But I would say all of those local regulatory permitting all of those steps would take place after the project was approved. >> Approved by referendum. >> Correct. >> Gotcha. So this list $30,000 but you know we're only going to talk about 7500 until a referendum. >> Yes. And you can and the you see the lump sum payments. Um and then there's the hourly budget, the locally local regulatory permitting. I would say that they were very conservative giving us $8,000, but that's ultimately working with our town engineer. So that could be a lot less than $8,000. Okay. Yeah. >> That that helps me support where we are tonight because I I don't want to have this conversation again every month with $8,000 next time and $12,000 after that. you know, especially without a holistic conversation or understanding where the town council sits on this and and what type of support we could get from the community.
Thank you. >> Thank you. That's everyone who had signed up to testify. Is there anyone else on SB2604? >> Seeing none, are there any questions? >> Quick question, Mike. So um you know my with this bill and the form and the prior bill we just heard um your outreach within community and other partners say [clears throat] uh and so for that has been engaged with correct? >> Yes sir. >> Okay. Now I just wanted to make sure that that has occurred. Um you know we have people that testify and sometimes try to kind of read the bill too far into it. I want them to be reassured that these partners have been involved from the beginning. My other question is that um involvement within the county um and I believe the mayor had said that the do you have full support on behalf of the mayor and the county?
Next item, budget and finance subcommittee report. >> So, we met on February 3rd. Uh, we received some preliminary figures for what we're projecting the level service cost for next year based on wage increases, what we're anticipating chapter 70 amounts will be, choice charter spending. These are the projected, not hard and, you know, engraved in stone. Uh this is a major plot twist, but we're expecting a rough financial year. I know no one saw that one coming. Um the biggest notable change was the budget development calendar. Um because the calendar was built and approved on using the way the city does its budget, but there has been a change at the city level that came down from the state that bumped everything back by roughly a month. meaning we had this beautiful document that is completely out ofd and it is not accurate. But thankfully the school department uh the school central administration has offered to update those dates so that we won't have this beautiful document that we can't do anything with and instead we'll have a more realistic picture of yes this is when the budgets are now actually due at this place and that place and the like.
So, thank you. >> So, we're voting on 7500 tonight to get this started that comes from our operating budget, but the the rest of it is is part of the capital budget. Correct. >> Yeah. We could tie this into the the project, the capital project, so it would not come out of our operating budget. >> So, that's not our operating budget anymore. I have another question. >> Thank you for those for those questions though. >> And maybe it's for the planning committee or Emily, I'm not sure. But before this went to referendum, didn't we have this information on what the track and turf project involved? >> We had it was in I believe it was year two of the uh capital plan. I don't know that we had solid numbers. I think we were ballparking 800 850 Dr. Solen is that correct >> in terms of the actual I think >> did we have real numbers on that?
>> Um first to your previous question absolutely senator the community can be assured that all stakeholders have been engaged. Um for instance at our recent stadium um authority district office blessing and the dismantling or the beginning of dismantling of the current stadium um all stakeholders and parties were invited and participated including the University of Hawaii who played a prominent role and who is a big part of our development moving forward. Um on your questions with the county um senator you heard from the mayor himself. Um the mayor has been on record and has said privately that he is in full support and the current administration and several members of the council um have also indicated their full support and expediting permitting and helping us to move forward in infrastructure spending. And I also want to make note that um our current agreements have all infrastructure being dedicatable to the city.
>> Thank you. Any questions for budget and finance? Yes, member Deniv, >> thank you for your report. I was curious, has the budget and finance subcommittee set any goals yet? And where are you at with your future budget book that was discussed last year? >> We have an upcoming meeting. Um, I got to find the calendar. I've got too many tabs. Um so what happened was when we met this month uh there the department head requests were still ongoing. Uh we have another meeting very soon in March let me see March 3rd. So we're going to be getting more into the upcoming budget. Um as far as the goals we did that I think was that at the December meeting. Does that sound right? >> Kate was here. >> Yes, because Kate was still here and we went through that. Um, we didn't go over the budget book this last meeting, but we did do that quite a bit on the December meeting.
>> We did have a quote on it at the time. >> Vin says >> so they they must have had something to go they just grab that number quote. I remember >> I'm so happy that we have the chance to have Mr. Masiana address us tonight. >> Oh, thank you. I I was at the meeting. The $850,000 number that the town council included in the capital budget and that ultimately went to referendum did come from the user group that did get a price from Rad Sports to replace just the turf field. So that's where that number came from. In our capital budget, we did have a ballpark number that we had gotten from SLR, but that was a very high level number. So, did that include the track? No. >> The field? >> No. Just the field. Just the turret. >> Just the field. Just the turf.
