001So, hi everybody. It's um it's 6:01 and um it looks like everybody's here. So, I'm going to call this virtual meeting of the Greenwich Board of Education to order um for January 5th. Uh if you would please rise for the uh pledge of allegiance. Pledge allegiance to the flag, United States of America, the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, for liberty and justice for all. Remote meetings are the great test if I have that memorized. Um um so welcome everybody. Um happy new year. Uh this is a special meeting. We only have as you know we only have one agenda item and that is uh to consider the proposal for the um uh funding proposal from the old Greenwich board uh building committee. So to start our conversation I have to
002make a motion here. Um, so let me make a motion here. Um, because this is an action item. Uh, just give me a second. Oh, I would like to we go. I would like um um I would like to authorize the administration to request an interim appreciation for old Greenwich School um in the amount. Shouldn't we say shouldn't we specify the amount here? Michael, >> when I got the I didn't have the full number at the time when I posted that. So, if you could just amend it, not amend it, just add that number, I'll vote. >> Okay. Um, James, do you have the number at the top of your head? I don't have that screen. >> Yes, it's 6277940. >> Okay. >> And you do need a second. I'll second Sophie. >> Okay. So,
003sorry about that. Um so, thank you, Sophie. So, um we have here uh tonight uh James Waters, the chair of the old Greenwich Committee and um um a whole sorts of all of the professionals that have been working on us. And before we say anything, let me just say that um um we as a board and the old Greenwich community um and really the whole town owe James and his team um a real debt of gratitude and thanks. um they worked um o over the break um last week um throughout the week um to making to getting all these numbers straight so that this project could stay on could stay on track um along with a lot of other members of the of the building committee and really the the fact that we're here today
004is really because the we're here today because really of the hard work they did and the lack of time they took off. So, uh, you know, by the board, we really thank them, but we really have to shout out, you know, all they did this week to make sure that, um, the dirt can fly on this project, uh, come spring. Um, so with that said, um, I think I'm going to turn things over to Chairman Waters who has a presentation because we know, uh, folks are at different levels of folks have been working on with this project for different amounts of time here. Um, so James's presentation is going to walk us through the project and where we are right now. >> Awesome. Thank you, Mike. Uh, and good evening everybody. Um, question. Am I
005supposed to cast something or or does do people already have it? Uh, that's not necessary. >> Folks at home, we have to present it. But, uh, Michael can probably do that. You want to put up the PowerPoint, right? >> Yeah. [clears throat] >> Mike, can you handle that? I have it as a PDF. Is that okay? >> That's fine. >> Do do you just sorry for the silly admin, but do you want do you want me to just is it better if I just do it as a as a PowerPoint for everybody? Would you guys prefer that? >> Probably. >> Okay, so let's do that. Mike, give me one second. I will uh be ready. Okay. Uh share. Okay. Can everybody see that? >> Yeah. Okay. >> Yeah. Looks good. >> Okay, good. Um All
006right. Well, good evening everybody and um thanks for uh convening this special meeting. Um it uh and I know we have some new board members. So, welcome to all of you guys and uh look forward to working with you guys um as I have those who are uh remaining and those who've been in the past. So, um look, I I'll just kind of start down the down the road here. Um, so look, not only has this this uh group uh on the old building committee um worked worked through the holiday, uh we've been at it for 3 years. Um, and we are now at a point where the comp the preconstruction process is complete. Um, and look, this has been a huge lift by everybody on the building committee, um, including your chair. Um, and,
007um, I I think we're now at a point where the Old Granch building committee was presented with the guaranteed maximum price for the project. Uh, uh, on December 23rd, we asked a bunch of questions about it. Um, we spent uh I'm for those who haven't attended our meetings, I'm a big fan of let we do our meetings in an hour. Um, and the uh the December 23rd meeting was not an hour uh to say the least. And um but you know, it was important that we kind of really looked at this. Um on the phone with me tonight, just so you you guys know uh everybody who's here, we have Jackie Welsh, who's the vice chair uh of the building committee, has been with us since the start. We have Lawrence Rosati, the owner's rep,
008uh, for the project. We have David Stein from Silver Petraelli, the project architect. And we have Jeff Anderson from Downs, who's our construction manager. Um, the guaranteed maximum price, also known as a GMP uh was was delivered. It shows that uh we would need uh $6,277,940 uh to be able to sign the GMP. Um uh we we are tracking that there is some uh board of ed uh OG specific capital funding that is unused um uh that could be used uh if you guys uh wanted to uh to sort of defer the the need. Um that's the 4,571 there. Um, I think one thing you're going to hear tonight is that the interim addresses some of the rising construction c costs and the bidding climate since we completed the 95% CDs estimate back in November
