001Here. Tim White. >> Here. Let's stand for pledge. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Emily, do we have any public comment? >> We do not. >> Okay, moving on. All right, great. All yours. All right. Um all right, all so this is I think our third meeting about the capital expenditures plan. Um I've given you a folder. I'm going to give this to all the board of ed members cuz the hope is that we are able to uh approve a plan tonight in planning committee and then adopt the plan from the board of ed or recommend it board of ed uh tonight. Um and in the worst case scenario would
002be June 4th, but I know that that's a packed meeting. So the the goal is to get this approved with the board of ed tonight. Um but in your folder you have a few things. The first is a PowerPoint that I'm going to go over with the board of ed just kind of with some information about our schools, about the capital expenditure history, and the proposal that is here. Um I sent you all an email earlier in the week that just outlined some of the changes that were made. Um I would say that they're not It's not that they're um negligible per se, um but they were all things that we had talked about. I would say the most significant change from the last time we spoke is that there was the um $1.5 million
003reimbursement um up to $1.5 million for a 95% reimbursement rate for a track and field renovation. Um and the impact that has is that we were able to reduce the amount of money in the turf project to 475, which brings us below referendum um for a total project value of $1.9 million. Is it Is track in there? Yes. So it's turf and track. >> Yes. So in the in the last part of your uh folder is the track and field project renovation, um project elements. This is from SLR. They gave a presentation, Kevin from SLR. This is his presentation. I followed up with him last week and said, "Hey, this is what this is looking like. We have this potential reimbursement. We're thinking $1.9 million, is that feasible with all of these recommended parts components
004of the project?" He said, "Yes, we would reduce the project contingency to 5%, which is a comfortable amount." And this would be the track and field replacement along with some other nets we talked about, some safety nets. Um, and the chain link fencing. So, moving the fence out Uh, I I don't know. I think the I remember from his presentation, I can double-check. It actually was not moving it It wasn't moving it cuz we had talked about that originally. I think it was making it so it was the compliant 1 m. >> Yeah. Yes. Yeah. With And that required some type of configuration of the platforms or the bleachers because I think there were there were some The front stairways. But we're not shifting the track and field. It's just going to expand it 1
005m. And he Yeah, that would all be covered in the $1.9 million. So Didn't we also widen the walkway between the fence and the bleachers, too, though? Cuz right now it's not. Yeah, and and he had said something about like it will still work with the 1 m expansion and the new chain link fence, but I know that there was some configuration that needed to happen. >> the the front stairs on the stands have to go or be moved back. And that cuz there's that dead space in between the two sets of stairs. But that's included in this this recommendation. So, it will make it will make sure that the the track is compliant. Uh, referendum question. Yes. Does this go to referendum? No. Just to be clear, you're sure about that? Like you talked
006to Shawn because I never remember if it's gross or net. Yeah, I talked to Ben about it and the answer is yes, this does not go to referendum because it's grant funded. The part that needs to go to referendum is if you're going over $500,000. That's being But there's another way to look at it, which is the project itself is over $500,000 and then we get a reimbursement, but I'm not sure if it goes gross or net and I'm actually was thinking it's gross now that we're sitting here. Yeah. I just want to be clear on the net. >> Yeah, and so and when I also submit the documents, I have to submit these like one pagers to town with all the projects where we actually parse out the grant funding versus like the budget
007for it and so like I said, I talked to Ben and he said this is not Okay, so that was along the same idea. They're going to Is it a grant or is it a A grant reimbursement, so >> So So it's like a sub >> But do we have to spend the money to get the money? >> Yes. That makes sense. So the council would still have to Yeah, but still So the council's still going to have to spend that 1.5. Yes, it's it's not exactly the same, but there are some school security grants that kind of work the same way with some capital projects. I don't know if anyone was on the board when these happened, but it like the person [snorts] traps at the >> Yes, that's an example of it with
008the school security grants. We had to spend the money. It was part of our capital budget. I do not believe it went to referendum and then we got funding back and that, you know, went to the town and that was part of the agreement. So it works similarly to that. >> Okay. Yeah, and we died cuz they had to redo the man trap cuz the first one looked like you were in jail. Really? I don't recall that, but I believe it. Yeah, and it was like metal wire that looked like Oh, and this includes the dis- discus cage as well. Yeah, the safety it's ball safety netting behind goal lines and then let's see. I just want to double check which page Are you on the second page? >> page two, yeah. Cuz I see
009the E up in the >> Yeah. Okay. So, I think that also this is like a general um you know, a a more broad This was the money that the Board of Ed approved, so we could do some design work. If we go any further with SLR, the next stage would be going to planning and zoning and seeing how extensive we need to work with planning and zoning um to move to the next step, but then obviously we'd have to work with SLR more to like definitely refine the scope and create an RFP or potentially use the state contract. I think that that's where we used Rad Sports or Shaw. Not sure which which one they're going by, and I think Shaw Rad Sports is under the state contract which wouldn't require us to go
