001Tim White >> here. >> Sam Rosenberg >> here. >> We have a quorum. >> Great. >> Yeah. All right. >> Stand for the pledge, please. >> Got a flag. Flag's coming. >> We do. Yep. Flag is coming. >> There we go. >> All right. 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. >> All right. So, let me pull up the agenda here. All right. Any public comment? Did you guys get anything? >> No public comment. All right. Uh I'm not sure who's taking this. I don't know if it's >> Yeah, >> Emily, you got it. >> Yeah, I got it. I got it. So, um, we're going to move to the
002energy performance contract and I'm going to give it to Vin Masiana to share some updates on our contract. I'll also let you all know that I sent I shared a Google folder just with some materials for tonight, including some of the things that uh Vin is going to walk through tonight. So, you just you have that available in your email since we are virtual paper. >> All right. Well, thanks Emily and good evening everyone. Hope everyone is doing well. It's a little strange to be in a planning meeting kind of not doing the role in all that. So, thanks Emily. Um, I'm gonna start with just a couple quick things having to do uh with electricity and energy before I get into the energy performance contract update. And this this will be brief, but Emily
003and I have been working with Rachel Bogger, who has been our consultant for electricity purchase for many years. We have a an electricity supply contract that uh runs through October of this year. We're uh locked in our supply rate at 10.35 cents per kilowatt hour. So, we've um reached out to Rachel to put together a bid knowing that there's a couple of elements here. One is that we know that Chapman uh and Darcy are and the existing norm building are coming offline although we will have to keep electricity on at Chapman and Darcy for a period of time. Um we also know that we're adding new Norton and New Barnum which are bigger schools. The other thing that Rachel we've asked her to take into consideration is that we are looking to add solar uh
004at six of our buildings which would change the overall energy consumption. So that's a lot uh for Rachel to digest and and put together a bid. Um but that is what she's she's working on. So I'm sure that you know Emily or Emily and I will give you updates as that rolls forward. But that's kind of something that's out in the background for us that we have an electricity supply rate that is expiring. Um, if you've been, you know, watching any of the news, and I I know Tim would know this even better than I do for sure, but, you know, there is an expectation that electricity supply prices will continue to increase in the future. I' I've, you know, read some articles that we're looking at 15% in the near term. And it's not
005because of, you know, oil or natural gas prices. It's really related more to the demand for electricity versus the available supply on the electric grid here in Connecticut in particular. So, this is a looming issue and and we do want to get ahead of it by trying to lock electricity to the extent we can. Um, as far as the energy performance contract, I have a few things to let you know. First is that we uh have been working with Johnson Controls and the school building committee. Um the school building committee has agreed on where we will install solar on the rooftop for the new Norton and the uh new Barnum buildings. They've also approved where we can install groundbased solar on both of those sites. What we've asked um the school building committee to consider
006and we are meeting with the school building committee next Thursday night is allowing the conduit that we need to be run underground for the solar arrays at Barnum and Norton to be installed now and we will ask the school building committee essentially to fund that and then we'll reimburse them through the energy performance contract. So Emily, I did you upload those schematics into the folder? So you know for the committee members, if you want to take a look at where the rooftop solar and the groundbased solar will be at those sites, you can certainly do that. But that is something that um you know is is progressing forward. The energy contract, any energy performance contract, everything that we've outlined we want to do. We're still forging ahead. You know, the one thing that we are
007waiting on is getting approval to be able to apply for the school construction grants, which is about $7 million worth of value. And we have started the process, you know, through our legislators to get that done. You know, the session for the legislature just started this month and runs through May. But there is a process that we've worked with our legislators on to try and get this approved earlier in the session like late February, early March. And once that happens, then we can really move ahead with the energy performance contract. So >> Dave, >> that's a big hinge point. Um um also related to the energy performance contract, Eversource um you know if you remember there were two fuel cells that were uh added and are being considered for the performance contract. One at Cheshire
008High School which you know that one we have a good bead on where it would be installed and and the production we would get. But the second one that I wanted to mention is at the wastewater treatment plant. We were work working and waiting for Eversource to to provide a price to get a natural gas line to the wastewater treatment plant. We did get that price. It's about $2.37 million. Um that is being discussed uh with Eversource and Johnson Controls to see if we can get um Eversource to pay a bigger share so we can pay a smaller share of that. So that is something that is also progressing. And really the last thing is I just wanted to explain that Johnson Controls and Energy our owners rep are still finalizing some of the details
009on the different amounts of savings that we can achieve through this energy performance contract. So you know everything is moving ahead. We're just waiting really for the legislation so we can get our con school construction grants um approved. And assuming we got the legislation, I do have to go through the process of applying for the school construction grants. The window opens the 1st through the 10th of every month. So, I'm hoping that we can do this in the March window. And the OCGR is supposed to um receive applications, you know, by the 10th of the month. They're supposed to complete their review by the end of the month and, you know, provide a response as to whether those can go forward or if there's additional information required. So that really is what I wanted to
