HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-10-07-CEC-minMinutes of the
Lexington Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC) Meeting
October 7, 2015
Location and Time: Town Office Building, Reed Room, 7:30 A.M.
Members Present: Jill Hai, Chair; David Kanter, Vice -Chair & Clerk; Rod Cole;
Wendy Manz
Members Absent: Elizabeth Barnett
Others Present: Jon Himmel, Chair, Permanent Building Committee (PBC); Elaine Ashton,
Town Meeting member; Sara Arnold, Secretary
Documents Presented:
• Notice of Public Meeting for CEC Meeting, October 7, 2015
• Draft Town Warrants, Town of Lexington, Special Town Meetings (STMs) #1 & 2,
November 2, 2015 (Distributed by Mr. Kanter to the other members of the CEC and
to Sara Arnold, October 6, 2015 9:58 P.M.)
• Draft Chart prepared by Pat Goddard, Director, Department of Public Facilities, with
information on the school projects designed to help meet enrollment demand
• Draft Minutes of the CEC Executive Session, September 1, 2015
Call to Order: Ms. Hai called the meeting to order at 7:30 A.M.
Updates on any new, public information from the Board of Selectmen, the School
Committee, or other Town bodies regarding the Multiple School Construction
Projects:
Ms. Hai reported that Carl Valente, Town Manager, and Mary Czajkowski, Superintendent
of Schools, will be making a presentation on the FY2017 school operating budget at the
October 8th Budget Summit. She also reported that a School Project Task Force is being
created to assist Rob Addelson, Assistant Town Manager for Finance, in developing a
scope for a financing model that incorporates the substantive and likely projects that need
to be financed to meet both school - enrollment projections as well as the other Town needs,
many of which are currently in our five -year capital plan. It was noted that in January 2015
a financing model was presented which included $5.0 million for regular, recurring, annual,
capital needs for the Town, as well as funding for a new Fire Department Headquarters, a
new Police Department Station, a new Hastings Elementary school, the heating, ventilating,
and air - conditioning (HVAC) upgrades at the Lexington High School's main building, and
the then - contemplated Multi - Schools Building Projects. However, there are significant other
projects, including replacement /renovation of the high school itself, which were not included
in that plan.
Ms. Hai suggested that the myriad school - related projects associated with meeting
school - enrollment projections have created a new fiscal environment that may require
changes to this Committee's previous approach to reviewing annual capital projects. In
particular, the Committee will need to evaluate projects in the context that:
• Not all of the projects currently being proposed or discussed can be reasonably
funded.
Page 1 of 3
Minutes of the Lexington Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC) Meeting
October 7, 2015
• Some small capital projects currently in our five -year capital plan may be
incorporated into the multi - school building projects, and some may need to be
postponed.
Ms. Hai's caveats included the following:
• The School Committee is elected and its members run the schools. They need to
take a lead in determining the school - related projects that should be brought forward
or postponed.
• It is important to avoid curtailing creative thinking on the part of staff because of the
tight financial environment. Often a capital expenditure can reduce operating costs in
the long run.
Discussion triggered additional comments, including the following —not all of which
represent a consensus of this Committee:
• The Town's senior - management team has the first opportunity and responsibility to
make appropriate recommendations for capital projects, after which this Committee
conducts its review.
• The Appropriation Committee needs to address the operating costs over the coming
years; as school enrollment expands, the need for more teaching staff grows. This is
expected to put stress on the operating budgets starting in FY2018.
• The Community Preservation Act surcharge that is now being assessed may need to
be reconsidered as a way to help buffer the financial impact of school projects.
• There need to be regular reality checks as capital plans are pursued; thresholds or
timeline points should be identified for triggering a reevaluation. A plan needs to
allow fluidity to allow changes when new information is available.
• Reserve funds should not be used for operating needs.
• The Town should not build school facilities, all at one time, for the 10 -year enrollment
projections, but we should continue to look at 3 -5 -year timeframes and continue to
adapt the planning to meet enrollment projections as they continue to develop.
Suggested approaches for this Committee included the following:
• Thoroughly review the current Multi - School Buildings plans which have been vetted
by the many groups, committees, and staff members.
• Support efforts to conduct investigative work at the Pelham Road site as soon as
possible.
• Critically review all of the items listed in this Committee's FY2016— FY2020 capital
plan and, in building the next 5 -year plan, identify those that need to remain in the
new plan and explain why any should be removed.
A chart prepared by Mr. Goddard identifying the school projects being considered for
presentation to the upcoming Town Meetings this fall and next spring and the currently
projected approximated costs for them was reviewed. Comments included the following:
• More data is needed, including full construction and overall project costs as well as
milestones for each funding increment.
• All of the major capital projects being considered for both the schools and the
municipal needs should be incorporated.
Page 2 of 3
Minutes of the Lexington Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC) Meeting
October 7, 2015
• It needs to be clarified whether other significantly expensive capital projects — albeit
not as major as a new school or a departmental headquarters —are being
incorporated into the projects included in the chart.
Mr. Himmel, who is working with Mr. Goddard on the development and presentation of the
schools capital projects, asked that suggestions relating to the chart, and any other needs
of this Committee associated with this process, should be sent to Mr. Goddard and himself.
He expects that another updated chart including some of the suggested information would
be available in two weeks.
Committee's Action Plans for FY 2016:
• Reporting to the November 2015 STMs: Ms. Hai asked if Mr. Addelson's financing
plan is needed for this Committee to write its report for STM #1. It was generally
agreed that that report could discuss the scope of work being contemplated, costs in
general terms, and the "gross game plan" (i.e., timing and sequence of projects);
with, if necessary, the Committee's position on the detailed financial analyses being
presented, as an update, at that STM. Mr. Kanter advised that the Schools Print
Shop would be operating on this November 24th & 25th so that report to STM #1
could be printed on November 25th, the day before Thanksgiving, if it is ready by
then.
• Annual Town Report: Ms. Hai reported that this Committee's input is due on
October 30th. A photo of this Committee will be taken at its meeting on October 20th
Approval of Minutes: Mr. Kanter distributed just to the Committee members for their
review a copy of the Draft Minutes for this Committee's September 1, 2015 Executive
Session, but as those Minutes are not yet releasable to the public, he then retrieved all the
copies.
A Motion was made and seconded to approve the Draft Minutes of the September 1, 2015,
Executive Session, as presented, and also to authorized their release to the public by
Mr. Kanter only if and when Mr. Pato, Chair of the Board of Selectmen, concurred that
everything in them was then suitable for such release. Vote: 4-0
Adjourn: A Motion was made and seconded at 9:03 A.M. to adjourn. Vote: 4 -0
These Minutes were approved by the CEC at its meeting on October 20, 2015.
Page 3 of 3