010to RFP, so really we have a lot of options here, but we would be engaging with SLR in the whole the whole process. Very likely. When does it occur? If it passes or if it doesn't yet. If this passes, it is currently in year one. So, there's 475,000, and then I have the But that's 14 months from now. Just to be clear. That's next summer, okay. >> And I talked to SLR like is that a a reasonable timeline? Summer 2027. Yes. Yes, it is. It's We really need like 4 months from like hitting the go button to project execution, so we are we are fine there if we wanted to do it in 2027. I think that that would honestly probably, you know, based on the age of the track be preferable to get it
011done as soon as possible, but it's in year one. Um any other track and field questions? I know this is definitely a bigger item for >> No, I think this is really exciting. At least to to get it moving without having to go referendum would be This is great. It just going to happen. Yeah. I Yeah. It needs to happen. And if Oh, so we're going to move the the long and triple jump in inside the D zone? I think that that's an option. Like I think for as these are all like theoretical, you know, like this is not a commitment. And what I will name is I'm I'm not I have to look a little more into this, but because we're getting a reimbursement for this project, I don't know if it requires some
012type of like committee with public input. I heard something about that with like these field projects. Yes. This is not necessarily public building. I don't know who would recommend it if it'd be the council or us. But if we do have to set up an advisory committee, we should make that happen. How many like can you get the specifics how many members are supposed to be? >> Yeah, absolutely. I think the first stage is like does it get approved because I kind of I was listening something cuz I've been listening like Pfast and all of the like components of like infill and I I don't even know if that's definitely required, but I know that there's a similar project happening in the Derby community and it's coming up that like they needed an advisory because
013of a state reimbursement. So >> the public should have some if it does go our way, they should have some sort of Totally, totally. I agree with that. I'm just thinking of the makeup of it. I don't know if since it's not really a building, I mean normally any building goes council approves the public building. This is not that and I'm just thinking What's land? That's what I was thinking is like somebody from Parks and Rec. And then not necessarily from the environment commission cuz the environment commission has not been It may work great now, but for years it was not functioning well. But somebody with some sort of environmental background. >> But that's the thing I'm like what what are the components of membership, right? >> Exactly. Yeah, I'm just throwing out some ideas.
014But if it is not PBC, which frankly I don't know why it would be PBC. Because it's not construction like that. I think that yeah, we probably ought to if we end up establishing a committee, which makes total sense. Yeah, I think we should have some ideas about like what from my perspective like if you just come up with some ideas but I'm thinking parks and environment would both be Yeah. backgrounds. Parks would be easy with parks and rec somebody from there if they wanted to do it and then somebody with some sort of environmental background which I would think that we could probably do. But I I don't also don't want to dismiss the user member either. Oh no not at all not at all. I'm saying like in addition to what like to
015me that's obvious like the sports teams but then or some sort of representative from the ex Yeah. >> teams yeah. Maybe the athletic director John Percival or something I I I don't know. Uh but then above and beyond that is where I was going with it and yeah I mean I think if we have like residents in town who are you know regular people I think that's good. >> Right cuz they use it. It is a public space. Yeah. >> That ends up being used when our sports teams don't Yeah. >> play on it and so forth so Yeah I mean people run on the track. >> Exactly. Yeah. So I'll I'll make sure to look into that. Um like I said I I'm not even sure the regulations of this body counts as that
016advisory but like I said I'll I'll look into that. Um that component of it. Any any other things with the turf specifically? Um So those are just the three options. We'll have to come back to the table and kind of select which one would best fit you know our needs. I think more is even more broad than that. Like if we know that like we have if we approve 475 and we know that we can make up the up to 1.9 with the the reimbursement I think that that is the kind of like the catalyst for this is what we have. This is what we want. This is the like the type that we want to have. >> I'm just looking at design you know I'm just we did a lot of things with that
017first field that I'd like to see mirrored in the new >> the this is not a set in stone. This is just like to give us some order of magnitude of of costs with with everything. Got you. Um So some other year one projects you have like the little one pager. Um some things just to note here is in that campus column, um any new project I highlighted in yellow. So, you'll see that there is uh four five six new projects. Every other project has been asked for before and been deferred. Right. So, there's 27 year one projects. So, okay. Uh I was just I'm looking at the fine print that I couldn't see on my phone earlier. Mhm. The placeholder for the Yes. >> uh storage at at Barham. Yes. >> Cuz I'm like
018I thought they were going to take care of that. And that's just >> [laughter] >> that's still in the works. What I will say what came off here is the power equipment. So, that got approved. But, the storage shed is still in progress and I think that it's going to get through, but I just wanted to keep it in here until it was final final. If it comes off, it comes off. I don't think anyone's going to Yeah. feel upset about um No, because I feel like they have a contingency budget and that could come from the contingency budget if need be. Mhm. Why stack the deck here when you have that budget to work with already? Yeah. So. You good? Yeah. Oh. With the storage, you know? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah. >> Yeah. And
