Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-02-13-CEC-min Minutes of the Lexington Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC) Meeting February 13, 2015 Town Office Building, Parker Room; 8:00 .. Location and Time: AM Jill Hai, Chair; David Kanter, Vice-Chair & Clerk; Elizabeth Barnett; Members Present: Rod Cole; Wendy Manz None Members Absent: Joe Pato, Chair, Board of Selectmen (BoS); Margaret Coppe, Chair, Others Present: School Committee (SC); Alessandro Alessandrini, SC \[arrived 9:15 ..\]; Bill Hurley, SC AM \[arrived 9:10 ..\]; Glenn Parker, Chair, Appropriation Committee; Kate Colburn, Lexington AM Parents Advocacy Group, Fiske Elementary School Parent Teacher Organization; Rob Addelson, Assistant Town Manager for Finance; Sara Arnold, Recording Secretary Documents Presented: Notice of Public Meeting/Agenda for February 13, 2015 ÅThoughts on School Building Plans Pre-K and ElementaryÆ, February 12, 2015; prepared by Mr. Cole ÅA Recommended Funding Approach with Flexibility that helps Achieve the Currently Slated School ProjectsÆ; prepared by Mr. Jon Himmel, Co-Chair, Lexington Permanent Building Committee (PBC), January 28, 2015 ÅNumber & Title Excerpts from Town Warrants for 2015 Annual and Accompanying Special Town MeetingsÆ; prepared February 12, 2015, by Mr. Kanter Proposed changes from Town ManagerÈs Preliminary Budget and Financing Plan (White Book) to Proposed Recommended Budget and Financing Plan (Brown Book); presented by Carl Valente, Town Manager, to the Board of Selectmen Meeting, February 10, 2015 (Distributed by Mr. KanterÈs e-mail to the other CEC Members and Ms. Arnold, February 11, 2015 10:17 ..) AM Draft #3 Minutes of the CEC Meeting, January 20, 2015 (Distributed by Mr. KanterÈs e-mail to the other CEC Members and Ms. Arnold, January 30, 2015 9:41 ..) PM Draft #4 Minutes of the CEC Meeting January 30, 2015 (Distributed by Mr. KanterÈs e-mail to the other CEC Members and Ms. Arnold, February 4, 2015 12:04 ..) PM Draft Minutes of the CEC Meeting, February 11, 2015 (Distributed by Mr. KanterÈs e- mail to the other CEC Members and Ms. Arnold, February 12, 2015 10:05 ..) AM Ms. Hai called the meeting to order at 8:03 .. Call to Order: AM Funding of the School CommitteeÈs School Master Plan for the DistrictÈs Facilities: th Triggered by the discussions at the February 11 Budget Collaboration/Summit 6, the following thoughts regarding projects to address the projected school enrollment increases over the next five to ten years were shared by Ms. Hai, as follows: Current discussions include about 20 construction projects; it would be preferable if this could be simplified, with fewer projects that achieve the same goals. Administrative options (e.g., full utilization of the Joseph Estabrook Elementary School \[Estabrook\]), should be pursued first; if some administrative options are not viable, there should be full explanations as to why. Page 1 of 6 Minutes of the Lexington Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC) Meeting February 13, 2015 Schools with the largest core capacity (e.g., library, cafeteria, gymnasium, and rooms for art, music, and support staff offices) should be used and/or expanded to accommodate students in schools without adequate core capacity, if possible. Maria Hastings Elementary School (Hastings) could be rebuilt to accommodate more students than now attend the school. Using a handout, Mr. Cole discussed his current thoughts, and made the following comments and suggestions: The need for pre-kindergarten (Pre-K) and middle-school expansion appears to be non-controversial; by contrast, an approach for the elementary schools is uncertain. A flexible plan is critical. The Enrollment Working Group forecast an additional 52 elementary students per school year, but this could change as experience influences the projection; it isnÈt known when, or if, the growth will stop. The studies being contemplated by the School Committee should include Estabrook, partially because this school has the core space needed for more students Building for 3-year blocks of time, rather than the five currently