Board of Education Meeting

001evening. I'd like to call this meeting to order for the region 15 board of education for Monday, December 8th. Can we please stand for the pledge of >> allegiance? I pledge allegiance to the I heard a voice from above. >> Okay. >> All right. Good evening everyone and welcome. Um, the mission of region 15, a collaborative community committed to excellence, was to educate every student to be productive, ethical, and engaged in a global society through proven and innovative learning experiences supported by a strong community whose decision-making is based in the best interest of all students. Um, we'll start with our student representatives tonight. We have Miss Victoria Datlo and Board of Education representative alternate Dianiela Ardino who's filling in for Liza Murphy tonight. So, go ahead. So for RMS, we have that uh advisory programs

002are encouraging students and staff to get involved in community service and support local causes. And then as well as the music and theater department, 12 students auditioned for the CMEA, which is the Connecticut music educators association. And then the theater club is doing Frozen Kids edition um and which is already complete and the show is in the next couple weeks. And then for MMS we have um scheduled for December 9th and December 11th um there's a winter concert showcasing students musical talents. And then both for RMS and MMS um in late November they went to Quebec where the students practiced um French and explored culture there. So um I had M mees and they had a very successful stuff bus event stalking the Milbury Food Bank. They also had a schoolwide field trip to the

003planetarium. They had a Barnes & Noble reading night which was very successful. So, we thank our community for that. And they have a fancy day coming up. Uh I'm not sure when, but it's like a classic day. So, like dressing up in Texas and stuff, which is really fun. Um for PHS, we recently last Friday, a group of students from our school went to the CIA leadership conference at Southern Connecticut University and it was super successful. I would definitely say we were able to learn a lot from the breakout rooms about how to come back to our school and be better leaders and, you know, handle certain situations and groups of people. So, I thought that was super successful. We also have our winter spirit week coming up in two weeks, which I'm super excited

004about, too. Um, we have we're ending the week with the students teach the class day. So, it was super exciting and we presented that to the students at the staff meeting or the teachers at the staff meeting on Wednesday. So, we're super excited about that and we're hoping it's successful and that we have a lot of participation. So, yes. Thank you very much. >> Thank you very much. >> Um, next we have a student recognition. Is Ron doing? >> Dr. Jones. Okay. Dr. Jones. >> I'll do my best to fill in for Mr. Pl. >> All right. who is unfortunately out sick, but I do have all of the names for the wonderful students behind me. So, we want to thank all of our fall athletes. We had multiple conference championships um and multiple successful

005teams. Um uh we also um were able to be very successful in our sportsmanship scores across the uh conference and we're very proud of the work that our teams put in uh to to achieve that. Tonight, I'm going to recognize our first team all state athletes for the fall. Um, and when I call your name, students, if you would, uh, come up, we'll clap. You're going to walk around here. Um, and, uh, we'll get started. So, uh, for swimming, Emily Dawis, >> next up, Stella Green. Next up is Caroline Sudter. And last for swimming, Keratas. Congratulations. Congratulations. >> Congratulations. Congratulations. >> We also want to recognize our diver who also set a school record that has set has stood since 1995. Um, sorry, Emma Sander. Congratulations. >> Congratulations. >> Next up, I want to recognize

006our field hockey all state participants, Alison Leonard and Giana Leonard in gold. Congratulations >> for cross country. Maline Mariani. Congrats. >> Congratulations. Congratulations. >> Moving on to girls soccer. Marella Genevese. Congratulations. >> Congratulations. >> And Maline Martino. >> Awesome. Congratulations. and engulf Jake. >> Congratulations. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Congratulations. Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you. Congratulations again to all of our fall athletes. Um our girls cross country team, our girls swim, and our field hockey team were all conference champions. Um and congratulations to the hard work. We're now on to winter and wish all those athletes a good and successful season. Thank you. All right. Um, so next on our agenda, we have the board of education election of officers. Um, first I'm going to go through the voting process for offices.

007Um so the voting process um will be we will use a signed paper ballot for all the votes. Everyone should have in front of them that Juo handed out are ballots for each um office. Each board member will write the name of the nominee for whom they are voting sign their own name and indicate their town. If there is more than one nominee for an office, then we will take a five minute recess as ballots are counted by either the chair or the chairperson and checked by Superintendent Smith. If there is one nominee for an office, we will still have a paper ballot vote. Um, and the chair will announce votes by each board member. Um, tonight we have um Heather Rogers uh uh participating online. and she is feeling ill and decided not to

008get the rest of us sick. Um, so Heather is not going to be able to do a paper ballot, but I will ask her to state what her um vote is so that everyone will It's not a these are not hidden votes, so I will ask her to state it out for everyone. Everyone that >> Okay. >> Should I be sending them to Jen Meglo or just stating them? I'm just gonna ask what your vote is and then she can write it down so that there's a paper ballot record I guess. >> Okay. Thanks. >> Okay. So weird like you're just above. >> Okay. Um so the act I I will open the floor for nominations for the office of chairperson of the board of education. So is there a nomination for chairperson >> I'll

009second. >> Thank you. and seconded by uh Shannon. Um any other mo any other motions for nominations for chairperson? Okay. So then may I have a motion to close the floor for nominations for the position of chairperson? >> Motion to close the floor for nominations for the position of chairperson. >> Thank you. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Thank you, Jeff. All right. So, everyone write down your nominees and the signature and the town and then pass it up to me. >> Yeah. I have every Okay. So, Heather, um, how what's your, um, what's your vote? >> I vote for you, Marian. >> Thank you. All right. So, Jennifer, you got that done. Thank you. All right. Pass it up here to just get it all together. Um, I forgot about this. John Gusitis

010votes for me. Thank Manzo. Thank you. Some of these names are hard to understand. Heather Rogers um votes for Mary and Manzo. Heather Dwire votes for Mary and Manzo. Sally Romano spells it out. Thank you. Votes for Mary and Manzo. >> I'm gonna get back to that one. Oh, for crying out loud, guys. Okay, Tom Mars, thank you for Marian Hanzo. Thank you. You guys are trying to stump me here. Stephen Sriani, Marian Ganzo, >> Marian. >> Yeah, I know. Um, who do you think that is? >> Sh. >> Okay. Shannon Kavalo from Marian Manzo. Thank you. >> Jeff Olsen from Marian Manzo. Thank you. and Sharon addict for Mary and Manzo. So >> a lot in fact all >> it's just a short >> um so the votes have been tallied um and I

011will turn this over to the clerk and the chairperson is um me. Thank you everyone. Um I'm so nervous. Um I just appreciate the vote of confidence. Um, I hope you'll know that I work very hard to try to do what's best for this district and I will always try to listen to everyone at all times um and act in the best interest of region 15. So, thank you for your vote of confidence. >> All right. Um, next I'm going to open the floor for nominations for the office of the secretary of the board of education. >> I would like to nominate Tom Mars as secretary board of education. >> I'll second. Okay. So, Heather Dwire made a motion for Secretary of the Board of Education, seconded by John Gyas. Are there any other nominations?

012>> So, what if we have questions like just discussion questions? >> Um, well, I mean, there's a motion on the table, so there can be discussion, right? >> Well, right. Up until historically, so just stating up until two years, right? This happens every two years. >> Every two years. two years ago there's always been a balance right a middleberry and a southberry person right so I just before we vote right I would like to under and I know two years ago we decided okay Sally and Jeff were new right there was kind of a changeover and then I was chairperson of finance so there wasn't really a person in Mbury to step into one of these roles I just would like to kind of see some equality with some of these positions that maybe a

013middleberry person would be an officer in that in some capacity. >> Yep. I I understand there's not a technical requirement for that, but I understand the position. >> Do any of my Middlebury friends want to do this? >> Do any of my Mberry friends want to like Right. Are we allowed to like discuss? I guess I I should have read the agenda because then I would have asked >> I'm okay with second. I'm okay with that. >> But would you want to be treasurer then? >> No. >> Sorry. >> I just I just think there should be right equality between the two towns and this looks like and I know this comes up in our town committees. No, shaking your head. It comes up right that we don't have right an officer seat at the

014table. So, I just want that to be known and to be heard, right? That that Mberry feels that there's not a balance in this board. >> I'm okay. >> What's up? You don't want either of >> Well, are both don't matter, but don't count for the same amount as they do. So, I don't want to I think Tom will do a good job. I support him, but I do I do echo the sentiment that it would be nice if there was nobody representation with officers and I would leave you want to be trans. No, no, but I don't I don't actually make any changes, but I but I think it's important for the record that Yeah. moving forward. I think that would be something important to me. Um I just want to say per but

015also I don't think this is a discussion we should have every two years. If that is the sentiment then you know I just I just kind of feel bad that this is coming up now this table. Um, you know, sometimes there is, uh, you know, people make their intentions known beforehand. Um, and there's and there's time. >> There was. So, I I only thought chair was tonight. I didn't and that's on me. I should have read this. No one called me out these other two positions. So, Marian reached out. I think Middlebury feels the same way. No one reached out to us specifically. And maybe it's because the thought is our votes don't matter. But I do want to make it a point that this is something that comes up and there should be a

016law. >> Um, so I I absolutely do think that your votes matter for sure. Um, and wouldn't want anybody to preclude their running based on that. I mean, um, this is, you know, we've had Mberry, uh, board, uh, executive committee members in the past with the same vote in balance. Um, so I don't think it's impossible to do that again. Um, you know, I just I I I just wouldn't want that to be the takeaway message here because um, you know, I have voted for Middleberry people on the executive board before and I would be happy to do so again. Um but you know at this point I just um nobody's standing up for nomination and I just don't want it to to seem like the South very steamrolled it. >> Well um >> I

017mean I think it was a little hard that it kind of came so quickly after a very contested election in one town and an uncontested election in the other town. >> Like I think >> there was a lot happening in Mbury. It would have been I feel like I I did get a phone call and I feel like it was pretty early. Um kind of and that was that was my decision was not to contest it, but I Yeah, I'm going to leave it at that. >> You're I'm sorry. >> I'm going to leave it at that. >> You're going to leave it at that. >> I mean, I did get calls from three board members running and I'm fine with those three. Um, I guess I I I definitely want to say that I

018I do think that your vote absolutely counts and I understand that there's a frustration, >> right? Well, I mean, and and you know, >> yeah, it's all done by statute or by the state and it it it is what is, but I absolutely >> um understand the frustration. Um I guess then I think Heather's uh point is well taken is that is there another nomination and if there's not then you know I think that your position is noted um and like um we could talk about some future um positions for Mberry members as well um so that we could have that kind of balance um that you guys think is important which I understand. Um but the the question is is that are there any other nominations for secretary >> just for point of clarity

019because Jeff asked and I just want to make sure Hookson used to be the secretary. That's correct. >> Yeah. John Hookson used to be the secretary >> and I was at one point >> and yeah you >> and my early years on the board there were um there was a middle grade person for the longest time was >> yeah treasurer you know as well as pension and um >> and right initially when I started calling the board there was some middleberry share and middleberry so I mean and but those were all things positions that were voted on. They weren't wasn't that way because that we I think we need that we felt we needed to have a a balance. I mean I understand what you're saying. Um but I don't I just those things just

020happened the way they happened. Um and certainly um the Middlebury people, you know, they did reach out to me. I understand you found out you read the thing late, but I remember being reached out to by middlebury people and voting for middlebury people um for the for these positions. So um I think if it's something that that you feel is important then you know in a couple in two years and just you know make the case. >> I personally think it would be nice if it weren't done behind the scenes with phone calls if they um I mean and that kind of puts the the timing all in one >> Yeah. >> in one basket. Just to clarify, there was no decision that was made behind the scenes. It's just sometimes people who are interested

021will call and just say, "Hey, I'm interested in like I'd like your support." And that kind of thing, >> but there's no >> once that ball is has rolled down the hill so far, right? >> I mean, that's right. >> It your votes do matter. Um, and right so I think when you're saying your votes don't matter, I think you're saying is your votes don't matter like right here for this maybe specific these specific votes because you um but uh I mean they they do matter. I mean, you're you're you're voting all the time, and I suppose if there's ever a split issue where Southbury collectively wants something and Melberry doesn't, then yes. Yeah, I suppose. Um, being in the minority, yes, you would you wouldn't have enough votes if it falls along those lines.

022But personally, I don't feel like I'm voting for Marian and will vote for um Tom because they're from Southbury. I'm voting for them because they've been doing the job. I like the way they've been doing the job and they're nominated, so I'm going to vote for them. Um, it's not because I'm like, "Oh, good. There's South people in that role again. Thank goodness." Like, "Let me just vote for like that's not what's going through my head." And so, your votes do matter. It it this is this happens every two years. It's in the bylaws. Like, it's it is what it is. I think the point was right, I know Mberry people have done it before, right? But there's always been quality. It's never just been all Southbury or all Middlebury. There has at least been

023one person sitting on that executive team from each town. >> So like I would almost suggest we should change the bylaws to ensure that that happens because it is un like I said, right, shame on me for I just thought only phone call transparently we got was Marian. So I thought the only vote happening tonight was Marian. So like I will not vote for these other ones. Um so I don't know how that works but like I didn't there was no conversation in that and I do feel that it's not equal. >> Okay. I would be open for having a discussion about bylaw stuff. Sure. >> All right. Any other discussions on this motion? Okay. So may I have um Are there any other motions for Secretary of Board of Education? >> Okay. So, may

024I have a motion to close the floor for nominations for the position of Secretary of the Board of Education? >> John Jenitis made the motion. >> Seconded by Steve. All those in favor? >> I. >> Okay. >> So, everyone has a ballot in front of them for secretary. I have not asked Heather Rogers >> for the motion. >> Oh, Heather Rogers, are you okay with um what's your vote? >> Heather Rogers. Yeah, that's fine. >> I don't know if I got your motion for the other one. >> Tom is my vote. >> Thank you, Heather. All right, everyone else, if you could write yours. Um, so we have um Heather Rogers's vote. Thank you. Thank you, Jennifer. Um, Steve Serriani votes for Tom Marks. Jeff Olsen abstains. Um, Shannon Kabalo abstains. Um, John Jenny votes

025for Tom Marks. Sharon Addict votes for Tom Marks. Sally Romano votes for Tom Marx. Heather Dwire votes for Tom Marx. Tom Marx votes for Tom Marx. And Mary Manzo votes for Tom Marx. So congratulations, Tom. All right. I'm going to open the floor for nominations for the office of treasurer of the board of education. >> I nominate Heather Rogers, the treasurer of education. >> Thank you. Is there a second? >> Thank you, Steve. Are there any other um motions for treasurer >> my commentary? >> Nope. Okay. Um if there's I see there's no other motion. So may I have someone make a motion to close the floor for nominations for the office of treasurer? >> So move. >> Thank you, Tom. Second by Sally. Um all those in favor? >> I. Okay, Heather Rogers, how

026do you vote? >> I >> to close or for myself. >> Okay. Thank you, Heather, for clarifying that. Heather Rogers is voting for herself. >> Thank you. Thank you, John, for writing down the ballot. Appreciate it. >> All right, so we have Heather Rogers um votes for Heather Rogers. Um Heather Dwire votes for Heather Rogers. John Gusitis votes for Heather Rogers. Sharon Addict votes for Heather Rogers. Sally Romano votes for Heather Rogers. Tom Marx votes for Heather Rogers. Stevens Serriani votes for Heather Rogers. Uh Jeff Olsen abstains. Shannon Kovalo abstains. And Mary Manzo votes for Heather Rogers. So, um Heather has the vote. So, congratulations, Heather. >> Thank you. Mary, >> can I just aside, I don't know if I can bring it up or down, but talking about, you know, change the bylaws. At

027some point, can we have a meeting on um the law, how it um pertains to the voting and how it's split, the six and the four and the two/3 vote versus the one and a quarter vote or whatever it is, and go through, you know, what the law says we have to do and what different. >> I think we can make that an agenda item with topic discussion. I would second that. >> Okay. >> All right. So, so for the future, we'll do a presentation. Um All right. Thank you everyone. Um and this has to be turned over to Thank you. All right. Next on the agenda are the approval of the minutes. Um may I have a motion to approve the November 24th, 2025 regular meeting of board of education minutes? I'll move that

028the board approve the November 24th, 2025 regular board of education. >> Thank you, Steve. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Thank you, Sally. Any questions or comments on the minutes? >> Okay, so we'll do a roll call for the approval of the minutes. Heather Rogers, where are you? >> Heather Rogers. I >> I Okay, go ahead, John. I shared sorry I >> Mary Manzo I >> Steve Serani I >> I >> All right passes. I'm so sorry for that you. All right. Uh next may I have information proposals policy and curriculum committee Miss Heather Dwire. >> So good evening. Um you will have before you um the results of our meeting uh before this one. It was December Monday before Thanksgiving. Um there we went with Dr. Jones to discuss new course proposals,

029revised courses and textbooks. Um so this is a little bit of a lighter packet than we've had in, you know, prior years. Um I think you know there's been a lot of work to build out electives entire years and this one was a little bit lighter so maybe a little bit easier at time reading. Um but we do have a new course proposal for world language um grades 11 and 12 for Spanish 4 cultural identity um and a revised course um actually a course that we had uh for college algebra but will now be um reformatted as an ECE course. So students taking it will be able to earn um college credit for that course. Um also um there was a review of the textbook used for our advanced placement US government and politics course.