019then, like I said, if it comes off, you know, I just it's holding the place, but that would that would free us 250. >> yeah, 250 for us. Uh the other thing to note is where it says plan year one proposed, um you all had asked some questions about like what's the total project outlay? If it's highlighted in green, it means it's a single year project. So, for instance, row row five, the Doolittle Stage Renovations, it's a $250,000 ask out of 250. It's a one year one and done. Um and so, you can kind of see that there are I would say the majority of these projects are multi-year, uh but there are some single single uh year projects. Um and then, on row 12, uh I want to make sure we talk about the
020I'm going to change this where it says the description. I already have a note about this but >> yep yep no. What I will say is the this document is like an internal document for [clears throat] us where it says South parking lot got switched that loading dock loading dock loading dock complaints. The documents I submit to the town are actually different so this is like internal to the board of Ed. So they don't see this. I know in a previous meeting I showed you like this is like the referendum description that is is better than this one. Language matters here. And language matters and I think that if we were to move forward with this any of the projects I have to do like the one page of the town where we talk about
021grants, we talk about the total ask and I would lean into you all providing you know support on that description. So I have something teed up but I would like you guys to make sure that you've looked at it. But that is the only item we have for referendum in year one. So with a total ask of about 5.8 million dollars. Last year you all approved 5.04 million dollars. So um last year approved 5.04, the board approved 5.04 million dollars, the town council asked us to sharpen our pencil. We actually reduced it to 2.5 million dollars. We kept basically safety and compliance updates. The town council approved 3.3 million dollars because they added the 800,000 for the track. So they actually approved our reduced ask. But ultimately we only realized 1.7 million of that because
022we had the two items that failed at referendum. So I'm naming that because you know it starts high but as we see in the process you know the every stage there's a little bit of a cut. But we're not putting 1.6 million dollars up for referendum. I tried to be sensitive to you know putting multiple things up. We saw what happened last time but I do think that the loading dock is a safety issue. Mark, Tim you got to see it in action. Um It's lovely. Yeah. So, um other things on here that I want to any changes that might have been made. Just looking really quick. Um one thing is row nine, the Dodd Middle School, the athletic field upgrade. We had $50,000 in year one originally for design work and then $300,000 in
023year two. I just pushed that all into year one. There's been a lot of talk about our fields um and access to fields, especially at Dodd. There's like some drainage issues and um it makes Yeah, it makes playability of the fields really difficult. Um so, instead of separating that into design and the actual I just put it all together. Um And then the other pieces of this, the like I said, the power equipment for Barnum and Norton was removed from this and other than that >> Where are you right now? I'm just kind of looking around here to see the other changes that I'd written in the email about about changes. Um which I just printed out. 250 for the greenhouse? Yes. Wow. It's in really bad shape. >> Oh, yeah. I I understand. That's
024enough. >> had to We basically had to knock it down, rebuild the wall. It's like falling off the slab, which is the issue. >> Is it really? Yeah. Yeah. So, if you go inside, it's cracked. Um but we just got that. Cuz Wait. Two different greenhouses, maybe? >> Which greenhouse? >> bought a greenhouse at Homestead. Yeah. This is the one attached to the high school. Yeah. >> I was just going to say we just got that. That's why that's why I asked. Yeah. I am I have no idea when the last time the high school greenhouse was used. It wasn't used when I was there. Okay. Yeah. And it I I'm a couple years younger. It wasn't used when I was there as far as I know. It was falling down. So, found that out
025when I started working here. [snorts] It was probably in four years of being a student there. You go all sorts of places cuz you for whatever reason you get access to it and it's That was the one place that I think I never actually got I never I didn't set foot >> [laughter] >> I didn't set foot in there until I was the SRO. Really? Yeah. Never Probably the SRO is the only one who would ever go in there for I was just in out just out of curiosity. Hey, can you open this for me? You can go in if you're a student and you're creative you can get on the roof, you can go in the tunnels, you can go basically anywhere the greenhouse Yeah, the tunnels there's there's a lot of surprises at
026the high school know it now. >> [laughter] >> Uh For the two people watching at home >> [laughter] >> Don't say anything. Let's see. All right, so I'm just looking to see any other changes we talked about the turf. Um I also reduced the elementary playground. Actually that was one of the projects that was approved last year and the great thing is that that's actually coming to fruition at Doolittle for this summer. They're renovating the playground which is really great, but that was $250,000. So if we put kept it at 250 then we're going to referendum. So I cut it to 240. Okay, just to be clear on the playground that's the upper one or the northwest one as compared to the southeast one? The one that if you're looking at the front of the
027building it's on the right. Cornwall? Yeah. Yes. Okay, yeah, yeah, yeah as compared to closer to the gym. Yes. Okay. And what's the plan with the 240 that you have right here? It's the 10 Yeah, it's between Highland and Doolittle or what? Yes, so it's divided up between the two. Highland has the north side of the playground that runs along the the campus. It's a very old playground. It's not ADA accessible. So well, it it technically meets the ADA threshold, but I would say the actual accessibility is another another question. So that would be potentially update the Highland playground. It is old. I think it's 20 years old. So. Okay. It's holding up well. Yes. Yes. Yeah, and I think For 20 years old. Yes. Yeah. And I think our facilities team has done a
