Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-08-23-SMPAC-min Lexington Public Schools Master Planning Committee Tuesday,August 23, 2022 from 3:00-4:30 p.m. Remote Participation via Zoom Master Planning Committee Members Present: Dr.Julie Hackett Daniel Abramson Dr. Maureen Kavanaugh Joe Pato Dave Coelho Richard Perry Michael Cronin Jess Quattraocchi (absent) Kathleen Lenihan Mark Sandeen Deepika Sawhney Michael Schanbacher(absent) Daniel Voss Alan Levine (Liaison) Sandy Beebee (Liaison) Other Staff Present:Avon Lewis, Current LPS LEA President and Melissa Battite, Director of Recreation and Community Programs The minutes were taken by Sara Jorge, Administrative Assistant for the Lexington Superintendent. Dr. Hackett had all members introduce themselves. The Committee reviewed the Master Planning Advisory Committee Charge and Focus Dr. Hackett would like to ask the School Committee to amend the Master Planning Advisory charge to consider a representative from the Recreation Committee to be on the Master Planning Advisory Committee. Dr. Hackett believes it would be beneficial to have a Recreation Committee Member on the MPAC as we move forward. She explained that the Article 97 Working Group that the Town Manager developed,walked the grounds of Lexington High School for site selection for the potential new high school. Mike Cronin, Director of Facilities, had some ideas of using the high school fields. During this meeting, Melissa Battite, Director ofRecreation and Community Programs, had great input that I believe would be vital for these hard but important conversations. Director of Recreation and Community Programs, Melissa Battite explained that it is all about timing-we want to make sure we can fulfill our programs for residents especially with fields going offline in multiple locations. Alan Levine explained that the School Building Committee will be deciding where the building is going. This group is going to be discussing things that are relevant but not the same scope, he asked Dr. Hackett to explain the difference between them. Dr. Hackett explained that the School Building Committee is more technical and the purpose of it is to make big decisions like placement and design, selecting architects, what items can be cut, how we are doing budget wise, it is the big picture group, not the nitty gritty. It typically does not meet very often. The MPAC is the detailed oriented group that decides which projects are most important, which is how we determined the high school was at the top of the list. Mike Cronin explained that this group is the "look ahead", we can't take our eye off the ball of what else we need besides the high school. We still need to keep Central Office on our list and if the building will be updated or taken down for fields, then Bridge and Bowman are not far away from needing new/renovated buildings. That is 8-10 years that we are looking ahead but a lot of fields are being impacted and that is what we need to be looking at. Melissa Battite: The athletic feasibility study has been completed. There are about 11 strong recommendations from as little as adding lights to a much larger scale like adding fields at the Central Office location. Daniel Abramson supports adding a Recreation Committee Member to the Master Planning Advisory Committee.This falls under the charge of the Committee to provide space for school facilities. Joe Pato explained that Central Office coming down was an idea but it was never a firm plan. Eventually when we have a place to move the Central Office then that building could come down for something else. Deepika Sawhney would like to have more input from Recreation as we look at a new/renovated high school. Deepika requests that the Athletic Feasibility Study be shared with the Master Planning Advisory Committee group and widely to other groups and Committees. Deepika would like to have one place for the MPAC documents and minutes on the website, which Maureen explained and showed the Committee where they are located on the Lexington Public Schools' website. Mike Cronin will also create a site for the MSBA process on the high school to link directly to the Master Planning Advisory Committee website. Mark Sandeen would like all voices at the table including Recreation. Mark asked if you see this Committee continuing to look at other projects or just moving forward with the high school at this time? There is going to be a lot of time and energy put into the high school and it would be good to have another group that focuses on all projects so that we do not lose sight of those. Is there any thought of what to do with the existing high school now? For example, Mark explained that he interviewed many Lexington High School parents for the School Building Committee and they indicated that their children eat on the floor for lunch because there is no more room to house all the students at LHS. Dr. Hackett explained that students will continue to eat on the floor and it will be crowded and it's a terrible plan but the kids really do not mind it. Mike Cronin explained that we have made moves to alleviate students from eating on the floor. We have moved students to the field house in the wing space with seating to eat lunch,this also makes it easier for