Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-06-14 BOS Summit-min Summit – June 14, 2018 Page 1 of 7 Summit Meeting Board of Selectmen, School Committee, Appropriation Committee and Capital Expenditures Committee Thursday, June 14, 2018 A Summit meeting was held on Thursday, June 14, 2018 at 7:07 p.m. at the Hadley Public Services Building Cafeteria, 201 Bedford Street. Present for the Board of Selectmen (BOS) were Ms. Barry (Chair); Mr. Pato; Ms. Ciccolo; Mr. Lucente; Ms. Hai; Mr. Valente, Town Manager; Ms. Axtell, Assistant Town Manager; Ms. Kosnoff, Assistant Town Manager for Finance; Ms. Hewitt; Budget Officer; and Ms. Siebert, Recording Secretary. Present for the School Committee (SC) were Ms. Jay (Chair); Ms. Colburn; Mr. Alessandrini; Ms. Lenihan; Ms. Sawhney; and Mr. Dailey, Acting Superintendent of Schools. Present for the Appropriations Committee (AC) were Mr. Bartenstein (Chair); Mr. Levine; Mr. Michelson; Mr. Padaki; Ms. Yan; Mr. Neumeier; Ms. Basch; Mr. Radulescu-Banu. Present for the Capital Expenditure Committee (CEC) were Ms. Beebe and Mr. Smith. It was noted that CEC did not have a quorum. Also present were: Ms. Batitte, Director of Recreation and Community Programs; Mr. Cronin, Facilities Director; Ms. Rhodes, Vice Chair of the Recreation Committee; Ms. Palmer, Recreation Committee; Dr. Stevens, Lexington High School Principal; Ms. Crowe, Science Department Head; Mr. Bouchard, School Facilities Manager. Lexington High School Science Lab Space Update Dr. Stevens, Ms. Crowe, and Mr. Bouchard provided an analysis of the growing enrollment numbers at Lexington High School and how they will affect the ability of current Science lab space to meet the needs of students, particularly those enrolled in Biology and Chemistry. In the 2019-2020 academic year, enrollment in Biology classes will require 10-12 additional Biology class periods (the equivalent of 2 classrooms). By the 2020-2021 academic year, enrollment will exceed capacity by 15-18 class periods (3 classrooms) in Biology and by 10-12 class periods (2 classrooms) in Chemistry. By 2021-22, 10-12 Chemistry sections will not have lab space (2 classrooms) and 5-6 Physics class periods (1 classroom) will have no space. By 2022-2023, (the furthest into the future that can be projected with any confidence), Science enrollments will outstrip classroom capacity by 5-6 periods in Earth Science (1 classroom), 15-18 periods (3 classrooms) in Biology, 5-6 periods (1 classroom) in Chemistry, and 15-18 periods (3 classrooms) in Physics. Dr. Stevens noted that lab classrooms are specialized spaces, differently equipped from regular classrooms, and that Science classrooms are already in use at least 85% of the day. Also, Lexington High School’s classrooms are dimensionally smaller than the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) recommends. Dr. Stevens said these Science space concerns predated his arrival at Lexington High School (LHS) in July 2017. Consultants had conducted a space utilization study and, in the same timeframe, a curriculum review of the Science department was embarked upon. Spanning Summit – June 14, 2018 Page 2 of 7 leadership changes at both LHS and the Town’s Facilities department, a team of administrators and faculty examined a variety of possible solutions, the two most viable to be presented this evening: 1) to build and/or reconfigure additional Science lab/classroom space; or 2) not to build and attempt to manage capacity with changes to scheduling and/or course sequencing. Of the “no build” option, Ds. Crowe said alternative scheduling, when studied, was deemed too problematic. If Advanced Placement (AP) course blocks were reduced from 6 to 5 per week, AP curricula could not be covered fully in one year and the courses would have to continue into the next school year. The possibility of restructuring the sequencing of science courses was also examined. This option, besides creating new space issues on its own, would result in further implications to teacher licensure, professional development, classroom materials, and result in additional itinerant faculty. Dr. Stevens said the “build” option includes two pathways: 1) find efficiencies within the current space and/or 2) add new space outside the existing footprint. Current spaces could be reconfigured; new or used modulars could be added, or two new lab spaces could be built, both at once or one at a time. Any one of these solutions would allow the current Science program to continue but the repurposing current classrooms, the least costly option, was seen to only pass the problem on to other courses; the expense of moving old modulars from the Diamond School to LHS was