010u provide in terms of an update this evening on the energy performance contract. So if there's any questions >> Mr. White Yeah, thank you. Um I apologize Vin. I missed it. You had mentioned that Emily put some uh files up there to look at the solar arrays the location and I I was clicking on that and I missed what you had said. I think about the telp. Is that what it is? >> Yeah. So, the school construction grant doesn't allow um for TP funding. So, we need special legislation. >> It's not withstanding legislation that would allow us to finance through the tel and still be able to get our school construction grants. >> Okay. And then later on, you had mentioned that you were looking at doing that taking action between March 1st and March
01110th. Fingers crossed on that. So, I'm assuming by you saying that the part I missed is the Tel is moving forward in a way that you you think could be good for us. >> Yes. >> No guarantees or anything, but Yeah. Okay. >> Right. >> Okay. >> Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, the the T if we don't do the TP, Tim, and we did want to secure this through bonding, well, you know, that we'd have to wait now until November. >> Yeah, I get it. you know, and so we're still trying and I'm going to put this out there and I I you know, I'm really cautious about it, but if we get this approved quickly enough, we may be able to start some construction this summer, you know, otherwise everything will will
012be done next summer. So, the sooner we get, you know, any of these energy improvements in place, obviously, the sooner we start, you know, saving some money, whether it's solar or the fuel cell, um, or even just some of the basic improvements like, you know, weatherizing our buildings. >> Yeah. No, thank you so much for this, V. I appreciate all the time you're putting into it. >> It could be a big win. >> Yep. Mr. Rosenberg. >> And just going back um to the solar. >> Yeah. >> Is it right on time or are we going to run into an issue with you know getting approval and moving it forward? >> Well, we shouldn't. It's just a question of when the construction can begin. >> Oh, okay. you know, so if you know, assuming we
013get the special legislation, we get our school construction grants approved, the timing of it, you know, may very well push the construction to next summer. >> Um, now that said, there's no reason we can't do some of the groundbased solar. Yeah. >> While students are, you know, in school because it's going to be away from the buildings, >> right? So, you know, that's all TBD, but you know, I think the worst case scenario would be that we do the bulk of the work next summer. >> Okay. >> The uh just uh pardon my ignorance on this, but you said you're going to go to the new new school building committee for money. Do we have to approve that or they have their own budget? >> No, they have their own funding. Th those both projects
014are well under budget. Um, and so, you know, and we're getting pricing, so I I can't quote what it would cost, but all they would be essentially advancing is laying the underground pipes so they can pull the electrical lines, you know, from the building to the solar arrays. Yeah. >> And they want, you know, the school building committee and OMG, the construction company, they're really anxious about doing this relatively soon because, you know, they want to get the site work completed. You know, over at Barnum, they've already put down the binder course of of pavement. They haven't put the final pavement down. So, they want to get all the trenching done this spring. and Rich Gussenberg, the school building committee chair, is certainly amendable to doing that. So, you know, we just need to dot
015the eyes and cross tees. We have a meeting tomorrow night with this with um OMG, the construction company, and Johnson Controls just to review their proposed plan for where that conduit would be laid out. So, trying to move this along as quickly as we can. But to that to that point though, Vin, didn't we approve the transfer of monies? I'm just thinking back to that contingency 250,000 or 200,000. Was that for the purposes of this or was that just set aside? >> Oh, no. The 200 the Are you talking about the $250,000 rollover? >> Yeah. No, that that's for operating budget. >> Okay. >> You don't there's no board of ed budget or capital budget impact on what we're talking about. It would be the school building committee advancing the funds to get that conduit
016laid and then through the energy performance contract we would reimburse the school construction fund essentially. >> Got it. Okay. >> I'm seeing a lot of numbers such the numbers align. is that I just curious if you don't know Vin um that's fine but you said reimburse to the performance contract I'm assuming that the school construction budget will be done in say two years three years even if it stays open for like an extra 18 months after everything's done but the performance contract go on assuming we do it go on for probably 10 or 20 years so there's a disconnect is like a onetime payment coming out of the performance contract that would yeah >> okay yeah cool thank Yep. >> Okay, that's it. >> Back to you, Emily. >> Thanks, Ben. All right. Um, have
017some capital projects updates for you all. So, uh, just as kind of prefacing this whole conversation, we were having conversations about the capital expenditures plan for the town. um way earlier in the year, I think uh like January, February, the town has decided to push back that process to align more with their budget season. And so we are looking at reviewing a capital expenditures plan next month as the planning committee and then bringing it to the board of ed in April. Um there are a few items that I just want to go through that are going to be pertinent to the the capital plan. And I'm hopeful that after this meeting, we can schedule time for March to review our our proposal for a capital um expenditures plan. So, uh with that said, a few
018capital projects that are important or timely. Um we have the Highland roof project. This was a project that was budgeted for $ 1.5 million in the 2829 school year. Uh the 2930 school year for a project estimate um you know we had $ 1.5 million. We recently did the design work with Petraelli for this uh to estimate our costs and it came back at $4 million for the Highlands. >> Yes. Yep. So, one thing is that our capital plan is only approved a year at a time. So, the $ 1.5 million, it's a few years down the road, but we're going to need to budget quite a bit more. Um, you know, and it's a heavy hitter at $4 million. So, I just wanted to kind of prep you for that because you will see
019that show up on the plan. Um, and I think part of the challenge is we estimate these costs and then our capital plan kind of gets pushed back and back and back. So, by the time we get to, you know, it was $ 1.5 million, now we're at $4 million. So, the the costs have increased quite a bit. >> Does does $4 million get us a whole new roof? How does that work? >> Yeah, it's pretty substantial. Let me see if I can pull up um what we have here. I didn't put it in the document >> cuz that hurts. >> It is. Yeah, it's it's pretty um pretty significant. So, >> if it makes you feel any better, there is a 50% reimbursement from a school construction grant for that. >> Well, that makes