030Um and that recommendation is also in this packet. Um we also met this evening. Um you know following our completion of reviewing our whole policy book um I had put out a survey to the committee to see uh what other topics they would like to cover through the year. Um but we started off with more policy um because there has been legislative changes um last year and those policies are starting to come out. So we did review um a group of policies on a variety of topics. Um we had a lot of questions on some of those uh legislative updates. Um but what we moved uh for your review for a first read coming near you soon. Um What we moved tonight was a uh a policy on our civility code. So this is something

031um Miss Ganzo has brought up before. Um it is something that K recommends. Um so it's not a mandated policy, but it is a recommendation and you should see back soon. Any questions, Heather? Next year we will start meeting once a month for an hour and a half as opposed to an hour. So I'm excited. New format. All right. >> All right. Uh next we have financing facilities. Miss Shannon Kabalo. So we met at noon today and discussed uh essentially the roofing project, but we're going to hold on that right because we have a bunch of motions we'll talk about. Yeah. So more to come later in the agenda on the roofing projects. We also discussed our new meeting time. So, we're going to be meeting the other live before the board meeting for one

032hour once a month. So, more to come from finance. >> Any questions for Shane? >> Right. Next, we have a pension update by Mr. Steve Serriani. >> Uh, pension had its quarterly meeting in mid November. As per our governance calendar, um, there were three items. investment review, municipal landscape update and annual actuarial review. Um the um we are the committee is leaving our actuarial assumption at 6.75% rate of return. I can tell you that um other plans in the state similar to ours um the average investment return assumption is 6.54. Um in terms of the uh quarter it was we were 5.5% uh more than when we started. Um and then lastly uh oh the funding as well. So part of that review included the funding status. We are at 73 uh.48% funded which is

033up from 68 the fiscal year before and 65 the year before that. um due to just the market conditions as well as um some other factors um notwithstanding that you know um Josh and Joe have been adding um a little bit um each budget cycle increasing the line item here. >> Did you say 73.84% >> 73.48% >> we're in the 60s >> that's fantastic >> still I think a little behind you know similar towns no >> thank you any questions for Steve on pension >> uh next we have the GES PES building update >> invite Antonia from Tecton to come and sit here and then we present presenter connection right behind Mr. So, >> no, they can sit right there and we're going to put them in that table behind. >> No, you can sit

034the table here. And then the connection is right behind us. >> Thank you to those who sent in questions ahead of time. uh appreciate the due diligence of Tech Time who's watched our last couple of meetings uh and has listened to the conversations um has read the questions that were sent in um and tried to um answer not just specific questions but also kind of in spirit some of the broader questions that um have come in and and try to anticipate where people are coming from and provide I have some information to to help you uh provide context and color to uh the project. >> Good evening everybody. Uh, my name is Jeff Kazinski, principal at TechCon Architects. >> And my name is Antonius Esparella, architectural designer at TechCon Architects. >> Congratulations to everyone at

035the table. Um, for those that are new, um, we're I've handed out um, essentially the the printed out slide deck. There's um, a fair amount of slides that have um, a lot of text on them. the the intent on that is to really um specifically respond to the questions that were the last couple. So, the content that um we have to present tonight and let's see if I can get this grab it. Drag it. Grab this. Hopefully Yeah, >> they they have copies in there. >> Okay. Sorry. I'm just trying to get the screen to be as big as it can be. So, all right. Um Okay. So, um content for tonight. um want to go over a couple of the conceptual um site plan updates um that are responding to some of the questions

036per se um for both GS and PS. Want to walk you through a case study that's similar to the strategies that um you might want to employ for um the projects. Um then we'll go over the frequently asked questions. Uh touch on the schedule. I've updated the schedule. I want to talk about macro schedule. um then talk about the design schedule specifically just talk about what happens in each of the phases. Then we can dig into um I'll call the micro schedule which is the the immediate next uh three to four months should you choose to kind of proceed with this. What what are the activities that need to take place um and then um go over the grant submission um and some of the challenges and opportunities that exist related to that. Um I

037think we're all up to speed on um some of the incentives uh as well which I'll touch upon. Um there's a couple other um thank you I'll hand these out as we get to themation. Um want to talk about uh the reimbursement uh base reimbursement the incentives and then special legislation. So I'll hand this this information out shortly and then a little bit about next steps. So, okay, we're going to start with GES first and please if I if you have questions, just ask me as if that's okay. >> Yeah. >> Um, so I believe so I watched the last couple um presentations that the superintendent gave to this committee. So, I'm going to lightly touch upon these slides and just point out the differences. So um in your handout um this is GES north

038is up. Um the the magenta color um represents the possible connection to the existing sanitary line. So there's a sanitary line um that to the north it's about 1500 linear feet from the GPS site. Um and for those Um >> all right. All right. Um so if you can see my pointer um the existing uh septic uh system is located um basically to the south of the building and that lower portion. So the way that we had seen it, I think you've seen the first um possible location of the building. You have two locations, the basically the southern half and then the western portion um to build new building should you choose. So the first order is to get the septic connected to this sanitary system if at all possible. We've been coordinating with um

039the utility company. They've hired an independent um engineer to look at capacity. So, they're doing their own conducting their own study right now and they're going to get back to us. Um they're also coordinating with WPCA. So, we've been pushing them along giving them um statistical information engineers, gallons per minute flow, those kinds of things in order to to do this analysis. So, we think that's an important piece not only for kind of long-term maintenance, but also to free up some quick question. >> Sure. We could do we have to do anything with the shisting field >> decommission decommission it and remove the structures. Yeah. >> Yep. >> Um so um one potential um option and lower portion of your screen there the blue footprint that represents um basically a 95,000 foot building. Um the

040footprint itself is about 64,000 square feet. Um we were asked to identify potential entrance points. So those are identified in those orange circles um highlighted. The the largest one would be the main entry. Um so what the strategy would be here and we've done this multiple times is to put up basically a construction fence separating the site the halves of the site. Um and assuming that the first phase of this would be already completed. which is connecting to sanitary system. So, um you put up the construction fence, you set up some temporary play areas, um and basically have a separate construction entrance. Um towards the top of the screen, you could build this two-story structure. Admittedly, you know, so so the idea behind these site concepts is to I'll call them test bit, right? So,

041we're not necessarily trying to resolve all the design aspects. We're trying to make sure that it's possible, right? So the grant application that the state's going to look at is they want to know size, scope, if it's possible, and how much it costs, right? So it's in your commitment um to the project. So that's what these are intended to do. The next iteration once we hear feedback from tonight and community is to further refine and develop, we'll still call it a conceptual site plan, building plan, but for the for for tonight, we wanted to talk about this footprint um as a possibility. So that would be during the construction um which would likely be about 18 months to build a building this size. Um and then once the building's complete. So what you're trying to

042do is capture two summers plus a full school calendar year. So you're really with this type of construction, you're really only trying to or minimize the disruption to one calendar year of school. Okay. Um, so this is what it could look like when when complete. Um, you could tear down the building. So once school is out um in June, you would then go after the and once the new building's built and school is out in the existing building, then start to demolish the existing building and do the site work related to the parking um and the granary related to um kind of the front half of the of the site or the eastern side of the site. Um we think you can safely separate Maron and Bus completely. Um, we think you can extend the

043Q lines deeper into the site to try to alleviate some of the traffic that we've heard um during some of our community conversations. Getting, you know, pulling that that separate parent Q lane deeper into the site will alleviate the traffic on Parody or if it's on Oldfield. Um, and then the orange line completely separate drop off area for bus. um adequate parking. Not suggesting that you need 200 parking spaces, but it just shows you that the area that would be consumed if you wanted to put 200 parking spaces. A building of this size, my my suggestion would be around 150. We always show it kind of over oversized to begin with because um it's easier to kind of scale it back. Um some of the strategies that we would employ would be kind of like

044grass pave or shoulder parking so that uh for holiday events and park you know things like that where there's there's um school events um additional parking can be can be made but without increasing the pvious area. The reason why I say that is because every square inch that you add per area you have to deal with storm water. So you have to um basically treat it, capture it, retain it and and meter it out just as if it is today. So Q in QL kind of calculations related to storm water. So we want to keep an eye on that that any questions on this before the next potential concept. So the other um logical location would be running basically north south on your screen. Same force print for now. um much easier separation of the

045site. Um the blue kind of cyan line, if you can see my cursor right there, is the um delineation of the flood plane. Um this site is a little different than um the adjacent properties in that there's a considerable grade change from basically that cyan line there which is a elevation 190 down to basically where the water is 170. So it's about a 20 foot grade change. It's just so I'm sure you're more familiar than I am with the site but there is a considerable grade change in that back area there. So where you feel comfortable like with the possible placement of building located here, same rules apply. Um we would connect to the sanitary build the building. Um you what's nice about this is you're not fighting with the the rise in the topography

046towards the eastern side of the site. Um so that there's there's a basically a great about a story or so great change from um Oldfield down to kind of the left on your screen. or the west side of the site. Um, and you're leaving all the modulars. You're basically leaving all the play and just drawing, you know, a fence completely separating this this construction off from the occupied school. Um, possible layout. Um, again, what what's important here is the ability to separate parent and bus drop off and have adequate parking. Um, so you can see the parking fields. We think this could be a strategy because you put if you put the parking closer to the roads, it then becomes another layer of b offer to the building. Um, and and if you start to

047layer in kind of the placement of these program components, what you're basically doing is pushing the the student activities deeper into the site, which is so that's what we're trying to do here with this potential option on Pompro. >> Can I ask? So, are you suggesting one's better than the other or just giving us options? >> I'm suggesting that you have um at least two options to place a building. I think both um either option has its opportunities and challenges. If you ask my personal opinion, I think this second option likely gives you more flexibility long term site. The one challenge with this this um concept is the part we got to figure out a solid way. What what isn't really fully worked through here is we don't want to have so many curve cuts

048on this. We want to try to minimize. We really want one per bus, one per car. Just from a perspective, we want those cuts to be as far away as possible. So, anybody else on this? Um, yes, it's a little bit more complicated and I think the first slide has a lot on it. So, let me let me walk you through it. Um, apologize. I probably should have pasted it in. So, the blue line that has this white cue on it is is an important piece. It is a proposed access road through uh RMS and um we we think this is an important piece to allow the ability to build and develop on the back or the I guess I'll call it eastern side the PES site. It does two things. it you build this

049um it allows for uh temporary construction access but it also longterm gives you uh a very long queue for parent possible parent drop on we wouldn't send the buses that way but we think sending the parents in that direction gives you about 2100 linear feet which is 100 plus cars of Q- line not that I'm not that the Q line would go that far but um it gives you plenty of distance um to separate and parent us. We think there's potential opportunity to possibly combine the septic sites. Um the reason why we would do this is from a long-term maintenance and operation perspective. Um we worked on the Oxford Middle School where they have three buildings on one campus. Um our engineers did some few calculations and it was basically determined that the size of

050the existing was adequate to accommodate the the middle school just by usage. Um so it allowed we pumped to that septic system but it allowed a kind of a more centralized plant um which is less maintenance overall on the cost benefit. Do you have to do that? No. Um it's just one option to consider as you move through the options. The existing um septic sanitary system for PES is in the the bottom left corner of the site. Um you have some parking and some access over it. So, um I know some more residential systems that usually we don't put anything over them, but um the commercial systems you can um you know drive them over them temporarily, those kinds of things. Um but so two things on on septic. You don't have to do the

051purple and and look at combining them. We were just suggesting you study it and look at it because I think it's an opportunity. Um it would the existing system is not going to prevent the development of a new building towards the the eastern half site. >> Where where's the uh the p the uh the other septics is >> the other septics. Can you see that right there? >> that's existing >> PS. Yeah. >> RMS the best we can tell from the the drawings there's there's one this is an interesting building. It it I believe they're located in this general vicinity. Um the original building was added to kind of in the back and I think they >> if you connect it where would it connect to? >> So what we would suggest is you could

052this purple line here >> you could you could possibly pump up to there and share >> the roam fields from 59. So it's it's a very old 1959. >> Yeah. I I the the one strategy there is is I think you're kind of on borrowed time for some of these. >> So if there's an opportunity to try to leverage some reimbursement, um you might as well try to do it. Again, you don't have to do it, but it's it's an opportunity. A couple other things just that you should be aware of on this site. Um there's an existing transformer and existing oil tank kind of right to the north of the PES. Um, and and that's part of the reason. And then you see all these kind of yellow lines stacked together. There's a pretty

053significant gray change right there. I'm sure you're all familiar with the site, but so that the the ability to create basically room to get by the building with construction vehicles is it's very difficult. You'd end up spending fair amount of money just chewing into that hillside that room. That's why we were looking at the possibility for Sure. >> Um other yellow spot on the bottom right like what is that that town >> this right here? >> Yeah. What is that? >> That is town owned property. So these are the three parcels. Um and then >> but region 15 is just the two right that third one. >> I think this is um >> uh that is state. I think it's >> I think it's state >> but the grade there is so >> no >>

054yeah there there's you can kind of see a little bit of again this is all from your GIS would have to be validated there's some wetland that that purple cues >> intended to be wetlands from GIS I think that's all just basically as a result of the lines are deeper than Yeah. Yeah. So you see them very close like that that means >> but >> so we think you can safely so so the reason why you kind of go in this almost parallel to those yellow lines is so that you can get a less than 5% slope of that. So this is a um you certain with cars you can go up to 10%. Buses you don't want you want to stay around six. this I we think you can safely get around like a

055four or five percent. So it's a pretty reasonable incline um or decline. >> There's one more question about that. Is there any issue with reimbursement because that's not on the PPS property. >> It's a discussion with um with the state. Um it was the same discussion that we had with Oxford because it was on the great oak they shared a campus but there was lines you know there was property lines that existed. Um so we we think it's possible to get the reimbursement based on previous experience. It's certainly a discussion because there's been a lot of change in the state. So um we would certainly suggest that it's the most economical approach of to resolving your uh sanitary systems. >> But Oxford got >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Well, I mean they saved they saved the

056time on the deep and they saved the the money on the extra. So the the health department calculations for schools are um They create a lot of flow but we had the the advantage of a school being there with um understanding what the usage was and we prove so that's the whole it's like you can basically take the middle school and say here's here's the flow you know where you can leverage it to go on okay so zooming in just uh a little bit right focus on PES site. Again, similar setup for now. It's the the blue that that footprint is a two-story building. Again, similar size, the 95,000 square ft. Um we think you can safely separate the the yellow um rectangle pretty much right the center of the screen is the um modulars.