028really great job of like trying to maintain things as as pieces uh you know have kind of broken off or um needed repair, but um we did have someone from Kompan, which is the playground construction firm that is doing the Norton and Barnum playgrounds that kind of looked at it and was like this is this is definitely time for a replacement. So. Um then the other changes for year one from the last time we spoke um we talked about the outbuilding re- uh the outbuilding replacement uh at CHS. That was one of the items that we actually saw on the tour, and that is in this one-year piece of paper um that is 27? Is that 27? Yes, exactly. Cut it before for me. Um so that's the outbuilding where Rich was kind of walking
029around where like we were keeping sand and salt basically in the just in the parking area. >> a cover over that. >> Yes. Um and part of the reason I moved some of these I do think that, you know, as especially as we're seeing snow and needing more salt and asking for snow equipment, um having the appropriate places for it is important. I think another piece of this is just kind of leveling the ask throughout the years. I do want to name that you know last year we asked for uh the five-year plan was $62 million. That's been reduced to a little over $31 million over five years. Uh part of that is due to the EPC. So, the the ask in general over five years is a lot less this time around, but I
030didn't want to, you know, have it like all different amounts of money across five years. So, as much as possible tried to level the funding ask year to year. Yeah, no, what the council does with roads is they basically I mean my recollection from when I was on the council is it's a 20-year plan and I did put out pretty much every you know year they put out another million and a half or two million dollars. So if it's two million dollars, you know, you can expect to be 40 million dollars to replace all the roads. And we just do two million dollars a year and think it always passes. It may have gotten rejected before, I'm not sure, but it's just how it goes. We do 5% of the roads on a yearly basis.
031Yeah. From a budgetary perspective, I think that's good for, you know, taxpayers and stuff. Mhm. Yeah, and I think next year we'll see like what you know, I know Vin is working really hard on the EPC and there's a lot of things that are still up in the air. So like a lot of those projects were removed from this plan and kind of put in a placeholder tab for now so we can see if anything needs to be added back. I know that there were a lot of questions about like Doolittle and air conditioning and roofing and windows. Um, so I'm saying all of that to say like you know, depending on where the EPC lands, this could look a lot different, but I do think leveling it out year to year, um, you know,
032if we get approved, then, you know, that helps year over year with the roads. So. Is the >> [clears throat] >> I'm going back to the outbuildings. Is the 150 square feet big enough for each of these sports? Yeah, so what I would say is I defer to Rich on that. Like he's spent a lot of time so that that comes directly from him. Yes. He talked to John about that. Yes, I think he does a really, you know, as you can see here like this these are his notes. He's like pretty he's very specific and precise and I think that that's if that's what he says he needs, then Okay. How tall are those buildings? Um I want to say from our tour they're like I'm like 20 feet. They're pretty tall, but I
033can I him. They've >> to be taller than I am. One story building is what I'm thinking. It's not You don't need to get back to me. It's fine. Well, now I'm curious. [laughter] So, I'm just thinking I'm just thinking of something like if if a net is like a soccer net is broken down and I don't know if it is, it's probably, you know, 12 or 15 ft. I don't play soccer, but if it's one bar, then that's big. That would be squeezing like a 10 by 15 ft. Yeah. building. Whereas for that height, it'd be a little bit easier. Um the only other the two other things I mentioned this was like the snow removal equipment. Uh originally kind of had put one amount, like we'd split it over a couple years. The
034snow removal equipment is line What is it here? Uh 16. So, our equipment is 15 years old. We had spread it I think in year one and year three, and I just pushed it on to year one. Again, part of the leveling, but like also the the equipment is old. And so, like as much as we can replace, we had a really challenging winter. I hope that that's not repeated for a number of reasons, like the operational and the financial components, but um just pushed that into year one. And something I deferred was the electrical service replacement to Highland, which is on line row six. So, the electrical service distribution is um like basically we don't have enough power. Um the classrooms don't, you know, they have these like duplex outlets. It's just not what
035the the school needs. We had um you know, allocated $50,000 and $350,000 for this. Um but I think that there might be something I'm going to just going to double-check this. I think I might have missed the prior year's approvals, because when I was looking at this project, um I think it might supplement another project in a prior referendum, so I just pushed it to year two cuz I didn't want two projects competing against each other. Um, and I think that this one, while an inconvenience, is not as much of a safety concern as the loading dock. So, just picked one. So, those are that's the year one projects and changes that were made. Um, and so the total is 5.879682. Did we talk about the bus depot project? Yeah, so the bus depot is
036that's not a year one project. I did add that to the year three. So, the bus depot is interesting because we originally had a project allocation of $125,000. You know, um, Datco, or I should say an affiliate of Datco, bought that Marshall building on, you know, where the Yeah, the East Coast Electrical, all of that is. Um, and between that and Sand Bank Road and our bus lot, there's a heavily wooded area um, that we got an easement for, so now it's owned by the town. Um, but in order to clear that, pave it, which is required instead of milling, um, it a very very rough estimate by Datco, who can do some of this work, um, is $800,000. And so, it's big, and I shared with Datco that like among projects, this is a