020it hurt half as much. >> Yeah, it's still it's a surprisingly big number. >> Oh my god. >> Yeah. Sorry, it's just taking a minute to load here. I can show you these pieces are second. I don't want these drawings, but yeah. So, here we go. All right. You should be able to see this now. So this is kind of all the the schematics but showing all of the roof components that would be replaced. So it it is you can say like right over here would be the driveway and then all of these components of the roof. So yeah, it it's it is the whole the whole roof. >> Yep. >> Um and then let me see if I can switch this over if it'll switch my screen. Um that >> now with all the
021stuff that's up on that roof, do they just work around that stuff? Is it move stuff and replace? How do they do all that? >> Yeah. You know, I I let me I would have to read through more of it. Especially you're talking about like the rooftop units and all of that. >> Yeah. That that's just out of curiosity. It's not it's not a pressing issue because we're going to pay them $4 million. They're going to figure it out. >> Yes. Yep. And then you can see here, this is pretty small. Um, I'll see if I can zoom in a little bit, but like the approximate uh square footage being the 108,000 square feet here. Um, and this is all the the components of the costs, but um yeah. >> Yeah. Um, and there there
022is contingency for that, but I would say that that's, you know, the contingency is $189,000. It's certainly not a majority of, you know, it's a 5% contingency. Um, so not a ton of wiggle room there. >> Is is um do you have an idea of what what's the what's the main driver behind the the the change from 1.5 million to four million? Was it raw materials, labor, tariffs, just like that's a big jump and I'm curious if it's going to hit other schools too? Yeah, I think and Vin, feel free to step in if you have more context since you're here, since you stayed. Um, you might get lumped in. Um, but I think that this this is when we've actually went out to design work for the $4 million. So, there's like a rough
023order of magnitude, like a belief of how much this might cost. And then that assumption is tested when we actually go out to the design firm. Um, and so some of the 1.5 is our director of facilities saying, you know, this is a rough, very rough um, placeholder, right? But this is also a project that has been deferred and kind of kicked around on the plan for a while. So it's it's just compounded by that. But we really never know what the design or the cost is going to be until we go out and for the design work. So >> yeah. No, I I understand that completely. I just uh >> I guess it's what I'm envisioning is you're basically saying Rich has a per square foot number in his head that might have been
024from 10 years ago and now it's dramatically changed and we have a new number per square foot, something like that. And it I mean if it was like if it was a number from say 10 years ago based on the last time we did a roof or something I I can't recall but yeah prices costs have gone up in the last five years. >> Yeah. >> Anyway, thank you. >> Yeah. >> Um >> any other questions about the roof? >> Okay. Um the next one is one that you all are uh pretty familiar with at this point is this Treasure High School track and field project. Um so back in the beginning of January sent out some inquiries to six different firms that provide services for design for track and fields. Uh ones that we're
025more familiar with uh SLR who had done some design work a few years ago. Um some other companies like Banesh who has you know come to Casbo vendor shows and has built some of the the track and field systems in New England and high schools in in Connecticut. Um and Laurio, which is a company we do some design work with, not track and field. Um and there were three other vendors that this um potential proposal was sent out to. We had some specifications about creating a design for the turf project. Um, and ultimately we got the three proposals back. One from SLR. If you could just hold one moment. >> Is it Vin? Is SLR is that my LOA Mcroom? >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yes. Um, so we had SLR and they did the
026work that that uh quote for $ 1.5 million for the mccclary renovation um where they had they had scoped out a diff couple different um potential options for that from the track and field all the way to like every athletic field at CHS. Um then we had Vanesh submitted as well and Laurio submitted a proposal by our deadline which was January 31st. uh with the three proposals and this included design work um construction management like all comp walking us all the way from the design through project completion. Um SLR came back with a quote for $30,000 for that work. Banesh came back with a quote for $120,000 for that work and Laurio came back with a quote for $92,500 for that work. So again, we're talking all the way from like, you know, design, uh,
027pre-bid, and then construction management and all the permitting, everything in between. So the full package. Um, obviously, Banesh and Laurio were a lot more expensive than SLR. We decided to talk with SLR a bit more um, about some components of their proposal. Um, and ultimately where we landed was $30,000. I will say SLR has, you know, an advantage here because they participated in the first when we built the turf. Um, not the track pieces, which has been around since the 1990s, but the turf itself. Um, so where there were some savings with SLR was a topographic survey that we don't really need because they participated, they um did the design work for the first round of the turf. Um, but what they quoted us specifically for each component of the project, and you have the
028the proposal in that Google folder, was for the preliminary design, a lump sum of $7,500 for the local regulatory permitting was they budgeted $8,000, but it's really an hourly fee. So, you know, depending on how we move, it could be could be less than that. Um, for the final design and construction documents, a lump sum of $12,500. for the bidding and phase services, a lump sum of $2,000. And for the construction phase services would be to be determined on an hourly or budget basis. So those were the five components of their proposal. Um and they proposed a schedule that would be 29 weeks in total. That would be assuming that if we designed everything that we were moving just from one stage to the next. It would not be assuming that we needed a referendum
029that we needed all the bud budget passing. But like the fastest timeline you're going to see would be about 29 weeks. Um, and so that's that's ultimately what we talked to them about. Um, and what we're what I'm coming to you tonight about is potentially engaging them for some for some preliminary design work for $7,500 because they have five different components, but we don't need to sign an agreement for the entire $30,000. We can do it phase by phase. The first phase being some design work. Um, and I would say, you know, why why do we need a design from SLR if they did the initial design when we had the turf is, you know, we really want to make sure that we're getting a the most up-to-date um, design possible. A lot of things