the custodians to clean and keep up with. Sandy Beebee: Recreation should be added to the Committee as there are many dimensions that we don't always know and adding their input would be helpful. Sandy agrees with Mark Sandeen,the MPAC attention is still on the full Master Plan - current conditions at LHS, Bridge, Bowman, etc. Dr. Hackett explained that we have balanced ourselves out at the elementary level. We are almost back to pre-pandemic enrollment. In May every year, we determine sections based on enrollment. We try to be conservative but not too conservative because we don't want to lose great qualified teachers. We went conservative this year at an elementary school and cut a section. We are now over in all 4 classes in one grade level and need overmax aides in each class, so this shows that enrollment is not as predictable as they were prior to the pandemic. We are balancing out and things are going as we thought they would for the most part. Deepika Sawhney motioned that we include a Recreation Committee Representative to the Master Planning Advisory Committee and to update the charge to reflect this; Mark Sandeen seconded. (Approved 8-0) Article 97 Working Group Update A. Notes from meeting on 07-26-2022 Mike Cronin explained that we can either renovate the current high school or build on a different site of our LHS property. We have a few schematics to show that we can build a new building on the field side of the current LHS property. We will be working with the Massachusetts School Building Authority as we go through the feasibility study and review all options of a renovation or a new building. With a new building, we will have minimal interruption for teaching and learning. Mike Cronin's point of view is that it is more cost effective to build a new building than it is to renovate the current building. If we are to go with a new building, Facilities will work with Recreation to reconfigure fields. We would reconfigure in a creative way and layout all the fields more efficiently. In the end, it will be a better product then we have today. Alan Levine questioned whether we can decide, if a new building is built, where it goes in advance or if this process will need to be done over again with the MSBA? Dr. Hackett reached out to the MSBA about moving the process forward including looking at sites, the MSBA said to move forward and they will, of course, review and do their due diligence, but we are doing the right thing with moving forward as we will be making recommendations. Deepika Sawhney asked Melissa Battite if the high school gym and the field house is being used by the Recreation Committee. Melissa Battite answered that losing outside fields will have a huge impact but also the inside facilities. We use the LHS gym September-June and summer time for rain dates.The field house is used for the entire school year for programs including evenings. Knowing when these facilities are taken offline or being renovated, will be helpful to keep the community up to date and when we cannot maintain level services.This could be a budget impact as well as Recreation sustains their budget with fees for programs. Mike Cronin said that we plan to support Recreation to accommodate the Recreation Programs even at other schools. Dr. Hackett presented an overview of the Massachusetts School Building Authority's (MSBA's) Eligibility Period with reviewing the MSBA's Eligibility Period Timeline, which is a 270 day process. We have submitted an Initial Compliance Certificate, we have formed a School Building Committee and the membership was accepted by MSBA. We are currently finishing up the The Lexington High School Educational Profile Questionnaire and that will be submitted by the end of August. Next up will be maintenance documents and enrollment certification by day 180 and confirmation of community authorization and funding to proceed with the MSBA Vote Requirements. Districts that successfully complete the preliminary requirements to the satisfaction of the MSBA within the 270-day Eligibility Period are eligible to receive an invitation from the MSBA Board of Directors to the Feasibility Study phase. Dr. Hackett did ask the Massachusetts School Building Authority(MSBA), has anyone who was invited into the eligibility period have not been invited to do a project and the answer was no,which is a very good sign. The feasibility study process is a year long process and they will look at all options. Dr. Hackett, Mike Cronin and the Town Manager,Jim Malloy will meet with the MSBA to review the portfolios of Architects. Architects will come back with plans and designs. Mike Cronin explained that the vote giving community authorization will be huge for the Town. Mark Sandeen: A couple years ago,this group put together a design for enrollment size and I believe it was around 2700. Is this still what we are thinking for building size? Maureen Kavanaugh explained that we were set to peak around 2550-2600 and we are projecting around 2400 now. I am hearing two questions, what are we projecting enrollment for and how big should we build the building? Joe Pato:The community is also considering redistricting or rezoning for denser development as an MBTA Community. We should take into account how much growth