WEBVTT METADATA Video-Count: 1 Video-1: youtube.com/watch?v=WVuiIavDGN4 NOTE MEETING SECTIONS: Part 1 (Video ID: WVuiIavDGN4): - 00:00:00: Meeting Called to Order: Pledge and Introductions - 00:01:22: Budget Update: Borrowing, MSBA Reimbursements, Expenditures Discussion - 00:07:55: MSBA Reimbursement Rates and Attorney Consultation Details - 00:10:49: Delays and Identifying Issues; Contractual Obligations Discussion - 00:12:24: Legal Actions, Procurement Laws and Performance Bonds Review - 00:14:38: Bond Counsel Recommendations and Capital Request Submissions - 00:16:14: Project Status: Outstanding Items and Roofing Issues - 00:18:22: Roof and Stonework Water Leak Resolution Details - 00:19:11: Sidewalks and Air Master Building Management System - 00:20:00: Capital Plan, Design Flaws, and Construction Errors - 00:22:42: Roof Project Balance Accounting and Immediate Needs - 00:23:17: Sprinkler System and Field Problems Detailed Discussion - 00:26:31: Contract Obligations, Design Approvals and Bond Counsel - 00:28:13: Sprinkler System Design Flaw and Corrective Actions Needed - 00:30:10: OPM Recommendations and Contract Standards Review - 00:31:15: Past Contractor Arguments and Project Manager Continuity Concerns - 00:33:04: Irrigation System and Subcontractor Issues Discussed - 00:34:59: Pump Replacement Estimates and Design Considerations - 00:36:37: CIPC Submission, Town's Money Source, and MSBA Reimbursement - 00:38:13: OPM Consultation and Legal Allowable Costs Compliance - 00:39:48: Invoice Accounting, Allowable vs. Non-Allowable Costs - 00:41:26: Town Meeting Proposal and Remaining Balances - 00:42:14: Reviewing Approved Invoices and Work Completion Status - 00:44:16: Additional Invoices and Over Budget Concerns Clarification - 00:45:38: MSBA Reimbursement and Expenditure Allowances Juggling - 00:47:14: MSBA Project Completion Timelines and Concerns - 00:48:51: MSBA Exact Number of Funds Holding Back Discussion - 00:50:26: Superficial Number, Contingency and Borrowing Authorization - 00:52:04: Faster Close Out Process and Borrowing Standpoint - 00:53:08: Invoice Approvals and Ongoing Roof Issues Discussed - 00:55:02: Proposed Pump Installation Review and Temporary Solutions - 00:56:55: OPM Referral and Taxpayer Dollar Concerns for Field - 00:58:15: Motion to Support Pump Project for Fund Sourcing Discussions - 00:58:47: Full Occupancy Received from Contractor Delayed by COVID - 01:00:07: TV Studio Fiber Optic Cable Contracts and Discussion - 01:02:01: Reviewing March 31st Meeting Minutes and Adjournment Part: 1 1 00:00:00.560 --> 00:00:16.080 All right, we'll uh call this meeting to order. This is a meeting of the West Park Community School Building Committee. Today's Wednesday, May 6, 2026. This meeting is being held uh as a hybrid meeting uh pursuant to the Governor Healey's approved legislation 2 00:00:16.080 --> 00:00:31.119 house uh H22, a bill extending authorization for local boards, commissions, committees to hold public meetings remotely in a hybrid format, extended timeline. Amend the section 38 chapter 20 acts of 2021. most recently amended section 40 chapter 2 of the acts 3 00:00:31.119 --> 00:00:45.760 of 2023 and replacing the current expiration date of March 31st 25 with June 30, 2027. Therefore, this meeting is being conducted via remote participation in order to ensure public access to deliberations and we do have a few 4 00:00:45.760 --> 00:01:02.800 members joining us uh remotely. At this point, we'll rise in uh sorry, we'll pledge allegiance. Sorry. >> Pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and 5 00:01:02.800 --> 00:01:22.799 justice for all. >> All right. So, uh punch list update and project review. Um Chris, I know you you do have a uh budget here in front of us, I believe. Could you 6 00:01:22.799 --> 00:01:40.079 >> Yes. So, uh just go over that. >> Sure. Certainly. So, um and I know our treasurer uh did plan on being here in a few minutes in case there's any questions that I can't answer. Um but essentially um over the last couple weeks I've sat down with both our treasurer and accountant to look at both 7 00:01:40.079 --> 00:01:56.880 the borrowing side as well as um what we've paid out and what is anticipated from MSBA. So um you can see at the top the borrowing authorization uh 968 you know as you go down the list you'll 8 00:01:56.880 --> 00:02:12.480 see um you know towards the bottom you see estimated MSBA reimbursement remaining. So, the town has submitted approximately $2.3 million of invoices to MSBA seeking reimbursement. 9 00:02:12.480 --> 00:02:27.440 Now, when it comes to the reimbursement, they don't reimburse us 100%. So, um based off of historical invoices and historical reimbursements, you know, we put this there as a placeholder at 50%. 10 00:02:27.440 --> 00:02:43.519 So based on that, um, as of now, we're technically over borrowed while we wait for these reimbursements to come in. So that's why that item is in the 11 00:02:43.519 --> 00:02:58.959 red. Now, if you go down and kind of how does that play out? Um, you know, again, the authorized town meeting amount. Now, we do have to pay back any overborrowing that's done. So, that's subtracted from 12 00:02:58.959 --> 00:03:15.599 the expenditure amount. Um, the total paid and expended as of 430, you'll see, is 94,689. Um, and not including that total because there was a delay was the invoices that were approved at this past meeting. So 13 00:03:15.599 --> 00:03:32.959 that's where you see um you know the 60 million50,000 um based on that you know the estimated maximum funds available after we close it out um through bond would be 1.2. 14 00:03:32.959 --> 00:03:48.080 Now, what I would say to that is, you know, I had a conversation with bond counsel and what she advised us of was this number isn't a solid number because there's a few variables here. One is, 15 00:03:48.080 --> 00:04:05.439 you know, we're paying premiums obviously for the borrowings that we have open right now. So, the longer this goes, that's incurring expense and it takes some time to close this out. The other thing is we don't know how much we're ultimately going to get back 16 00:04:05.439 --> 00:04:21.199 from MSBA in terms of reimbursements. Now again, ideally 50%. Um, however, if it's less than that, it's going to be coming out of this amount here. Um, and if for whatever reason we 17 00:04:21.199 --> 00:04:37.840 go in the red, that is coming out of our free cash allocation. The town would have to come up with the money to repay. So because of those variables, um it is her strong recommendation that any further invoices 18 00:04:37.840 --> 00:04:54.320 um be declined outside of what has been committed already with regards to the project scope. So I did ask her, I know there's been some conversations about what, you know, we can use the 19 00:04:54.320 --> 00:05:11.440 funding for versus what we can't use the funding for. based off of her recommendation, the some of these ancillary things that we've been talking about here, if it was something that they were to review, it's 20 00:05:11.440 --> 00:05:28.720 likely that it would not be a qualifying expense under the authorizations that we've been given. So, so that's something where, you know, if our treasure comes, she can explain that in a little more detail, you know, but it was pressed upon us. Oh, and Sue's 21 00:05:28.720 --> 00:05:44.080 here, so she can jump in here in a second. Um, it was pressed upon us that it's in the town's best interest to close this out. I know that there are some things through our conversations and I'll take 22 00:05:44.080 --> 00:06:00.800 the sidewalks as an example of that that's kind of been on hold. I think at this point as a town, as a committee, I think there's going to be some things based off of a the funding that we have 23 00:06:00.800 --> 00:06:15.759 available or, you know, may not have available as well as what the authorization that we have, you know, to spend these dollars on. we may have to consider that some of these things have to be shifted to our capital plan 24 00:06:15.759 --> 00:06:32.080 um as you know future allocations in our upcoming fiscal year budgets um which you know again I know that that is a process in of itself you know I think that a lot of the leg work that's been 25 00:06:32.080 --> 00:06:49.199 done to date um could help inform and expedite that process but my big concern concern would be this a couple things. Number one is we get back news from MSBA that we've overdrawn and then