057Um yeah. Um, so we we think you can come, you know, 15, 20, 25, 30 feet off that, put up a fence, maintain your play areas, maybe create a temporary play um adjacent to uh the cafeteria, which makes a little, you know, some sense, and get the cars completely out and maybe set up some temporary parking out here. I have um an enlarged view of this area to talk a little bit about the screening. There was a question specific to that. So we'll get into that just so the entrance points again same setup orange kind of circles. Um so we think you can safely um get down to the site. You we think they're back up. You could use an area up here potential contractor parking um or just get them completely offsite. We think

058without affecting these two existing fields but to the side of it, we think you can get some parking there that way. Well, we don't want we don't want cranes or storage or materials up there, but if we had parking up there, >> sorry. So, temporary parking for like staff would be up there. >> No, no, no. For the contract. >> Oh, okay. >> We we do think on this view um I was taking a little we were taking a little bit here because I just If you ever been back here, this gets a little bit um >> Isn't that a parking lot though? >> Yeah, this green area. Um we were proposing, you don't have to um because obviously you're taking some green space um during construction, we were proposing to take this over and

059then make up for it out front there temporarily. So again, same setup. You get the two summers and then the full year. We think if we can get somebody to do both schools at the same time. >> Sure. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Yeah. Um I'm going to show you a case study or example uh of a project nearby. Um it they're building it's the same CMR different subcontractors. That's a whole different discussion. But um the answer short answer is yes. Um but I can show you some of kind of distances. Um, so when you finish this site, we but we did make some modest modifications. Um, we pushed kind of the parking a little further away from the building because this lower portion of the blue would likely be uh cafeteria gym so that you

060have adjacent play outdoor education adjacent outdoor education. There was a question to the fields being close to um Main Street South. Um we think that and I have another another slide that'll show show you the actual distance, but we think this field the edge of this field would be at a minimum 150 ft away from Main Street South. And I'll show you that one slide. >> Can I ask what are the blue >> blue dots coming off Main Street towards the visitor park >> right here? >> Yeah. Um, so during the school day, we want to have the parents drop off on the on the correct side and students go into the building and then return back up and out that direction. The dotted line could be um if you wanted to send them out

061in this direction um or after hours and nighttime use, you you basically would shut this loop road off and community can come in here, park, And the red is the bus one. >> Yes. >> Yeah. Yep. >> And I think similar to similar comments to GES, you're pulling the parking the drives deeper into the site. So I don't you're going to alleviate a lot of the concerns related to the stacking up. >> May I ask a question? So when this is final, if you follow that blue line around the back of the field, what's the buffer between that car line and those fields going around what was the old construction or excess construction? >> Like see how it wraps around the field like wraps around the school and then goes up. >> Yeah, I I

062think you could have a 25 to 30 foot buffer between any kind of green space. That that's kind of why I was showing a dotted line here. I don't think it's all that bad to maybe just have a one-way route. That would be something that we would have to study traffic wise to see what >> then it would all be going out through RMS through that access route. >> Yeah, they would go back out. Yeah, >> I I think timing wise I think they're on different schedules, right? So, I don't know if there would be challenges on RMS, but I I think this gives you the option for either which I think is better than what you have and you you have about five 500 to 750 ft of road basically pulling you out easier.

063So so like buses turning in and come all the way in there wouldn't be any I don't know if they cube now somewhere else or if they come right into the site. Um but with this plan I think there's plenty of space for them to to stack on site. So I think this slide was presented. This is just a summary slide of um you know the amount length and the access road. I think it's probably about a million or so length 1.2 put that in. Um it has I think it could be re it's can be reimburseable. I think it has like safety features. that has traffic attributes that I think are all improvements. Um, and I also think it gives you the options to traffic options. It gives you multiple different options. I still

064think you want to have two curb cuts on Main Street South. What you choose to use for them, what we'd have to that would be explored during the traffic. >> That's a two lane road, Jeff. >> Yeah, most are two. Um um well certainly both curb cuts coming off Main Street South two lanes and so would the >> Yes. Yes. The 24 shoulder >> would any emergency vehicles would come in through that what is that that red line. >> They could come in through the red line or this blue dotted line. what what I think would be logical during the day um after school is in session you would close the loop road um and any visitors would either be f funneled in here or be funneled here and then at the end of the

065day you would open back this loop loop rope back up shut this down send them all back that way and send the buses out this way >> so when you say shut that down because you know that's a lot of square footage when you start thinking about school security Right. And access points. What do you mean by shutting that down? Like a gate in >> Yeah. Yeah. We we've done um >> they're electronically controlled gates um that are also coordinated with uh life safety emergency vehicles. >> So would that be something that would be put in front of RMS as well because it would need to be across the entire >> Y. Yeah. I I the the way that we There's a little more to the the numbers that I showed here. We have sight

066lighting guards, access control on on that whole access road. So, it's it's it's a >> that's all. >> Yes. Yeah. >> But at the end, final construction is what we're talking about. So, that would all still need to be maintained when it was live, whether it's the gate house, whether it's guards, whether it's whatever. Correct. >> Uh wouldn't be a g it would just be a gate electronic operating. Yeah. Yeah. with camera access control. That's the way they >> during construction probably have like temporary fencing with like eight beds gates. >> Oh yeah. During construction, there would be complete fencing around the entire area, buildable area. And you'll see that picture. >> And this is a silly question, but now that we're on the security topic, >> all of the camera maintenance, that's all been

067baked into the cost. >> Yes. So I have that was a that was a good actually it was I was going to guess that somebody was going to ask that so I have it on the slides. Yes. So so both any project that goes to the state for a grant has to meet the school safety infrastructure guidelines and that includes everything from site strategies to visitor parking distances to entrance uh entrance lobby to cameras. School glass. We talked about um it's not ballistic glass, but it's intrusion intrusion resistant glass around the entire perimeter. Um we employ what's called septic crime prevention through environmental design. So you're when you're talking about safety, it's about delay, it's about strategies, compartmentalization, the site building. Um, so all of that is in every that would go through a grant

068application. Um, I just want to show you um a case study because it's a similar size building. I think I might have shared with you Madison um many months ago. This is um Norton School in Cheshire which is um I don't know what it is. Um but this um similar size building 600 students 96,000 ft. You're talking about 95,000 square feet. Um it's built on an existing school site. Um so left side of your screen so very similar for the right residential um neighborhood. So maybe a little bit more dense as far as residential, but um limited curb cuts. The white outline here is the existing building. Um and the the footprint here in the gray that's called Norton School is the proposed building. So what they're doing is they're building basically behind very much

069like I guess GES or PS they're building behind the existing school. um than tearing down the school and putting parking finishing the parking. They have a separate parent drop and a separate bus drop. So, a little bit more refined site plan to what you would expect to see. Um what's what's important about this strategy with the the and I spend a lot of time on parent plus it's important is if you could stand in the there's a very safe um vegetative and wellprotected pedestrian way to get you into the site and all the way up to the front door. Um and um the principal or faculty and staff can stand at one station point and see three important. They can see all the bus, they can see the parent. So that it we try to

070use this kind of diagram almost everywhere so that um it really is a very safe way to um separate pedestrians, parents. Um so this building has um things like geothermal see all the dots on the left hand side of the plan. So, we had to choreograph the I think there's 78 wells um coordinate that with the ongoing school activities and the construction. Um and then there's a I mentioned well PS has that temporary access road. You see this piece on the top right? That's a that's basically a temporary access road for construction vehicles that then becomes emergency access. So, here's a here. I'm gonna pause it. Um, so there there you can see. So, this is similar size building to yours, two stories. There's the existing building there about 35 ft distance between the two.

071Um, and this was taken this past year. Um, right, I guess right when they got out of school. Um, but um, yeah, here's >> so you can kind of see there's a there is now a construction fence all the way around that building. Um, completely separated, too. Um, so that's the kind of revised concepts and explanation for PS and GDS. And then the next series are, forgive me, but they're they're text heavy, but um, really good questions. Soils um, both properties were um, I think farms at one point. Um, and then concerns about soils, concerns about geotechnical uh, consistency. So um, Every grant application has to have a what's called the phase one. So that's a site environmental test um to understand the history of the site and if there's any potential contaminants. So that's

072step one. That would report would would identify if there were any concerns and additional testing they would recommend. geotechnical. You don't have to do it as part of the grant application. It's something that I would recommend. You spend a day out there with a a boring rig in the back just to validate. Um subsurface conditions. This is geotechnical is for foundations and toings and structural. Um the budget that we provided includes site environmental an allowance for site environmental and an allowance um for building hazardous material removal. So the site is about 500 to 750,000 removal based on our experience and the building hazmat is about between 1 and 1.5. Um in addition to that you have owner contingency of 5%. We did a little digging. Um so this is the way that like um existing

073sites work. If you look at the original building documents and the structural drawings in particular in the site, these are all show conventional footings and foundations. So it's all conventional type of construction. So there's no um sophisticated um structural system because of soils. So when you look at these drawings, that tells me that if they built the building on, you know, through conventional means, if you're building next to it, you're likely going to build conventional means. So we looked at both um PES's old drawings and GES's original documents. Um and we feel I mean you still need to do the geotechnical, but we feel that looking through this documentation that there's limited risk with finding any kind of unprecedented conditions back there. The other questions were um golf course and balls flying towards the building.

074That's why one of the other pushing further away and the south axis helps. There's a question about temporary place to try to avoid that buying temporary capes. There's plenty of black top play and grass play areas identified. And then um we think you don't have to remove the portables to finalize the option. Um there was questions on PS on the fields. Um we we'll show you that graphic in a second. Sorry. Um I there the grading I think there's plenty of grading. There's currently plenty of separation distance. We already talked about the staging areas for construction. There was a question about more anticipated challenges. Um I will go over kind of the contents of of the budget as it exists today. Um so we think there's adequate contingencies to protect um the project. Um very

075good question on about expandability or expansion of the existing buildings. We often will make sure that the infrastructure in the buildings is sized adequately to the building. So instead of adding modulars, you'll have utilities set up at the of a corridor so that you could um add to the building with additional classrooms or you could show that in contract documents that it'll bid set and bid them as alternates if you wanted access road went over in detail. Um we think there's limited RMS disruption. There was a question about a turf field at RMS. I Can you do me a favor? >> So, there's a couple handouts. There's a lot of information on here, but this is an important document. This is the ineligible sheet. So, these are a list of items that the state does

076not there's two items ever that Antonio has handed out. This is a list of ineligible costs. So, to summarize it in basically two words, no turf fields. They don't they don't reimburse those. And then anything off the property, they're not going to reimburse it. So, if you need to go get a utility that's 1500 linear feet down the road, you need to pay for it. Um, we already talked about safety. The other component is energy. So, the building has to meet the high performance building standard. So, it will be energy efficient. Most of our buildings are um either net neutral um net zero or offsetting um geothermal. >> I got that. >> Um >> I know I'm throwing a lot at you, but um I'm almost to the end. Promise the pes existing site plan.

077So here's what's interesting here is on the screen is your property line. It's 75 ft back from existing um Main Street South. Um and we think we can add another offer of another 75 ft. So usually 150 back from the road before an actual playing field starts. So you can have a stone wall, a vegetative buffering. You're going to maintain the existing sidewalks that are there, all the mature trees. So all of that would stay because that's not on your property. Um there was a question relative to noise with the building being located closer to um guess the highway. So today's buildings because of energy coats the the walls are basically almost two feet thick um because of insulation. There's air barriers, there's water barriers, there vapor barriers. Um we're confident with today's construction. These

078are this is just an image of what's going up today just so you can see what kind of some of the guts of it. Um we're confident that that noise will be ated today's contemporary construction. Um the windows um are one in thermally in uh termally broken. They all have to have pretty significant separation in their frame. So it's different than a residential window. It has to be basically two frames separated completely. So all of that helps all the noise. So I'm not long story short is that I I think um perfectly fine with noise mitigation inside and outside the building then even during construction. So right in the middle of this slide there was a question about will you hear cure hammers those kinds of things. Um this is um a picture from last

079week at Norton. Um, so they they close up all the openings. So all the work inside the building, whether they have the windows installed or not, is it's completely separated. So you're not seeing any kind of arcs growing or noise from hammering, those kinds of things. Um, quick on budget. Um, obviously all the site improvements, all the building improvements are included. Um, I wanted to point out just the soft costs. We went over this before, but soft costs are comprehensive in nature, but to add some comfort to those that are concerned about um cost overruns or escalation or those kinds of things, we're required or the state requires them to escalate to the midpoint of construction. So each of the projects has about $16 million of escalation. because it's 36 months of escalation trauma. Your

080grant application if you were to submit in June of 2026 to the midpoint of construction because you got about a year and a half of design plus half the construction, you're you're talking about $16 million. So that's about $440,000 I mean yeah $440,000 per month of escalation. So we think that the budgets are adequate to cover escalation. In fact, seen the current market kind of level out. Um, but on top of that, you're also required to carry an owner contingency of a minimum of 5% which is $3 and a half per. So, you don't have to spend that, but the state makes you carry those. So, there's no penalty for not spending the the amount out. The challenge is is if you need more, it's very difficult to go back. So, we try to be

081comprehensive in nature, conservative in budgets, um but making sure you're maximizing the value. So, >> sure. >> Say furniture and so forth. So, >> do we use any of the furniture schools or you got to buy all the furniture? you could um many districts will choose to um either repurpose it for another school that needs it because they know they're getting X amount of the new furniture. Um that's what usually happens is they'll they'll repurpose to other schools that are included in and use this budget for furniture. But everything from tables, chairs to um technology to interactive screens, all of that And that's in >> that's probably the >> Yeah. And and there is you need to inventory what's in there and you don't just discard it. You you repurpose it to other areas. Um

082they're doing that now. They're sending to three of their other schools. So um real quick on the schedule that you've seen the slide before. Um I just recall give you the June 30th every year. It's the deadline. Um priority list comes out December 15th. Actually, it's coming out for last year's couple weeks here. Um year and a half design year and a half to two years of construction. you're if you were to submit for next this June 2026, you're not putting a ribbon on any of these projects until 20. Um, so there was a couple questions as to when can you contribute to design again? Um, so the design phase is about a year and a half. There's three phases to it. Um, schematic design which is about five months design development which is about

083five to six months that construction documents. So schematic design so you have about a year worth of community engagement and shaping this. So so the plans that I showed you aren't going to be what the building looks like. It's going to evolve. It's going to change. It's it's going to be refined by everybody. So that whole year, year and a half, you get all your approvals and then you go to construction. >> And these are both run concurrently for both schools. Two different committees or one committee both. >> So usually it's one committee handling both. Um usually you'll stagger by a couple weeks just because it's a lot of approvals and review. You'll you'll have I guess when you're reviewing a lot of material, you would stagger the design presentations by two weeks. Um, we

084think there's some strategies to to running them concurrently with potentially they still have to be separate projects from state state perspective, but you could do combined bids for mechanical like mechanical subs. So, you could potentially maximize your if you will. Um, and then give some shity for long-term like you're getting the same. So, that's another piece that's a positive. >> But in the states mind, they're two separate projects, two separate project number two two separate building committees, but the same people. >> So, Jeeoff, I have a question. So this is interesting to me that there's a year of design that happens. So what goes to the public before the at the referendum like there is some kind of a design that we are going to do but it's not the design phase or >> so

085yeah it's it's a good question. So I would so you would have a conceptual site plan and conceptual building plans that give you an idea and a rendering that give you an idea of what the buildings could and should. um the these three phases are are validation of that but also really digging in. So schematic design we're going to go through the process again just to make sure you're going to do traffic study. You're going to do more due diligence and then with the committee you're going to really develop almost like two or three options to make sure you pick the right option in schematic design. And then in design development, you're going through every room and talking to the educators community about, you know, where outlets are, where you want your what materials are

086in the room, h how you want the lighting set up, where you want your switch, all that kind of stuff. So design development is room by room. Schematic design is shape look of the building design development is each room and then construction documents is really hard time like heads down and flow. Um but for for a grant application you need to convey the size of the building work how the build how the site plan could work with all the parking and play areas. the floor plans show what the potential arrangement of the building could be and then a rendering. Um I would say 95% of the time it it does change. It gets refined. That's part of the process to make sure it's correct. >> So when you were talking about your earlier presentation, there

087were a couple slides um and you don't need to go back. There's no need to go back. >> Okay. But you mentioned we think this could work, right? I'm thinking about that 1.1 and $1.2 million access road. >> Sure. >> What happens if it doesn't, right? Like what happens if this goes farther down the pike? Is that more grading at a different cost? Like, >> you know, because I feel like there's action on the table, right? And an action that's on the agenda. And I need to understand what that looks like relative to what I think you were speaking of just, which is kind of it kind of we're getting farther down into the nitty-gritty kind of work like how how does that risk mitigation cost differential as you start to do that work it's

088going to change some of these estimates but at the end of the day whatever is built in that referendum is a set number >> so how do we manage that because in my mind when I look at some of the schematics you've provided whether it's the wetland component I'm a little nervous on GES >> and the parking the septic component. When I look at the access road on PES, some of those components there, I could see hitting some roadblocks and seeing like, wow, we have to send XYZ because now we maybe need to fix the septic or we need to change this or we need to from a topography perspective take more soil out like that all comes off of that end. So, we have to then make decisions as you're talking about going through

089the schematic phase and the design phase to determine where we would take that money back from a building perspective or identify ways to get more money. >> Yeah. So, >> that's correct. >> Yeah. No, that's it's it's a it's a good topic to discuss what during the grant application you have a design contingency because because we don't know all >> Exactly. You don't know until you >> So the design contingency on a on a grant application estimate is about 10%. So they're going to they're going to take everything that we we drew and estimate it and they're going to add 10% and say is it's for all the stuff you didn't show >> including an inflation rate or not. >> So the 10% includes the inflation rate. >> 10 10% is called a design estimating.