0092024. Um and and I think for those of you who are new, I mean this this is the basically the the culmination um of a multi-year effort that started in 2018 when the board of ed decided that old the renovation of old Greenwich was a high priority for renovation. The ED specs were approved in 2021. We did some revisions in uh 2023 and 2024 uh uh based on some of the diligence that we've done and some of the the uh input we were getting from our consultants and from our building committee members. Um we started work in October 2022. Um and you know this is not our first rodeo with the the board of ed. Uh we've certainly um been you know worked with the BET and the RTM as well. uh and also done
010tried to do a lot of work in terms of uh getting input and meeting with stakeholders and parents and teachers and and making sure we had their feedback on the project. All right, so moving to next slide. This just on the you know really an eye chart not going to go through each line but on the left side you can see all the kind of steps that are complete. Uh on the right you can see >> James I still seeing slide one here. >> Oh are you? That's weird. Why is that? Is that uh >> is this one from your laptop or is this uh Michael controlling it? >> This should be from my laptop. Why is that not showing? Is it Is that it now? >> Yeah. Now, now we're >> Oh, you know
011what? Hold on one sec. I'm going to re I'm just going to uh I'm going to redo something on the share. Excuse me a sec. sharing the wrong thing. Okay. All right. Do you see that now? Is that better? Okay. All right. So, um the left side you can see all the steps that are are complete. The right are the steps still to do. One thing I would note is the building permit um is in the final stages of completion. We're just working through some input from the fire marshall. Um uh we'll talk about that in a moment. Um uh and then we're we're on track to start this April. Um so our bid documents all specified an April start. Um I I will point out that um here also that you know when we
012started this process about three years ago, we thought that the pre-construction um process was going to cost us about $2,86,000. We're about $245,000 underneath that um based on what we've done to date. Um okay, so next slide. I get ready. Oh, shoot. Why am I not showing this? Okay, there we are. Okay. All right. So, um here is the summary of where we are in terms of um uh cost for the project. Um I show I'm showing this at as two scenarios. This scenario one is what the old Greenwich School Building Committee has um looked at and endorsed. Um, I did include a second scenario because based on some feedback that I was hearing that there may be some interest in a 10% owner contingency. Just wanted to show what that would look like in
013terms of overall costs. Um, the uh uh you know I I'll for purposes of explaining this, I'll just you know kind of walk through scenario one. Um we do have some early electrical materials that are uh going to be used uh that we we put out to bid over a year ago. They're on order. They're going to be used to to power uh a bunch of the things in the building. Long lead items that we didn't want to sort of uh get, you know, have get in the way of our schedule. Um the guaranteed maximum price that we have from Downs is the 45127908. Um we have some alternates that we can get into in a minute. Um talk about some of the details there. they're included in the 45 number above and the fire
014pump which is a you know also included in that number. So the total um kind of construction cost there would be 45693. Um we are we have a soft cost budget that's just around 5 million. uh a 7% owner contingency is just a simple kind of u 7% of the of the 45693 above it and you get to total project cost of 53894. Um then going down into the source of funds uh this project has 47 million51,000 approved uh to date. Uh I will note that 1965 1.965 million of that is has been conditioned by the BET. So assuming you guys agree with um you know uh an interim here, one of the things we will be asking the BET to do is to release the conditions on that 1965 so we can access uh
015that funding. Um uh also the that that corresponds to the early electrical package was uh used out of one of the the um uh board of ed uh project codes that's related to ADA compliance uh that was coordinated with um with Ben and and team um so we could get those those items ordered um and you'll see the funding gap there uh in red Um, any questions on this slide? >> Yeah, >> go ahead, Paul. >> I have a question on the on the contingencies, but I'm happy to wait until the presentation's over. If you think that's better, James, you you tell me. >> I uh h happy to talk about the contingency if you want to spend a minute on it or we can there is a later slide on it, but it's up
016to you. >> So, I mean, I guess I have two questions. Number one, this is the first time that we're seeing this. One second. Sorry. Um, this is the first time we're we're seeing it. And I'm also, you know, a contingency, um, usually the high end of a commercial contingency, even a municipal project, is 8%. Um, the 7% seemed like it was right in the wheelhouse. Uh I, you know, to add three points to the contingency, I get concerned that a contingency can become a slush fund. Um although I'm not opposed to adding funds to this should they be necessary, I would prefer that um you know, understanding exactly what they're going to be used for um before approving them would certainly be a better way to spend the taxpayers money. Um where did the
017you said somebody suggested that you have this 10% there was some suggestion that we might need it where did that come from and what are your thoughts on this I I I mean look you know I what what the building committee has has discussed previously in public um and you know amongst itself is is the 7% number um I just wanted to show this kind of illustrative on what what a you if you were to have uh a 10% contingency uh just based on some you know feedback I was hearing from Mike etc that you know what does that look like? So that's that's sort of I'm not here to advocate for one versus the other. I mean I think the at the end of the day this is a renovation of 120y old building.