we're in 26 00:06:49.199 --> 00:07:07.039 trouble on that side. The other side of this is this is reviewed and there's expenditures that we've done that don't comply with what's been authorized of us. I think both are very concerning and I think we should start thinking about 27 00:07:07.039 --> 00:07:23.520 you know as we have been how to close out this project while still trying to address the issues that we know again with any building over time we're going to come across issues and I just you know just as a personal note I just think the longer that this goes on we're 28 00:07:23.520 --> 00:07:39.680 we're going to find issues and I don't think there's going to be again because this is extended out I don't think there's going to be a perfect time to close out this project and it's but I think um again based on the recommendation the guidance the funding 29 00:07:39.680 --> 00:07:55.199 that we have available I think that's the discussion that we as a committee should be having >> Chris the original uh reimbursement for the Tony you could help me with this uh Dave the uh the reimbursement for the project initially from the MSBA I think we were at 30 00:07:55.199 --> 00:08:12.000 >> 38 48 something >> 48 something >> the overall project reimburse ment because of overages was down like wasn't it like 42%. >> Yep. >> Something like that. >> Yeah. >> So that where that's where we are as far as the total project reimbursement. I I 31 00:08:12.000 --> 00:08:27.280 believe it's somewhere around 42%. It's not it's not it never was 50. >> Yeah. >> Uh but >> and this is estimated I you know but just for discussion purposes and trying to give everyone >> I think he did a great job with it and I don't differ with the results that I see 32 00:08:27.280 --> 00:08:43.200 here and make sense. Obviously, I'd like to see u the balance to deal with some of these issues, but I think you made a a valid reason why we shouldn't maybe come up with another way of doing that. Um, so I don't have a problem with it personally. I did ask that you kind of 33 00:08:43.200 --> 00:08:58.320 check with the attorneys because we've had a lot of since we did the ribbon cutting, which you know, in hindsight 2020 maybe we shouldn't have. Um, we've had a lot of problems and there were design problems. Yeah. and some of the payments that we've made since are 34 00:08:58.320 --> 00:09:14.720 correcting design problems. Matter of fact, I think there's another one on the agenda tonight. >> It just doesn't make sense from the school building assistance standpoint. I mean, we've been better off with, you know, 20 years ago a clerk of works handling it here because they certainly weren't supporting us when we were trying to deal with these issues. 35 00:09:14.720 --> 00:09:30.240 >> It seems like they still aren't now. >> So, I'm wondering um what you're suggesting here and the data you've given us. Yeah. >> Why that took so long? >> I'm talking like years because we haven't done a whole lot outside of a 36 00:09:30.240 --> 00:09:46.959 few expenditures, but we never really had a handle. And some of us around the table have been saying we thought it was around 1.2. >> Yeah. >> And and we were debating that among us for so long. But at least we've got to this point. So we what's done's done at this point. And your recommendation going forward, I think, is a solution 37 00:09:46.959 --> 00:10:01.519 that it's probably in the best interest of the town to take this approach. Um but I I do think that um we need to be very vocal and we need to look at the documentation that we have through minutes of meetings, our responsibilities and people that we 38 00:10:01.519 --> 00:10:17.680 contracted with and the lack of the response on on those design issues. Those are flaws in design pulley design issues that cost us dearly as a town. We could have been under budget. We could have been done with this. we could have completed a year at least a year ago uh 39 00:10:17.680 --> 00:10:32.720 if we were able to pull the trigger on some of these things. We've talked about it. We we've talked to our town council, but we've never kind of taken the next step. Now, I assume the town council is saying it's going to cost us more money in the long run. Um but that would 40 00:10:32.720 --> 00:10:49.600 suggest that we don't have a valid case and I don't understand why we don't have a valid case. So I think just to answer to those points um so when it comes to you know the time it takes I guess to deliberate and talk 41 00:10:49.600 --> 00:11:05.200 about these issues and identify these issues and fully understand those issues I I know that that was um some time in of itself. You know, I think the question which has come up even in since my time here is what is something that 42 00:11:05.200 --> 00:11:20.399 could be honored under the contracts that we issued under the procurements um by the various consultants and contractors and what isn't, right? And if it isn't explicitly stated and they fulfilled it and we've signed off and 43 00:11:20.399 --> 00:11:35.760 we've paid them, as you noted, it's very hard to pull that back at that point in time. I'll also note that again because this has been some of this information um wasn't readily available or you know I can't 44 00:11:35.760 --> 00:11:52.160 again I can't speak to it but because of that delay of time again more things come up more issues arise maybe they've compounded in other areas or they're tied to each other and again that's that's my speculation there but I think 45 00:11:52.160 --> 00:12:08.320 with regards to um whether or not something's actionable You know, the other thing that we'd have to take in mind is that is an expense to the town, right? And that's not something where 46 00:12:08.320 --> 00:12:24.959 I think at least from my seat here, I don't know if we have a full picture of the standing where it the dollars would be wisely spent. And I'm not going to go speculate on the legal side. >> Chris to that to that point. So, as everyone knows, we spent a lot of time 47 00:12:24.959 --> 00:12:42.320 with the attorney and we we threatened action against the uh against the architect and we had many meetings and many conversations and a lot of phone calls and a lot of a lot of things >> and I I think what it ended up, you know, we 48 00:12:42.320 --> 00:12:59.040 got them to commit to help, but but you know, the the alternative was to, you know, once you sued them, that was the end of any help and then there was no guarantee that you know we would win anything or you know it could just potentially cost the town a lot more 49 00:12:59.040 --> 00:13:14.959 money and I think the uh the thinking was hey we've got monies left over in the account let's use those that money would be better you know we'd be wiser better spent fixing these issues instead of giving it to the lawyers so I mean that's kind of 50 00:13:14.959 --> 00:13:30.720 >> and Tony >> except though there's a procurement law in the state of Massachusetts and you're the procurement officer officer for the town of Westport right now and we know that there's some requirements that we have to follow by state law and one of those are performance bonds and we talked about that a number of times 51 00:13:30.720 --> 00:13:47.200 whether we talk about the roof or we talk about design for for water systems and and that kind of stuff and there's some requirements that you assume when you're paying that those performance bonds there's some money held back because of that performance there's some testing there's some warranty aspect of 52 00:13:47.200 --> 00:14:02.320 it we've never been able to take advantage of any of Yeah, which I you know I think I think again it ultimately and again correct me if I'm wrong I think our goal here is to try and get you know from point A to point B right to a point where hey as 53 00:14:02.320 --> 00:14:19.519 much as reasonably possible we we put this in a place where you know we're able to hand it off and obviously over time ultimately it's going to have to be part of our regard maintenance and operation of of this facility. Um, you know, I think 54 00:14:19.519 --> 00:14:38.000 it's I understand the point about the funding and the dollars and I definitely the thought process of hey look the here's here's the money and here's these issues and let's correct them so that we can you know do right by obviously the town 55 00:14:38.000 --> 00:14:53.040 and the residents and and the students here of course um I think a benefit that we could see again should we decide as committee hey look you know we concur with what bond council is recommending 56 00:14:53.040 --> 00:15:09.360 here and let's start to go down that route right now as I mentioned earlier there is a cost to the town with these bonds and assuming again that this you know we're we're going to get back 1.2 57 00:15:09.360 --> 00:15:26.800 >> or theoretically have 1.2 to um that can go towards paying down the borrowing, right? And ultimately, you know, saving the taxpayers dollars. Um which again, if we're coming before them in the future 58 00:15:26.800 --> 00:15:42.560 as part of the capital request and we say, "Hey, look, we this wasn't the right vehicle to get these matters addressed because of the restrictions with the dollars, because of the uncertainty with what we get reimbursed. we could take these findings, we could 59 00:15:42.560 --> 00:15:58.160 submit it as a capital request and we could put that before town meeting for this upcoming, you know, upcoming cycle. And I know that that process starts in August. Um, so I would feel confident that we could have all of our ducks in a row by that time with all the estimates. 