090Okay. >> So during your schematic design you'll see you'll see an estimate total up a number and then they're going to say 10% of your number. Add 10% to that number because your drawing started. >> So each see the yellow on each of these phases. So then we're going to take the estimate. We're going to have an estimator. You'll likely hire us a CMR CMF risk. They're going to have an estimate. We're going to sit around a table and talk about what did you have for um excavation? Oh, I had this that. So estimate reconciliation at each of these phases and that that 10% schematic design estimate contingency and the design development goes down to like 5%. And then at CDs it's basically the same. So when we start a grant application we're at that

09110% because we don't yet know but that's just related design. you have a owner contingency that's completely separate from this that's about 5 to 10% for the unforeseen um I don't know there's some somebody buried a car on the hillside we have no clue so that's going to be 10,000 that's what that contingency is for outside of the design so the reason why you go through these phases is because you at the end of schematic design they very well may you know, you need to build you're going to get the same result. Classroom's going to be the same size. If you build it slightly different from here, it's going to save us money. So, that's the conversations that happen in each of those phases. Um so there's there's a lot of built-in um checks and

092balances along the design phase to each of these phases but also in the grand application um that is all back stopped by so we're going to do an we'll do a conceptual design we're going to do an estimate you're going to come up with a number we're going to take that number compare it to the 20 or so projects that were just completed in the state and see that score is so there's Look, there's a lot of kind of checks and balances to make sure that you stay on course. Um, the only time in my career that I've seen it, and I think it hit every project in state was that spring 2021, I think it was, when everybody thought the end of the world was coming, but it didn't. Everybody put their projects out.

093So, that was the only time that I've seen budgets go sideways. Um, but the state um has a pretty thorough process. So, we're we're confident, completely confident that at a grant application phase, you know where those numbers need to be, know where those so that if you do have to cover that, you you don't want to go back. It's just they're going back the option we're saying is we ask for a grant for $100, but really we only need 80 and then we got another $20 in contentious >> something like that. Yeah. I mean, so I'll give you a good example. Norton um the Cheshure projects, they we all estimated them. the bid savings. So on bid day, one came in I think about three to four million low. One came in about $7 to

094$8 million low. So that was the savings that they realized in the bid. They all they still have their contingencies that they're tracking. So they decided to move a little bit to to do a little more furniture. Um they're not going to spend it all. They're going to return, you know, some of that back to the community. They don't suspend it. So, um, so I think I was a little We're at the end of the slide deck. Um the I think the one piece that I didn't talk about is um and I think this might be new to to some. So the state so this is um I know it's small numbers to read I highlighted district uh you know your regional district um at the top it's it's the yearly reimbursement rate for um

095general construction is basically renovation and and new construction is just that it's new construction what's interesting is state released an updated chart in August which That's why I don't know if I remember presenting this. Um the delta used to always be 10% between renovate. Um now it's basically much closer. It's 49.29 for renovate. So the town all towns are different but um >> delta be closer. >> Is that what we can argue that it'll be cheaper to do? target. >> Yeah. And then I'm not I won't go over it, but there's some in your more information in your packet on um the uh the 15% pre the early childhood and then special ed. So obviously you go with the the%. So we're trying to get your base rate be the 49 plus 50%. What we're

096trying to >> just get like free reduced lunch your community but >> it's all for the major driver community well >> but it is interesting to see your percentages your historical >> thank you so much >> absolutely >> any um you're not going anywhere just see any questions for Uh, first, uh, thank you. Uh, I appreciate you addressing all the questions. I appreciate you taking another look at GES in particular. Um, I think that second design, personally speaking, answers a lot of the concerns I might have had about the original look at GES. It feels a little more conventional and that the building is now facing the street and not off kind of in the corner. Um, and those are the kind of things I I know we're not there yet, but I was the

097one that asked about, "Can you show me where the front entrance is?" The reason I'm asking is, um, there's something very quaint in the small town about driving down Main Street and looking up at the hill and seeing Pompro Elementary, right? Um, and having there's something very conventional about having the front of the building squared up with the road that you're driving on. Um, and so those are some concerns that I do carry into PES. Uh, I kind of share Shannon's perspective that I I I trust you, but I still won't fully trust that access road until I'm driving down it. You know, like it does seem like there's Well, point, you know, case in point, we don't have a second look at a PES placement because there really isn't second place alternative place to

098put a PS or if there is, I'd love to see it. Um, what I'm heading towards is I mean I think you you mentioned it in your presentation. It presents more challenges than GPS, right? It it seems like it's a tight fit back there. I'd be curious to get your perspective. There are still a couple of properties that we have not yet rolled out as a board that would be undeveloped sites. So, could you compare for us and that's something we'll be discussing later in the evening. So can you discuss and just kind of compare developing behind PS versus you know I know you know the Roxberry site you had done some work on that and we did some phase one testing that results just came back so what would the construction process be like

099what would be the advantages versus the disadvantages uh there's another one at IBM maybe we're looking at so if you could just give me a quick topline like what made the comparison developing PES versus an undeveloped site. >> So, the first challenge, well, believe me, we looked at a lot of different properties. Um, >> we ruled a lot out, but I think those are kind of the last ones standing. And um I think the topography even though you have the hill to navigate between RMS, I don't think that is as challenging as some of the other sites that were proposed to be quite honest. >> I think you know the the unforeseen are less with a site that you know than a site that you don't know. Um So Roxberry, for example, um good site

100could probably would fit a building of this size quite well. Um the unrealistic challenge is not just specific to that site, it's what happens with PDS because keep in mind the demolition remediation and making PDS site usable or attractive to some other use. You have to deal with building in some way, shape or form and that's a big building deal with from a hazardous environmental orientation perspective. So that that often the reason why we we take hard looks at existing school sites is because you're getting the reimbursement to do all of it on that site. when you move to a new site, you're you're you're letting go of some of those challenges, but you have to acquire that site and then you're left with what do you do with so um so that's some of

101the comments that I would have. Um, I think geographically some of the sites that we looked at just looking at where your existing catchment areas are and the Roxbury said it was a little bit I wasn't quite sure how that would all work transportation wise. So, you would have that would that would likely impact um the way that you would lay out your bus and parents because of you're changing kind of the geographic catchment area. So you got to think about transportation too. Um so it's I guess in short it would be my concerns would be less about more the site itself and more about what's left over if you if you like that does that make sense >> remediating and >> prepping PS for sale. >> Yeah I think >> choose to sell it.

102Yeah, the the viable the the the Roxberry site that we looked at I think is is the one that I think is seemed to be the most viable out of all of them. The the ones at IBM um I have some concern I have some concern with how do you get there? Um keep in mind they spent a significant amount of dollars um developing the access to that site. Um, so the question is, do you want to share that access to that site? How does that all work? >> Yeah, Jeff, I'm so sorry. Can like we Yep. I microphone's over here and >> Sorry. >> Um, understand you're answering Tom's question, but you're saying some good stuff. Yep. >> I want to make sure we catch it. Um so so I think that the the

103sites towards the south or on the opposite side of 84 with the photography um I think you'd be spending a dis disproportionate amount of your project budget on site development. you could potentially further develop it down the road a property like that. I mean, there's limitations in just the blueprint itself. You can't change the footprint of these two locations. You could continue to expand year over year in decades on a different piece of property like the IBM property. I mean there are logistical issues but when you think about the generational impact that can be transformative this is a very limited program >> despite the immediate acute challenges >> if if you're talking about developing a campus a long-term campus than >> or turf fields or whatever it could be 10 or 20 years down the

104road you know in a different referendum or something. >> Sure. Sure. Yeah. If the it really the biggest challenge that I saw with all the sites that we studied was was the topography the the the building footprint of a building of this size. It's it's fairly significant and it's not just the footprint of the building itself. It's it's the parking related to it. And you have to keep in mind that um some other requirements related to access might be a little bit different than than for like a corporate development. Meaning you have to provide universal access to all to to all your fields to all portions of your building to all portions of your play. The state's going to be looking for that. So, and that means um basically paved accessible means to those fields.

105So, so some of those do end up adding up um over over the long term. So, I com I would completely agree with you if you looked at the the IBM property as the development of a long-term campus. Um you're going to spend a significant amount before anybody sees that result just just getting there with utilities. Keep in mind all that that infrastructure is you know it's getting close to the end of business life as well. So um those you're asking my professional opinions scare me a little bit more than what you know what you see in front of you some that's that's why we're not pushing in either direction. or giving new options. But I think if you're talking about mitigating risks, I think I think I'd rather mitigate them with existing structures that

106I know. >> That's Shannon. >> Uh do you remember aside from the fact that with the Southbury training school property we'd have to guess go through Harper to acquire it and possibly pay for it, do you remember the other reasons that went off the table. Um, was it lack of usable space uh >> for the training? >> Yes. Yeah. So, >> um to to get a plateau on that site for a a flat area for a buildable flat buildable area. Um, the only options that I saw was the kind of the I guess I'll call it the culde-sac of smaller homes that were that were developed that you would that that you would have to remediate and do some grading. The other challenge with that site is that uh there's some big waterways and wetlands

107that exist there that in in theory you're going to have some considerable setbacks from that start chewing into the usable area. That's so um and even if you're even if you're looking at it, you're walking and it it seems reasonable, you know, from a navigation perspective to walk up those hills, you got to keep in mind every time you kind of cut to to level out, you're compounding the edges. So you're gonna have like a one thing I consider the most and Tony hears that all the time like certainly on elementary school I don't no we don't want to see retaining walls we don't want to see fences we don't that those are all places to um even if they're low containing walls for school of that for those that student population I think you're

108asking trouble. So when you start looking at sites like that can you do it? Sure. I just I just think you're gonna end up I still think you're gonna end up spending more on site than with the classroom. >> And it's just because I don't know the number off the top of my head with our reimbursement rate going up on like a remediation, right? Like a renovate to new, >> right? that still pushes PES completely off the table on a renovate to new versus a rebuild, I guess, is the question. >> Yeah, it's it's a good question. Um so we think um we did some studies that I may or may not have here where you you study um the phase occupied renovation of pees and how long that would take and the cost associated

109with that compared to the new build. If you can prove um it's this this slide actually. If you can prove that a new build is more economical than a phased occupied renovation, then then you're entitled to the higher reimbursement. So from a value perspective, that's we we had some conversations with the the sure what the committee exact >> the feasibility committee. Um, >> I was just wondering dollar differential right now that that number has gone up. Was it like >> what's the number >> that the remediation of the school was factored into that cost analysis? >> I guess I'm just looking for like what that differential is. What what's the number? >> You mean the the renovation? >> So like right a new school is $100 million. >> Yes. Yeah. Yeah. >> Right. The renovation

110to new is it 75 million? I get it over over a longer period of time or is it 150? >> It Yeah. So, we worked with um new field construction was hired was partially hired part of our collective team and they gave us costs per square foot for renovation that were higher than construction. >> That's >> Yeah. Is that answer? Yeah, >> it Yeah. I I'm just Well, I guess that depends on like does that include like site, right? Like I'm just trying to look for the all-in number because that there would be less site work, right? Less other work that would have to get done. So it's like a price per square footage. Okay, that's one thing, but only if that includes like everything else we were doing. Like is it 100 versus 100

111or is it >> It was an apples to apples comparison. Some of the some of the challenges with a phase occupied renovation is your your remediation costs tend to go higher even though your site costs are lower because you have to put up I'll stick them down. You have you have to remediate a building uh nights, weekends, summers um rather than if you were to demo it. It's much easier. So, so the ad premium goes up, the site cost, development cost likely down the length of construction though, unless you have a place to put them is almost double. So, >> yeah. Yeah, understood. I just think there's been a lot of questions, right? I like why I think game field is an easier conversation. I think the ES1 is a more challenging one. to have

112a number around that because like if it's a couple million dollars right at the end of the day like I don't I I think that would sway people >> and the renovate to new option at PS is would that access road at $1.2 million still be on the table or would that be removed like that I think is kind of where we're going. Yeah, but those that would understand like we've seen the plan on if it's new, but if we were to do a renovate to new like how would that some of that >> you probably you wouldn't you wouldn't end up developing the access road. >> Yeah. So the access there's 1.2 million. You know what else about like topography or other things? I'm not I'm not saying that that's how what we should

113be thinking about, but I think it raises a good perspective relative to the overall end. >> Wasn't that was on a slide the >> faucets. We have that answer >> the feasibility. I didn't realize like the access road wasn't needed. So if that was on a slide, it >> was like that's a big number. 1.2 just to put a road in and we're not even sure if it's going to work and it's going over septics, >> you know. But I mean I think it gets us close to what what people are asking for. I I thought it slid >> mean I think the committee took all the rent a options pretty much off the table. Some of it was cost and you know the efficiency of the dollar spent. Um but a lot of it

114too was the length of the project. um doing a renovate project is, you know, twice as of essence or so, but but twice as long um in an environment where you don't necessarily get to build a construction screen between works in school. So, I think that was a big part of that decision, too. Um, and you know, I get having an all-in number is helpful, but I think there's like there's a grid, there's a matrix here of like reasons why we're doing that >> and and understood, but I think some of those conversations happened prior to the full acknowledgement of some of the issues that we're having with PS, right? Because it was like, okay, we can find a new site. It's okay, right? There kind of this path went down without considering all the

115facts that we know now. Um, sorry. I was just >> No, I think it's a fair question. I just want to add that, you know, >> yeah, I think the case to the community is is there there was more than one reasonability study committee um didn't renovation. >> We did, but we didn't choose it. >> Right. Well, I mean, it was there was a a an aha moment at the ability study where we talked about value that they felt that there was more value in new construction than a renovate to new. But like remember the the first recommendation was build one new school on one new property. But I think the feasibility study committee recognized that that was a tall order whether we're going to be able to find a big enough property to accommodate

116that that and they did look at a lot of this kind of stuff about the existing property versus new. Our second recommendation was the two schools and the two properties and then the third. >> Yeah, I understand because a lot of factors have changed since those numbers were run today, especially with increased reimbursements in here with this, >> right? So, I just would like maybe just to update an update. >> Yeah, we'll work on >> I don't want to be public comment. >> There is public comment later in the agenda. Um, it's coming up right after board member comments as soon as we finish this. All right. The renovates to new would basically be keeping the same, right? >> Yeah. >> That's okay. And I feel like that that was the other thing that I

117would just add that I actually remember when you did your initial presentation was a kindergartener walking from one end of PES to the other. It was like 10 minutes of time. um just like the whole layout of the school itself um was not necessarily conducive to an educational environment that there was like so much time wasted just walking one to the other it could change >> I don't know that was that question >> you're still going to have a single in theory it's still a single floor school for PS obviously the ceiling height in the current PS you really would have to raise the roof significantly to get height for duck work and everything I think you would likely end up with either building something on the roof or having duck work on the roof.