018There definitely will be unknowns that we're going to come across and this would be specific to the owner's portion of the contingency. there is a 3% contingency for the construction manager that is baked into the $45 million number. Um, so you know there there is uh you know if you took our the column on the left, the 7% and their 3% you're at kind of an aggregate of 10% for the project. Um uh I I've had I I I will say I've had some people who are you know we've t I've talked to and they're like [clears throat] man you know renovation you should be looking to have more contingency than for a new construction as an example >> but the w the the the window that's kind of accepted for commercial construction is am
019I right when I'm saying that's between six and eight that's the that's the norm. Uh >> I I'm I'm probably not the right one to ask to answer that. Uh DS, what Jeff, do you want to take a stab at that? Lawrence, you you two >> I mean I I would just add Jeff Anderson with Downs. I mean, a lot of it is dictated by the project. So, as James mentioned, we're talking about an extremely old building or a portion of this building is extremely old. Now, we've done a a good amount of vetting in terms of looking at existing conditions, looking above ceilings and so forth, but I think you've got to look at what percentage it ends up being based on the risk. And there is more risk in in that building. But
020I think as also James said, we're not advocating for 10%. Um, we've been talking about seven. Uh, and we've done everything we can to try to make sure that uh this is this GMP is inclusive to everything that we possibly could know. Uh, and we would move forward with that. >> I'm I'm conscious here that we're we're um we're we're in the middle of presentation here. Karen, I see your hand there. Is this on specific to this slide? >> Uh, yeah. I did have two specific questions related to this slide. One is um James, you'd mentioned the 1.965 million conditioned by the BET. >> Uh, could you clarify what those conditions are that you're you'd be asking them to release? Yeah. So when we created when when that condition was created by the BET, it
021was basically saying that those funds would be released subject to receipt of the the GMP and ensuring that we had uh a 7% contingency um you know for the project. >> Ah okay. Um and then can you clarify what's in the revised soft costs and why were they revised? >> Yeah, I I can should I can can I wait until we get into that slide that >> Oh, absolutely. Yes, if you got more details. Sorry, this we just got a preview of this in the middle of the workday, so uh I haven't had a chance to flip through. >> Yeah, [snorts] let's let's definitely we'll get to that. All right. Um can I keep going? Okay. All right. So, this slide shows you the um guaranteed maximum price that we have from Downs. You'll see
022circled down there uh in red is the 45127908 from the previous slide. Um Jeff, do you want to describe that a little bit for us? >> Yeah. So, I think this is a culmination of the the bid process. Uh going through a detailed scope review. Um I think I lost you there for a sec, at least on my end. uh going through a detailed scope review of single. >> Uh oh. >> Sorry, I had a little technical difficulty here. >> It's all right. We can hear you. >> Oh, you can hear me. Okay. Sorry. Detailed scar review with every single one of the contractors that were low bidder on these trade packages. Uh so that we're comfortable in presenting to the building committee and of course Greenwich. uh a recommended um bidder for each category
023to accomplish all of the scope of work uh that we uh need to uh undertake at the school. Uh includes allowances for things that we would consider to be uh areas of additional risk or additional concern. Uh it has the alternates which again I think we're going to get into in a little bit more detail shortly. uh the required uh supervision for us to be on site uh to ensure that we're managing this construction uh understanding of course that we're in a school with a construction project and I not vice versa uh insuranceances, bonds, fees and everything that we would need to do again to comfortably uh present um a guaranteed maximum price GMPS at a time. Jeeoff, do you want to characterize for everybody how many bids we we received in aggregate because I
024I I think that was an important thing. >> Yeah, we were well over 60 uh this time around for each one of these trade packages that you see. Uh starting with the top line that has a number in it. Um certainly improved significantly from the last cycle. Uh that was a a a good effort I think by all to ensure that we had gotten to this point of the rebid and and uh every effort was put forward to do the best we could to get as much participation because ultimately that results in the best pricing. >> Any questions specific to this slide? Can we keep going? >> Okay. All right. So the next slide shows us um shows you some of the alternates that we looked at. Um you'll see that there are nine different
025alternates um that we that uh we built into the bid uh bid packages. Um we did that um to basically you know give give ourselves depending on how the bids came in uh give ourselves some uh opportunity to do incremental things to the project or take some things out to help the kind of numbers. Um so just I I will quickly tick through these. Um, I will ask Lawrence and Jackie to and and David probably to opine um if there are questions on some of the specifics, but the first alternate is a a raised garden planter. Uh, which I think the building, you know, was a a kind of a nice to have, not a mustave. Uh, and the building committee decided that that that was just, you know, not not something we needed to
026pursue. Um, and so that's we kind of said no on that one. Um the second alternate is for exterior cornises. Um that relates to a specific section of the building. Um and uh the building committee, you know, the the thinking is that as we're doing some of the work, there may be some additional cornises that we see are like rotted out or, you know, things like that. and that I this this uh alternate would basically ensure that we do all of those um you know some of this may for example be something that comes out of an owner contingency. Um cuz you know we don't we just don't know until we you know get up there and are actually seeing uh what it would result in a change order. Um so but the building committee