60 00:15:58.160 --> 00:16:14.800 Um, if there's additional testing that would need to be done, you know, we could get there. Um, but that would be, you know, without having bond counsel come in and look at all of these things and Sue was the direct contact on that. I would just be concerned with some of 61 00:16:14.800 --> 00:16:31.839 these expenses that we've been considering or currently. So, so first of all, thank you Sue and Chris for providing this. I think it's helpful to have the numbers in front of us. Um, and I agree at some point, hopefully a point that we're rapidly approaching, right? it is. Some of these things are just 62 00:16:31.839 --> 00:16:47.920 going to be part of the maintenance of having a new building, right? That's that's the reality of it. So, I I 100% agree with you. Um, you know, there are some outstanding things. Obviously, CHA is still managing the project. Were they invited to this call, by the way? >> Yeah. >> Or I believe so. >> Did we receive 63 00:16:47.920 --> 00:17:02.959 >> anything from them whether they were? >> No, I haven't. >> Okay. Um, so OB and Gail who we're contracted with now for the roof, right? and then maybe a design issue that we'll discuss. But outside of that, where does it do we know where it stands working 64 00:17:02.959 --> 00:17:19.439 towards close out? Is it is it just the roof that needs to be addressed with with uh the contractor? Where where are we at with that? What what needs to be done on the punch list to get to a point where we can say, "Okay, this is we're we're we're nearing closeout." 65 00:17:19.439 --> 00:17:35.280 >> That's the last thing going on, Paul. >> Okay. All right. So they had started with um putting up the diverters um to collect the rain water and divert it to divert the water some to other um drains, but um they still have to address like um we have we had leaks 66 00:17:35.280 --> 00:17:50.799 that started from the beginning of of the school that they have to take off some of the uh stonework in the front. So um I don't think that we ever got pricing for that, but they did. So, I don't think it's part of the summer plan that's going on, but it was something that when we did a walkthrough, they 67 00:17:50.799 --> 00:18:06.720 wanted us to show them all the issues that we were having, which we did. And um we had that water test done that we got approved to have done. And that's when they found like they have to take the the um some of the uh stonework off and um where that leak is. So, and that's in like two different areas. And 68 00:18:06.720 --> 00:18:22.240 they said that's kind of like a big big project. So, >> okay. >> I don't know what I don't know where we're >> and that wouldn't be why wouldn't that just be covered under the roofers? it I guess. So what what's under the roof and warranty is just is the membrane itself material is Yeah. So this is 69 00:18:22.240 --> 00:18:38.640 >> it's getting behind the stonework and then running along the beams and finding it's fine as it's Yeah. Exactly. >> same it's the same length >> and it's it's funny because yeah it's right in the front there and it's both it's on the same side. So it was the same design the same in the same exact issue going on. So they know kind of they're like yeah that's why it's 70 00:18:38.640 --> 00:18:55.679 happening. I they could probably explain about it a lot better than I could but >> but in the so in theory once that work is completed then we have we don't really have any substantial outstanding >> except they don't have they're not contracted for some of it. >> Right. Right. 71 00:18:55.679 --> 00:19:11.120 >> I mean unless I mean you know if we're going to let the sidewalk issue go then no. Right. like, okay, if we take that off the punch list and just deal with the the elevation every winter, then probably no. Um I don't I mean, we're 72 00:19:11.120 --> 00:19:28.240 dealing with air masters ourselves for the um right, we have control of the building management system now. >> Yeah. >> Um so I think that's >> Yeah, we already had the recommissioning that was already um that was already I guess you guys gave us the okay to do to 73 00:19:28.240 --> 00:19:42.720 go along with that. So, we're just waiting for air masses to give us state when they can come do the recommissioning and we were looking at getting uh funds back and stuff like that from a grants or whatever that they that they were going to look into for us. So, yeah, >> they're in the process of doing all that. >> Yeah. 74 00:19:42.720 --> 00:20:00.080 >> Well, and I think too just again the some of these capital, you know, obviously one-time expenses versus once it's in place and it's just routine recurring. >> Yeah. >> Um >> Sure. >> Like the sidewalk as an example. I I I I 75 00:20:00.080 --> 00:20:15.919 don't want to just say like let's just you know not consider it or forget about it but I think if if we package it as hey this is part of our capital plan for these improvements and again with you know required testing that would need to take you know sampling 76 00:20:15.919 --> 00:20:32.240 you know re-engineering of the work you know construction and package that as a project and submitted into the CIPC. Um >> there's you know this first of all is there a design flaw right with the sidewalks that you my 77 00:20:32.240 --> 00:20:49.679 understanding is you've all have um been talking about it for quite some years >> first winter first winter >> um so so that's an issue once you put it to CIPC we don't we really don't have any control over that >> well I don't think that's a design flaw >> it's the the material they were using 78 00:20:49.679 --> 00:21:06.799 >> right it's a construction yeah that's a construction >> that's kind of the thing Tony Tony has mentioned many problems. These are design errors and some of them I I won't argue with you are. But the the problem is the contractor is supporting his work and the architect is saying no, they 79 00:21:06.799 --> 00:21:21.520 didn't do it right. >> So we're stuck in the middle with them pointing at each other. Um >> right. >> Except that we have the state that's supposed to be acting almost as the clerk of the works in the process and they let us downing terribly. >> Yeah. And our project manager as well. 80 00:21:21.520 --> 00:21:37.520 >> We didn't have a voice in it. We tried to have a voice in it, but we couldn't get we couldn't get the contractor and the architect in the same room and try to solve it. Yeah, I think just looking through the correspond I mean there was a lot of correspondence on this and I I just think a lot of hands in the pot you 81 00:21:37.520 --> 00:21:54.240 know with CIPC you know I think the way that again you look at it is we've gathered data and again deciphering the data vetting it making sure who's accurate is nobody accurate in this does it you know is there other things that need to be 82 00:21:54.240 --> 00:22:10.960 identified is CIPC is the funding mechanism Um ultimately the project manager would you know be the school right? I mean the community schools um you know to put that procurement together and 83 00:22:10.960 --> 00:22:26.080 you know bring on a team that feels comfortable and confident in their qualifications to you know write that wrong. But um yeah, I just again just based off