118The >> the existing roof structure is a basically a cast in place concrete structure. So that make it difficult. >> Yeah, it's not pretty low there. I mean I think it >> yeah didn't contemplate the work >> leased back in um well a couple meetings ago but originally in May the faucet slide so but it was was it has $80 million renovated and $86 million new deal and then additional costs because of the renovation I guess there's some temporary or throwaway costs that temporary staging area or temporary classroom however it works So maybe that's the slide that you is that what we're talking about like and then we tack on okay well now we need an access road is that is that what we're asking here >> kind of drove the delta further >> right

119where renovation is cheaper >> was the access road always in the new >> I think that's that's where >> that's where we're getting I think confused because I don't want to say confused but we're talking about two new schools but now with the reimbursement like what does the new school require ired for it to be built versus the renovation. And clearly there were pros and cons, but to Shannon's point, it was this road less traveled that we kind of have gone down. And I think from a transparency perspective, it's really to me anyway, it's important to understand, okay, what are the cost implications? What's the impact to the community and the classroom, right? the two the doubling the time is significant but I'm also in my mind a little concerned over two simultaneous construction projects

120happening so I think it's all of those factors >> just and it also but and if you rent if you renovate then you add another you add $12 million in costs because of temporary facilities escalation because you have to go up four years peers so there are there are so it does so the road ads costs but yet taking longer I suppose ads costs and and shut my kids around ads costs as well >> and this was based off which reimburse them though because this is not enough >> uh the older one >> update I think it's a great slide to to work to re ref >> yeah I mean I this doesn't really contemplate your reimbursement what it's >> suggesting is the value that you invest in building versus um you know what stays

121in the building and what doesn't. That's the discussion. And so this is this is I I mean we can update some of the you know the the components related to the the access drive and things like that, but this is specific to the building and what you would likely experience in a renovate versus in construction. So and this is I mean this is bags closer. You're going to end up spending you're going to end up putting more into the physical environment in a new building than renovated phase occupied renovation. >> The costs that are represented here are end to end totally complete renovate and new. >> This was this was >> when it was done the estimate. >> Yeah, this was a while back. But yeah, I was really trying to articulate the value that

122you invested. Yeah, I mean what the reimbursement rate used to be a 10% belt that it's closer now. So it makes the argument for renovation that much more difficult >> and and it could potentially be a $10 million conversation, right? So I just want to be like prudent about the cost, right? If the 80 million is all in, we have to add some more to this 86 million, right? because of the site constructor thing we're talking about a $10 million differential with just reimbursement doesn't necessarily fix yeah that's a big number right it's not like a million you're getting reimbured more your >> so basically what you want to see is a is a more updated number >> just two clarifications that I would make you can do the update but 15 million in preschool

123reimbursement is on new construction not renovation construction or could it be applied to both if you were to add a preschool Well, and while you stay on that slide, then the other piece, just to make sure everybody's clear, is that the while the total on the new building is overall more, you're spending 12.9 million of the 80 million on that swing space. So, you have to move students while we're doing construction. So, there's no long-term value in that. It goes away when the project's over. Where whether that road even cost more up front, you now have that road that we paid 40 cents on a dollar for period where that other stuff where maybe you get 49 cent or we pay a little less um per square footage. A lot of that stuff goes away

124at the end of construction. >> So I I hear you, but I also think that there's a traffic component. >> I want to make sure you understand. Yeah. Yeah. And I think that it's the big picture, right? We're removing maybe traffic from Main Street, but we're adding it to what is that Peter Road. Um the the fact that that road goes around play areas makes me concerned. It opens up things from a safety perspective and you've addressed a lot of them in this discussion, but it's the first time I'm seeing this on a slide and so I'm thinking about it relative to the other conversations. And then the cost that you've outlined, does that include the septic the connecting like on on GES that was a planned septic that is included? >> Yeah, we're it

125the original estimates um we did a calculation for both sites for on-site septic. What I haven't done because I haven't got an answer yet is is that decide on GES to connect what that would be rather than building connect. >> So would we connect to that GES subject and then we would build a new building and then reconnect it to the new building. Is that the plan or is it just to connect it once into the new building? >> One conversation. I don't know that answer. >> Okay. >> So what we do know is that anything not on our property we have to pay for and it's not reimbured. >> Okay. Um and so and what we're suggesting and we also know that the septic gate is original. So what we're saying is that that

126sewer line we should at least connect with the town and try to put a sewer line in. Whether or not we connect it now, whether or not we connect it later, either way, if we were to keep painting renovate, then we should put it on to build a new one, it should be on a sewer system. We should if we have the opportunity to get rid of septic and then kind of timing and when that may change based on what we decide. But either way, they're going to dig up uh Peter Road and they're going to put a bridge in. We should do what we can to lay pipe while it's open. >> Peter >> and then PES. But again, the septic is part of the re would be reimburseable, you said. >> Yeah. Okay.

127And the idea there reimbursement for blue, >> but either way, we need updated numbers on all. >> Yeah. >> So, now we have a motion potentially on the agenda uh for later this evening. Um I'm hearing a little bit of perhaps skittishness from some board members about property. Um I think it's interesting that the questions come back on on renovation. The question I would still have is the things we are going to get asked about repeatedly. Have you looked at the training school? Have you looked at IBM? Right. And people now know Roxbury Road because that's on the agenda. Um I will I'll be happy to support closing doors. Um if I know that that is like our our last best option, right? So you before uh voting myself to close doors, I'd like to

128see if they're closed for us prior to that. Like for example, when Jeff mentioned getting utilities upside, that's the first time I've heard that. Um and I flipped through some previous presentations. I haven't seen it. That'd be a really helpful talking point to bring to the public. So what I would love to see at some point, okay, I'm one board member, but before making that decision to close any doors, I'd love to see what are the viable options still in front of us. I want PDS Roxberry Road. That could be a very quick discussion, you know, just asking for is the town of Southbury that brought it to us. The town of Southbury may no longer be interested in selling it to us, but I think we need official answer. We might get it at

129public comment. I don't know. I would welcome it. It's not gonna happen. Uh IBM, if we have structural issues, we also need a right of access. I know in a previous meeting we talked about speaking to a property owner about right of access. If they haven't gotten back to us, maybe we put a date on that. And if they don't get back to us, that door to me is closed, but I'd much rather see this decision start to be made for us so I can stand behind confidence the last best viable option we have as opposed to having to make those decisions ourselves. And I'd like to add to that. I think that there were also some additional FAQs, at least the questions I sent through that I have not seen. They may have been

130talked to. They may have been integrated into a slid set, but I've not seen them represented on the slide. And in the FAQ document that was distributed to the public, they were not represented. So that's important to me to make sure to Tom's point because I think they hit on some of the same elements that from a transparency perspective that those have been formally addressed and posted. Hi Jeff. Go ahead. >> I would answer them. I I don't know. >> It's okay. Go ahead. No. What are the questions? >> Yeah. Well, so yeah, let's put them out. So I I don't know if it's over for me to speak because I feel like people are looking at me u to answer a lot of this. So I am an agent of the board, not individuals.

131So I am happy to do any of this work. Some of this work requires studies and contracts. We did the phase one on the Roxberry Road property. There's a cost to that. Um, if you want to study, you want we we've reached out to the independent person that we would have to or organization that we have to buy property from. We've talked to them a little bit. If you want us to pursue like getting it uh assessed and what the value to be, what the total cost to bring the road in back there, if we can do those things, there are costs. the looking at property in Mbury we've started but the real challenge with that becomes redistricting. >> So I have to do a redistricting study because what we would effectively do is take

132log meadow and redistrict those students to the new school and redistrict the field students to to log me. So if you want us to do that a redistricting studies you know5 or $6,000 it may take a month to do. So we can go down whatever path that people want to do. I just need like board to say collectively these are the things that we want to answer and the questions that we want to do it on. Just a comment, just speaking to some of that here helps to frame some of the conversation, but when they're sent and it's not addressed, it becomes like vacuum. And that's where I start to get a little bit uneasy. And I know that you've heard me say about pre-ereads and I don't want to be on a soap box,

133but this is where a period becomes very valuable because if there are additional questions or things that don't necessarily get addressed in that pre-eread, then that's a different conversation before a board meeting >> and heard, you know, but I think like and to the extent you can provide pre-ereads, we will know in this case like when you come tonight, we try to get presentations. There's a lot of information here. a lot of different parts. Totally understand, >> you know, and so like and this is a valuable conversation. So like we were talking about building a specific website or they cues on it. Uh the information really from the transportation company came in pretty recently about could they do like bus routes uh from like taking PES offline basically and moving that. So some of that

134is we wanted to share some information might have conversation like the only anxiety that I have is the more variables we continue to circulate the harder it becomes to get to that May referendum piece we like I don't want a false we don't have to do we don't have to do like you are board of ed you can decide you know my anxiety is there's a lot of safe and I don't mean this as like an ultimatum or threat or anything like that but there's a lot of reimbursement dollars out there. Like that 49%'s a good number, but when we get close to 70%, that's a really good number. Um, and I can't control what happens, you know, in the next legislative session. I am very anxious that the people that pass those laws didn't

135understand the cost implication. >> And as Jeff seeing projects and all the other architects seeing projects, if that's not there, it changes the dynamic of building or renovating a school. if some of that free school dollars changes goes away. So like all of this again, we're in this together. I'm an Egypt. Whatever you want us to do, we can pursue. Um there's still some variables that are out there. And I guess the idea of trying to help us. Do you want us to work and spend resources and time kind of answering some of the questions that we have about these sites? The the study committee ranked them and I please correct me if I remember wrong. There was a choice that that was discussed around should we like rank the one, two, three or should

136we just say these are the three options and the committee said one two three for a reason. Um and so if we want to continue going down the three like whatever I think you know >> think about that I think the one 123 was also before we knew some of the logistical challenges of PES and you know we had some idea but the sort of road step and all that kind of stuff to to me the the real outstanding question isn't so much the renovate to new I I I'm satisfied with the the bucket and all of that but understand people wanting more numbers um it really is the idea I think that's the one people I you know are are going to still ask about. So for me that's the um it would be

137helpful to have answer to that just >> okay Steve and then Shannon circle back to Sharon >> no have an answer on the property I thought it was too topographically challenged and not enough flat you know space um zone not the right way. Uh I thought there were a lot of reasons that a loss of tax >> access would make it. >> The the most important thing is that we don't own IBM. >> That is the biggest hurdle is that we don't own that property and that whatever >> whatever other property is at we'd have to buy it and that would have to get approved by referendum. So that's like a a big hurdle. We have uh Southbury Training School, Roxbury Road, any of those properties that additional hurdle that we have a referendum that

138we have to if we found out the access road was approved and it cost us whatever a million dollars. It's still topographically challenged. We still have to buy the lands. Like I feel like that door is the only other door I think might still be open to me is Roxberry Road. And just to add to your thing about IBM is that that's recently been zoned industrial. >> Um is so that you're dealing with possible next to some industrial something. >> Okay. So those are I feel like those are >> kind of circles. Sorry. I think this kind of circles back to what you were you were going to like there's this whole lot of stuff but like we don't want to just close the door. We want to make sure it's an informed like okay

139ask answer closed. let's move on. And it and I think that that's kind of what you're hearing, at least for me, it's like, okay, if it's if it's zone and it's industrial now and we can't control the access and there could be XYZ going on next to school, okay, we have to say maybe it's done and answered and maybe that was already out there, but I think that it's also a state of a lot of different information. We we talked at the last meeting about how we wanted to winnow things down and I think now we're we're opening them up again. Um I I thought, you know, we had the phase one study on Roxberry Road and I thought that would be discussed tonight. That's going to be enough information. I I assumed to close

140the door. the request for the Middbury was I thought that was one person made that request and it was well are there properties available and now we're hearing that the redistricting you know to get people transported all the way over to you know the Mbury side of town um it's one thing to have to do for the high school but now you're going to be shuffling um elementary and middle school kids over like I feel like that that door is closed Uh >> but but is it right because you have LME which is essentially the line and if there's decent property that didn't need a lot of site work I feel like maybe has more like flat spots or close to places we already own right like us I don't know if the decision I

141wouldn't make a decision on whether or not we had to redistrict to be like a conversation that was my comment when it was said before I was holding my hand up but it was like if there's a decent property and decent place in Mbury that's going to cost us less, right? Why wouldn't we at least evaluate that versus building roads downside embankments and trying to get access to IBM? Like if there's a decent for sale piece of property that's there and if there's not like right but like did we check and I'll take it a step further if there's redistricting and that's off the table then that door is closed to your point. I I think it's just if the question's asked, we spend time on it. It just needs to be answered in close.

