Following up on Monday’s Special Town Meeting (STM), the Select Board & School Committee talked through the timeline for dealing with Neary School’s building issues on Tuesday night. That included a timeline for replacing the roof and process for pursuing a renovation project.
The two groups agreed on a basic framework for a building committee. They hope to vote on a charge in another joint meeting next week.
Here is my overview.
Roof Replacement
The Town/schools won’t be able to pay for a roof contractor until/unless the ballot measure passes in the May 12th annual election. (That will ask voters to exclude the debt from bonding to fund the up to $4.5M roof replacement.)
But, there are other important steps that need to be taken to line everything up for the work to be completed this summer (and finished before school reopens on August 31st).
The NSBORO Schools’ roof consultant (SOCOTEC) needs to prepare documents to use for issuing an RFP on the roof work. Hopefully, the School Committee will be able to approve the funding for that contract at their regular meeting next Wednesday.
RFP for the Renovation Project Studies
Simultaneously, officials will get the ball rolling on studying potential renovation projects at Neary School.
Select Board member Kathy Cook opined that the next phase of work could be completed in time to hold an STM in the fall that presents votes with building project options.
She suggested potentially bringing more funding scenarios than were discussed at past meetings, including at Monday’s STM. (Scroll down for more on that.)
School Committee Chair Chelsea Malinowski advocated against waiting for a building committee to be seated to issue the RFP.
Superintendent Gregory Martineau wasn’t sure that could be ready in time to approve at this Wednesday’s School Committee meeting. It may need to wait for a future date. It also may need to go through the other board.
Select Board Member Al Hamilton questioned if it’s actually the Select Board that is responsible for overseeing a school building renovation project. It sounds like they’ll be touching base with Town Counsel about the legal process when the project isn’t being handled through the Mass School Building Authority (MSBA) program.
If the Select Board is the approving authority, they will seek to ensure the School Committee endorses the RFP before it goes out to bid.
Potential Options for Voters to Choose
On Monday, voters approved Article 1, to study Option 1 (a full renovation of Neary School as a modern building that would last 30 years) and Option 2 (a limited cost renovation to extend the building’s life by 15 years, targeting keeping the full costs of the roof replacement and renovation to $15M or less.)
For each of the two Neary reno options, voters will be asked if they are willing for the Town to fully cover the full cost. That would allow the Town to follow its own process and a potentially aggressive timeline.
Select Board Chair Andrew Dennington asked if the future building committee would be charged with narrowing down options. Cook said both options should be presented to voters. And she suggested that for each option, they should also give voters the choice to go through the much longer process of seeking a partial reimbursement from the state through another MSBA grant.
Applying for a grant would postpone the project until whatever unknown future year the MSBA accepts the project into its grant queue. According to Malinowski, that would be followed by the MSBA’s three year process for accepted project. Malinowski and Cook both noted that during that time construction costs would continue to rise.
Select Board member Tim Fling asked about the possibility of pursuing MSBA reimbursements for some elements of a Town Building project. That would be through MSBA’s Accelerated Repair grants. He wondered if that process is easier/faster.
Malinowski responded that they have been following that process for Trottier’s roof, and that has also taken three years. Martineau clarified that the other two repairs the grant program covers is replacing windows and HVAC (heating and cooling) systems. Cook noted that the reimbursement percentage from the state is higher for the repair grants than the building projects.
Select Board member Marguerite Landry asked about adding a new gym onto the school. Cook suggested that rather than incorporating it into the options, it could be handled as an alt/add. That could mean that voters will also get to decide how robust of a gym renovation they want to support.
Building Committee Charge
Members of both boards agreed that they need to start recruiting soon for the committee to oversee the renovation project. And they agreed the charge should be for 5 at-large members. Rather than specifying representatives from any boards or interest groups, they will seek the best people. They also agreed that, when picking members, they need to include a variety of viewpoints.
Hamilton stressed the need to ensure that the public trusts in a “credible process by people who don’t have an agenda”. He pointed out that the unanimous School Committee and majority of the Select Board voiced their preference for Option 1. But he interpreted Town Meeting’s rejection of a proposed amendment as a clear vote against eliminating investigating the less expensive Option 2.1
Hamilton described the risk if voters believe that officials aren’t sincere in putting together the most feasible version of Option 2. He warned that “wouldn’t help” pass Option 1.
Members of both boards agreed. They also agreed that the committee should make regular updates to the Select Board for greater public transparency. (The committee’s meetings will be open. But Fling noted that given the volume of committee and board meetings, people pay more notice to the Select Board’s agenda.)
In discussing committee recruitment, Cook said they wouldn’t need to hold public forums this summer. And Hamilton indicated that seeking public input during the Feasibility Study phase is less important than it was for the last process.
He described the approach taken for the New Neary Building project design as “don’t think about money, just think about what you want in the school, things like that”. But for the renovation, Hamilton said:
We’ve got a box and we’re going to do some things inside that box. And so this is really more about engineering and architecture than it is about design.
It was at that point that Landry raised whether a new gym would be an addition to the building.
The boards will hold another joint meeting on Tuesday, March 10th to discuss, and potentially approve, a charge for the new committee. (At Landry’s suggestion, it will have a different name than the prior Neary Building Committee. It may be titled the Neary Renovation Committee.)