027said look let's let's you know it's a it's a bigger number here. let's not um you know definitely go with it but we will be prepared that you know this could be a use of an owner contingency down the road um on the sheet flooring I think that everybody felt you know old grain school right now when you go into the building for those who I I think you've probably all been there by now um but the main entry is on the second floor now uh we are one of the things we're doing with this project is the main entry will be on the first for and so this alternate would make sure that the first floor has all the same sheet flooring rather than you know it'll be the name sort of the main
028you know uh main uh entryway and main access point for the entire building. So we thought it was important to to do this so that the floors do look consistent and that it looks nice. Um uh and that's why the building committee accepted that one. The fourth alternate is some pre some cabinetry in the prek um windows which are currently kindergarten rooms and will now become uh prek uh kind of a a nice to have but not a mustave. Building committee said no. On uh alternate five is some shelving units for the stage. Uh kind of a nice to have. Building committee said you know we're not we're not going to uh we're not going to recommend we spend additional money on that. on alternate six is some a lintal replacement. Um and uh it's
029a a deduct alternate. So if you access if you say said yes to it, it would decrease the the project cost. Um I think it's a relatively small amount of money. I think you know people were felt like we should be doing this uh when we replace some of these windows. Um uh the seventh alternate is a roof replacement on section A um of the roof which is the roof that's above the gymnasium cafeteria and it's basically the 1990s late '90s edition. Um you know I think this one uh you know I I will let um I presume there'll be some questions on this one. Um the I'll let the the architect uh um the architect speak on this one, but I I think it we purposely did build in this deduct alternate so that
030we would have some swing um if if and you know if depending on where the bids came in and look that the general thinking is it does this will this roof need to get replaced at some point? Yes is the answer. Is it one of the worst is it in the worst condition of the other roofs? No, it's not. Um, and you know, I think you know, our charge per you guys and the EDS specs is, you know, to make sure we really address things like ADA compliance and fire protection and um, you know, security and and things like that in this building, h building wide HVAC and, you know, this is a a roof replacement. Um, wasn't necessarily core to that. Um I can understand why people might want us to do that. Um
031but the building committee said yes, we would um accept that deduct alternate. Um alternate 8 is some controls for existing unit ventilators that um just in our coordination with Dan Watson, he's expressed some interest that we uh he have the ability to control some of those units that are going to remain in place um just as a backup to the new HVAC system. Um, so we said yes to that one. And then alter add alternate nine is some to do some seat walls, a second ring of seat walls around the front entry. We do have a first ring that is being done. And I think as we were thinking about it, we said, you know, it actually might be kind of nice uh to take out that seat wall, might open it up a little
032bit more. We'll save a little bit of money. and and I think and saving some of the money, we would we're also then going to be pursuing a a deduct change order with a site work contractor who has built in the foundations for that to his bid. So, um that's the kind of summary on where we're at on those alternates. Um Mike, I I presume you'll want to have some discussion on that. Do you want me to keep going and we'll come back to this? >> Yeah. Yeah. Why don't we keep going and finish the presentation and then we can have one discussion. Okay. faster. >> Sure. >> More efficient. >> Okay. So, um Karen, per your question, here's their soft costs. Um you can see the total number um down there in the bottom
033right, the 5 million. Um you can see it's divides up into pre-construction and construction. Um so the pre-construction period or soft costs are roughly 1.84 million. [snorts] Um and the construction period it's 3.16. Um you will see some of the bigger items in the construction period. Uh things like the new playground that we are buying at a soft cost. Um also things like the abatement um uh monitoring uh is is baked into the site cost uh sorry the construction costs up in the design fees during the construction period. Um, also our our sort of ongoing relationship with Silver Petraelli and Morganti, our owners rep are covered in here as well as some things like moving expenses. Um, some of the the new FFN which is solely focused on the new addition. Um, you know, and
034buying some of the technology, smartboards, that kind of thing. Um, but that's sort of in aggregate the the soft costs. I will highlight two specific items. uh for you that are sort of that are newer ones that that as things evolved over the last six to eight months we we wanted to make sure we were accounting for. The first is the deep inspection services. You'll see that kind of about a third of the way down. Um we need to have somebody who is coming and making sure that everything that we're doing is compliant with deep uh as far as like you know some of the site work that we're doing. So, we did we have added in $150,000 allocation for that in the in the construction period. And [snorts] then towards the bottom, you'll see
035a gas line in the street reinforcing the main. Uh based on our conversations, um we've um come to understand that we're going to need to do some work there. So, we're we're accounting for that work. Um uh down in those soft costs. Uh, Lawrence, anything you would you would uh that highlight that I might have missed on this? >> No, James, you hit all the big items. Um, like you said, um, the others are budgets that we've been carrying. There's minor escalation associated with, you know, some of the items, but overall it, uh, you summed it up well. >> Okay, great. Thank you. All right, let's go into contingency funds. Uh, per pulse question. Um so just showing it again showing it just in a couple different ways. Um just wanting to also this slide
036on this slide in my mind I'm trying to show the fact that there is a construction contingency that is um that 3% number and wanting you guys to be aware of the sort of total magnitude of constru of contingency funding that would be in this project. Um [snorts] so under what where we have come out uh there would be a total of 4.5 million of contingency funds. Uh about a little north of three would be for the owner and 1.3 would be for the construction manager. And then you know if if someone were urging us to have a additional owner's contingency that bottom table shows it. So the owner contingency would rise to 4 and a half for a total of 5.8 in the project. Sorry, trying to uh find my unmute button. Um, you