of what my prior discussions with Sean have 84 00:22:26.080 --> 00:22:42.080 been at least on that matter um I don't see us being able to um do that under warranty or you know within our existing mechanisms. >> Chris and the current the roof project that's been that was approved that's 85 00:22:42.080 --> 00:22:56.880 already been accounted for in these numbers. >> Yes. So, if you see here um towards the middle of the page, it says balance to completion including retainage. Um this is I think it's 846 um is the balance to completion and 40,000 is being held for 86 00:22:56.880 --> 00:23:17.600 retainage. Now, if you recall this amended scope of work was done using their contingency line, >> which ultimately comes out of that 886 obligation. So, >> so I mean we have also immediate needs 87 00:23:17.600 --> 00:23:33.840 that um we brought to you today and we can't wait a year for that, right? We can't wait for CIPC that are on the agenda. I don't know if we want to if you're ready to talk about them like the the sprinkler system in the fields. Another long-standing issue were the 88 00:23:33.840 --> 00:23:50.400 fields. And Paul can explain about the fact that this is what the third time the pump and the sprinkler system has broken because of a design issue. >> They've had problems since um the school since the school was built. They tried to grow grass and then the the sprinkler went down and then they then they had to 89 00:23:50.400 --> 00:24:05.039 uh lay outside and then something else happened with the system. Um I wasn't there at the time so I'm just going by um >> it's a pump issue pump design issue that >> Yeah. So based on >> Yeah. So basically what's there now um 90 00:24:05.039 --> 00:24:22.000 the pump sits inside the water. It's a um it's just a regular well pump and um so it was it was engineered out to to be that instead of the system that we're that we want to have installed is a like a duplex system where the pumps aren't 91 00:24:22.000 --> 00:24:37.840 sitting in the water. Centrifugal pumps. It'll have the um tubes going down. It'll suck out the it'll get the water that way rather than sitting inside there. And when I looked at the prints, that was that was the design that was supposed to be. It was supposed to be three actually three pumps and then they 92 00:24:37.840 --> 00:24:53.919 put it down to that one well pump that's sitting in the water that we that we've had problems with because I know there's a lot of iron in these waters. And >> so that so the pump in that well failed the first year. They replaced it uh on the warranty or whatever part of the contract. They replaced it. >> Mhm. 93 00:24:53.919 --> 00:25:11.039 >> The original pump was laying the uh I guess that's the pump, right? the pickup tube, whatever you call it, was laying basically on the on the floor of the tank >> and it it just got silted up and and it caused the pump to fail. >> When they replaced it, they raised that off the floor of the tank. I don't 94 00:25:11.039 --> 00:25:28.000 remember how many inches so that wouldn't happen again, but apparently >> Yeah. And they installed it. It's like on a slant or whatever. So, that was kind of one of the issues. Um and um just >> But Paul, but is the failure of the pump? Did the pump fry or is it did it fail because there's dirt getting back 95 00:25:28.000 --> 00:25:42.880 in the pump? >> No, it failed because it it fried. Yeah, there's no more there's no more dirt getting in there that that we know of. Um but everything that they have to do, they have to go into a confined space. They have to pump out that whole system just to check just to go to the bottom of the tank and check what's going >> because the pump's at the bottom. 96 00:25:42.880 --> 00:25:58.000 >> The pump's in the bottom. >> So, this is a 30,000 >> and so yeah, for us to get it to back >> gallon tank. So, size of your pool in your backyard >> with a pump at the bottom of it. So here's so here's the challenge is you know so right now I guess over the last number of months we've been 97 00:25:58.000 --> 00:26:13.760 operating on the punch list right and so theoretically this would be a new punchless item that would come up or new concern that's being raised off of what we've been working on you know how >> well it's an issue as far as being a 98 00:26:13.760 --> 00:26:31.520 punch list I mean when you say punch list that >> well if it's not addressed we can't close the project out >> so I I think my recommendation on that would be similar to these other items that we've talked about that are on the list is, you know, through our OPM 99 00:26:31.520 --> 00:26:49.200 services. The question is whether or not there's something within the contract that obligates the contractors to correct the issue. And if there's not, then it's not an allowable expense under this per bond council. So that's 100 00:26:49.200 --> 00:27:05.120 that's kind of the line is if it's something with the original construction that's flawed that our OPM is saying, "Yep, this is something where they have to come back and correct it and that shouldn't be additional cost assuming again that it was done improperly and they're obligated to it." >> Yeah. Like I said, I don't know if it 101 00:27:05.120 --> 00:27:20.960 would like it's considered like improperly, but you have one pump that you're relying on and then every time that there's an issue with it, we end up spending almost 50 grand to bring it back to where it needed to be um again. And then now we're going through the same thing this year. >> It might not be a good design, but it 102 00:27:20.960 --> 00:27:37.840 was still an approved design. So the town signed off on it. I mean, somebody signed. >> And here's the ch. Yeah. >> That you have faith in. >> Oh, yeah. And >> I, you know, I think we should be closing this stuff out and and uh put this expense to it if we have to do it to pay somebody who's going to get it 103 00:27:37.840 --> 00:27:54.000 done the right way, maybe. >> And if not, we'll deal with it down the road. But >> exactly, >> if you can get the this as an allowable expense, if not, don't worry about it. just close it out and cover that way. >> And unfortunately, that's kind of what has been conveyed to us via bond 104 00:27:54.000 --> 00:28:13.600 counsel, right, on these particular items. >> Um, >> hold on. >> Kim, go ahead. >> Did she hear us, John? >> Maybe not. >> Um, >> we can text. 105 00:28:13.600 --> 00:28:30.320 >> Oh, now we can hear you. Sorry. Um I just wanted to reiterate what Paul said. I mean we definitely Paul saw the bargain the project um the um installation was engineered out you 106 00:28:30.320 --> 00:28:46.880 know engineered out. We had several injuries with the car last year. We spent over $6,000 just repairing what was there just to function for one year and we're not even um we're not even able to start it up then again this 107 00:28:46.880 --> 00:29:04.159 year. So I mean with all the funding that we've already put towards the field, all the work that Carl's done, we need to have a system that's consistent and constantly works. And if this is the system, I I think we have to push forward with this or every single year 108 00:29:04.159 --> 00:29:20.640 we're going to be investing money. And this isn't just strictly a maintenance issue. This is an issue that this has been an incorrect design. >> Got it. >> So I have a question. Was anything with the fields originally on the punch list? 109 00:29:20.640 --> 00:29:36.000 >> Oh, all kinds of stuff with the fields. So you can't >> Yeah. So >> reeding the fields, the sprinklers, >> but not the but not the pump. The pump broke and then it was repaired was under warranty at that time. So >> the warranty, right? >> Wasn't brought up as a >> So what I'm saying is to Chris, you're 110 00:29:36.000 --> 00:29:52.559 saying the idea of the fields have been on the punch list. Did we close a piece out of it maybe prematurely? Like I don't see why that should be an issue because it was part of the punch list and obviously while we still have it, right, it's it's not it's not fixed. So 111 00:29:52.559 --> 00:30:10.000 some of it is to I guess the points that were brought up is some of this if you recall has a timetable to it right within x amount of time and so I that's why I would suggest at least for these items 112 00:30:10.000 --> 00:30:26.240 it be brought to OPM to see is this something that again whether if there's a certain time frame and I don't have that language in front