037really challenging one to get across the finish line. Um, and you know, so I did add it in here, and we are going through the process with P&Z of getting a project approved because the project approval will be 10 years. And we had capital money already approved, the 125. Now, we probably have about $90,000. So, you know, investing the design work to get a design and get an approval, and then if in a subsequent year we can afford to do the work, great. Um, I did want to put it as a placeholder, but it's certainly not a year one project. There are no safety concerns. Our buses are still able to run. Um, Sand Bank, that's a tough area to take a left out of, especially when you're pushing a ton of buses, but that's
038that's a different concern that would be solved with this project, which is really about land clearing and creating more space for our employee parking and bus staging. And electric buses, creating charging stations for that. >> bus contract that them acquiring that space could then increase their fleet for us, too. Well, I I don't know that we need the fleet to be increased, but it's really tight in there. So, it creates a lot of like staging issues and when they're moving buses around or plowing, um I think as our student enrollment grows, that could become more of a But will they will they keep the old lot as well? Yes. Okay. >> Yeah, so we own we own everything. >> Okay. >> So, that's that's another kind of interesting piece of this is we own Sand
039Bank, we own own the wooded area, DATCO owns that front parking lot and that building. They're willing to move our people out of the bus trailer. We have a triple wide on Sand Bank and we would move into that permanent building. Um but we also are fine to be in the triple wide for now. There's no safety concerns, it works, and so, you know, it's it's for us, I think it's there's probably more of an urgency [snorts] on their end than there is for us. Um what do we need what why do we need more space exactly? I'm missing this because I'm thinking they could be bringing employees here Mhm. to a building that already exists. So, the parking lots are probably sufficient for whatever employees are there cuz I'm thinking that generally it's parking
040lot is designed to fit the building. So, they're expecting a certain number of employees. That's how much the parking lot will cover and the buses would still only be Cheshire buses. Were they bringing buses from >> would be just ours. Yeah, so why do we need additional space? I'm missing this. Yeah, so and actually across the street right behind Highland Bowl is where people are parking Yes. >> right now. So, the drivers is the drivers. You can't park in our buses. Got it. Oh, okay. So, all right. >> All that fits is buses right now. And so >> No, I totally understand that. I wasn't thinking about that. The bus drivers need a place to park. Okay. And what do we do? We just pay them some sort of lease or something? We don't That
041code us. That code us. >> Which probably That means that >> We're paying for it. >> [laughter] >> No, I get it. I get it. Okay, so that makes sense. So the idea would be to shift the parking from there over to the woods. Yeah, there would be some space um there and then just like cleaning up the lot that's currently there at the like the the building itself. So there's Sorry. Go. So there's no You said there's no safety concerns. Like I'm think This is where my head goes. We have a We have a system that exists and it works right now. Highland Bowl is getting paid something. So to me, they like that. We're saying we wouldn't be paying them anymore for that and we'd be spending $800,000 to expand impervious surface, which
042from an environmental perspective I don't really care for. So I'm thinking status quo is where my head goes. Rather than even talking about the $800,000 and unless there's a compelling reason other than it's like totally adjacent and we own the property, I get that, but uh maybe it to me maybe a reason would be Highland Bowl gets sold and they're going to do something else with the property. But for the time being I if the bus drivers are comfortable with it, like crossing the road in the morning, whatever, I just shrug my shoulders and say, "All right." I wouldn't want to be a bus driver. I thought the lot behind the Waco building that on the corner of Highland and San Mag was bigger. It It's not that big. The Waco building? You mean where
043East Coast is? >> Yeah. Okay. Yeah, I don't think it's I don't think it's all that big. >> It's not that big. Well, the Are we talking about You're saying >> The existing parking lot behind the building. >> Yeah, no, it's not big. It's not that big. It's very small and >> I expected it to be bigger. >> This would also include spaces for electric electrical charging for vehicles if that was something you wanted to entertain with DECCO. That makes sense because there's a bigger footprint for that. Yeah. >> Because it's not one five-minute fueling station, it's park it in a you've got a porous cement pad, put the equipment in and then it stays parked for eight hours or whatever it is. >> more space, right? >> Exactly, that's my point is you're pouring
044a you're pouring a cement footprint cement pad as compared to one diesel fueling station where people can run through probably every 10 minutes, fill up, and you just need one fueling station for 35 trucks. Might take a few hours to get them all filled up for 35 buses. Might take a few hours total, but literally you can't do that with the electric unless you go really expensive, which is not going to happen. And I think that like, you know, the town you like you all approve a five-year plan even though it's really year one, right? And so like being in year three, there's a lot of flex it's not Sure, no no no, I totally get that. To me, 225 is a placeholder. Yes. Yeah, it is. Um but I'm just I'm just offering some
045thoughts. If I guess if we could get a plan in place to electrify, I personally would be more I'd be more interested in understanding the the impact of that with a bigger footprint. It would make sense. But for the time being, I'm just I'm shrugging my shoulders going if people are okay with it. Yeah. So, would we if they were to move the buses, are are the buses going to stay in the existing lot or Yes. Yeah, and what I it would be an expanded lot because all that wooded area but basically the employee parking will be towards the front towards Highland Avenue >> Okay. and the buses towards the back. >> Because it would still be I'm I'm just looking at the logistics of fencing further Yes. Right. >> Because we want the Yeah.