037know, I I know I'm curious to see if you can answer to us sort of why you filled in both. You know, I guess you're giving us the option for both contingencies. I know going way back in the day, you know, ham a uh at that time we had so many schools that needed to be redone. It was it was 5% I think. Um and we kept having to go back to the B bet to ask for more uh funding because we kept bumping into issues along the way. Um and I know with new lab I believe it was around 10% we had funding left over that we returned. um you know with all that's going on in the world and the fact that we know that since the original documents were were drafted as
038you guys noted in here funding you know costs and prices have gone up I guess we have no no way to believe that those costs might not still continue to rise uh again who knows what's with what's going on in the world these days um and uh you know my 10-centent opinion is 10% is you know h having extra that we can return is better uh than having to continuously go back uh to the BET and asking for more contingency funds if we we run into errors. So um what was the thought process giving us both? >> Honestly, the the thought process is just so you can see the total magnitude um under under either I mean what where where the building committee has has come out and discussing is that top table. Um, but
039just, you know, look, I, you know, I I've heard there is interest, uh, in making sure we have a, a more robust owner contingency. So, I wanted to show what that what does that look like dollars wise. >> Yeah. I mean, and I know that there, you know, the discussion before was concern about using it as a as a slush fund or something. Um, which is as, as far as I know, never happened in in in construction projects here um, for the board. But I again couldn't couldn't say only in the years that I've been involved certainly or be beyond. But um if that is a concern certainly if we could always revise the um action item uh that we're voting on to include a you know a requirement that you know any and all
040funding you know obviously it always goes back but you know >> one thing I would just >> go ahead James. One thing I would just say to that point is look, you know, we we are designing this project for your EDS specs, right? I mean, we're not uh just going out and saying, well, we'd like to do this and we're going to go do that and we're going to pay this guy to do that. We are our our mission, our our whole reason for being is to support the EDS specs. So, you know, like a use of contingency would be in support of the EDS specs, right? in and you know as we run into a a problem with something or something else that's unforeseen and there are going to be unforeseen things in this
041project. So um wanting to make sure that yeah we don't we don't want to have to come back. >> Well I was going to say assuming when you're opening the walls of a school of this age. Yes. You don't know what you're going to find in there. You're bound to find >> Let's let's let's finish the presentation. I see a bunch of hands up and stuff. We still got um I want to let's let's see if we can get James to say I think that a 10% seems to make more sense. That's all. >> Okay. Okay. >> Do you want me to keep going, Mike? >> Yeah, please. >> Okay. All right. So, um look, now just kind of trying to show some of the differences um in in where we are in dollars versus
042where we were before. The where we were before is the col the the blue on column on the left. where we are now is column on the right uh in the middle and the differences on the on the right. Um so just wanting you to see some of the differences in terms of the direct costs which are highlighted in the box above uh the soft costs which are in the middle and some of the the um kind of offsets that we were considering uh in the box on the bottom. Um I'm going to go kind of in depth uh on some of these. I do want to highlight that in the uh December 2024 CD estimate we were assuming you can see that 1.48 mill 1.4 for 1,418,954. Those are um those offsets are in
043that footnote below number two. And you'll see now that the only offset that we're using is that the 565 uh that's using the uh OS ADA compliance funding. Um that's the only one that we're showing. Um we'll go go a little bit deeper. Jeff, do you want to explain that the uh bridge on the direct costs here? Sure, James. So, you know, I I think taking a step back that we we go and put this project out to bid comparing it to an opinion of cost at a time which was approximately November, December of 24. Uh for the history that occurred, we decided to push the bidding until uh rebid until this past October, November into early December. Um over that period of time, um we've dealt with some scope changes on the project, not
044the least of which are some soil disposal issues for polluted soils out there, a fire pump issue, but we've also incorporated a significant amount of cost management. That would be that approximate million78 number that you see there in the upper red box. But as also has been mentioned this evening by some of you committee members, we've had a significant amount of escalation. We have what I would entitle market conditions that could be influenced by tariffs, could be influenced uh significantly by the location of Greenwich, candidly uh in the attractiveness of of a a long renovation process and getting bid participation. That's what we ran uh into in the first cycle. Obviously improved that significantly with the second bid cycle, but we're estimating that in the 7% range, 2.4 2.5 million. uh that provides you a
045level of bridge uh to how we got from a CD estimate from approximately you know 14 to 15 months ago to where we sit today based on actual bids. We're now beyond that opinion of cost. We are into hard numbers, commitments and you know the term of the GMP as we've talked about this evening. >> Okay. And I I I will quickly then cover uh some of the the the changes on the soft costs. You can kind of see they they total up to the >> eight 830,000. Um I mentioned a couple of those earlier. Um one of the the uh you know we did make some modest adjustments to what we're paying our team. Um uh but what you know the two bigger numbers that stand out to me um are the uh deep
046inspection services which we were not accounting for before and now uh we have we've established a budget of 150 for that and then for the gas line in the street down there at the bottom of the page of 70,000. Uh similar similar story. Um, and the other stuff that we've got it that that we have changes in here is mostly related to, you know, this is, you know, taken a little longer. It's been a little bit more work to get this ready to go out to to uh start construction. Um, okay, highlighting here just so everybody is on the has on the same page that this is uh this slide shows you specifically what the capital is. um that is old Greenwich School specific. Um I have uh uh obviously been in close touch with