142>> We have to consider again, we want to put something before the public that meets, you know, checks a lot of boxes for a lot of the people. We're never going to make everyone happy completely, but I would imagine redistricting a lot of people to the other side of the district is is not going to be something very popular. Right. So, yeah, that's just regardless of, you know, even if you even if there is land and we buy it, >> okay, we're going to shift some kids around and there's going to be kind of I mean, it's not like kids don't sit on the bus for a long time. My kid lives close to school. They sit on the bus for 40 minutes. So, we drive. So, like >> just saying you still have to

143find the property, buy it, you know, figure out what. So, I feel like I feel like a lot of the doors are closed and we have the information somewhere at this table to to make >> I think you look at middle dairy property right now the district is a north south district you looked at middleberry property for pees we're talking about an east west configuration I think you'd have to redistrict you have people practically new town we would be shipping middleberry and that was a situation you know, you know, I had personal experience with, you know, that's that's right. That's, you know, has been now with us. So, I I I don't think you can do it without redistricting. Um, >> I wasn't saying redistricting wouldn't need to happen. I was just all I was

144saying like, is there a good piece of property that's sitting available for sale? Because when you drive that corridor where all of our schools are, >> every 22 feet on that road, it's space for sale, right? Like there there is a significant amount of property, right? And I know one I'm sure of, but that's like would be ideal, but okay, right? Like along that road, right? There everything is for sale. I don't know what it is, how big it is, whatever. But if it was just like, no, there's nothing big enough like I wouldn't suggest putting a school at MMS, right? Like that's not going to work out. But if there was something next to our other campuses, right, to move because then you start saving transportation costs. Like think once you start moving the

145schools to a centralized like campus hub, right? As we kind of talk about thinking about the future, what is this district going to look like 15, 20, 30 years from now? And if there's not, fine. I just don't know the answer to that, right? I know it was brought up. I was like, "Oh, that was a great idea. I'd never thought of that." But I never got into work. >> And I think that if the the if we can't move forward with a decision because it it's going to take XYZ number of months to do it, then obviously don't do the study. Let's figure out what we need to do now. Right? And I think that's that's just it's not about investing time on things that are not going to have any return. It's just

146making sure that some of the information has been shared and that's really >> So just hold on one second. So like are what what question do you have any other questions or >> No, I don't want to move on. I want you to have your questions. Yeah. >> What I think I'm learning and taking away from this conversation is that we are the most engaged audience we will ever have on the school project. We have seen some of the slides half a million times and there's still some questions coming up. So if we have this much conversation about it, imagine what happens when we get to the human level. Uh, so I think where I'm where I'm at is I would love one more six- page presentation that kind of lines up all the finalists

147and gives us the updated pros, cons, and cost considerations. Um, not just for our own decision-making process, but that's the presentation I'm going to point someone back to. They say, "Why didn't you look at IBM?" Oh, we did. And here's the definitive slide updated as of whatever the next meeting is or whenever we get it. I would disagree respectively. That's what our website is for. We have that information. We can put that together. Now, we don't we don't need I don't want to schedule I don't want to schedule a meeting to have a presentation that we're then going to use like that's in to to point people like we that the whatever we whatever body of literature we're going to give people to that gets put together after we make the decision. I feel like

148we're but some of us need some of us like agree with >> we don't have new numbers right like >> we need I think the numbers >> renovation like we literally just got caught off the press when you go back to that when you go back to that police side it says existing right so that 15% is not off the table on a renovate to an existing so like just a six pager with all the numbers >> different that's part of No, because we're still talking about a PES GES property renovate versus new when you say so I I agree matters. No, I agree. >> I agree that is a question that needs answering. But when we talk about what the superintendent had said about you know Mbury and redist all those other things like

149again I I think all those doors are closed except for the the Roxberry one which we have more information on. And then what you just mentioned about the numbers with reimbursement. >> Yeah. And I and I do want to say like we we have gotten a slide about IBM a couple times. Once at the retreat, once I feel like it was in September, I can't remember. Um I think it's it is a matter of digesting what is out there. We have a lot of the answers. And I did hear I mean there there's a reason why that motion is on the agenda is because the board was like let's see if we can narrow this down and it's not we'll get there when we get there but it's not closing a door necessarily so much

150as focusing our resources on one option and like recognizing that you know yeah IBM you could do it at IBM but it's going to it's there's a lot of hurdles um and we have a viable option in front of us that works that we want to consider more and further explore. That's really it's not a matter of closing other doors. It's a matter of putting things on a back burner and not allocating any more time and resources for now until we figure out if this other option is the best option. >> I just have a quick question. Is there even time to look at at this point like the whole logistical situation buying property? I mean, or is that are those doors just closed because we want to hit this 15% because because of our

151because it seems to me like we're cutting it pretty close if we're we have to be with taxpayer dollars, right? Like if we're talking about a $15 million differential like >> right I don't think I think we have to right like right this isn't our money we're spending this is the district's money that we're spending and every piece that we sit here and approve is going to go back to our taxpayers. So, I kind of feel like I feel like there needs to be like a six page slide with all the numbers on it that we can point the community back to with numbers, updated numbers, >> right? But what I'm saying is that the motion for tonight is to say go figure out those numbers and then come back to us. That's the motion

152is is just to focus our resources on really hashing out that second option by the feasibility study. So, yes, we still need to have numbers. Yes, we need all that updated. It's just like we're just trying to say don't go look at Mberry properties. I I would not I think that there's still there needs to be what is IBM? What is Roxton? What is right? It's like money like you want them to figure out that it's going to cost you know an extra $7 million to to level spot in IBM to >> well but just even some of the logistical I mean money seems a big part of this. I'm talking about spending $220 million right like and guess half of it is reimbursed for different pieces of it. Yeah. That needs to be a

153driver and a factor in this conversation. So you think that the study would come back and we would it would say it would only be you know a few million to like somehow IBM would be magically >> I don't know but like I I have not seen it all in one place right to compare all the pieces and say like no >> that was that was done at the retreat like there was a slide at the retreat and there was another slide that was done >> but not with update like what I'm asking for is the numbers to be updated with new information that we were given expensive information like significant swings in information. That's just my question. Okay. >> And this is my my two points of confusion. Yes, we saw an IBM slide

154in August and in maybe September, but very recently we engaged a property owner about a right of way that would alleviate some of those concerns. That was done after the slides were presented. So, let me at least get an update. And if the property owner has said no or has not responded or won't respond by date, then then to me that is not a viable option. But since we got the information, we opened another door, asking this property author. Um, I'd say the same thing about Rox Road. The phase one testing didn't shut it down. It said it would be viable. So, we opened that door. So, we got to follow it up. And if the town is no longer interested in selling it, that closes that door. But, we have continued to investigate things

155at the direction of the board. No one's operating on their own here. So, we just need kind of a definitive, I think, answer on those slivers that have remained open because we asked for further evaluation. And I think that's going to be hopefully very easy. Get us to a no. If it's a no, get us to a no. Let's move on. I don't feel comfortable moving something forward having not either officially asked the question or, you know, made sure we did full due diligence. Those are lingering issues that I think I I would like to see tied up for being asked. Anyone else have any questions or comments? Tech time >> comments. >> All right. >> Not but I don't want to ask questions. But >> um you know we talked about an access road

156being one and a half. I think, you know, as Josh mentioned, the the thing that's looming large over my head is the 15% reimbursement for having space in the building. We're talking about a $200 million project that is like way like that return blows a $ 1.5 million robe out of water. So the door that I do not want to close is being able to submit that for referendum this year. You know, I'm not ready to say, you know, let let's put a pause on it. You know, if it it jeopardizes that timeline to get this direct grant up. Um, I was, you know, I've been very involved in this and I was on the feasibility committee and I been to all the meetings and I think I think there was one I wasn't and

157I watched the whole darn thing. Um, and I watched this presentation and I shut down five questions. So, you know, you'll see those later. I don't think the end point is that we all have zero questions and then we'll move forward. I think you will all continue to ask questions through this whole process. I certainly hope we all continue to you've asked questions through this whole process. Uh like just the eye on the ball that I want to keep is that you know we we really should consider you know trying to move towards this referendum. So you know I I I'm not saying don't follow up on things that we've started. Um, I'm just saying, you know, I really want to keep the momentum so that even if we have to, you know, pump the

158brakes later, we've still done what we can do to keep this moving forward as a referendum day. So, you know, um, so that that's my two cents. I have questions. I'm happy to follow up on things that we've we've asked. I'm happy to have more information. I absolutely do think that we need, you know, comprehensive communication to the public. Um, you know, like these the slides are great. I think you need a certain level of engagement. You need to engage into this process up to this point to really grow. Uh, so, you know, I am absolutely more than happy to revisit like our communication um to the public about this. Uh, but I think we can do that in tandem with kind of moving this project forward step by step. So, so that's where I'm

159>> just to disagree with everybody else. I have enough information. >> Thank you. >> I think you're disagreeing with everyone else, but >> I actually have a comment. Um, I agree with what Heather just said. I'd like to keep the momentum going of exploring the second option, but at the same time, like she said in tandem, answer the questions that people have without everything coming to a screeching halt because we do have um a deadline that we're trying to keep at this point um to get these projects moving forward. And I think everyone says we talk things to death um and we take our time and sometimes that stalls things. Um, I'd like to see that not stall at this point. >> It's dead. >> That means your presentation is done. >> All right. Any

160other questions for Tecton? We can talk more at the motion. Um, but any other questions for Jeff and Antonia? Thank you very much. Appreciate your I'm sure you're going to be coming back again soon. >> Thank you. >> All right. Um, next on the agenda, we have board member comments. Any comments from board members? >> No. All right. Now, we have comments from citizens. The board of education recognized citizens. Hold on, Mr. O'Neal. My thing. The board of education will recognize citizens from Mbury and Southbury and citizens are asked to state their name, their town of residence, and to limit their comments to three minutes. I have got my little timer here, Mr. O'Neal. So, >> won't be that long. >> Okay, go ahead. >> Just for anybody that doesn't know me, um, first elected

161this house, uh, I do want to say I appreciate all the hard work you guys have done on investigating this two elementary schools. From what I see, elementary school. It's the challenging part of this. Um, one of my things that I brought up uh, running for for select South was to get a dialogue with state officials and I have talked to uh, state officials and I was hoping to present to the board a possibility of maybe building Bob Elementary on 219 acres of state property 172. It does encompass the 45 acres of the personnel village, but it extends from personnel village all the way up to the mansion um where the president used to reside. It goes behind Lake Stibs. Um there is interest with state officials to possibly convey that land to the to

162the region or to the town. Um, I just think with the traffic that's on Main Street, trying to eliminate um, Pop Rock Elementary there, it would be a better fit where the training school is will a good option for not only the region but the town. Um, as far as uh the Roxbury Road property, I personally have no interest in selling that property. I think it's a key piece for the town to really preserve the rural character of the town. I'm sure most of you have seen the um buff roar on social media about possibly building a school there. So, that's all I have for you. I did good with Marian and Josh expressed the the possibilities for the 219 acres. So, do have a meeting set up with some state officials and I'll report

163it back to you. I know time is of the essence with what what you're trying to do with all the uh percentages off and everything, but it is a another option. >> Thank you. >> All right. Any other comments for you citizens? No. Okay. Next we have regular business requiring board action. And here we are. Um may I have a motion regarding um an approval to focus the GSPS feasibility study committee recommendation number two which is the two schools in the two existing region 15 properties and authorize the administration to initiate the process for developing draft language for May 2026 referendum. move that the board of education focus on recommendation number two to schools on the existing region 15 properties of the GESPS feasibility committee and authorize the administration to initiate the process for developing

164draft language for a May 2026 referendum. >> Thank you, Steve. Do I have a second? >> Thank you, John. All right. So, here we are with discussion. Um, one one thing I want to um what what this meant to me is that we're not adopting any recommendation on the GESPS um projects. What it what this meant is that we're going to focus on recommendation number two. In other words, like recommendation number one just doesn't seem like it's a feasible option. and recommendation number three um which was weighted obviously number two was weighted heavier by the feasibility study committee um recommendation number three just is fraught with whatever issues that we talked about prior so we're going to focus our the motion is to focus our resources time and money on recommendation number two but not

165excluding anything at the moment does that make sense So discussion, questions, comments. Go ahead, Josh. >> Oh, okay. Go ahead, Josh. >> Um, my thought I like that focus on number two, but I think there needs to be some not doors closed, but here's the state of affairs for.1. We put them in order for a reason. One was the preferred preferential, and we know that town's not going to sell this property. Um, we don't have any other available properties. doesn't mean that they're all completely close, but so now we're moving to two because this doesn't seem probable, right? Probability of one is down in the 15% range. So we're going to number two and we're focusing our effort there to exhaust it >> or to improve it because we were doing that with number one

166first, right? >> And if that one then fails, then we move down to number three. So I think we need to summarize where we why we shifted from one to two and then focus on two like in the same >> but your one to two are different than the one to twos on here. the ones that you just said through and that's why I think this is confusing because R1 is one school to guess. >> That's what I was referring to. >> Oh, I thought you were saying like but then you said Roxberry Road. It's not for sale. >> That was the one school. >> I don't think it was a >> I thought Roxbury was a site for one school. >> No, Roxberry was a site for the third option. We were hoping that

167there was going to be some big property. There are some big properties, but none of the owners were interested in selling. >> And that's that's my version of one. I would confuse the Roxbury property with being a site for one. So just wrap up here >> the committee put it in order one to three >> one we've now exhausted to the point of it's a low probability so we're moving our efforts to two and then we spend the effort on two and then see where that brings us. Right. >> That's what I just to add whatever word I'm looking for. It's it's about the time um to that. That's how I >> So you're saying you would amend the motion? >> No. No. I would in this focus. Yeah. >> Page one of our focus

168is your neck. >> That's all I'm saying. >> Okay. >> So that there's clarity publicly. >> Okay. >> Anyone else have comments or questions? >> So I understood what you said. Um, but now I'm thinking like again there were other we talk about tours and I know you go over whatever but um Mbury IBM notberry um yeah middleberry IBM like and and Josh saying you know we'll do what you want me to do I I don't giving him direction. I don't does this give direction. >> Yeah I I think that's a really good question and what would your answer what would you propose? I and the same way like this kind of is closing the whole conversation and we had like this to me is the exact opposite of us wasting an hour sitting here

169talking about all of our concerns, right? We're saying nope, now we're focusing on it. like I personally can't vote on this because I don't have like that six page or whatever Tom's version that we're talking about saying like these are the components and pieces to say we're only going to focus on this I think is not what we just asked Josh to do. But just just to make a question, the reason why this is on the agenda tonight is because at our last meeting, we were kind of coming we were jelling towards wanting to do something to kind of and remember I said it was going to be like two votes like this was going to be like one initial vote to narrow the focus and then ultimately we'll have to do a big vote

170on what we're going to ultimately do. So this is the first this is this is what we put and it was generated based on board conversation from last meeting. me it was I think it was potential action was the word that would meet >> and I think that um I I was actually looking for that wording when the agenda came out and the reason why I was looking for that way in which this is worded it's very specific to Shannon's point it is like that's the decision we're renovating or I'm sorry we're building new on these properties that's it and I think that what I heard in this conversation today is That still may be it, but we need to make sure that check, check, check, done, done, answered, closed. And and the word focus,

171I'm trying to focus, but not at the expense of not addressing board members concerns over and I'm not saying time, energy, money into XYZ studies, but this is the reason one, two, three, done. And maybe it's all out there, but I don't think it's out there in a way that is digestible and easy to read. And we've been talking about the need to have crisp communication, not only for this board to be able to to speak to our decisions, but also for the community to access on the website. And for me, that's that full picture because that then says as a board member who wants to endorse a new school like a long time ago. I just want to be able to say we did our due diligence. We can back the decision and this

172is why we can back that decision. And with all due respect, we've had a lot of conversations, but it has not been at that 30,000 foot view. Chris, Chris, Chris, done. and we're good to move on in my opinion >> especially given like what we just heard right like people don't want a school in Main Street us saying this right without kind of doing due diligence the other pieces but like I think we just kind of need to put it all together >> more cohesively would say we would focus >> yeah I think there are people who like the school on main street just >> I mean and I've heard a lot of people who don't right and that's that's fine that's a referendum conversation but I think if we had all the pieces in

173a place to look and say this is why this works the pros and cons whatever the situation is and I feel like there was a lot of new information tonight that I like right these updated pieces the clarity on yeah we could add and I agree we need to hit this referendum date but if that if the inclusion is is that we can add preschool space to an existing structure and still get 15%. like that drastically changes some of those numbers, right? Like I do think there are some pieces to button up before I would say we're gonna focus on >> Okay. So then just as it's written um and I feel like and I would vote for it as it's written but um because I feel like I have all the information I need.