046Um and what I would say too is this came up in the planning and zoning committee is like, "Okay, are you going to use that entrance as an entrance or exit on Highland Avenue, like that parking lot?" And that is not the intention. It's still to use Sandburg. That still has a lot of traffic problems, but like it's not creating another means of egress for buses. Um cuz that would probably create I actually don't know if it'd be better or worse cuz you can make right turns, but that's not the plan. Like let's use Sandburg. Okay. Um I think that was it. So, I guess my my one thought on this is just uh no, a couple of thoughts. Uh so, for something in like Doolittle, I think Dodd might have stage renovations as well.
047Mhm. Um I totally understood the point you made about say the Dodd stage and it has like the uh the splinters are like the splinters are almost like weapons coming off of there. >> Yes. Um [snorts] so, I completely understand that, but I just um without getting into the details right now, I just want to highlight that for the council that uh I guess my question is you mentioned that, but then are the drapery, the lights, the sound system I understand the idea of going in and getting one project done all at once, but if they're not necessary when the council's concerned about the total capital budget spend, >> just to uh give them more uh details if they ask about it. They may not ask, but I want to make sure that you're prepared
048for that because are the other items here, say for the Dodd stage, in your opinion, are they necessary safety issues for this year? Yeah, so this is kind of a like a roundabout way to answer your question. >> It's okay. It's okay. I think that there are legitimate safety issues, and what happens is either you're having kids up on a stage where there is having splinters or you're not using the stage because it's so unsafe. So, I think that there's that issue. I think it can be worked around cuz you can just say, "Okay, stop using the stage," which is not great. Um I think that the other piece of this, the non-safety piece of this, is that there we're getting two new buildings and Dodd and Doolittle are not seeing any of that. And
049so, you know, older buildings that have old stages that are are not in great are kind of in a state of disrepair, like paying attention to those because the schools aren't really getting anything else Yeah. No, I totally get that. I do think that's extremely important, particularly for Doolittle more so than Dodd. Dodd is the whole town. Everybody's treated equally there. Yeah. >> Um, Doolittle's not and I've heard uh that the property values are uh diverging depending on the elementary school districts. I don't know if that's true. That's what I've been told and I find it to be perfectly reasonable, believable. So, I totally get that. Um, anyway, my simple point is just to uh offer up uh it be prepared um if the council asks about something like sound system, that's a safety issue.