We want to ensure that this is a plug-and-play so that anything that we develop we can inc we can get city support and be dedicatable so that they take care of the sewage and the water and the things of that nature. We don't want to take on that responsibility as a state state agency. >> Thank you senator. >> Sorry I'm sorry about that. Thank you so much. >> Not away. I was running away [laughter] senator and you caught >> almost no thank you sir. question. Since you've been in contact with the county and it sounds like they've been very cooperative, were you able to get uh any of the sewer capacity um information that we've been asking leadership prior to yourself? >> Absolutely, Senator. So, so this is where we are with that information. We have received emails and verbal indication of where we need to be on housing capacity.
I'd have to pull up the minutes in order to see because I don't want to misremember something. >> We had different models. >> Yes. >> At the table. >> Uh, we had and what we went through. Yeah, that was a really good meeting actually because that was the one where we went through and we're talking about what all information we specifically wanted to see. And so, uh, something that thematically came up a lot was class size. And that also came up a lot at this, uh, most recent meeting because we want to make sure that when we're presenting the data, we're tying it in specifically to how this is impacting the actual classroom, the class size, keeping that in mind. And of course, another one of our priorities is saving our people's jobs because it's going to be a tough year. Um, did that get all of your questions or I'm just sort of mulling over a future new business item of when the subcommittees meet and have set their goals that they submit them to the full committee, not necessarily for approval, but just so that we know what the overarching plan is for the year.
So, now this is the track. >> Yeah. We had a we had some conceptual work done with SLR in 2024. There were two uh concepts that were put forward. They had the track and field listed as uh turf replacement and track components for $ 1.5 million. So, that also played into the estimate for year two last year. >> Okay. So are we expecting that we're going to go out to referendum again for the field too? >> It'll be it'll be one referendum >> for the project combined project >> which I think is better. >> Well, we got to take a look at what the numbers are when the numbers come back and then make a determination of how we'd like to approach that. whether you know we can do one one year and one the next or you know if it's more economical to do it at one time while the equipment is there but we'll look at both.
Um keeping it in that 4,500 number, the 4,500 number. We have now submitted formalized letters to both the board of water supply and ENV so that we can get a formalized report back that justifies that number. Um and both have been responsive thus far and intend on getting it to us as soon as possible. Um I would like to kind of draw the underline that all consultants um whether it was RLC co or others have indicated that given the demands that the stadium itself will have the mixeduse retail and the potential other developments have that the housing number is pretty firm in that 45 4,500 housing units. >> Okay. So you basically have a kind of unofficial rough number. We have an unofficial rough number, but we are codifying that with official responses from ENV and the Board [clears throat] of Water Supply. >> Okay.
So that when you finish your year and you postmortem your goals and you find out if we you know if you achieved your plan or didn't or however that went there will be a body of work that can be passed to the next chair of the subcommittee if even if it's not that same person so that they can understand where the work has gone and where it is at. So that's why I'm kind of just starting to think about how the sub if the subcommittees have set the goals and of course we have to untangle that. But after we do all of that, that's just a hope that I have in my heart for the future. >> I think that's a great idea. I can go back to uh the previous meeting to find what those goals were and put that on the agenda for the upcoming one that will touch on those and that way it will be included in next month's report.
>> Yeah. >> Thank you. Anything else before we take the vote? >> The motion on the table is that the Cheshire Board of Education approved the expenditure of $7,500 for SLR to complete preliminary design services for the track and field project. All those in favor and opposed. One opposed. Thank you very much, >> Madam Chair. Before we move on on the agenda, could I go back to another item under the planning committee? >> Yes. >> Um, Emily, you mentioned uh $4 million for the Highland roof. I think you also mentioned year five of the capital plan. So, how long is that number good for? I mean 3% five years like another $600,000 just at 3% inflation. So >> yeah um and this is a project that has been p pushed back in further further years. Um and there were some asks last year when we were finalizing the capital budget about pushing things like further into the plan.