047Ben Brandon as we've kind of got been going through this process. Um just to make sure I understand what those dollar amounts are. Uh you'll see that you know we have not we have only accessed those funds in two specific areas. one is the um early electrical that 565 that's in the red box at the top of the page. And then in that s the the line below with the sewer maintenance um money that was established in fiscal 2324 um we've accessed 13,900 of that uh just to do some of the sewer um invest in investigatory um an analysis uh that we wanted to do to get the documents that we um but those are the only two uh amounts we have we have uh used of that. The rest is a a balance standing
048at 1.7 million. Um I believe uh uh the GPS has has encumbered that to the building committee. Uh but we didn't we're [clears throat] you know not planning to use any of it unless you guys tell us to. So all right and then uh did I skip one? Nope. Okay. So I'm getting towards the end here. So ready for the questions soon. Uh another another eye chart just to show you all the things that we've done and where we are now. Um different way of looking at that slide that we looked at earlier. And then you know just finally this is kind of you know where where we're at um on the project. The amount we've we've spent about 1.84 um million on design to support the ED specs. Um the bu this building committee
049has done I think a really good job of um trying to contain and offset costs whenever we found them. We tried to find some savings um somewhere else. Um in my interactions and they've been numerous over 3 years with the community. I will tell you that uh people really want this project done. Um and uh not a day goes by that someone says you know what are you gonna start soon? Please start soon. So, um, you know, and and look, I felt like it was important as we got started to really make sure, you know, we weren't just, you know, of course we're our job is to do your EDS specs, board of ed eds, uh, for the school, but I want wanted to make sure that we were getting real-time feedback from people on
050the ground, people who use this building on a daily basis. And I can assure you we've done that and, uh, we will continue to do that. So, it's super important. we I know from the members of our building committee who are you know old ranch school community members um but others um that you know uh that communication uh throughout this project and and really we're only about halfway through if we you know have three years of construction to go um all approvals are complete the building permits the one the one thing that is near I would say near complete and I'm told regularly that a conditional letter is sitting in the building department waiting for us to finalize uh the discussion with the fire marshall. I'm I'm feel pretty good that we're close. I know
051we have that funding baked in uh on the the the recent ask from the fire marshall to add a fire pump. Uh we had baked that into the numbers that we just discussed. Um and then we're ready to start in April. So, you know, I think we would certainly welcome um your action on this tonight. Um I know that we are planning to go and discuss this with the the BET next week. Um and um and that uh you know I've been in conversations with the moderator of the RTM to convene a special meeting the RTM at the beginning of February. Uh assuming we accomplish those steps um I think you know we're prepared then to finalize our our GMP contract with DS and to get started in April. So thank you very much. >>
052All right. Thank you James. Okay. So there's a number of there's lots of folks here. um able to answer any questions. I know I saw some hands up or earlier. Um and Paul, looks like you're the first hand up uh this time around. So, go ahead. >> So, I'll probably ask some questions here, but is when we're voting on this uh 6277940. Um what is the is is that the 10 or is that the 7% or does that not get calculated until it's needed? Is there an option one and an option two? >> No no no such thing as dumb questions. So the the motion on the table is the 7% contingency. >> Okay. So then let me just reiterate um the general from DS uh Miss Hirs was talking about um you know these
053potential things going on including tariffs and stuff like that but the gentleman made it clear that that's baked into the 7% not only the tariffs the other history I'm pretty sure that there's been a a ton of walls and ceilings opened up here and that this building committee has done a phenomenal job with their partners ers on actually drilling down and doing the due diligence necessary. Um, walls have been opened. The gentleman said he even took into consideration the location of Greenwich and I believe the building committee as well as the uh the gentleman their their um their request was 7%. They felt they needed 7% after being on that committee and looking at this. Um, so I just wanted to make sure I reiterated that. >> Jeff, do you want to do you want
054to add to that? >> Uh, I don't think so. I I think it's important to note that um that we have bid the project based on a set of plans again based on your your initial edecs, a schedule. Uh so once we are released to do so, we're issuing contracts uh and everything that the contractors could possibly know as it relates to costs are baked into their contract. So we should be comfortable as it relates to that uh in terms of any outside you know influencing issues unless there's something drastic that occurs from the government in the next uh couple months. Uh but I think in summary, Mr. Mr. Gabiel, you you summarize what I had said earlier. >> Mr. Cheney, please go ahead. >> I feel like I'm I feel like I'm jumping the
055line here. I don't know if there are people ahead of me, but I I just wanted to say that while I I do understand that 7% sounds like it's it's great. I do feel like 10% might be a better from what uh Karen was saying, I was going to say it was 5% at at ham and they kept having to go back for interims. the 10% at new lab seem to have worked well for both the BET and the building committee. Um we're going into the roof, the floors, and the walls, and it's a 100-year-old building. Um and I feel like and if we could just explain um to to everyone here since some of us are new, what happens to the o the money that's left over on a contingency? >> So my my