174Um but if it is voted for as written then I I feel like certainly we can still get any information we want. Um but the um you know it's not it takes the middlebury properties possibility and the IBM possibility off the table. >> It doesn't take it off the table. It just takes like we're not going to spend time on it. That that's what it's that's what it's >> kind of but it's not shutting the door completely. So if we end up going down a road where we figure out this option number two is no good, then we could always revert back to that third option that the feasibility study >> recommended. Y two things of that we're not bound. I mean we kind of made that crooked and to go by sequentially by the

175one two three recommendations from these builders study. >> And my other question is just I mean that was new information to me um that we heard from for meal about school property. Um I just you know and I didn't know about the access road to IBM that we were investigating that. I mean I do think that there's been new information. I do I I don't think we should jeopardize missing the deadlines, but like I I agree that there have been a couple other things that come up tonight that I just I think are important to address and I don't know if there's some way to compromise this, >> you know. >> Um I and I I would agree that we're not bound by the feasibility study committee's recommendation. However, I do think it's owed a

176certain amount of weight because they spent a lot of time and they went through a lot of I mean you did too. >> I know. I know. And honestly, the last time we were kind of >> Yeah. >> And again, we're not bound by it, but they we wrestled with a lot of this stuff um particularly with the renovate to new versus >> right separate property. >> Yeah. Go ahead, Steve. >> Um so I think again keeping with momentum in in regards to the training school property that the first selectman mentioned. Um and he acknowledged that there's he's aware of our deadlines like And I say this with all respect, like a lot of select men, both Republican and Democrat, have talked about that for years and nothing has really come of it. I I

177think um however, um if in if we choose to keep the momentum going and in two or three months we find out that yeah, there's going to be 200 acres of flat land, we just have to knock down some trees. Absolutely. stop. Like we don't I mean we're not committing to building the schools with this vote. We're just committing to that being like the next focus. So I mean the first one is to say it's worth waiting a year if there's now 200 acres of free perfect land to build option number one. But I think if again if we wait we're just we're we're going to lose the momentum to declaring the >> Anyone else? I I agree with Steve. I have enough information. Um I think it's I I understand having it in a

178more digestible format. I completely understand that and I think we can do that. But I think we have enough information here. And it's for me it's a a real a matter of what the feasibility study recommended. Um and it's also a matter of what we own. We already own the properties. Um and we can work with it. We have a viable option. Um and so I'm I think we have enough information. At the same time, I would love for all of us to be together on this. So, um, >> Marian, I had my hand up. >> I had my hand up, but it's okay. Um, I know it's harder because I'm not here. >> Yep. Go ahead, Heather. >> Okay. Thanks. I did also feel like I had enough information tonight to at least keep

179the ball rolling. Um, I agree it doesn't really shut any doors completely if we keep focusing on tightening up information on option number two. So, I would be in favor of um voting on it as presented with the expectation that there are going to be more answers and tighter numbers and they're going to really drill down about whether or not that access road is attainable. um and just go from there. >> Thank you, Heather. >> So, why can't we just say we authorize the administration to initiate the process for developing draft language for a May 2026 referendum without saying we're focusing on a recommendation? >> I can I think the administration was looking to say what do you want us to do or what do you want us to do? not this. I think I've

180heard right because I I just want to be like right if Trina we're saying like okay but I think some of us are saying we need a little bit more before it's this right so th this whatever will be split and it'll be close whatever so that's fine we call it to vote but I'm just saying like I don't I don't think everyone's there quite yet maybe they could be there in the next meeting if we get some summary slides together and it's all kind of laid out pros and cons but if we're worried about meeting the deadline is it just kind of starting the process for developing draft language. Like I just I'm trying to like I know like from a consensus perspective I think everyone wants us to get to referendum. Like I

181don't think there's any person in here who's like that's not the goal, right? Like I feel like we're all on the same page with that. But it's just like how do we get there on the same page? And like will this make it feel like because this wording makes it feel like none of the other stuff's ever going to get answered and then we're going to be circling. What I don't want is us in April to say like, "Hey, how come these things that we talked about back in our December meeting weren't fully vetted and then we voted on this?" >> So, here's the here's my difference of opinion with you, Shannon, respectfully, that I feel like they have been answered. I feel like it's been asked and answered. I feel like we're at a

182almost at a point where we're spinning our wheels, I would say, because I I could like like the South Berry Training School like we haven't even like we talked about it before. The bus routes would be really difficult to to navigate that because of the location of that property. Never mind that it's in a flood flood plane. Never mind this the the slope issues and all of that kind of stuff. Never mind that we do not own that property. And for years, South Perry's been trying to get some kind of you know, getting that property. They haven't been able to do it. So, I think it's a nice idea. I I I think you for South Bur's benefit should absolutely pursue um trying to get a hand in South Burberry training school, but should we

183wait for that? >> I'm not saying wait for South training school. I'm saying there's a lot of new numbers tonight and new information that haven't been fully vetted, >> right? And I think we need updates on those. I think we need updates in the numbers visa be for the second option like I don't think I don't I'm not so sure that we need to like have numbers for what else. Can we just make the motion to authorize to develop a the language for a referendum in which we're building GES and PES on their own sites so that that can move forward but we don't have to say we're focusing on it exclusively you know so that like the momentum for the right like the actual draft of the referendum gets going but without making asking

184everyone to commit to the word focus on >> yeah let's hear from the administration >> so the only I guess I guess is the short answer the challenge the referendum looks very different if it exists in acquired property. >> And so I think to to say what you just said I guess that is how I read that. So it's fine if it's not worded right like however you want to word it but the idea is to you in order to draft that language like we need to talk to the bond attorney we need to talk to um you know and and in part because when we did the uh repair bond some of that stuff came up on us a little fast and remember we had to pivot quickly and people were uncomfortable. So I

185don't want that to happen again because it's a much bigger project. So the more we can get run >> I I mean because I think what I'm hearing is like people are are pretty confident that's where we're we're going to get to but not confident enough to say focus do this. So why not actually get ahead on the bond that was really helpful for for well I won't speak for myself but I think for us to hear >> like a one page two page whatever that document is we're at a point the and we've kind of been talking around uh all of the information that we have and we have tons right and there's lots of powerpoints and lots of presentations and it's really hard unless you're engaged to to synthesize so we want to

186get to a point to synthesize I guess one of the questions that that we struggle with is what do you want us to synthesize and you know we can put that document together. I >> I think the the issue that I have and it's and I agree with Sally is that this wording is really locked in and I look at it as two parallel tracks. You're moving the momentum towards getting to referendum with the understanding that the recommendation from the building committee the feasibility committee was a re build on those two spots but I don't want to close the door to what you had said earlier if something else or maybe Steve something else is coming up that maybe this better option the way this is currently re written relative to the conversation that happened

187today seems very disproportionate And that's my concern with the way this is. I don't know what good looks like in this moment, right? As >> and and I know you're like trying to play around with the wording, but that really is my concern with and it was my concern when I saw it on the agenda the way it was written and it's my it it's my concern is exacerbated by the fact of the conversation that we had today. >> Yeah. >> One other piece of learning from today. Um, it sounds like everyone is okay with a May method. >> Yeah. >> And we had left that door open and Josh, you got a tough role to play here because I know you're trying to guide the board, but you know, you have said all along

188if you want to push this out another year, we can. You know, stop me if I'm wrong, guys, but it sounds like everyone at this table wants a May referendum. If that's the case, that closes some doors, right? Um, so I think if we even confirm that, like, yeah, we want to move forward with a May referendum and we want to, you know, draft language. I'm okay with all of that. Um, you know, and then let's let's find out what that does to our process. Uh, that to me is solid information. Like we're resolved. We want a May referendum. That's a guiding it's a guiding piece of information that I think we've taken for granted. I just don't know if you're going to be able to get to a RA May referendum if you're I

189mean we have limited resources guys right like we don't have someone whose full-time job is to go research all the other options I guess is >> I don't that's what you want us to do like I feel like our friends from tech have been extremely accommodating and very good and we've said what about this property what about this property and they've looked at the GIS maps and they've walked some of the property. Some of the stuff is out of our control. We've reached out to some of the private owners of some of those properties. We have some, you know, kind of soft conversations of, yeah, we might be interested. Like the the Canur one is is it is the, I believe, the biggest tax revenue property in the Bavarian. The last time we looked it

190was like 10 or 12 million to buy it. So if that is really a path that you want us to go down, then we really should have a kind of but if you want us to like explore like to what extent I guess is where we can do back of the napkin stuff, we can kind of do it and and then when the board comes back and says we want more concrete numbers. Some of those concrete numbers require like property assessments. They require and some of those things take time. I think though Josh that the way this is worded it takes the renovate to new off of the table because that wasn't the recommendation of number two of the feasibility committee. So even if you don't even open up that Pandora's box of looking at

191all those other things, the conversation that happened today relative to what I found that $200 million, the difference in this that and the other, the the ability of actually being able to do the access road or not having to put in the preschool component, to me that hasn't even been addressed with the way this is currently worded. So you can focus in on that on on on those rebuilding or renovate to new or building on PESGES, but I don't think that this board like when I read that I said is this two new schools on existing properties? That's how it was presented. That's not how we're coming out of this conversation. If that's truly the viable option, right? Okay. So, so here's the thing like so how we're this is like so just because one

192or two board members say something doesn't mean that that's the the voice of the board, right? So that that's what I'm trying to to what we're trying to figure out by doing a motion. So just because two people say something doesn't mean that the whole board thinks that, you know, right? And just because like one person said that we maybe should look at Mberry property doesn't mean that everyone should think that. So that's what I'm try what we're like there's >> it's the way it's worded Marian right >> it's the way it's worded >> right well if you if you have a different like you want to amend it that's that's fine but I could say like I think there's some lowhanging fruit that we can eliminate like for instance I think it's a like

193looking at middleberry properties I just don't think it's going to be worthwhile to go down that >> rout coming up and that's okay to close that door >> okay so then how okay >> as long as that's been publicly addressed it has not been included in the FAQ you. It's not been communicated that this is the reasons why we're not doing it and that's fine. >> Does the board want us to look down? Does the board want the administration to go down that route? >> What my concern is Marian, we have had multiple discussions. There are a lot of time spent on conversations, but yet some of the questions never get answered >> because only one board member asked it. >> I'm not I asked the question about the middle barrier, right? And I'm not

194but the perfect example. That's the perfect example. So, like I think that I don't I don't know if the majority of the board would want to go down that road. So, why would we have the administration go look there? >> I'm not saying that it can go in an FAQ document. It can be answered. It's not viable for this, this, and this reason that it's that it's redistricting. It would be too much to travel. I just think that when some of these things come up, whether it's the access road, whether it's the septic, what full transparency, that's all I'm asking for. I'm not saying it it requires tons of time, energy, and resource to go and explore every little nook and cranny. And and it's okay to move forward with focusing in on a renovate

195to new or new building on the existing property. But the way this is worded gives me the impression that I am voting tonight on whether or not I am endorsing two new schools on the existing property. And I'm not sure if that's even possible based off of the reimbursement rate, the access road, etc., etc., etc. And if we come out and we find out that that's not possible and it comes out that we have to do renovate to new, is that still a viable option if we said yes to this vote. That's really where I'm coming from. >> I have a question. I have a comment. >> Yep. Hold on, Heather. Hold on one second, Steve. And then Shannon, and then you. Okay. I think just >> the numbers come back in a month or

196something happens and we discover renovate to new. So I think yes to answer your question like it it I don't think it like locks us in but it definitely sets a direction >> in a month we find out renovate to new. It's just it's it's the way to go like we save tons of tons of money but that the mood shifts like I don't think this voting yes to this to me doesn't preclude in a month changing our mind and saying okay well now this is a better option. we're gonna change the momentum to to to this other thing and then that's the one thing that the the administration is going to focus on and maybe we still make the may referendum maybe we don't but like it's I I don't think this I think

197I agree with you I do think it's it's it's setting the direction yes like we're going to renovate we're going to do what we're going to do what you said but it doesn't mean that we can't do something else later if more information comes to light that makes these other options appealing it's kind of Yeah, >> that's how I'm living. >> But Shannon, >> so I'm going to piggy back on that and then I got to piggy back on this. >> So, right. And and here's Right. I rebrought up the middle property and that is because when Sharon brought that up, I was like, "Wow, that's something I never thought of. That could be a great idea." But I agree with like right if it was like the redistric's going to be this, it's going

198to be this, there is no property, it was never answered. So to say like one person just because one person speaks there's a lot of things people say I'm like that's a great idea or that's great. Just because no one says at that moment because of how we kind of raise our hands and do it doesn't mean that that didn't trigger something in someone else's mind. So I think it's kind of unfair to say like only one person asked it. We're not going to look at it. I think we are all here elected right and some of us newly elected right by a lot of people asking us to come to this table and do a job. So like right for us to not ask the hard questions and get answers on paper about some

199of the stuff I think does what we're here to do a disservice. So I think it is important to get all that stuff on a piece of paper and I think it is important to say like yep someone asked about middle beer we need to answer that question right that is our job to ask the hard questions to get answers to get them documented to get them on paper so we have a place for the public to go and say yes when that was brought up because there was a lot of people that heard that that texted me that night right and because I think there was a lot of people like oh does there's a ton of property when you drive to MMS on that road is will that be cheaper. Is that a

200better option? Right? And I was like, I don't know. It was a great question asked tonight. I'm sure we'll hear back. But just to say like, no, it's closed off because you thought only one person asked. I just I don't think that's fair. >> It's helpful to know that other people are interested. >> I think people want to make sure that we are reviewing all avenues to make sure from a cost like we want to do what's right for the children, but we also want to be prudent in costs and not cause disruption. I think there's a people concerned about access roads through RMS, right? There's kids that play sports on that field, right? Opening up roads for people to come back through that I think people are concerned about the access road, right? So,

201I think there's a lot of kind of commentary swirling, but us getting it all in a document on a piece of paper, I think is super helpful. And the way that this is worded is setting a direction where it's like the way it's worded now. And it's fine. I think that's why I say all the time, like I know we like to build consensus, but it's okay to agree to disagree and say like because this is so focused and makes it seem like this is our new direction, I think this is a disservice to vote for it the way it is because it is telling us to go down a path when there's still so many things unanswered and not written down on paper. And if they're all closed, like Tom was saying before, totally

202fine. But we don't have that document. >> Yeah. And there was a lot of new information tonight. Okay, I'm going to go to Heather and then I have a proposal for changing the language. Go ahead, Heather. >> Thanks, Marian. I think a lot of questions were answered just naturally in the feasibility committee. So maybe it's harder for people that weren't involved in that part to kind of wrap their head around how um things migrated to this point. Um and I think things naturally happen that close doors. My concern is that in all of this extra tonight, we're closing the second option doors in the meantime. And I don't want to keep I want to keep the momentum of that second option. That might be the end option uh going so that we're not dragging our

203heels um through this longer process and then losing the momentum and not being able to make that referendum. I liked what Tom said about the fact that everybody kind of seems like they want to get to that May referendum. And then the other thing to keep in mind is the feasibility committee was comprised of many different stakeholders including teachers, administrators, and community members, elected officials, and the renovate to new option was not popular. Um, so even if we do get to that point, which maybe we will, um, that's not where we that's not where that committee recommended we would go, we've gotten to that second best committee recommendation at this point. Um, and we've talked a lot about a bunch of other things that maybe came up in the feasibility committee as well. So, I

204just don't want to drag our heels on this and create more um, confusion or stall the progress. So, I would be fine voting on it as it is tonight and then answering all of those other questions in tandem and looking at other solutions, but not spending a ton of time and money in making it so that we don't make that May referendum deadline because these schools have been in dire need for way too long. >> Thank you, Heather. Um, so I have I I hear where everyone's coming from. It is 10:30 and we have a very important vote still due on the roofings projects. So I would pro like where does where does everyone feel about either amend >> you making a motion to >> I'm I'm trying to get I'm trying to propose two

205other two options either tableabling this until January. Okay. So e either table this motion to January because I like I I want us all to be together. I really do like I don't want to I don't want to start off on the on a bad foot. Um so despite the fact that I think that we have enough um information, I want all of us to feel that way. Um so either we table this to January and then unfortunately move the data presentation to another time, Carrie. I feel like we're neglecting you. Um or you could change the motion to move that the board of education focus on the existing region 15 properties for the GESPAS project and authorize the administration and initiate the process. So like so eliminating the recommendation part of it and just

206going there. But I I would just say let's make a decision either we table this or we kind of limit it to just the existing properties and kind of play with what we could do with the existing subsidies. Did you want to poll everyone to see where they were at based on the original? >> Well, I think that takes into Sharon's point into consideration that you could still look at the renovate to new. So, it kind of takes that >> but I don't know if other board members agree with that. Right. >> I was going to go ahead. >> So, let's just kind of see where everyone is like either on tableabling it or kind of that wording that I just said. >> If you t So, I guess the question right because I I

207like to make decisions with information. if we table this Josh till the January meeting, right? Because this is where you need the pulse check, right? This is where we need to be like, hey, if we do this, we're not making a referendum like that. Like those points like should be kind of like black and white to us like every time we're meeting so that we know, right? Kind of like we talked to on finance day like there's roofing stuff that has to be done tonight or we're not making the roofing project, right? So it's like if we don't start doing this, right? like if we don't move on there something are we missing May does that put us in jeopardy if it doesn't I would say table but if it does then I think we

208need to do something >> so there are two components to that technically April is when you have to set the date and the language and the language has to be specific and has to include dollar amount >> to get to that dollar amount you have to decide what as you heard Jeff say tonight that rendering and the envelope and the cost that has to be developed before you can write a referendum in April. So, we are starting to close in on the time where if you don't give them a direction, as Tom pointed out tonight, even in the the work that's happened over the last couple weeks looking at the best way to fit a building on the GDS property, right? like that work has to happen and people have asked like what's it going

209to look like in order to get those drawings like we can't be going into uh February saying we're not we we're not sure what we want to do like at some point in the not too distant future you're going to have to coalesce I think all the questions are fine and we can continue to to look at them but at some point we're going to have to say of the information we have and what's viable this is what we're going to do the Again, I think some of this language came out of the last meeting where people started asking like how are we going to start to narrow this in? Even if this is you table this like I think this was productive in that we started getting to where are you in that piece.