030have changed in the turf industry in the past 10 years. Um, and we want to make sure that whatever we are eventually putting out to bid is just the the most sound proposal and, you know, has been vetted and isn't isn't old. Um so you know although they like I said they have an advantage because they've worked with us before they're they did have the most um coste effective proposal. So um and I think what we have also what was also talked about is could they do different scenarios like the track and the turf just the turf just the track. Um there are some components of our track that just needed to be need to be updated to fit regulations um in terms of like the fencing and how far it is from the actual
031track um and the track lanes and you know we need some work done on our long jump area. I think there might have been one other area but there's just some some compliance pieces that we are need to if we update the track we need to account for that um in a new design. So, just talked to you a whole bunch, but want to open it up for questions about this. >> Mr. Rosenberg, >> and just for clarification, so we're proposing that we peacemeal the work. Now, >> I'm proposing that we move forward with an an initial $7,500 design work so we can apply that to our capital plan. Um, and doing that kind of as soon as possible. So we can make sure that that's reflected in what we submit to the board for
032the capital expenditures plan. >> What would be the ultimate cost if we move forward with a full-blown >> So um the answer is I don't know. So we had gotten a proposal for just the turf replacement from Rad Sports who had who did our current turf. Um, that was, you know, that's kind of outdated, a little outdated at this point, but it was about $800,000. >> When when we had SLR do the full proposal for the track and turf a few years ago, it was $ 1.5 million. When we talked to SLR um last week, they said they just did a track only renovation at Lumisafi and it was $ 1.5 million. So there's like a lot of track and they got like the top of the line um track, but I'm just saying we
033there's a big variation and if we move forward with the design work, we we're going to have to be pretty clear about you know where we want to land. Um I'm I have had a number in my head about 1.5 thinking about kind of like the the >> total package between the track and the track and the field. >> I don't know if that's reasonable, but that's kind of going from the SLR quote. I think that you know that's And then typically the measurements are all the same or is it because they besides the quality of material that they select are there any you know cost savings in you know you have to have obviously size you know um criteras and so forth but >> I think it comes down to what we we want
034to put in. >> Okay. >> Yeah. So like for example, >> you know, there's there's different like schools of thought and I think Mark, you you have a lot more expertise in this area than I do, but about um pads versus using um like natural materials like sand and like I don't know if it's lom to create padding for the players and who is using the field, but like there's so much variation and availability with um with turf um that yeah that there like the lumis shape is an example of kind of I think like an outlier, but it exists. You can spend $1.5 million on a track. >> But the the lifespan would be my, >> you know, first priority, too, because how long are we looking at? How old is is the shot?
035I mean, it's been so long. >> I think it's 14 years, isn't it? And I'll just second that. Like, life cycle cost is my concern, too. Yeah, >> it's it'll be it'll be 15 years this fall, >> right? >> So, we're beyond what the record >> well beyond. >> Yeah. >> You know, we I think it we put a really good product down when when we put that one in and I it must have been maintained very well because it's, you know, nobody has a 15y old field. >> Yeah. I think that the fact that it drains so well that field, I think helped extend the life. >> Yeah. Um, but there's no doubt it's it's it's outlived. Um, it's it's useful life and it is time to replace it. I mean, it's still it
036passed all the GMAX testing, but >> So, it doesn't >> Yeah, exactly. And I'll I'll just add that for the $7,500, you will get an estimate of probable cost from SLR as part of that as part of that process. So, >> and so we went so we went out last year without a Wait, did we have a Did we have a study done last year on the field before we put out what was it? $800,000. >> No, no, that was based on um you know, a couple years old an SLR proposal. And like ultimately you got you know we didn't put that in year one, right? The um >> No, we didn't. We didn't have anything to do with it. So, but that's also um for for you all to consider is, you know, if
037we're putting this in year one of this project, you know, going with our strongest foot forward and saying this is the most recent design that we we have. >> So, I just I want to be really clear about this like we stepped into this conversation and I completely understand. So, I don't know if there's any other like offline conversations. I understand completely where you're coming from, Emily, and I'm I'm not upset with you for doing this. I appreciate you trying to like take care of stuff. I think it'd be great if it got replaced and I also heard the voters speak only a couple months ago and so talking about spending more money on it right now, it's it's not something I'm like really excited about by any means. Just to be just to be
038totally clear about that. This is uh yeah, I I I don't think that I'm prepared like if we had a vote tonight, I don't think I'm prepared to say, "Oh, let's spend, you know, $7,500 or only $7,500 on it." I It's a more complicated topic. >> Yeah. >> I mean, I I understand, Tim, I you know, I get that the voters said no, and I was kind of surprised at that, but the reality is that at some point that field isn't going to test. and now we don't have a field and you know we've got a lot of athletes that are going to be looking for a place to play and we can't play and you know god forbid that you know it doesn't test this summer what do we do you know >> no
039and I I totally get that I get where you're coming from and I kind of wonder if has the council said anything about this like in response to us I haven't heard anything like I wish they'd be like hey by the way we really screwed up board of ed sorry about that like at minimum >> I think you know I think it's something that, you know, we I I I think we have to spend the 7,500. I think we got to get this ball rolling and I think we we've got to do a better job selling it to the public because it's, you know, it's a major concern because that is that is the field and, you know, you look at an event, any event on a Friday night in Cheshure, I mean, that half