being contemplated, would help avoid over- or under-building. It appears that a 2-step approach could address the schoolsÈ 3-year capacity needs: Implementing administrative solutions to address the current overcrowding (e.g., flexible redistricting to make use of the available space at Estabrook; using aides in Åover-maximumÆ classrooms). This reduces some of the immediate pressures. Rebuilding Hastings as a 5-section (i.e., five classrooms per grade) facility, so that it can accommodate more students than are now attending the school. This suggestion includes abandoning efforts to seek Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) funding assistance for rebuilding Hastings because: It is unlikely the TownÈs request will be approved in the near future, thus delaying a replacement school longer than is advantageous for the Town. An approval of funding for Hastings would likely jeopardize MSBA-approved funding assistance for an anticipated high school project in approximately 10 years; the High School replacement will likely be more costly than the Hastings project. An MSBA-approved project is subject to MSBA requirements and will not necessarily result in the most advantageous project for Lexington. Rebuilding Hastings is preferable to bricks-and-mortar additions/renovations at the new Harrington Elementary School. Installing pre-fabricated units at the Fiske Elementary or Estabrook should be considered. Mr. Cole noted that the studies being contemplated could change the way he is currently thinking. He also recognized that redistricting is disruptive to families and students. Page 2 of 6 Minutes of the Lexington Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC) Meeting February 13, 2015 Ms. Coppe identified the following issues for the School Committee: There are challenges with adding classrooms to Estabrook associated with the placement of the building on the site; the location of the loading dock; and a 1-story area that does not have the foundation to support a second story. th If enlarging Hastings, the acceptable maximum size of a K-5-grade program needs to be identified. If the School Department assigns new students to attend schools outside the school assigned to their neighborhood, the Town would be required to provide the necessary transportation. The financial ramifications associated with sending special-education students out of district need to be evaluated. It was generally agreed that current overcrowding and projected enrollment indicate a need for construction of some additional space. This Committee suggested that delaying the construction for as long as practical is best for knowing what is needed and for financing the projects. It was suggested that the following options be evaluated for short-term relief: Redistricting Use of aides to support teachers in over-maximum classes. Using art and music rooms as classrooms on a short-term basis Relocating special-education classrooms to schools that have space. It was also noted that postponing redistricting until a series of projects is completed creates unused classrooms on a short-term basis. This does not seem appropriate when some schools need immediate relief. There was discussion about a proposal, created by Pat Goddard, Director of Public Facilities, and Mr. Himmel that would request $4,080,000 at the March 23, 2015, Special Town Meeting #! (STM) to fund further studies, schematic-level design, design development, construction documents, and bidding. The purpose would be to identify the best approach for addressing the need for additional capacity in the schools, with the level of work tailored to the projected needs and timelines for each of the schools involved. This Committee felt strongly that the Motion under the Warrant Article for that work being contemplated should include a requirement for BoS authorization (with a collaborative process including agreement from the SC and input from the Finance Committees and the PBC) to proceed beyond a certain point for each of the projects being considered. Mr. Pato reported that the BoS is uncomfortable with funding that