>> yes. >> Pearl Spenson, >> yes. >> Christopher Bowen, >> yes. >> Rich Visque. >> Rich Visque, can you hear us? >> Sorry. muted. Yes. >> Thank you, Rich. Mayor Keefe,
>> yes. >> Anthony Cogleandro, >> yes. >> Don Martelli, >> yes. >> Joshua Miranda, >> yes. >> Chris Saramela, >> yes.
>> Motion passes. Thank you very much, everyone. >> Good. Linda, I'm going to take the screen back for just our next two quick agenda items. These are accounting housekeeping items. So, uh we've processed uh 10 budget
revision requests to date. The most recent one was actually uh um to align the left field allowances. Um a lot of the allowances in our approved contract are the type of allowances that we'd spend during the design phases being that we're completing uh the design
phase and moving into um full bidding and construction. it. We're at the point where um those allowances get so messy that we need to clean them up. Um BRR1 is to clean up Perkins Eastman contract. Last month we cleaned up left fields. Um
and again, this is a accounting reconciliation between lines in the Perkins Eastman contract. This is not bringing in any new money. It's not tapping any contingency. It's not removing any money. Um, I will put the the BRR forms that I've showed you
before are relatively boring, but I've lost control of my screen. One second. So, this is the actual BRR form that lists out each category within the approved contract where money is going
to and from. This will help us keep the um both MSBA budget accurate to how the billings have happened and the munis budget with Rich and his staff. So there's uh five different moves within the approved um Perkins Eastman contract that need to happen to align it all
correctly. Secondly, um I'm just going to go through both of these because they're we can do one motion for both. Secondly, we have BRR12 which is related to builder's risk. Um, the city has procured the builder's risk insurance policy outside of the
construction contract. We had always carried a $2 million plug in the construction contract, that $412 million number that um, everyone's always seen. And um, we cannot bill it against that line because it's in the construction
category. That all has to be within Consigi's line. So, this BRR is simply to move the $2 million for that builder's risk plug from the construction category to the owner's insurance line in the MSBA budget. Um, it'll also allow Rich and his staff to
do that in Ununice and we'll bill it against that uh policy, that line in the budget rather. So, the premium for that policy um ended up about 1.6 million. It's about a $100,000 savings to procuring it through Conigi. So in the
end, this was done um partially because uh there's some savings to be had from the city engaging the insurance agent directly. Um but that does create uh about um 300 I did the math wrong. Um but
savings against the 2 million. So the delta between 2 million and this 1.6 um number will be carried as savings for now on the owner's insurance line. So BR11 aligns Perkins Eastman contract
doesn't move any money in or out. BR12 moves the $2 million plug for builder's risk out of the construction contract and into the owners insurance line. >> Any questions on these moves? Oh, thank you, Stacy. Y
>> motion to approve um BRR 11 and 12. So moved. I will second that motion. >> Thank you very much. Motion made by Stacy Rizzo, seconded by Susan Graalisi
for the roll call. Stacy Rizzo. >> Yes. >> Susan Graalisi. >> Yes. >> Carl Spenson. Carl, can you hear us? >> I said yes. >> Oh, sorry. >> That's okay.
>> Christopher Bowen, >> yes. >> Rich Visque, >> yes. >> Mayor Keith, >> yes. >> Anthony Kagglandro, >> yes. >> Don Martelli,
>> yes. >> Joshua Miranda, >> yes. >> Chris Camela, >> yes. Motion passes. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Um, so that's all the formal
business we had tonight. Um, I'll we'll do a public comment and then go to any new business. >> Brian, can I make a comment before public comment? >> Sure. Go ahead. We just at our Monday uh subcommittee meeting there, we just um made a point to make sure that we got
our tees crossed and eyes dotted on the reimbursement not being lost by moving that builder's risk out and we were looking to make sure we get something in writing to hang our hat on as opposed to someone just saying so without the proof. So just wanted to put that on the
radar. Thank you. >> Yep. Risk Rich, sorry. And um the word risk has been on my mind so much lately. Um but the MSBA, as you indicated, has said via email. They're okay with reimbursing for that once it moves. However, this form is the one we're
going to use to chase with them. That form will come back to us with confirmation of that. So, we'll send that over to them um once it's executed and preempt it with a reminder of, hey, you already said this was going to be eligible, but we will follow up on that and ensure that that is still u
eligible for reimbursement. >> Great. Thank you. >> Thanks, Rich. Uh if there's any public comment, name and address for the record. I'm going to look around for hands. Seeing none, I will move to any new business from the committee or other
business. If there is none, we would entertain a motion to adjourn. >> Motion to adjourn. >> Second. >> Thank you all. >> Thank you very much everyone. >> Right. Thank you.
>> Thank you. I'll see you soon. >> Recording stopped.