056understanding, what happens with the money that's left over will get returned to the town. Miss Coin. >> Um, I'm gonna not talk about the contingency for a second. Um, I was wanted to talk about alternative two and alternative 7. Um, with alternative two, I guess I guess this kind of does relate to the contingency. I'm a little concerned when because we're talking about such an old building and we're doing, you know, that things could get damaged and this exterior cornice and the fascia and the sophet repair and everything like that if we don't we deduct that $164,500. Now, you know, I guess I want to understand why we're comfortable. I assume that we're not going to be happy if we do a huge renovation project and then there's a bunch of uh exterior work that
057that looks really um [laughter] like it needs to be done right. I don't think the community is going to be happy of like well that cornice is you know falling apart and the sophet is hanging down. So I'm I guess I'm a little confused why we aren't just leaving that money in there because it seems likely that that could be necessary. So, I don't know if someone can speak to that. And then secondarily, and kind of relatedly, the roof, I don't know that we need to talk about this, make any sort of decision on this tonight, but once you have an entire crew assembled to do a massive renovation on an old building and we know that the roof is going to need to be replaced, you know, why are we going to push it
058off? I my understanding is that the roof is somewhere in the queue in the next say five years. And so my concern is we finished this renovation project and then 6 months later we're like and now we're doing the roof. And honestly I feel badly for the community that it would be hey here's we're tacking on now there's a new project that we didn't include with this larger project. Um, and also I imagine there's some efficiency with doing a project. That may not be true because I think a lot of the roofing projects we try to get them done in the summer. So maybe it's fine. And and so I'm kind of with both of these questions, I would like to hear from the experts of of why it would be okay not to do
059them now. So, um, on that one, could I ask David, um, Jackie, uh, Lawrence, could you guys, David, do you want to kick it off on on the thinking behind alternate 2 and alternate 7? >> Yeah, happy to do so. Good evening everyone. David Stein, um, with Silver Petra Selling Associates. So, um, alternate to related to the cornice, um, just based initially on the ED ed ED specifications, that wasn't specifically noted as a maintenance or repair item during the due diligence and design of the project. That's when it was noted there was some some areas that potentially could um use repair and replacement. Um because we're not doing a full replacement of some of those adjacent areas, we decided to at least build in for a costing purposes the replacement or repair essentially of the
060cornice that only wraps around the original part of the building. It's approximately 350 linear feet. So you see what that works out in terms of just general cost per square foot. So from the beginning, this was not part of the original scope or anticipation to do that upper area. If we were adding additions to that, we'd be touching it. But basically, our work, even our modest addition that we're doing in the back, doesn't interface with that. So this is really a standalone piece. And with that, we have not seen drastic signs of leaking, you know, in classrooms above windows or other signs of visual designs of distress. So therefore, we felt comfortable recommending this as an alternate, seeing what the price may be. Now, when you enter into an effort just like this, as you
061see at $160 plus,000 worth of work and scaffolding that'd be required around the perimeter of the building while we're doing other work that can open up some other conditions that we may not be able to foresee. And that also then ties into the owner contingency that we're you're all talking about. And that just taxs that. So, you know, at the moment, there are some superficial items that could be repaired in the future. Right now, as we presented to the building committee, there's no apparent signs of major distress. If that was the case, then from a structural perspective, people would have raised their hands. We just don't see that at the moment. um and therefore it just opens up another risk profile of the project that wasn't really based on accessibility ADA improvements or HVAC that
062was part of the EDS spec. So that's sort of the genesis behind that related um um related to the roofing piece of it. Um very similar the project never contemplated a full roof replacement. The roofs that we are touching which are adjacent to those roofs. We have some flat areas that are intersected between these asphalt shingled pitch roofs. Those areas are absolutely being replaced in kind. That's a full replacement down to its substrate. Uh we have new mechanical units that are sitting on this. So these shingled roof areas again are not showing necessarily signs of disrepair. they are will be reaching their end of their predicted life. But you know, why remove why remove roofing items if you don't necessarily need to? Now, your point of is it potentially more efficient to do it in
063um succession with other work. Um yes and no. There's a lot of other activities that are trying to happen all at once during the summer. So, it's fairly compressed. to um a roofing replacement project is reimbursed by the state and does not require the same action item as a large alteration project like this does. So you can essentially apply every month um throughout the year. You do not need to go for state bonding for that. These are priority type projects that can basically just be applied and that work can be started at the beginning of a calendar year and be ready for a roof replacement in the future. And it sometimes it'd be less um expensive because it's just a roofing contractor coming in and doing their own work and they're not essentially coexisting or
064working around a lot of other construction activity. I'll defer to my colleagues on the construction side to talk about that, but I think he could visualize if there's all this other activity, a roof replacement, they could come this in a fairly short order. So hopefully that your question. >> Yeah, that that was very helpful. Thank you, >> Jackie or Lawrence, just real quick, anything you guys would add to David? >> No, to what David said that the the cornises have a chance to snowball and consume potentially the owner's contingency. And as far as the shingle roof, there's no work on it. As David said, all your mechanical equipment is on the adjacent flat roof. So, it's a pretty straightforward repair or replacement in the future, whether it's done through the project or as Dave mentioned