040the town's there. I mean, it's it's it's everything. and you take that away and tell them they got to play day games over at at Bartham, that's going to be kind of a depressing thing. Or play play at Bartam at night with no stands. That's going to be a problem. I >> I think you just need to mitigate the potential increase in costs later on, period. you know um and I would prefer having the more up-to-date data um with the 7500 so that we can forward to the town uh because like the both of you uh you know there's some frustration in that it just showed up >> on the referendum without any actual forget the conversations that need to have had but we couldn't even sell it because we didn't have the data to
041really promote it in a sense you know, we had old data based on what Emily is saying or, you know, what was presented. Um, but I I feel more comfortable if we move forward, get the most, you know, up-to-date information from the design team here, SLR. Um, and then take the next steps and and map out a plan. Um, I do want to see them kind of a comparative if we potentially can get, you know, what is a Lumis Chaffy quote versus where we would ultimately probably meet in the middle. >> Yep. >> Because I think the public needs to see that, right? Um, if you're if you want the the field and the quality, here's the price tag versus what are you willing to accept in the lifespan that we're looking for, too. What's
042the What's the actual lifespan typically, Mark? I know you know >> it's between eight and 12 years. I know the >> Okay. >> that the same year that we put ours down, Chester Academy put their turf field down and that field was replaced four years ago. >> So, it's same manufacturer. We picked a better product than they did and they got four >> Well, it it'll be five years this year less. And >> that Yeah. And that just proves that, you know, we we need to get up-to-date information here. >> So, I think we should move forward with at least the 7500. Um, but we do have to ultimately spend 30,000 though, Emily. I'm just looking at the fees. >> Yeah, I don't know that it would be $30,000 total. the the um lump sums
043are the preliminary design, the $7,500. The final design and construction documents would be um $12,500 and then bidding phase services for $2,000. I would say that those costs, the 22,000 is really like non-negotiable for them to get us through the project. Um but the two pieces is the the local regulatory permitting. They budgeted $8,000. I don't know that it's going to cost that much. um especially once we're able to talk to a town engineer. Um and then construction phase services as um TBD >> and potentially could be something that is folded into the actual capital expenditure plan. This is a piece that can't um because we haven't been approved but folding as much as we can into a capital plan would be great. >> It sounds like on on average like in other areas been
044I know we had spent 50,000 or more just on the consulting work. the 7500 I think is quite reasonable for what you're going to get because they're going to they're going to do a study not only of our existing facility, but they'll look at what um options you have for the different types of turf blades, different type of infill, are you going to do padding, and you get an estimate of probable cost. And you know, by the time you get to capital budget, at least you'll have something in hand that is is solid for everybody, board of ed members and the town council to weigh in on. >> I agree. I think this is a start. I think there there's going to be a large part population that's going to ask for the most up-to-date
045information um so that they can support it moving forward. Um because there was other I mean Tim you know there were other variables outside of it just showing up on the referendum. We just didn't have the facts and enough time to really educate the public on it. So I think moving forward if we take these incremental steps you know hopefully when it does get to the referendum people have already been aware uh you know of the pre work that is happening right now. Yeah. >> So, do we need to have a vote to bring this to the board to vote and amend the agenda tomorrow or >> Yeah. So, how it would work is if you want to do a motion um to recommend the expense for the $7,500 um you could approve that tonight
046and then bring that motion to the board of ed. And then additionally, we just have to amend the agenda to include the motion. So, >> okay. >> I'm just curious, do we have to make a motion on this? Because I thought your threshold was like 30,000 or something for consulting services. >> You don't we don't have to for this, but I think given everything that has happened with the turf in the past, I am trying to go through all of the channels. >> Yes. >> No. Ca. Great idea. >> Totally. Totally. But if we if we vote on it, I'm gonna I think I'm going to probably vote no right now. I'm just not prepared to go down this path yet. And I get it, but this is um the truth is is the turf
047has sort of fallen off my radar in the last couple months, but as it comes back to me, which I appreciate you putting it, you know, back in the forefront, I'm just not prepared to spend money on something that the voters just spoke on. So anyway, whether we have a vote or not, that's where >> honestly there's an ex board member that's been texting me about are we moving this anytime soon. >> So we're we're getting the, you know, increase still. >> Oh, no. I get it. I get it. Um, yeah. Anyway, that's where that's where I am. But I do appreciate you bringing it up, Emily. I do. Ben >> is so happy right now. >> Keep my thoughts to myself. Tim, >> you know, as I said, I think this is a reasonable
048price and you know, you want to be armed with the information. You know, the one thing that I just want to remind everybody is what went in front of the council was brought forth by a user group. It was, you know, it was, I mean, John Perino, the athletic director, did speak to it, but it was the user group that brought it forward and they didn't have a lot of information. You know, if you if you do this study now, you'll have some really solid information that you can use. >> So, I I appreciate what you're saying. And ultimately, there was a vote that was cast. >> Yeah. >> And it wasn't the user group. >> Elected officials, they they cast votes. I've done it plenty of times and this was one that they got
049drastically wrong as far as I'm concerned. Um or they did they there wasn't a follow through on it at minimum where they where there should have been followth through >> and I I don't disagree with that Tim. I I 100% am with you on it. >> I guess you know what another thing is has there been any follow-through from them in the past three months? like, okay, I don't think we got an apology, but it seems to me like if I was the person who if I was the person making that motion, then I would have been like, "All right, I got it wrong. We got it wrong. We need to figure this out." That's that's how I see it. So, I Anyway, I'm done. >> Yeah. And you know although this did not meet