rolls into construction. He summarized a potential approval process that includes the BoS and staff holding summits with the SC and Finance Committees during the summer to review the options. The BoS would make decisions based on input from those summits. Mr. Addelson discussed the complexities associated with a 5-year time restriction associated with bonding a project that does not result in construction. He plans to meet with staff next week regarding this issue and will work with the TownÈs Bond Counsel to determine how to word an Article that may include design work for some projects that are constructed and some that are not. Page 3 of 6 Minutes of the Lexington Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC) Meeting February 13, 2015 Mr. Parker and Mr. Pato discussed options for mitigating the high tax years that result from the 20-year debt service model, prepared by Town staff, that includes all of the construction projects currently being contemplated,. Those options include: Adopting a 30-year debt-service strategy for the school projects (although it was recognized that this approach would involve a higher interest rate, could potentially affect the TownÈs bond rating, and could potentially complicate the bonding of future projects); Curbing the TownÈs current 3% Community Preservation Act (CPA) property-tax surcharge; and Increasing appropriations into the Capital Projects/Debt Service Reserve//Building Renewal Stabilization Fund. MembersÈ Inputs to the CommitteeÈs Reports to the Spring 2015 Town Meetings: Mr. Kanter reviewed the process for preparing the reports. He recently distributed a ÅshellÆ version for this yearÈs report to the Annual Town Meeting (ATM) and the two accompanying STMs, which should be used as the starting point for the Committee members to use in making their actual inputs to the first draft of the 2015 report. Any text included from last yearÈs report is colored blue to distinguish it as a carryover. With regard to the Warrant-Article Explanations and Recommendations section of the report, Mr. Kanter will cut-and-paste quotes from the FY2016 Recommended Budget & Financing Plan (ÅBrown BookÆ) and Committee members should only add material if there is something specific to clarify or share. It was agreed that there would be one report to address both the STM and the two STMS, that Ms. Hai will draft the Executive Summary, and Ms. Hai and Mr. Kanter will review the ÅHow to ReadÆ sections. It was also agreed that Ms. Hai will work on the Capital Budget sections with program-description inputs, as follows: CPA: Mr. Kanter Recreation DepartmentÈs Enterprise Fund: Ms. Manz Water-Sewer Enterprise Fund: Ms. Barnett Individual members were assigned to make Inputs to the Programs section, including for the FY2015 column of the historical-funding tables, as follows: Open Space: Ms. Manz Lexington Community Center: Mr. Kanter with assistance from Ms. Manz Fire and Police Departments: Ms. Hai Library: Ms. Hai Department of Public Works: Ms. Barnett Department of Public Facilities: Mr. Cole Recreation: Ms. Manz School Department: Mr. Cole Information Services: Mr. Kanter Page 4 of 6 Minutes of the Lexington Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC) Meeting February 13, 2015 Affordable Housing: Ms. Manz with assistance from Ms. Barnett Mr. Kanter will address the Appendices. Using thelist of the Warrant Articles, the Committee believedÄbased on its current understanding of each ArticleÈs scopeÄit would be reporting on the following Articles: SPECIAL TOWN MEETING #1 ARTICLE 1 REPORTS OF TOWN BOARDS, OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES ARTICLE 2 APPROPRIATE FOR SCHOOL FACILITIES CAPITAL PROJECTS SPECIAL TOWN MEETING #2 ARTICLE 1 REPORTS OF TOWN BOARDS, OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES ARTICLE 2 PUMP STATION REPAIRS ARTICLE 3 APPROPRIATE FOR PURCHASE OF FIRE ENGINE ARTICLE 4 APPROPRIATE FOR CARY MEMORIAL BUILDING SIDEWALK ENHANCEMENT ARTICLE 5 AMEND FY2015 OPERATING, ENTERPRISE AND CPA BUDGETS ARTICLE 6 APPROPRIATE FOR AUTHORIZED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ANNUAL