of me but what I would say is Let's just say there's a certain standard that it's supposed to be able to do. >> Yeah. 113 00:30:26.240 --> 00:30:42.880 >> Right. Or achieve and it's not achieving that. >> Maybe the language is warded in that way so that if there are design changes to the original design, maybe that's something that they can come back with and say, "Okay, what's an adequate 114 00:30:42.880 --> 00:30:58.240 design?" Because this has deficiencies. If it turns into a, hey, we have to redesign this because the design that was approved that was signed off and paid off of wasn't 115 00:30:58.240 --> 00:31:15.120 adequate and now it's breaking. Now that I mean I can't speak for the OPM, but that's not going to be something that we can hold these contract. >> So that's a so that's a good example of what we've been doing for the last three years, 116 00:31:15.120 --> 00:31:30.320 >> right? Yes. >> We would say your we would have that argument. >> Yeah. >> And we would take it to the the person who designed it or the architect or whomever and they would say, "Oh, no. That was that's perfectly fine. We use that all the time. It's it's normal. There's nothing abnormal about it. It's 117 00:31:30.320 --> 00:31:45.760 typical. It was a construction issue or it's a it's the pump. It's it's the company who build the pump. It's not it's not a design issue." So, that's what we always that that's always the answer we get and we've gotten >> two two things. One is I I think with with this one in particular, you know, 118 00:31:45.760 --> 00:32:02.240 the other ones may be different circumstances, but with this one in particular, it's not like it was a less than ideal design that we preferred something else and now it's breaking for the first time. This is an issue from day one that it was a a bad design that has consistently caused issues for Yeah. 119 00:32:02.240 --> 00:32:17.039 for the system, right? >> Yeah. And the company that I have that I have in there right now, he was he designs them all the time. And he was like, I I never would design a system like this. I never I don't know why they would do this. it was like overengineered certain parts and then other stuff is like um 120 00:32:17.039 --> 00:32:33.760 one pump with no redundancy like it was just like they never they would never do that >> on on the other side of this too. So we do have we have a project manager right that's supposed to be helping us >> but we've process seven project managers >> right so it's not it shouldn't necessarily be on the school department or on the town administrator to 121 00:32:33.760 --> 00:32:50.000 necessarily help chase down these items and look through the contracts to see what what's what. That's why we we're contracting with a project manager, right? ideally. So I I'm I think that's been part of it. Obviously continually has been the issue, but now as we're working towards closeout, I think we're really seeing where that issue lies 122 00:32:50.000 --> 00:33:04.399 because this should be something that can help us through, right? That that's that's >> and we're deal now we're dealing with with the effects of it. Right. >> So I to that point >> and can can I say something else also? >> Go ahead. So the year the year that the 123 00:33:04.399 --> 00:33:20.559 pump had gone down, Mike Dart was here and that was the first summer that we tried to turn it on and it was defective. It fell to the bottom of the pump, took up all the dirt and you know the the pump failed. When we contacted 124 00:33:20.559 --> 00:33:36.240 Central Nurseries, which was the company that had um done the field work and had done the irrigation system, they subcontracted it out to another company, which I believe was Precision Plumps or something like that. They were out of 125 00:33:36.240 --> 00:33:52.399 New York. It took them all summer. They didn't come. So that's why we lost the grass that year. They finally came. They put the pump system back to more or less original except that it wasn't on the floor. It was a different um pump stand 126 00:33:52.399 --> 00:34:09.200 that they put the pump on. And then what happened when we contracted with Central Nurseries to renew our irrigation startup and shutdown with them, they refused to come back. They said that that we were outside their work zone and that we'd have to find another company. 127 00:34:09.200 --> 00:34:26.560 So pretty much they've sort of um you know washed their our their hands of us. Um and like I said the next year when we tried to start it up we had nobody to start up the system. We had to reach out to Rain Dance and they're the ones in 128 00:34:26.560 --> 00:34:41.839 conjunction with Industrial Pump because Rain Dance only does the like irrigation system. Industrial Pump has been helping us with the pump systems since the pump went down. the flow switch went down, we lost the floats, those kind of things. 129 00:34:41.839 --> 00:34:59.760 Rain Dance doesn't do that. So, this is how we've come into play with both companies being here. And right now, we need them both. >> So, Paul, do you do you guys get a quote to just replace the pump also? Right. 130 00:34:59.760 --> 00:35:14.640 That pump. >> Yeah, that and the VFD, the var drive. Um, that's that's gone too. it. There should have been a block heater in there. There was no heater in there. Um, so it's basically to get it back to where to normal, it's like between like 131 00:35:14.640 --> 00:35:31.280 20 25 grand. And then like I said, for the that's just to get back of what we already have that we know that we know is wrong. Yeah. >> And then we have a price of uh 75,000 for the duplex system that wouldn't be sitting in the water. Um and uh it would 132 00:35:31.280 --> 00:35:48.960 it would be less work on all the both of the pumps of course because they'd be going back and forth um for 75 grand. Yeah. >> Yeah. I mean just I don't know obviously all the history of it. It's just you know I think there's going to be some 133 00:35:48.960 --> 00:36:06.400 design issues that are going to come up continually. I I you know I think the challenge now is what we're up against with the dollars and the and the guidance that we're 134 00:36:06.400 --> 00:36:23.119 getting from bond council. And again, I think my goal coming into this from my perspective is how do we again get this to a place where we can make some movement on these things and get it in a vehicle so that these things can get 135 00:36:23.119 --> 00:36:37.760 done. And if the answer is at least if the answer through the OPM is, hey, we can't recoup the the money or the scope or the work here, then I I don't think that that's the end of the discussion as a 136 00:36:37.760 --> 00:36:54.160 town. I think it's just you know now we work together in a different format and a different you know vehicle and now goes to CIPC >> as as friend said there's kind of like this is something that came up so there's no time to like not like get put on like next year's budget or anything it's kind of like something we have to 137 00:36:54.160 --> 00:37:10.400 do we have to make a decision now to to and I think you know I understand right we're costing the town money the you know the longer that this project goes on so understood so it is the town's money either way right whether it's getting being paid through CIPC, through 138 00:37:10.400 --> 00:37:25.920 the town budget, you know, through a school budget. Who who knows? So, wouldn't we want to at least give it a shot that we'll get some of that reimbured from the state? >> Well, so um >> from MSBA, wouldn't we do that first and then if we don't 139 00:37:25.920 --> 00:37:42.560 >> So, this dollar and I guess for clarity, this is borrowing. So >> Mhm. >> So when we borrow, what I'm what I'm saying is that that would not be an allowable borrowing item >> that we could borrow for, >> right? So if it's not, then yeah, 140 00:37:42.560 --> 00:37:57.760 >> we're going to we're going to fix this pump some way, right? We're going to do it because we just spent $50,000 on the athletic fields and this this community will not be happy >> if come fall again, we don't have the fields. So why wouldn't we 141 00:37:57.760 --> 00:38:13.839 give it a shot first? And if they turn us down, then they turn us down. Why wouldn't we give it a shot? Because then, if I'm understanding it correctly, you were saying it's not according to bound counsel, it may not it may not be an allowable cost. Why don't we give it a shot and move it