050Yeah. Yeah, and I think that there's a reality that we approve something and then, like last year, we asked to sharpen our pencils and we have to think about which of these are we going to prioritize in a plan, right? Um, cuz we knocked it we cut it in half last year by the time we got to the town council, beyond what the board had approved. So, I do think that's a reality, but um It's just that um tacking on to what I'd said, I don't know if you can expand on this, but my understanding right now, you had mentioned the EPC before, the energy performance contract. Um, so the last proposal I saw, I'm sorry, cuz actually I might even be closer to it in some ways than you uh cuz I'm on that
051energy committee, but the number was $55 million and I think I think Vin told me it's $20 million that is locked in. >> Yes. Like actually locked in with contracts and stuff, uh rates taken from the banks, all that financing, blah blah blah. So, there's another $35 million that is 30 or 35 million that's not locked in, that's at risk right now for whatever reason. Um the 20 million, correct jump on the hearing, tell me if I'm wrong about this, Emily, but the 20 million basically is in short, it's the solar. Mhm. And the 35 million incorporates what I really, really want, I suspect we all really want, which is a lot of those energy savings, like efficiency and conservation measures that give us those savings. That was being targeted toward Doolittle improvements. Like several
052million dollars in Doolittle improvements. So with that being at risk, a lot of the Doolittle improvements that you were talking about that I think I and I think probably everybody wants to happen. Um in terms of fairness to all the different elementary schools. Yeah. Uh haven't happened, but it is at risk right now to some extent. Um And I can show >> I don't think it's it's not it's wouldn't be a situation where it's like 35 million or nothing. It'd be more like 35 million, something less than 35 million, and then see what survives based on funding. Yes. And what I'll share with you, I'm looking at this cuz I was like I feel like a page didn't print of this. I did not make enough copies cuz I just kind of had it a
053reference point, but I'll share this with you all. Um there's an EPC conversation earlier in the week where they talked about projects that were funded with the 20 million dollars and the projects that were still up in the air. So if you look at the gray grayed out areas, that's the ones that are up in the air right now. And you'll see Doolittle cooling is is one of the up in the air projects, but I can just pass that around so you can see. But like I'm saying, I feel like there's like a page didn't print because there's only 17 projects on there. Um Yeah. But you can kind of see that like yes, Doolittle is still very much up in the air. A lot of that was the solar for the EPC being approved.
054That's one of my biggest concerns is making sure we get the uh the air conditioning at at Doolittle cuz And the I-Fair. Yes, the idea was to have it Yeah. financed through this. Yeah. I can show them. I just I just want to mention that cuz we're on the capital budget overall. And and I would say like the you know, going from a 30 $62 million 5-year outlay to a $31 million like that's you know, cutting in half. I I just don't know what that's going to necessarily look like next year if we determine that $30 of those EPC projects are not going to get financed, right? Cuz then are we just adding back the $30 to our our outlay. So. Yeah, I don't honestly I I personally never looked at that 30 million to
055the 60 million. I You look at those year one. Yeah. >> That's the rest is the rest is a plan. Yeah. I saw that somewhere somebody was making fun of like Washington DC budgets and they said this is this is what we used to make fun of with the Soviet Union when they would talk about their like five-year plan. It's good that it's good to have a plan but but like I said I just see it as a placeholder for further discussion. Yep. Um any other questions you guys have about this? I'm I mean I'm I'm okay with this. The one thing that I've mentioned is the uh the loading dock and I just want to have a plan Yes. to explain this to people. >> 5 to 10-year plan? >> [laughter] >> No. No,
056a 5 to 6-month plan. I I >> To explain if this if that goes out to referendum this year I and I'll participate in it. >> Mhm. But I need to know that there's some sort of plan to to explain this to people. >> Yeah. Yeah. Cuz I don't think just changing the words is necessarily going to I don't think it'll I don't know that it'll fly and I really also have no idea how many projects the council was planning on sending out. Like do you know have you heard where they are? I don't know they're I and I don't mean the council cuz they wouldn't have it officially but Sean would have an idea. They're not the plans from all departments are not due back until June 11th. So I I haven't seen them.
057And what department? Yeah. So we spent a June 11th. Yeah. I guess the I guess the question I'm wondering I haven't I have not done it myself but I'm wondering if there's a year or two from last year that's online. Do you happen to know if there is? Uh you mean are year two? No, town the council's year two. >> Yes, there is. I can find that. Well, when they have to So June 11th comes all the departments submit by August when they have to basically tease out exactly what they're moving forward. >> Yes. Oh yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah, that's the process. Yeah. But we Yeah. And for sending out another 10 referendum items we're in the same boat except we're calling it loading dock instead of parking lot because it is primarily the loading
058dock. But I think for us for our work is maybe planning ahead to you know, make the awareness and so forth when the green light goes on in August. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I don't I don't know that it needs to be anything more than that. I just think there I just think we should have like some sort of commitment to like explain this to people above and beyond what we did last year. Yeah, I think the message is pretty loud and clear though. Um that I think we stuck with that last time and and obviously it wasn't effective and so their conversations are going to have to stand around like what do we move forward? Are the Have you had those conversations with council members on like I don't really care who it is? Informally.