050the threshold for design services I think if this is a path we want to move forward with you know we've talked about the turf a lot is like yeah we like at every stage we want to be approving it because this is a big request this is a referendum request and if we're not getting past the planning committee or you all aren't brought in like that's going to be the same conversation at the board of ed and I don't know what the town council will do but I didn't think that I that was my first experience right with the capital expenditure plan and things were added and so you know That's my only frame of reference. But, you know, if we're not getting it done here, >> I don't think that, you know, we could
051have a repeat of the referendum, >> right? And I I I feel comfortable in that at least the board did their due diligence in, you know, kind of dotting our tees, you know, dotting our eyes, crossing our tees. I just I don't think we we move without doing the leg work that was again wasn't done by other parties. So >> uh Mark >> So uh I have the uh the proposal. Uh, I'll make a motion. Motion of the planning committee recommends to the Chesh Board of Education the approval and expenditure of $7,500 for SLR to complete preliminary design services for the track and field project. >> Any second? >> Second. >> Thank you. Any further discussion? >> All right. All in favor? >> Opposed? All right. two to one. >> Motion carries. >> And hopefully
052Tim, we convince you differently once we get the facts in line. >> I mean, that that that is part of that's part of it. Yeah. But it's it's uh >> I mean, I think you understand where I'm coming from. >> Yeah, I do. >> Like this is >> the same. >> I do. But I think it's again I I don't think we just not do anything. either, you know, back to like our responsibility as a board um to make sure we at least put our best effort forward in fact finding, data collection so that we can have some sort of decision that's, you know, I hate to say it's got to be a data driven decision. No, I I I a data distri datadriven decision as to whether we send it back to the voters
053or to the council uh and giving them the ability to decide based on data. I totally get that. And honestly, I didn't think that it was going to fail, but I really do think that the whole affordability thing is a real issue. And what I'm looking at is um you know the voters who came out last fall I think were very clear in what they were in what they were saying and they voted Democrat down Democratic down the board and they voted no on a couple of referendum items that was very clear >> and that's just part of what's going through my head like it wasn't uh I don't feel like it was accidental >> and so I'm not sure I do wonder if it was like what what more is there and I I
054completely understand appreciate what you're saying, Mark, because I go to the football game sometimes and yeah, there's a lot of people there. It's a big event venue for us. Um, but that's yeah, there there was a clear vote also. So, anyway, I'm done. >> M, you got more for us? >> I have one more for you. Um, also extracurricular related. So the last one we have for the capital expenditures project um that doesn't require a motion or anything is we've talked about the CHS weight room um and that we have a anonymous donor who is willing to donate equipment and flooring for the wait room but that was contingent upon getting some air conditioning which we have none in the wait room. Um and so what we ended up doing was moving forward with design
055services with Salamon. Uh that is currently underway. The good thing about this project is that it's actually covered under an open capital expenditures project. Um, so this isn't out of the general fund. This already exists, doesn't require any additional approval. Um, but just giving you kind of an update here was that uh we're currently under under the getting the design work done. hoping to have that done by the end of March so that we can go to bid in the beginning of April and complete those renovations uh between June and August with a substantial completion date of August 21st. So just a little little update there. So the impact of that is uh athletes and students that are using the weight room during the summer would be relocated probably to the maintenance garage which apparently
056has happened in the past. Um but that would be what happens while we're we're doing the HVAC. Um the only other thing with this project is you know the basic understanding is that we could tie this into existing RTUs and if that's true um then the project should be fairly simple um in the event that it's not it could potentially push that June to August timeline but we won't know that until the end of March when we have the bid package. >> Okay. Um, any questions about the weight room motivation? >> Yes. >> Right. >> Yeah. Thank you. Yeah. So, what I So, what I understood you to just say is basically you had encumbered funds that were not yet unencumbered. What was the project that you're linking it to? >> Yeah. The project number
057is 01359. It has to do with um RTO's and HVAC replacements of the high school, a specific area of the high school that includes includes the weight room. So, we were just >> Okay. So, this makes total sense. >> Yeah. >> This makes sense to do that. It actually was. Okay. Yes. Got it. >> Yep. Yep. >> Thank you. >> Um and I would say some of that is offset because if I know that when we wrote that the initial plan for that project number um the wait room had not materialized yet, but some of this is offset by some of the EPC work that we're doing right. That >> you mean the donation? the donation wasn't >> the the the HVAC renovation >> because it's it's for a c certain part of the school
058but because we have the EPC as well that helped free up some of the funding in that capital project for this instead. >> Got it. Okay. So the anonymous donor they're going to replace all the equipment in there substantial all of it. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> I I don't know what the configuration is. John um John Paracino unfortunately he wasn't able to be here tonight but he has been working with that donor and they kind of have a vision to what that would look like for the space but yeah everything um the hesitation was obviously like the new equipment rusting with >> it's awful it's awful in there in the summer >> yeah it's awful >> so it's all it's all new equipment it's not you know fairly >> used brand new and nice
059new floors Wow. >> I don't exercise so I can't speak that like I think they're stations but you know I I know that it's in good hands with John Perosino. So >> well thank you to Mr. and Mr. and Mrs. Anonymous or whoever it is that's donating this. >> Yeah. >> Yep. >> When's the anticipated then? Um >> where when's the what? Once we get all this completed for >> uh the substantial completion if we do everything on time should be August 21st. >> Oh, okay. >> Is that the HVAC or the weight room as well? Like actual weights and >> that's the H that's the HVAC project. >> And then the weights presumably that wouldn't really take that much time to go get that put in. So is this a project that's done before