forward? And if it 142 00:38:13.839 --> 00:38:29.119 isn't, okay. >> Well, so if um we we would not get reimbursed anything for this because the the site work was over the percentage that the state would reimburse us. So that this would be part 143 00:38:29.119 --> 00:38:44.880 of that work. So this is coming out of town money anyway. >> Yeah. So um so I think what I'm suggesting is we do give it a shot by going to our OPM and saying is this something that we could 144 00:38:44.880 --> 00:39:00.720 do under you know under this you know committee under what we have through our available funds. If he says no, like I said, from bond counsel, it's already been, and Sue can again speak to this a 145 00:39:00.720 --> 00:39:17.839 little bit more, but if it's, you know, she more or less said explicitly, we should not be paying any additional invoices outside of of that corrective work that we've contracted for. Um, 146 00:39:17.839 --> 00:39:33.839 and she's gone as far to say that we should reject invoices at our accounting department. I, you know, I, and I, that's not, I I don't want to be, you know, I don't like that as the answer. I just, that's, 147 00:39:33.839 --> 00:39:48.480 >> from a legal standpoint, that's what we're legally allowed to do with these dollars. >> I'd be prepared to to vote on that and support that. >> So, we should go as a town. So, at our last meeting, we did approve some. >> Yeah. >> And those are some of those are here 148 00:39:48.480 --> 00:40:03.760 >> uh the stone for the for the uh the septic system, the diamond um trophy cases. >> So, those that that stuff's been done. 149 00:40:03.760 --> 00:40:20.400 >> So, yeah. So here's what I may suggest is we have not given a line by line accounting of every single invoice that obviously we have incurred as part of this project. And I mean obviously this is a multi-year 150 00:40:20.400 --> 00:40:36.800 thing. Um we posed the question of allowable versus not allowable. And you know, I think that was the clear distinction that was provided to us. And I would not recommend sending bond 151 00:40:36.800 --> 00:40:54.079 counsel of what we've been spending because then it opens up more questions from past actions. I think my recommendation would be at this point in time let's you know what is the philosophy you know of everyone here 152 00:40:54.079 --> 00:41:10.880 about how we address these remaining items that would be my best recommendation um to to the group here and you know understanding that I I know that there's going to be things that we need to come up with a plan for and a 153 00:41:10.880 --> 00:41:26.480 funding source for um >> the The other side of this is we're going to have a balance that we didn't use, we didn't borrow on about a million dollars. >> And we could go to town meeting, even a special town meeting, and say, "Look, we've closed it out on the 154 00:41:26.480 --> 00:41:42.880 recommendation of of bond council and our treasurer and I assume our finance committee and our selectman so forth. We think that's the best thing to do in best interest of the town. But we still have this million that we we didn't we didn't act upon. So, we ask consideration for these items and this 155 00:41:42.880 --> 00:41:58.160 the school department can show why we need these items and try to see if the town would vote to to expend those funds. I that's what I I think we need. >> I mean, I think that's where we've been all along. >> Well, no, we haven't because the meat is 156 00:41:58.160 --> 00:42:14.640 still running. We're still paying for having this open. And >> listen, if I could have closed this out three years ago, I would have closed it out three years ago. Believe me. >> Yeah. >> Well, well, why don't you >> But let's get back to the Let's get back to that list, though. at at our last meeting we approved and the the work was done. 157 00:42:14.640 --> 00:42:29.920 >> So >> the only thing that wasn't done was the glass install on the trophy cases but we're just wait it's being manufactured so we're just waiting for them to coordinate with diamonds. >> But the $1,100 for the stone that was done >> the 3,000 for the cases 158 00:42:29.920 --> 00:42:44.400 >> the EW is electrical work. >> Yep. >> That's been for the cases. Yep. >> Oh that was for that. Okay. What was the turf again, Paul? 21,000. So that was um that was some of the equipment that we that we uh needed. It it finally came in. So it was the attachment 159 00:42:44.400 --> 00:43:01.280 >> city works city works was a uh a um a uh an issue we've had from day one. That was to finally repair that ladder into the water room. >> That's that was on the that was on the uh >> punch list for >> that was on the punch list. >> Yeah. That that's been an ongoing issue. 160 00:43:01.280 --> 00:43:16.960 Gail was uh that's the contract that we uh we entered in with Gail to uh to help us with the this pro the >> final roof project. And again the uh the 35 CHA same thing that's 161 00:43:16.960 --> 00:43:37.200 contract with them for uh services. So, I mean, all these have all been approved. And I mean, the only ones, Chris, that you would on here that maybe we would question uh 162 00:43:37.200 --> 00:43:59.599 would be the diamond the cases, but that that's already done. Those are already installed. Everything else uh >> Yeah. Well, you could argue the stonework was maintenance, but so I think these need to get paid. 163 00:43:59.599 --> 00:44:16.960 >> So I Yeah, that's um we that to the committee. You know, I think um like I said, I I would just um I know there's some things that we have in the queue right now and I think uh as we go forward, again, looking at this 164 00:44:16.960 --> 00:44:32.560 punch list and working with the OPM just um additional invoices, you know, we'll have to really keep an eye on here. >> Yeah. >> Can we decide to pay the invoices that we've approved the work, you know, said 165 00:44:32.560 --> 00:44:48.319 yes, go ahead and and do this work. you know, we've committed to that. This this is the first time we've heard >> Yeah. >> that we're over budget. Um up until today, I thought we had over a million dollars left in the budget. >> No, that's there. That's there, Dave. 166 00:44:48.319 --> 00:45:04.000 We're not over that's not a >> Well, I see that, but they're saying we we shouldn't be spending that because >> we're counting on reimbursement that we're not sure we're going to get. Um, >> and and sorry, just to clarify, and are we saying that we shouldn't spend it 167 00:45:04.000 --> 00:45:21.359 because we don't believe that it's allowable costs? >> That the costs that we're asking are not allowable? >> Both. Both. It's that because I mean, we're on punch list. So, theoretically, we should be near fully expended on the 168 00:45:21.359 --> 00:45:38.319 project anyways. And now, it's just a question of what we're going to get back an MSBA reimbursement or not. >> Yeah. So part of this is on the MSBA reimbursement side, we don't know how much we're going to get back. On the borrowing side, we have what is allowable for an expenditure. And if 169 00:45:38.319 --> 00:45:54.400 this were something where again this comes up and I I can have maybe Sue speak to kind of the that piece of it, we're kind of juggling those two issues at hand here, right? >> Can't we ask? But I think the MSBA 170 00:45:54.400 --> 00:46:09.599 should I think they would know exactly what I I mean I think >> I think the OPM should be able to go through. >> I mean they're going to hold whatever they're holding until the project actually gets closed out. But as far as reimbursement, they've already >> there's nothing we're spending on that we're going to get reimbursed for. We've 171 00:46:09.599 --> 00:46:25.839 already we're past the uh >> right >> the reimbursement stage of this is just their basic holdback that they're holding. Is that correct? >> This is the what they're holding back. They We're not certain how much of that hold 172 00:46:25.839 --> 00:46:41.839 back we will actually receive >> but we should know that. >> Yeah. >> We're not we never know that in advance. >> Well, the the OPM should be able to answer that question >> because they know what the you know what the state agreed to reimburse us so they 173 00:46:41.839 --> 00:46:58.160 can put together which which costs you know where we went over where we didn't go over. >> Yeah. I you know >> the other thing that the bond council indicated is expenses um 174 00:46:58.160 --> 00:47:14.960 normally