065in the future. >> And I I would agree that David explained this very well, and I would prefer to have the roof replaced without the construction manager's markup. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. That's very helpful. >> Oh, I think Karen Krauss, I think you're you're up. >> Thanks, Mike. Um, James had talked about, you know, some unused BOE capital funding that could reduce the need. I think in the version I saw earlier in the week, it was about 1.7 million. Um, you know, could you could you go into some detail on what that when that was approved, what that was approved for? I think I I realize that this is a little bit left pocket, right pocket. Um, but from a governance and transparency standpoint and and to Paul's earlier expressed concern about, you
066know, slush funds, I I don't love the idea of repurposing money that was approved for something else. >> Absolutely. Do you want me to share that screen again just so because I have I I can >> Yeah. >> better. >> That might be helpful. >> Yeah. Okay. Uh let's go with this one. Can you guys see that? >> Not yet. >> No. Oh, shoot. >> There we go. Now it is. It just was had a lag. >> Okay. All right. So, you can see what we're talking about here are seven different line items. This is funding that was um included in the town budget. Uh let me zoom in a little bit too. Um and you know I put what fiscal year that money was the monies were established. Um and look we you know
067we we were not in to be clear we were not involved in the creation of these these kind of went came about through the regular capital process. Um and uh this sort of this column right here uh where the budget is is kind of the number that was established. um the ones that were on uh the ADA compliance uh and the sewer uh items, those were established while the building committee was uh beginning its work. Um it was um that was they were established at the same time that we were adding asking for uh construction funding. Um and uh the construction funding was not provided at the time. Uh but these these funds were established uh that million million 30,000 uh and the 500,000 for the sewer. Um they not to my knowledge not based
068on any detail or or data. They just were were sort of saying um you know uh we support ADA compliance and we support OS sewer. Um and then the the exterior concrete masonry. I'm I'm not really I I think that was just a normal ordinary capital item. Um and so you know that that that's my knowledge. I don't know if Ben Brandon would add anything else on that. I would I would just say that it's been routine and customary that we would uh use existing project funds for the uh project. If if the board of ed and the BET want to pivot away from that strategy and now go from a gross rather than a net, uh we certainly can do that. But this this is routine of how you would use existing projects that
069have already been earmarked for OG and it would just would just offset the the ask. >> I appreciate the clarification and and Sophie and Ben, maybe this is something we could take up in finance committee at some point because as I'm looking at some of these dates that are a while ago, maybe I'm misunderstanding, but don't doesn't the town borrow the money and start paying interest on it? Um I'm just surprised this wasn't clawed back sooner. this feels like a long time to have outstanding and not spent. Um, so maybe we can maybe we can I don't want to derail this conversation, but I think that's maybe something to talk about in the in the finance committee. >> Yeah, I'm happy to do that. >> Great. >> Sorry, I didn't realize it was still up.
070I was going to actually um jump in and support Miss Coven as it related to her um you know advocating for some of these alternates and I had an additional alternate but after hearing David speak um and realizing how you know something else gets put into this mix um it really upsets the apple cart and again that this has been well so well thought out with this uh with this committee and I I'm just um grateful for them and their recommendations. So, uh, thank you. But I'm I'm good. Okay. Other other questions. Okay. So, seeing none, so there's a motion on the table. I know there was uh talk about um the contingency. Um I know that's something that uh speaking as, you know, a member of the committee, the building committee, is something we
071talked a lot about. Um, you know, there is a lot of confidence right now that um the the recommended number that sent that's been sent to us as a board is is is appropriate. Um, I would I would I would caution against changing that and adding contingency. Remember, there's also that 1.3, you know, there's two sets of contingencies out there between the construction and the owners contingency. So, right now the um uh for for what it's worth, my thought would be to to move forward with the with the with the number as presented um and uh recommended by the building committee. Without seeing any other comments, um I will call the question. So, all those in favor of Dr. Anthony, just remember that since it's fully virtual, you have to do a roll call vote.
072>> Thank you, sir. >> Okay. Um, I did forget that. So, because we're virtual, we must do a roll call vote. So, I will call us one at a time, beginning with me. MJ McCrant Anthony is I uh you're just in the order I'm on the screen here. Uh Karen Krauss, >> will you restate the motion that you were about to do that? I just think it's going to be well helpful for the public and me. Yes. So, this is the authorized Thank you. So, this is to authorize the administration to request an interim appropriation for Old Greenwich School in the amount of um 6,277,940. >> Uh, next is me. I >> Wait, second, right? We have to second it. >> Well, it was seconded. And I'm >> It was seconded by Sophie. That was
073just a restatement. >> Um, and it's worth clarifying the 6 million, but remember the 1.7 is allocated. So, we're actually adding 1 4.5 million and changed an additional funding. Um, okay. So, I lost my screen here. Okay. So, let's try this again. So MJ McConey Anthony I um Paul Capiel >> I >> Sophie Coven >> I >> Bob Cheney >> hi >> Karen Hirs >> yes. >> Oh >> Wendy Walsh >> I >> Veronica and company >> I [laughter] thank you. Sorry. >> All right. Did I get everybody? Oh, yep. I think I did. Okay. Motion passes. 8 Z. All right. Thanks everybody. Thank you. Uh uh David, Jeff, Jackie, uh James, Lawrence, uh thank you all for joining us. Ryan, I see you on there. Um thanks all for joining us. Um I appreciate
074it. Um and um this meeting, uh can I get a motion to adjourn the meeting? >> Motion. >> Seconded. Um, all right. Bye everybody. >> A quick roll. All in favor, everybody roll call vote and everybody voted yes, right? >> Yes. >> Yay. Okay. Thank you. All right. Thanks everybody. Happy New Year. >> Thank you guys.