210Um you know if you want to continue to look at some of the things that that involve destinies that we can't control that depend on people we can continue to do that. At some point we're gonna have to save the tech time, draw a school, get the cost for the septic, all of that. >> One thing that we do really well at the budget time is we send in questions and you address them. >> Yes. >> And and one of the things that I think is actually missing and you're hearing it consistently in this conversation. It's not even about it could even be in order to get a full answer, we would need to do this this and it would prolong this. That is helpful because that will will drive my decision-making process. And yes,

211I'm one board member and people may not agree with me, but I'm talking about me right now. It will drive my decision- making process to say, "Okay, if that's going to push this out and it's going to cost this much, then I then I can get behind XYZ because I know that we're up against a clock." So to me, that's where I think that just having that transparency of asked, answered, or this is what it would take in order to answer it is significantly huge when we're talking about $200 million. It is not about having you run off and do everything because that's not productive, right? We cannot prioritize everything because nothing's a priority. building a new school and reaching the referendum is a priority, but I think that how we make sure that we

212have addressed all the questions and making sure that those are absolutely matter of fact in the full FAQ because I looked when they went out to the community and I was like, I'm not seeing my questions represented. That's a problem to me. That that to me is is is really huge. And I'm not I don't want to speak about tableabling or modifying, but that is needed regardless of what we end up doing and what we end up voting on this. It is needed throughout this entire process. And that is what I feel we owe the community when we're talking about $200 million all along the way. >> Yeah. >> So that just just to be clear, the FAQ is not complete. Number one, right? It's still being worked on, but it was like the general

213questions that we thought the public would answer. So it was not going to have unlike the budget. It would has all the board member questions that that was just more like what we thought that the the was the general questions that the public might have. >> So and it's still work being continued on. I feel like you have the first. >> Yeah. And I will >> we just we can move off to the FAQ if you just indulge me for and I mean this with the most respect that I can say like so we hear questions we put a presentation together and try to answer as many questions as possible and this this is kind of how we've been like the retreat took your questions on the property we tried to answer I very much

214understand that like tonight's presentation I feel answered a lot of the questions they weren't in the FAQ yet but we try to because they provide context and images and um examples and comparatives and it's not just a one word or two paragraph. The the FAQ that we put online I think is 10 or 11 pages. The total FAQ is about a 45page document and we're trying to I don't know the best way to say here are complex questions. the the board and the committee took a year to go through questions and that's why you have 46 presentations. A lot of it's duplicate information. It's hard to digest, but it's hard for us to to wrestle with some of this. Like I I don't want to dismiss the questions on the IBM property, but I feel

215like we've already addressed the topographical issues whether the road comes through a private person that we buy or not. We've answered a lot of these questions and I I very much get that maybe not in a way that people hear them or that's digestible. Um, but it's really hard for us to call through 13 different presentations that are 27 slides. It's too dense. We we have an outside consultant that we're trying to help build a website to digest some of this stuff. So, I do think like a lot of the questions that came in, we shared with Tecton. We went through how do we answer these qu he tried today to put them in clusters and try to answer questions about like um continuity of education during construction like I don't know if a three-word

216answer like technology of modern construction is going to mitigate noise like I don't know if that does it justice you know and so and I I mean it with sincerity we have a hard time answering some of these questions and so I hear you my like fear or concern concern is we're going to put together a document that's going to boil everything down to one page nice infographic and what we'll hear back is it doesn't answer these questions which is going to be it's true right like we can't put it all so some of this is helpful for us but it is really hard to try to figure out which questions and how to answer and I laughed that we tried in that document that I think is only like 20 questions out of the

21750s and the draft of that document is like 60 pages I'm going to need AI to go through it and like summarize it. Um, and and so, you know, our attempt to boil everything down is like 57 pages. So, >> but even just boiling it down to this one referendum >> based off of tonight, I think would be very helpful. >> Yeah. Sure. >> I think it's okay to send out 60 pages, right? Because then it's like it's on there. Go look at it. Right. It's it's much I'd rather have one 60page moving document than go back through the last year and find where this data is. I you can't hear half the meetings because the audio is not good, right? Like that is a place it's searchable. It's easy. It's in one spot, >>

218right? The link to all the presentations, >> but like that like no disrespect tonight, but like some of that stuff was like like not needed, right? like some of these things it was like stuff we've heard before but it wasn't answering some of the questions that I heard come out of last time. So, I echo kind of everything that Sharon's saying. And then kind of this spring of new information, which wasn't even like changes things, right? You're saying, "Okay, we're going to save $10 million. That changes things." Okay, there's $10 million kind of on a back page. Like, that's a conversation, you know, because 200 million. We spent we spent a lot of time at this last budget talking about $150,000. $150,000. We spent hours at this table. Now we're talking about $220 million. Like,

219okay, we got to move to the bottom of the problem, right? It's a big number. And at the end of this, we all have to go out and sell the community on this and back the community on this, right? And say that we did our due diligence and this is where we landed, right? So, like, I know it's painful, but however long that takes us to, like we all have to get there because if we don't, it's not going to pass. If we're doing something the town doesn't want, it's not going to pass. Like that's my concern. We do all this work, we hit referendum, I don't want it there. Doesn't matter what we've done at this table. If the sentiment of the community doesn't match, we're all sitting here. And that's why I think

220we come up with these things where it's been said like, "Oh, that's an idea. Did you guys look at that?" We are doing a disservice by not writing it down and sharing it because people are like, "Well, they didn't do that, so I'm not going to vote for it." Right? Like that's the end goal. It's not about getting it to referendum. It's getting it to pacif. >> Yeah. >> All right. So, if we table it tonight, do we still have time to make it to the roof? I mean, >> yeah. >> I don't want to be like alarmist or anything. >> It's cutting it closer, but it's still possible. >> Yeah. >> All right. So, is there motion on table? All right. So, Shannon Kavalo has a motion to table. Do is there a >>

221Don't we have one on the motion or >> the motion to table kind of is supersedes the original motion and then to just like kind of set it and we can say we could table it till the next meeting. >> Table it to Yeah. >> the January 13th. >> January 12th. >> 12th. Okay. >> Second. So second by Sharon. Okay. Any discussion? All right. So we'll do a roll call. Heather Rogers, how do you vote? >> Heather Rogers. Nay. >> Nay. Okay. John, >> no. >> Sharon, yes. >> Sally Romano, yes. >> Heather, nay. >> Dark. Yes. >> Steve, what are you? back. >> Shannon, >> yes. >> Jeff, >> yes. >> Um, I'll be a yes. >> So, let's have to calculate that. >> Sorry. >> Yeah, I have this. >> There's Heather Rogers.

222No, John's a no. >> So there's one, two, three nos. Four nos. >> It passes. >> So it it's tabled. Okay. So we are tableabling that till uh January 13th. All right. And we're going to move on. Um >> can I have January 13th? >> Sorry. 12 12 will be definitive action. Yeah. That will be a proposal action. We move forward. >> We're we're tableing this that but that's the end date. So ultimately that that is an action-driven agenda item to in order to meet the referendum. That's what I'm coming away from this conversation. We're tableabling it with the understanding that there's going to be some additional information that addresses new information shared today, but an action is going to have to be made in order for us to potentially reach referendum. What's been tabled

223is the >> we can table this until we would have and then you could amend it on the >> get information that we need to make >> good referendum. >> So we could have an emergency meeting after >> okay >> for just this time >> if we decide to. >> Okay. All right. So um next item. Um, may I have a motion for approval of the Long Meadow Elementary School roof project and the creation of the building committee? >> Move that the board of education approved the Long Meadow Elementary School roof project and the creation of the building committee. >> Thank you, Shannon. Do I have a second? >> Second by Sally. Joe, can you talk about this? Certainly. >> Fast. Um, so the the quick piece is this is all going to come back

224to the board at the January 12th meeting, which is going to be a quick meeting, too. Um, this is there's a quick timeline here we've laid out. Um, I'll sum up pretty quickly. The ability to get the cost estimates done faster and get the committee formed faster allows us to get out to bid earlier. So, what this is right now, you're authorizing us to form a building committee and finalize cost estimates. The building committee will then meet in very early January to approve the cost estimates. And this board will then adopt those cost estimates to allow us to fly to the state. and we'll get our state approval and then we'll go out to bid and this or will come back to make that final award. So what what you're authorizing now is just the

225ability to kind of begin the journey uh at the state. Um there's some cost estim that that I that are listed here in the document um but there'll be a full piece on the cost estimates at the January 12th meeting but the in sense the cost the roof was about $2.2 2 million. The wrinkle to this, which was talked about at finance, there's a solar component as well that we could get significant reimbursement on, which would bring the project to $3 million in total cost, but the solar array would have a very, very fast payback. Actually, sorry, let me break that apart. $2.2 million is 50% reimburseable for 49.39%. So basically you the state would pay $1.1 million the board pay 1.37 you would take the debt service dollars that are currently sitting inside general

226fund the 1.3 million and you in a sense take a loan out of your capital reserve fund to basically complete the project and then that'd be reimbursable back to that fund. Um the solar piece have another component on it payable. Everything's got a timeline these days. June 30th there's significant federal credits that expire. The solar array is approximately $750,000. You get 50% back from the state, 30% back from the feds, plus a $35,000 a year credit on the solar array that we would own. So the payback timelines about three years. Challenge is we have to have that underway by June 30th. So that' be kind of part of the project as well. That's a lot of things they just fired off. So I >> appreciate that finance looked at this today and was >> Yeah.

227And again, I I know it's late, but so this is this coming back on the 12th. We'll have an analysis on the solar. Um, so there's there's a there's there's a lot more pieces there you'll see. >> So these were all vetted in >> Joe. Could the net net on non-solar versus solar was somewhere like hundred and some thousand. >> Total cost of solar net all down is about 200 right around 200,000. um with ongoing well when you take the the ongoing credit of about 35,000 a year um the payback on the panels are about two and a half years which is pretty pretty ridiculous and this allows the timeline to go out to bid and make an award probably at late March. >> Any other questions for Joe? comments anyone? >> All right, so

228we'll do a roll call. Heather Rogers >> I John. >> Yes. >> Sharon, guess >> I do. >> Marks. I >> Mary Manzo. I >> Steve Si. I >> Shan Paul. I >> Okay, it carries. Next. May I have a motion for approval? Um, >> these are three state motions that are mandated by the state of Connecticut to apply for the grant. >> Yep. So, may I have a motion for approval to apply for the roof replacement grant at Long Meadow Elementary School. Resolved that the Pod Grog Regional School District number 15 authorizes the board of education to apply to the Commissioner of Administrative Services and to accept or reject a grant for the roof replacement at the Long Meadow Elementary School. >> Thank you. Do I have a second? Any discussion questions? Again, this

229Joe said that this is all this is the required language. >> Okay. So, if we're ready to go to vote, Heather, how how do you vote? >> I shared yes. >> Tyler Romano, I >> Heather Dwire, I >> Marks, I Manzo, I >> Steve Seran, I >> Shan, I >> All right, it carries. Thank you. May I have a motion for approval to establish a roof replacement building committee? >> Resolved that the Pontrog Region 15 building committee is hereby established as the building committee with regard to the roof replacement at the Long Meadow Elementary School. >> Second by Jeff. Um and I think that um >> Joe, do you want to talk to >> this? This will the finance members of the finance and facilities committee will serve as this committee. This roof replacement committee

230is a very narrow scope. Obviously, it's a roof. The building committee for the school projects much larger, usually lots of decisions about this is really you'll make the award. You may have a change order or two that come over. They're usually small on these types of projects and then you'll complete the project. Um where you're do as you as Jeff spoke about your design and things to the roof to the building are a lot more the roof is existing. Um there's a lot of building code everybody else have to meet. So, it's pretty straightforward in that. >> I just have a question on that wording of that motion. It says that the region 15 building committee is hereby established as the building committee. Shouldn't it be resolved that the Pompra region 15 finance committee is

231hereby established as the building committee? with regard to the roof replacement at the Long Meadow Elementary School. I >> if if one we we can't edit these motions. I I don't disagree with that, but a lot of people have like a committee they just form like an almost like an ad hoc. Um yeah, if if if we reward these, they won't accept them. So I I >> But do we have a re We don't have a region 15 building. You're establishing a building committee in a sense it's going to member it's member of the members the existing members of the finance committ you're selecting it could be any members you want but the finance committee is just the list of members >> any other question >> and that doesn't need to be reflected in the

232motion >> we cannot change the wording of the motion Heather this is like the >> got it we will submit a list of the members yes of this committee in the grant application >> on Heather K have a different motion saying we're going to set up a building committee of the finance committee and then you can go to this portion >> the motion that you created in the creation of the building committee did that >> they are these minutes get signed in sent it's a process I can't even explain that part that's a whole another day >> we okay should put it to vote All right, Heather, how do you vote? >> I Heather Dwire I >> Tom Marks I >> Mary Manzo I >> Steve Serani I >> Shanno I >> Jeffson I >>

233Great, it carries. Next and finally, may I have a motion for approval to prepare schematic drawings and outline specifications for the roof replacement at Long Meadow Elementary School? resolved that the Pomperog Regional School District number 15 hereby authorizes at least a preparation of schematic drawings and outline specifications for the roof replacement at the Long Meadow Elementary School. >> Second. >> Thank you, Jeff. Any questions or comments? >> We'll have big drawings and everything else that's allowed to make big drawings and big prints and big rolls of paper. That's what this means. >> We'll bring it back. Well, you have to look at that or do it in case you want to move a shingle or something. >> Any other questions or comments? >> All right, Heather, how do you vote? >> I Sharon I >>

234Dwire I >> Tom Marks I >> Mary Manzo I >> Steve I >> Shannono I >> Jeff Wilson I >> it carries Thank you. Announcement of future meetings Monday January 12th PNC's meeting at 6 o'lock. Also, on Monday, January 12th, we're having a regular meeting at 7:30. I don't think it's going to be the data report. We'll get um figure that out. Also, Monday, January 26, we have the regular meeting. Um or maybe we're going to do the enrollment report, maybe the superintendent's midyear. I don't know. We'll have to see. May I have a motion to adjurnn? >> Motion to adjurnn. >> Thank you, Sally. Have a second. >> Second. Second by Heather Dwire. All those in F.