060school opens? >> Yes, it is. I would say that the >> Yeah. And and there's the proposal for starting is June 8th. So, it's a it's a pretty I would say um like conservative timeline, like a big chunk of time. Um the one piece that would happen after the HVAC that is not within like this purview is the the flooring, which is also being donated, and I don't have a timeline for how long that would take. >> Any idea what they have planned for the floor? >> For the what? >> The floor. >> I don't ask John to follow up. Okay, >> just so you know, you sound garbled right now, Mark. Okay. >> Um, all right. Any other questions about the wait room? Okay. Um, so I actually had there were two other items
061on here. the medical insurance is actually um in reviewing the planning committee um kind of bylaws and it's not actually really relevant to this this meeting. Um but I can share more during the board of ed meeting. So I'm actually going to I don't know if that requires some type of motion to remove that agenda item, but it's just not part of the planning committee. >> So >> I'm cool. I'm good. >> Is that official motion? Um >> I second. >> Great. Thanks all. Um the last thing I want to share with you, which is I would say facilities and maintenance adjacent peanut gallery, you got to stop talking. Sorry about that. Um is a transportation update um that I think all of us So our transportation team is moving from that bus depot um
062over to Um, the bus depot is moving from their temporary trailers over to Highland Avenue because DACO has opened their building. >> So that old Cheshire Glass facility is part of the bus depot. >> Yes. Um, so they're actually on the second floor. So on one side of the building is Chespot, the other side is all Dco on the second floor. that replaces all of the the trailers that we have over on Sandbank. Those are actually the trailers are probably going to be relocated um by DHCO. We're currently in design uh through an existing capital project for the um the I would say the um combination of the sandbank and the Highland Avenue lot because we have an easement that was approved earlier in the year. So making the parking lots uh combined and that
063being staff parking as well as bus parking um and that would include some space for electric vehicle charging in the event that we move forward in that direction. Um also expanding the number of buses that are available. Um, so that's that's not listed here on the the agenda, but that is just an item that you all should be aware of that that we are currently working with DACO and also SLR uh about some of the updates that we'd like to do this summer as well. There's a big forested area between those two lots um that would actually need to be taken down. We are lucky in the sense that Deco, interestingly, has like a mulching division where they remove trees and turn it into mulch and sell it. So, it's like a little fact for
064today. Um, but just know that that is happening with our bus depot. Um, another update that I think is relevant in terms of like redistricting and uh changes and everything is that Luther Miller, who has been with us for 15 years, is actually going to retire this summer. Um, and so we are looking actively for his replacement, have some good leads, have conducted some interviews. Um Luther is tenatively looking to retire on July 1. So we'll not carry us through, you know, when we open new schools, but we are hoping to get a replacement that can learn under Luther, but um I do think it's relevant just for this uh committee just to know about because we've had conversations about redistricting and the impact. So, you know, we are looking >> convincing everybody to join
065you ultimately. Is this where your plan is? >> No. They're all gonna be having >> everybody. You guys have to stick around. But um yeah, listen, we you know, Luther uh and Rich Clevette, myself, we're all in the same age bracket, you know, and I I know the board members are aware that there were these potential retirements coming up, but um you know, getting ahead of it by hiring somebody to replace Luther before he leaves is is a good strategy obviously in my opinion. Do we post it already or No. Yeah. >> Yeah. So, we've actually we interviewed someone we interviewed um someone about two weeks ago. We interviewed someone this morning who um honestly was was um really great. Um I would say that we're just kind of in this this has been a
066really challenging position to hire for to find someone with that level of expertise especially in public schools that has done routing and kind of does this unique configuration that we do. Um, but we did have uh two candidates. Like I said, we interviewed one this morning and are feeling good about that. So, we'd like to get someone in as soon as possible. So, >> is there a potential for, you know, unlike the other processes the board members have been a participant in? Um, I just want to make sure that they're or at least the parent population has a, you know, a piece of that process. >> Luther Luther has Luther is a is a parentf facing job. Luther has a parent facing job. A very much parent facing >> with a lot of the requests
067that comes in and so forth. So, Yeah, >> calm. Someone who's calm and listens. I think that's I think that's an important aspect because >> yeah, you can have upset parents calling up. >> Yeah, let me um let me follow up with Jeff about that. Um that's a really good point. And so you are right. They there's a lot of customer service associated with that job. Um >> at least for at least for about a month out of the year, August to August to September. >> Yeah, it's year it's year round now, you know. Um, but that's that's a great point. So, um, and just another thing along with that, because we have talked about bus routing and the redistricting maps, I just wanted to share with you that, um, an a update that we
068are potentially going to make um, is updating us from the current routing software we use. It was called Trapeze at one point. It's had a couple different names. That's what Luther uses to do all the routing. um to potentially using DACO's software, they use something called Trans Versa. Uh ours is Von now is what it's called now. Um but we think that by using Dco software one, it will integrate with a lot of their systems and it will probably make communication more fluid. Um we have talked to Dco about the potential cost difference and you know switching to their platform and what that would take. Um they initially had quoted us at um a fee of $25,000, a onetime setup fee to switch to their software. Um and I was able to negotiate that to