TOWN MEETING ARTICLE 2 ELECTION OF DEPUTY MODERATOR AND REPORTS OF TOWN BOARDS, OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES FINANCIAL ARTICLES ARTICLE 8 APPROPRIATE THE FY2016 COMMUNITY PRESERVATION COMMITTEE OPERATING BUDGET AND CPA PROJECTS ARTICLE 9 PROPERTY PURCHASE Ã 241 GROVE STREET ARTICLE 10 APPROPRIATE FOR RECREATION CAPITAL PROJECTS ARTICLE 11 APPROPRIATE FOR MUNICIPAL CAPITAL PROJECTS AND EQUIPMENT ARTICLE 12 PLEASANT STREET SIDEWALK (Citizen Article) ARTICLE 13 PROSPECT HILL ROAD SIDEWALK (Citizen Article) ARTICLE 14 APPROPRIATE FOR WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS ARTICLE 15 APPROPRIATE FOR WASTEWATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS ARTICLE 16 APPROPRIATE FOR SCHOOL CAPITAL PROJECTS AND EQUIPMENT ARTICLE 17 TECHNICAL CORRECTION TO THE BORROWING AUTHORIZATION UNDER ARTICLE 13b OF THE 2014 ANNUAL TOWN MEETING ARTICLE 18 APPROPRIATE FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES CAPITAL PROJECTS ARTICLE 24 APPROPRIATE BONDS AND NOTES PREMIUMS ARTICLE 25 RESCIND PRIOR BORROWING AUTHORIZATIONS (Note: there may not be any) ARTICLE 26 ESTABLISH AND APPROPRIATE TO AND FROM SPECIFIED STABILIZATION FUNDS ARTICLE 27 APPROPRIATE TO STABILIZATION FUND (Note: this may be indefinitely postponed) ARTICLE 28 APPROPRIATE FROM DEBT SERVICE STABILIZATION FUND Page 5 of 6 Minutes of the Lexington Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC) Meeting February 13, 2015 ARTICLE 30 AMEND FY2015 OPERATING, ENTERPRISE AND CPA BUDGETS ARTICLE 31 APPROPRIATE FOR AUTHORIZED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS GENERAL ARTICLES ARTICLE 35 ACCEPT MGL CHAPTER 90-I, SECTION 1 (Complete Streets Program) ARTICLE 41 AMEND GENERAL BYLAWS Ã CONTRACTS AND DEEDS ARTICLE 42 COMMISSION ON DISABILITY REQUEST (Note: This is a Resolution request) ARTICLE 45 TOWNWIDE PROCESS FOR SAFETY (Citizen Article) ZONING/LAND USE ARTICLES ARTICLE 46 ACQUISITION OF LAND SHOWN ON ASSESSORSÈ PROPERTY MAP 22, LOT 51B Mr. Kanter asked that members submit their material next week. The following votes on Minutes were taken: Approval of Minutes: A Motion was made and seconded to approve the Draft #3 Minutes of the CEC Meeting, with changes as discussed, for January 20, 2015. Vote: 5Ã0 A Motion was made and seconded to approve the Draft #4 Minutes of the CEC Meeting, with changes as discussed, for January 30, 2015. Vote: 5Ã0 A Motion was made and seconded to approve the Draft Minutes of the CEC Meeting for February 11, 2015. Vote: 4Ã0Ã1\[Ms. Barnett abstained as she was not at the meeting.\] Member Concerns and Liaison Updates: Mr. Kanter reported that the SC supported the School DepartmentÈs Capital Budget: proposed DepartmentÈs Capital Budget, but the BoS had deferred the request for a DPF Truck with an Aerial Lift. Because of the way the Warrant was drafted, there may not be a way to have that item voted as part of the Capital Articles at the upcoming ATM; therefore, the Town Manager and the SC will be discussing an alternate funding approach. Ms. Barnett reported that, based on a conversation with Solar Panels on Hartwell Avenue: Mark Sandeen, Chair of the Sustainable Lexington Committee, a Request for Proposal for the solar-panel project would seek a 20-year lease with a provider for installation and maintenance of solar panels. The provider would sell electricity to the Town. The project is expected to generate $12 million in revenue during the 20 years. The installation might result in the loss of $70,000 in annual revenue from outside sources that are currently using space at the Hartwell Avenue site. There would also be some costs associated with preparing the site. Details are being developed. Ms. Barnett expressed concern about the trade-offs; others expressed concern about ensuring any such project did not preclude providing for a modern firing range and associated facilities for the TownÈs Police Department at the Hartwell Avenue site. A Motion was made and seconded at 10:06 .. to adjourn. Adjourn:Vote: 5Ã0 AM These Minutes were approved by the CEC at its meeting on February 24, 2015. Page 6 of 6