Thank you. And then uh one more question, please. Uh the bill um specifies that uh funding will not be released until the stadium authority has a project readiness uh plan. How long do you think that that's going to take for you guys to do? Because there's no deadline on the bill or no time frame on the bill. So, I guess it comes down to you guys on when you guys have the plan, then we move to the next step. How long is that going to take you guys? >> So, so the the way that I can answer this, Senator, and and please forgive me. Um, I'm going to I'm going to dance around just a little bit, so forgive me in advance. Um, all construction projects have multiple contracts that govern them, um, there's no one contract that governs it all. Um, on the stadium site, we've had five or four, depending on how you count the last two.
Sound good? Excellent. Um, it's it's not necessarily on here, but I might entertain a motion to approve your subcommittee meeting minutes that we did receive. >> I'll second it. >> Okay. >> Are they not in there? They were not included. >> They're not written. >> This is more of a >> Well, no, it was separate. >> Oh, >> it was included in a different folder. >> Yeah. Yes. They're there. >> No, no, they're actual minutes. I thought >> the minutes are there. Perfect. I was looking at the generalized report. >> I appreciate you looking out for us, though. >> All right. So, we have a motion from member Goodwin. We have a second from member Child's.
[clears throat] Um and what I will say is yeah that if the farther we push this back the more inflation and the more unrealistic $4 million becomes. So I think as we're talking about the plan next month in planning committee, it is important that we figure out where that fits in, especially when we have design work that is is fresh. >> So when when we go get quotes or preliminary estimates on capital expenditure plans, standard practice, those are in today's dollars, not you know, we think we can lock this in for two or three years or >> Yeah. and and I can I'll look back on sometimes they include some inflation estimates um and also have contingencies. I don't recall if this one specifically does, so I'll I'll take a look and see. >> Miss Taylor, can you speak to the um condition of the roof on at Highland School?
Um, two of them were the stadium specific and those have already been settled and executed as of September of last year. Recently, as of the day of the blessing itself, we reached a tenative agreement on the master development agreement, which is a tenative on the development that surrounds the stadium. What will be there? How will it be there? Who pays what? Um, the reason it's tentative is because the lawyers are finalizing the language. We literally reached that agreement that morning of the blessing. And then lastly, it's going to be the ground lease or infrastructure type on the rest of the development and that's what we're currently negotiating. We expect to finish that by mid-March. Um therefore, we are we feel that we are progressing in a manner in which we do not need this kind of involvement from HCDA. That being said, we welcome it as a backup should we lose support or should another administration feel differently about our project or should any other thing happen that we need to keep moving.
Any discussion before we approve these minutes? >> So, the only discussion I'll have is that the these are the minutes from the most recent meeting. The subcommittee has not actually voted yet. So, these are the draft. So, does the subcommittee need to vote on them? >> Should have asked Liz. >> Should have >> probably >> um because what the way that I understood what Liz was just saying is that most subcommittees don't vote on their own minutes. >> That they they come to us, we approved, and we say, "Good job, and now go make more minutes." >> Is that not how you all heard it? I think every subcommittee approves its own minutes and then they send the minutes to the full committee because that was something we discussed last year that came up in Hyannis where all the meeting subcommittee meeting minutes have to come to the full committee for awareness not to vote necessarily on the subcommittee votes on our minutes.
Can we can we wait five years? Is it advisable that we wait five years? Um not that we have any say over it. If >> Yeah. in not being a roof expert but deferring to our director of facilities. This is a project that he has moved forward with design work for. Our roof is over 20 years old. It's a it's a large building. Um and so, you know, we have, like I said, not being an expert, but can this wait five years? Sure, it's a big project, but every year you wait with a a project like this is the potential for more leaks or more more issues. But our director of facilities felt strongly about pushing the design work forward. Okay. I just want to know what to advocate for. Thank you. Uh, anything else under planning committee before we move on to policy? Great.
Um, so I guess to answer your question is we expect to be done with our contracts very shortly that will allow us to move as full partners with Aloha with AHDP. >> Yeah. and I understand your push back a little bit with having oversight from HCDA and DAGs. Um, however, and you're kind of you're you're the new guy coming in, but prior to you, there were leadership that was kind of sitting on things. So, I think that if we can assure the legislature that all people are working together, uh, accountability is at the forefront. Making sure that things move along will help to get you the funds sooner rather than later. And my last point that I'll make is that right now the funds appropriate for $48 millionish dollars. >> 49.5 >> 49 49. >> I got to be specific because I need it. [laughter] >> Uh and and you know the reason why we want to expedite the readiness um proposal is it because if it the longer it goes the more money that's going to be needed.