069the cost of the VO software that we use. So it would be a cost neutral um proposal. We pay about $11,000 for VO a year. Um and if we transition to DACO, we would pay the onetime setup fee. And my understanding from talking to them is that that would be a onetime fee. So, it would actually alleviate a budgetary, you know, it would free us up $11,000 in subsequent budget years. So, um that is our plan. There isn't a motion attached with that, but like I said, I just wanted to kind of loop you all in because we've had some conversations about redistricting in the planning committee. So, other transportation questions? Yeah, >> thank you. Um, yeah. So, uh, my understanding is that if we get three inches of snow, we spend $30,000 to clear
070it. >> And maybe we should buy a truck and a plow as an alternative. So, uh, as long as I'm not way off base on what I just said, I when you get the time, I mean, it's not I don't see it happening in the next few weeks before snow season ends, but, uh, I think it would for me it would probably be worthwhile to see if it would make if the numbers would make sense to, uh, in-house it. >> Yeah. >> Or in onboard it, something like that. >> Yeah. I think Oh, sorry. Go. Go ahead. >> No, I mean, but I would just say to if you do that, just try to be uh realistic about it. not just the uh sort of the life cycle cost whatever you could sort of estimate
071the cost of the plow as well as the realistic aspect of it which is if it's three in you know snowing three inches on a weekday can you get stuff cleared with one truck versus if it snows on a Friday afternoon yeah maybe you could put like one guy out there whoever to go plow all the parking lots over the weekend but um there's a peaking issue with it too I guess uh but if it you If it's that expensive, maybe it does make sense to 30,000 for three inches. It may very well make sense to insource it. >> Yeah, I would say the um the thing along with the equipment that we we would have to be mindful of that is the person that is operating the plow. Um we have a pretty lean
072grounds team right now. Um, you know, we obviously we put the inside maintainer through for this budget, but um the the minimal right now we have um a grounds forman and three grounds people and so you know >> Yeah. No, I lied there. >> I mean I I do I do believe in climate change. Um but I also think we're still going to be getting snow for years to come. Um and I think we I think it's probably more of an oddity that we just didn't really get much snow in the last few years. >> Yeah. uh you know I don't So anyway that's just uh something to keep in mind. Uh >> where's that number coming from Tim? 30,000 only because I feel like because we have the pool or shared resources with the
073town it saves us more in the long run and they do an exceptional job. I mean, these past couple of snowstorms, our kids are >> Does the town >> the town doesn't clear our lots, do they, Vin? >> They salt after um after our vendor >> Yeah. after our vendor completes all the plowing. And you know, by the way, we have a couple of our own trucks that do have plows on them, but they we're just not equipped to handle that much snow >> that quickly, right? You have to get to all of the schools. I think that's it's that's the logistical reason why you have we two different vendors right now. But yeah, we do not our vendor doesn't treat the lots. Our town does it for us. >> Got it. But the vendor
074the vendor does the plowing of snow. >> Yes. >> Yeah. Okay. Anyway, I guess I'm simply saying like, you know, it's always when you see numbers, you know, looking big, looking for an alternative makes sense. Yeah. >> So, if an alternative if insourcing it made sense, then I'd be open to that, too. >> Yeah. And and just to go back, Sam, to your question about like the cost, um, for example, on January 17th, we had a 3-in snow. We plowed and treated it. It was, um, $27,870, but we had a 9 in snow. We plowed and treated it on the 27th of December, and it was $38,000. So it's not like a doubling cost but there is kind of a minimum you know based on the amount of snow. So we are paying a lot
075for those those bigger snowfalls. >> So what if we if we left everything to the town to do wouldn't that >> they don't have the they don't have the person power to do that. So yeah, >> so it's it's definitely a a conversation moving forward to see if maybe on their end, you know, get them to to pay for it and buy the buy the resource. Uh and then like I said, we you know, use our shared resources. I personally think that we haven't cancelled school is obviously a good sign that you know they're doing a great job with keeping up to you know plowing and sanding and all that. >> And the you know the reality is that we have you know seven days a week we have people using our buildings for sports
076and so it's not that you know we have the luxury of saying let's wait until the snow is done and we're going to come in you know on Sunday night or really early Monday morning. It's, you know, people are plowing as soon as as we're able to support those programs. >> Did we get that fire hydrant cleared out? >> My wife told me about something on Facebook about a fire hydrant at DOT. >> Oh, um I hope so. I'm I'm not active on the Cheshure forum, but >> Sorry. Yellow snow, Tim. >> Huh? >> It's covered with yellow snow. Don't eat yellow snow. Um, all right. Those are all the the items I have for tonight for you all. >> Awesome. >> That's a lot. >> All right. Uh, >> tomorrow the only item that's
077moving forward tomorrow then is the $7,500 that we >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> I won't be there. >> Sorry. Yeah. And Mark, I'm happy to, you know, in the committee update share whatever of the other items you feel like are, you know, you want to pass off to me, just let me know. >> Okay. >> I'm sure there's going to be Yeah. talk talk about the turf. So, >> okay. If if I if I may in all seriousness about the about the fire hydrant um just uh to speak to your team just to see if there's like a process about fire hydrants on on building on school properties to make sure that they do get cleared out in a heavy snowstorm whether it's a maintainer or whoever it is. Um, but just to to do
078that, I think generally speaking, like there's no real process as far as I know, like growing up in town, it was if the fire hydrants in front of your house, they just whoever the homeowner is just clears it out. Um, but I never really thought about it until this popped up like in terms of a school property. So, just to make sure there was >> I think it was Dodd is what my wife said. >> Do Yeah, it was dog. >> Yeah. I mean, I don't think it should be Yeah, should be straightforward just to make sure there's some sort of process to follow up on that. >> Yes, I'll follow up with you on that one. >> I'm surprised like a phone call to public works didn't really fix the issue. I don't know
079if they did, but I'm just saying to put it online, right? That's >> true. I'm good. She >> second. >> All in favor? All right, we are journed. Good night. Thanks everyone. Good night.