it's a project would be closed out a couple of years a you know within a couple of years after occupancy and things beyond that point the MSBA is saying it's no longer part of the project you know they their 175 00:47:14.960 --> 00:47:30.880 feeling is >> the MSBA >> with the projects. Yeah. Even the MSBA at that point is saying if you're in there and operating in the building, it's got to be complete. You know, they 176 00:47:30.880 --> 00:47:46.960 re recognize certain pro certain things may need to be completed after occupancy, >> but within a year or two, everything should be of occupancy in general. But we meet with them online like once a month. we have a meeting with them so they're well aware that we're continuing 177 00:47:46.960 --> 00:48:02.400 to yeah >> to address issues issues >> and that yeah I'll just note that that isn't something that's been discussed specifically here but it's a concern that bond council looks at as a generality for projects like this >> and like I said I just think the longer 178 00:48:02.400 --> 00:48:19.920 we go you know I think the more challenges we're going to face with regards to how to best close out this project you Yeah, I that's I agree to close it out. I think uh by checking with Boston again 179 00:48:19.920 --> 00:48:35.599 and try to see what our options are going to be. Uh and then we'll any needs that we have, we'll have to address them in a different way for funding, but it's the best interest of the town and there's nothing to be gained by continuing this on. When you cut a ribbon, two years later, we're still 180 00:48:35.599 --> 00:48:51.920 arguing about stuff that we should have been dealing before we cut the ribbon. you lose all your your your your advantage in trying to accomplish what you're trying to accomplish. >> No, I I I I think the MSBA should should be able to give us an exact number of what they're holding back. 181 00:48:51.920 --> 00:49:08.079 >> So, our count so um our county department's obviously the one who puts together all this documentation and sends it to them. I can have a conversation with her about what that communication is like with regards to um their evaluation of this. >> The OPM should be able to >> Dr. Roy could help you out with dealing 182 00:49:08.079 --> 00:49:22.559 with the people in Boston, too. >> Yeah. I >> Yep. So, we we >> we're on those meetings. >> Yeah. >> Again, and I I understand even if we sort of closed it out tomorrow, you know, the town will get this money back. 183 00:49:22.559 --> 00:49:38.960 >> I still need a $75,000 pump or or else we are going to continue. Now, we've spent every single year we have spent maybe on those fields every single year. We're probably about 50,000 a year I would say if not more 184 00:49:38.960 --> 00:49:55.760 because something breaks. So there is no guarant first of all I need it immediately and second of all there is no guarantee that you put it into a CIPC. However, there could be a guarantee if we take it out of these available $1.2 million funds. Right. And 185 00:49:55.760 --> 00:50:11.440 in the long run we're hoping this is going to save everyone money so that we're not continuing to come back and saying that the fields are a disaster. And that's a conversation that needs to be had at the state level with the state department of education and our state 186 00:50:11.440 --> 00:50:26.160 senator and the state representative and dealing with any of issues and I'm comfortable with the town working with the school department and getting it resolved, but we got to they got to close. It >> doesn't make sense. >> Yeah. I I mean I think you know I think as a 187 00:50:26.160 --> 00:50:42.960 >> it's I understand and again I think that's why it's so challenging even when I look at this number >> is It's a superficial number, right? And I even again from >> it's what we've been authorized to borrow, >> right? 188 00:50:42.960 --> 00:51:00.400 >> Don't use it. We just pay interest. It's less money we used. >> But also because it's a little bit of a moving target even with regards to what we're paying on the back side of this, you know, to keep these open. So, it's something where 189 00:51:00.400 --> 00:51:16.400 I I I would personally treat it as if we don't have it. That's that's the truth is I would treat it as if this is this amount even though it looks like a large amount is this is um a contingency so that as we close out 190 00:51:16.400 --> 00:51:33.200 this project, we don't go in the red. And you know and I think um you know again that's something where if this was a project again back when it you know if it was done you know again with everyone there and the punch list 191 00:51:33.200 --> 00:51:49.440 was done timely and some of these issues were able to get resolved a little bit sooner than this. I think it this would just be something that we would again have to roll with the punches as some of these issues come up with with all of our facilities. 192 00:51:49.440 --> 00:52:04.720 >> There's another piece to the accounting part of it though. We we were authorized to borrow >> and we were approved at the state on what we could borrow for. >> Those figures can be handled within a few hours by people, you know, that are well versed in looking at this stuff to 193 00:52:04.720 --> 00:52:20.079 tell you exactly where we stand with it. So, I think we can accomplish this close out a lot faster than we're suggesting. It's unfair to expect the the town accountant or or the treasur's office to understand some of these invoices as they come in, but it shouldn't be unfair at the the school building assistance 194 00:52:20.079 --> 00:52:37.040 level in terms of the authorization for funding and what's approved and not approved to address that. We were told when we first started this project that this process would go pretty easy from a borrowing standpoint. when you put those invoices in with within weeks, you'd get a reimbursement from the state. A state 195 00:52:37.040 --> 00:52:51.920 senator said that, a state representative said that. If we're not getting that and it's some some, you know, we disapprove this invoice. What's happened? Because those things should have been handled routinely. We haven't done a whole lot of invoices in the last couple of years, the the majority of 196 00:52:51.920 --> 00:53:08.000 that stuff should be squared away. >> So, I no I so I I agree, Chris. You should going forward be extreme be very cautious in not going outside the scope of what the work that we're already contracted on before the committee tonight are the invoices for items that 197 00:53:08.000 --> 00:53:23.599 were for work that was already approved by this committee >> and the the the pump issue. So those are the two things pending >> tonight outside of the the ongoing roof issue. So I think we I think the committee should address that first and then you know obviously going forward we 198 00:53:23.599 --> 00:53:39.359 can I I certainly agree that that's what we should be working towards. So >> well we can't really address it because we don't know where the source of funds are going to come from. >> Can we if >> so the committ so the committee can act on improving these invoices. Um you know 199 00:53:39.359 --> 00:53:54.480 that's a again a vote that the committee could take tonight. Um, you know, I'll just say like I said is this is something that bond council is looking at and if it's something that where we have to come back to committee or if there's an issue that arises 200 00:53:54.480 --> 00:54:11.200 >> um you know I can obviously >> provide recommendation in consultation with the treasurer >> to approve the uh >> the invoices. >> I second. I'll make the motion to >> I'll make the motion 201 00:54:11.200 --> 00:54:27.760 >> and uh to approve the invoices for Stone Farm uh Diamond Regional uh EWE Turf uh City Works Scale and CHA um and um as totals are outlined on these invoices um 202 00:54:27.760 --> 00:54:44.319 invoice numbers and attached for the figures that are >> is there a second? >> I think there second >> any any any discussion? So again, these were invoice. These this is work that was completed uh or mostly completed. We're just waiting on a couple of things, I guess, 203 00:54:44.319 --> 00:55:02.079 uh at our last meeting. So this this this work's actually been done. So all in favor? >> I >> I All right. >> And I'm going to abstain. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> So the next item on the on the on the agenda was the uh the prop the um 204 00:55:02.079 --> 00:55:19.680 proposed pump uh installation of pumps. So that will table that I guess or >> I I have a question on that. Is is there anything we can do on like an interim basis shy of replacing the pumps? Uh you've got a tank full of water. Can you 205 00:55:19.680 --> 00:55:35.599 have bring somebody in that can put a fire hose in there and spray the fields or something for less, you know, save us this year for less than $75,000. >> There isn't there's there won't be like complete coverage of you know there's sprinkler heads everywhere. There's probably 100 sprinkle heads out there. >> Yeah. 206 00:55:35.599 --> 00:55:51.359 >> You just I understand what you're saying. I believe I was trying to find a workarounds and there's we talked to couple couple of companies, a couple of other professionals and there's just like no work around for for that. >> You pretty much have 30 days that school's going to be 207 00:55:51.359 --> 00:56:06.640 >> We push one other time and we end up getting if So, yeah, 30 days like 30 days. >> Could we use a portable Paul? Could we use a a portable pump to pump that to pump the sprinklers? >> Bish. I was asking you >> like I said it could be pumped out but who's going to 208 00:56:06.640 --> 00:56:23.599 >> I'm saying temporarily I'm saying so we don't let the fields uh >> well the thing is all these items have costs right so we you know that >> we can address the design issue or we can continue putting band-aids on it and and continue to hit our operating budget every year with with what shouldn't be 209 00:56:23.599 --> 00:56:39.760 maintenance costs but is now essentially has become maintenance costs. Right? it comes down is you got to be prepared to take 75,000. You feel that strongly about take 75,000 out of your budget between now and the end of the year and hopefully you get a balance at the end of the year to cover it. >> I don't know if we have balances like that. We operate a little a little tighter than that. 210 00:56:39.760 --> 00:56:55.920 >> So I think the um in addition to maybe temporary measures if those if there's options available um maybe refer this item to the OPM who can provide again that recommendation if this is something that the proposal. Yep. >> We'll do. And then if it if it is 211 00:56:55.920 --> 00:57:10.880 something that either can or can't be addressed, I think the committee should be updated on that so we can we need to move I think relatively quickly on this one way or the other >> to address it because what I what I fear happening is either way it's it's taxpayer dollars, right? So we're we're either spending more taxpayer dollars on 212 00:57:10.880 --> 00:57:28.240 a temporary fix potentially costing more money or we're addressing the design issue one way or the other, right? Whether it's something that the OPM opines on and says we can or can't do or whatever it is, right? That's that's my concern is if we don't act on it, it's going to it's going to cost us more money. Right. >> Right. Because not only the actual 213 00:57:28.240 --> 00:57:43.520 physical pump, the amount of money we had to put into the fields itself, even when the pump was working was over $50,000 in the fall. And I think it was you, Tony, who I remember that I first came on and you drove by the fields and 214 00:57:43.520 --> 00:57:59.520 oh my goodness, they were all like I don't know, burnt out. They were all burnt, right? And so we're talking, let's say it takes us six months to get the the a pump or whatever we're doing and we're having burnt out fields, we're talking now over $100,000 and the 215 00:57:59.520 --> 00:58:15.440 continual. So in the in the long run, in the long run, this is the most efficient cost-effective option, right? So you know, so I think the my request would be that we move forward with that as soon as possible because that's the most 216 00:58:15.440 --> 00:58:30.960 efficient way to get it done. Well, why don't we make a motion to support it and get it moving and the source of funding will either come from the schools or come from this uh school building assistance. Uh >> no, I think we're all in support of that. We don't need a motion for that. 217 00:58:30.960 --> 00:58:47.839 So, uh we'll we'll check with uh DHA. >> Well, we're not telling you not to do it. It just >> I just need money. >> We'll do I'm ready to do it. >> I I can't give that answer here, but OPM can. >> Yep. Yeah. 218 00:58:47.839 --> 00:59:02.960 >> Okay. We know what we need. >> Can you say something? >> Yes. >> I just wanted to add um one of the comments about the occupancy. Um and I do believe that we only received full occupancy towards the end of last year from Ralph Souza. I believe we were only 219 00:59:02.960 --> 00:59:19.119 on temporary occupancy and that was one of the items that was needed to be finished for the punch list. So, um that may be the start of the one to two years after uh the completion of the project. So if 220 00:59:19.119 --> 00:59:35.359 we just got occupancy last year, um this shouldn't be an issue regarding pump. Yeah, if that if that came up as a concern, like I said, for this project, that has not come up for our project specifically. But if that question arises um definitely can convey that 221 00:59:35.359 --> 00:59:51.280 information to a bond council so that they're operating with the you know correct information >> and they should consider that COVID happened towards the end of this project and that delayed materials. It delayed a 222 00:59:51.280 --> 01:00:07.680 lot of things which kind of >> you know that's why we're running late. One of the reasons we're running late. >> Oh yeah. >> Okay. Um, >> did you do the studio f TV studio fibers? >> No. Where was that? >> That was up at the top. 223 01:00:07.680 --> 01:00:24.000 >> Just discussion. I don't think there's anything actually. >> Uh, school construction update. Well, I mean, that's what we do bring that. Yeah. Uh, well, the TV studio fiber. Uh, again, I I that's what fiber optic. That's something that's come up several times. I know it's been put out to 224 01:00:24.000 --> 01:00:39.040 whoever. And my understanding is it wasn't on a contract. it wasn't in the contract that we had one one cable in the contract and all these other lines that they put in. They basically told us that well we got those for free then that's why they're not connected or something. I mean that's my 225 01:00:39.040 --> 01:00:56.160 understanding of that fiber optic cable. >> John knows a little bit more. >> Yeah, you may have told me that before but I'm forgetful. I don't I don't recall that. I'm not saying that didn't wasn't said. But it wasn't that long ago where we uh we had those people here 226 01:00:56.160 --> 01:01:11.839 again and it was it was like no you got you got what you paid for. That's basically that was their answer. >> So we got paid for 20 30 fiber lines going in with nothing. >> What do we have? We have one to the music. What do we have? One to the music room. What? >> No. Some of them work right. 227 01:01:11.839 --> 01:01:27.440 >> The big area is the gym. >> Yeah. Uh which I have one feed. Yeah. The gym. We we trace that. the gym, the auditorium and the library has some in the fields >> and then and all those other >> and all those other lines go away to 228 01:01:27.440 --> 01:01:42.000 other classrooms. And >> so what happens is from the data ports where all those places I just mentioned, they get shot to some of the IT closets and then that gets sent back to my room somehow. I mean, we could check with CHA and have 229 01:01:42.000 --> 01:02:01.599 him just kind of revisit that again, but I mean, my recollection was that we got what we paid for. >> Signed off, >> way above my pay grade. And I don't mean that facitiously. Um, all right. So, that Yeah, that was a student. So, >> the minutes, 230 01:02:01.599 --> 01:02:17.359 >> so review and act on the uh school building committee meeting uh minutes from uh March 31st, 2026. Any >> approval? Second. >> All in favor? >> Humpt I. >> All right. So, 231 01:02:17.359 --> 01:02:33.920 Chris has a little work to do and uh he will follow up and we'll let the committee know what's going on and if we need to have a meeting uh sooner than later, we'll do that and uh see if we can't get some of this money used up. All right, with that motion to adjurnn. 232 01:02:33.920 --> 01:02:40.839 >> So moved. >> All in favor? >> I. All right, we're adjourned. Thank you everyone.