that would be and the implications it would have on enrollment. The MSBA will review our enrollment and based on that,they will recommend the size of the building. We will do our best to influence and give feedback on size and can use Joe Pato's example as reasoning for a larger building if need be. Dan Voss questioned the MSBA process. Does the MSBA determine the size of the building and what they will fund and if Lexington Public Schools'want it larger, do we fund the rest to make it a larger building? Dr. Hackett's experience is that they will say smaller and only fund what they consider is a need. For instance,they probably would not fund moving Central Office to the new high school to give recreation fields at the current Central Office but they would allow us to fund. Mike Cronin's understanding is that MSBA used to not support net zero infrastructure but we will find out as we go through the process. We plan to put this on our initial design scope and if they do not accept it, we will go from there. Dan Voss: Designing a building to be net zero is just designing a building to be efficient and from what Dr. Hackett is saying,we would just have to fund what MSBA won't. What I am concerned about as we have seen in the past,the process starts, and the design is generated which creates a budget,then we get further down the road and various prices go up. We then begin to start cutting things out that were not part of the design scope from day 1. We need to build these elements into the design scope from the beginning and the budget upfront so that they are not eliminated or cut from the budget if prices are to go up. Dr. Hackett has been in the MSBA process for a total of 10 times. I think what I hear you saying is that we have a Sustainability Policy that is very clear and specific and it is a local question we will have to answer to and if the Community wants to fund it. We are going to have to come to an agreement with the School Building Committee,the Select Board, and the School Committee and if not, it would be a matter to be taken up with the School Building Committee to vote on. Dr. Hackett will discuss the Sustainability Policy with the School Building Committee at the first meeting in September.This is why the makeup of the School Building Committee matters, as votes matter, especially if we cannot agree. I was very particular about the schools being well represented and the municipality wanted theirs.This is a school project and it is typically overseen by the School Department. We can debate and disagree but the conversation needs to be open and honest. Mark Sandeen:Are we able to select Architects that have capabilities to follow through with our Town goals and what role do we have in this decision or does the MSBA make the decision? Mike Cronin and Dr. Hackett explained the architect selection process. Architects submit proposals and portfolios to Lexington and MSBA.The architects then will meet with the MSBA and Lexington voting members,to pitch their designs. MSBA will ask Lexington Public Schools'who our prefered Architect is and we usually do get to decide. Daniel Abramson:The community's engagement with this process should happen sooner rather than later. We also want to keep in mind our Diversity, Equity, Inclusion goal as we move forward with hiring Architects.The Master Planning Advisory Committee is not going to be duplicating the efforts of the School Building Committee but it is really the nuts and bolts especially keeping the community engaged. Deepika Sawhney: Having been through the process with the Police Station, I saw how getting community input from specific groups later on impacted the process and caused delays. We have programs that are not completely Lexington like LABBB but we host a good portion of it and we are very invested in it. Where do our beliefs and thoughts of Lexington go into the MSBA process? Dr. Hackett explained that LABBB and our students in our METCO program are a priority and that was stated in our Statement of Interest. We were very clear as a group that these programs would not be an afterthought.That is captured in the Education Questionnaire and in the Statement of Interest. Kathleen Lenihan: I have already spoken with the PTA/0 Presidents that meet monthly. We discussed having a point person at each school that attends board committee meetings that have the high school project on their agenda, so that they can report back to their parent group each month with an update. I. Next Steps: A. Meetings and communications with the community need to happen sooner rather than later. We will update the community on the process and what we know so far. B. The first order of business for the School Building Committee is to review to the Sustainability Policy, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion goal, and the Town Disability Policy C. We will submit the Education Questionnaire on day 90-this is just the worksheet that will be built into the read Education Plan D. Keep up with the Master Plan (other buildings on our list) and the interim plan for the high school E. The Master Planning Advisory Committee will meet monthly- please let us know if you have agenda items from now until the next meeting The meeting adjourned at 4:55 p.m.