059Okay. I think that the message has been received for sure. Okay. How many was it last year? Do you happen to recall? There was a bunch but The thing is the one thing that I feel like I've noticed and I haven't Was it 10? It was. Yeah, it was something very similar but yeah, it was it was a lot. I haven't I haven't looked at it compared year on year but I definitely feel like there just have been more referendum items cuz I think everything is just more expensive. >> Yeah, and the need is greater too. >> And the yeah, stuff gets older. >> Yeah. Um and so I I'm not convinced that I believe that reason it is entirely possible that, you know, five reasonable council members look at it and say, "We really
060really do want to send all this out." And that's that's And And so it's not to say that we shouldn't do it, but I think it's I feel like if we the board are asking for it, it's incumbent on us to make a better case for it. >> Right. That's >> But I do I am sensitive to the public's information overload, too. And And 10 referendums is an overload. >> Oh, totally, but we don't control that. That's what the council We're just saying if we >> should influence that. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. And if we only limit it to one, I think that's I think that's pretty good. >> Yeah. I mean, I don't think I don't see anything else off this list that I'm that would really be the big priority outside of the
061loading dock. Yeah, and I I think that it feels odd when the last time we talked and it was the turf versus the loading dock again. Like that's just Yeah, we've removed that element, and I think when we're talking about two referendum items, cuz you brought this up before, like what are we going to do to advocate for this? And it's like now we're putting two projects that have went against each other. It feels not great. Um, you know, to the point where if the but the reimbursement had come through, like I would have moved the loading dock or the turf into your two, cuz I wouldn't have wanted them to go head-to-head. But I think that now that the the turf is not a concern referendum-wise, we have more time to put into the
062loading dock and the public information and even how I present it to town council, right? You guys got a tour, um, but for them parading them the information and, you know, we did we did give a town council member a tour last time of the loading docks, but being able to offer that and get people more informed and the public more informed, I think we can we can do that this year. Yeah. So, we have some time. And we're again pre-gaming >> Yeah. Yeah, I'm not looking for any sort of like solid commitment other than just like a a verbal commitment to say, "Yeah." And if it includes even if it even includes like going to some meetings, like weeknight meetings, whether you as staff, us as board members, I don't really care, but like
063whatever meetings we attend. I mean, I go to the Norton PTAs, I'll bring it up there in September, October. I'm not going to bother people with it now. I don't think anybody's going to be too focused on it now, but I do think when we get to September and October, I think there would be value in in doing that explanation to people. >> to be some marketing plan. Yeah. Okay. All right, as long as we're on board with it, then I'm okay sending that one forward and I'm fine with the rest of it. It better get approved. That's what It better get approved when it does get approved. Exactly. I Yeah. You miss being able to touch the crumbling loading dock, but I'm happy to show you anytime you >> you really want to get
064up close and personal with the dumpster. Yeah, do I have to go with you? >> you got to get between the dumpster and the loading dock, and that's where you can get the full view. Yes, I need that experience. And just >> [laughter] >> just to to be to be clear in case >> here on that. Yeah. In case this hasn't been conveyed to you, so correct me if I'm if I get something wrong here, but the idea is to expand Yep. the loading dock allowing for additional refrigeration, which what went through my mind is we have a smaller high school population than a lot of time in the past, but we also have different nutrition requirements. So, a lot of it literally is we never had I don't think we had breakfast when when
065we went to high school or anything like that, and now there's breakfast afforded to many kids. And you had I think we had two options on the line and that was it. There were two two separate lines and >> Yeah. Now they have four, five different Yeah, so there's all kinds of food. Yeah. But what I will say is um you know, yes, the the loading dock would be expanded. I would say that that's more of a like a side benefit than like the safe the correcting the safety issue and the crumbling rebar is really the primary focus, but part of Bridget's plan is okay, we have seen expanded capacity of our our nutrition program, so if we're going to do this and we're going to have a loading dock that lasts 50 years, let's
066make it bigger so if we need to put something on it, we can do that in the future and we're not having this conversation in 10 years. And if I recall correctly, he said they're getting daily deliveries from Highland to the high school. So, they're driving food to the high school every day. Yes. Yep. That's definitely an added benefit. Yeah, that would have been a proactive plan. Yeah. So, we're not voting on anything. >> Yes. You are. We are. If you're aligned, yes. There is a a motion to approve the plan. Would you like to read the motion? Sure. I just didn't have it in the agenda, what you sent. Yeah. Okay, so that the Cheshire Board of Education recommends one up. >> I'm going up. Bottom up. >> Yeah. That the Planning Committee recommends
067to the Cheshire Board of Education the approval of the 5-year capital expenditure plan and budget for improvements to current buildings in the total of $31,870,921 with $5,879,682 to be funded in year one and with annual allocations as follows: 2026 to 2027 school year with $5,879,682 to $2027 to 2027 to 2028 will be $5,895,000 2028 to 2029 $7,185,000 2029 to 2030 $7,283,239 and then 2030 to 2031 $5,575,000. Second. All in favor? Are there any further discussion? No. All in favor? Unanimous. Second motion. Nope. No, this is >> That's for later. Tonight? Oh, yeah. That's not later. Yeah, I'll keep that for later. That's all, folks. Motion to adjourn? Don't you have to sing? Oh, the recital's at 7:00. Oh, I thought you said 6:00. Well, I'm not I'm not He's going to make it 6:00. Yeah,
068I'll probably go right home right now. Um Motion to adjourn? Motion to adjourn. Second? Second. All in favor? I. I. We are adjourned.