deemed unworthy of the short-term benefit. Buying, installing, and outfitting new modulars was deemed too expensive. Dr. Stevens added that, while the team continues to look at the space needs, several other efforts are proceeding simultaneously: a Scheduling Committee is analyzing the possible advantages of longer block scheduling; the School Committee is discussing the subject of graduation requirements; the visioning process is taking place for a new LHS building in 5-7 years’ time; and the NEASC re-accreditation is underway. The team firmly believes the space issues cannot be resolved by the no-build option. Therefore, understanding the cost, it was recommended that: two new Bio/Chem classrooms/labs be added in Building G; two Physics classrooms be relocated; and faculty offices be moved to Room 309. Mr. Cronin said if this proposal goes forward, a $1,139,000 funding request will be made to Special Town Meeting 2018 in November. If approved, a compressed timeline will proceed through design, bidding, contract award, and construction phases so that the labs are ready for occupancy in the fall of 2019. Mr. Pato (BOS) asked if the request for two classrooms is sufficient to meet the need. Dr. Stevens said that scheduling czar/Math department head Kevin Kelly has looked closely at the numbers; he and Maureen Kavanaugh, Director of Planning and Assessment, feel confident that two classrooms is the right recommendation, at least for as far into the future as can be confidently projected. Regular classroom spaces without specialized equipment are more flexible and scheduling for these spaces can be manipulated more easily. Mr. Lucente (BOS) asked what the possible outcomes are for the Scheduling Committee and whether they might affect the Science curriculum. Dr. Stevens said that he does not foresee any impacts on these space issues from that committee’s recommendations in the short run. This is Summit – June 14, 2018 Page 3 of 7 the first time in 20 years that the schedule has been analyzed; the most important considerations are pedagogical. Mr. Levine (AC) summarized the problem as acute and noted that the impacts would start in 15 months’ time and the suggested solution should last 4-5 years. He asked if any other space crises exist that will need to be addressed and if non-high school uses of space, such as for the IT department, could be moved out of the building. Dr. Stevens said, as far ahead as the study can see, Science is the area of the curriculum that requires additional built space. IT can be moved but it is unclear where it would go. Additionally, the reclaimed space would require new equipment and the IT infrastructure would have to be replaced wherever it was moved to. Also, due to enrollment, additional staff will be hired and these faculty will need classrooms, meaning that areas not currently used for classrooms are already under consideration for classroom space. The funding request includes estimates for installing water and gas lines to the new lab spaces. Ms. Hai (BOS) asked if the large grade cohorts coming up from the middle schools will require additional classroom space in other curricular areas besides Science and what the funding source would be for the proposed construction. Dr. Stevens said regular classrooms have greater flexibility and no more of that type should be needed; Mr. Kelly, the scheduling expert, has done the analysis and concluded that the other curricular capacity requirements are manageable. Part of the impact to Science is that class enrollments are strictly cut-off at 24 students for reasons of safety. Mr. Valente said the funding source has yet to be determined. Ms. Hai asked if adding a no-lab honors level would provide a possible solution, adding that offering honors might also alleviate some student stress issues. Dr. Crowe said there is a big demand for AP Science classes but agreed that honors level classes would require fewer blocks. Dr. Andrews noted that a recent experiment that added honors Chemistry was found not to reduce demand for AP Chemistry and also resulted in a migration from regular Chemistry to honors. Ms. Colburn (SC) said the School Committee hopes a recommendation to request funding will be made soon. If funding were not approved, the program would be greatly affected and she imagines the School Committee would come back immediately with another funding request for Annual Town Meeting 2019 since the problem is not going to go away. Mr. Padaki (AC) asked if there had been consideration of using other schools’ spaces to resolve the problem. Acting Superintendent Daily said that faculty, transportation and scheduling obstacles preclude this option. Ms. Lenihan (SC) reported that the middle schools themselves have space concerns due to enrollment increases. Ms. Jay (SC) said the team that examined the space problem took multiple approaches to arrive at a solution and came to the realization that the only viable option is to build new space. Given the recommendation, the question is what steps now need to be taken. Mr. Levine (AC) suggested, due to the urgency of need, that a Special Town Meeting be called before November. Discussion of School Master Planning Committee Summit – June 14, 2018 Page 4 of 7 Ms. Colburn (SC) said the Schools last formed an ad hoc Master Planning Committee in 2014. The 2015 report from that group laid the groundwork for the recent school expansions: the Lexington Children’s Place project; six new modulars at Bridge, Bowman and Fiske schools; a new, larger Hastings School; and additions/renovations to Diamond and Clarke middle schools. About a year ago, the School Committee formed another working group to assess whether the above initiatives would be adequate to accommodate continuing enrollment increases. The working group included two members of the School Committee; Superintendent Dr. Czajkowski; Ms. DiNisco of DiNisco Designs; former Facilities Director Mr. Goddard and then Mr. Cronin, the new Facilities Director; and additional staff members, depending on the discussion at hand. The first six months of meetings focused on the Science lab issue. During the second six months, capacity, enrollment, and program needs were foremost on the agenda. The team determined, ultimately, that the best course of action would be to develop a new Master Plan, taking into account the various factors confronting the Schools and the options to address them. The School Committee has approved the formation of a new School Master Planning Advisory Committee (SMPAC) and its charge, which includes development of a 5-10-year school facilities Capital Plan “analyzing current facilities, enrollment forecasts, and developing conceptual plans and timelines for needed educational spaces”. Almost all positions on the Committee have now been filled; two citizens were appointed this week. Once new Superintendent Julie Hackett arrives in July, the SMPAC will work with her over the summer. Ms. Hackett supports the effort in general but her direct input is needed. Funding DiNisco Design’s participation in the master plan process is another key piece of the process, Ms. Colburn said. DiNisco Designs has already worked on related issues and, until recently, the School Committee believed DiNisco would be able to continue the work using residual funds remaining from a previously $4.6M borrowing appropriation. However, because of the way the motion for that appropriation was worded, Bond Counsel determined that the remaining funds cannot be used for a second purpose, even though it is related. The School Committee would therefore like to ask the Appropriations Committee for a Reserve Fund transfer of $106,000 to fund DiNisco Design’s continued participation. Alternately, the School Committee could find funds either in its FY18 or FY19 budgets but a Reserve Fund transfer is preferred. Ms. Colburn said it is important that the master planning process begin as soon as possible. Mr. Valente said the decision to approve a Reserve Fund transfer rests with the Appropriations Committee and centers on whether the AC determines the request is for unforeseen/extraordinary expenses. The School budget funding alternative remains within the purview of the School Committee, which has bottom line autonomy, although Mr. Valente noted that the Municipality and the Schools have an agreement not to use operating funds for other purposes. If a transparent process is followed and an agreement to depart from standard practice is reached, the use would be deemed allowable. Mr. Pato (BOS) concurred that it is essential to start the master planning process as soon as possible. He noted that town-wide Capital planning is also extensive and asked that, as the School plans advance, as the School plans advance, they be coordinated with Town-side Capital efforts. Summit – June 14, 2018 Page 5 of 7 Ms. Barry (BOS) agreed that working collaboratively, rather than in silos, is important. At this point, the Municipal Capital Plan requires an update as well. However, Ms. Barry noted that the community has begun to push back on debt/ tax bill increases. She advocated for clear and open communication as planning goes forward. Ms. Barry (BOS) asked if the SMPAC would look at non-building options. Ms. Colburn said she is sure the Committee will look at all options. She projected the SMPAC’s report would be delivered by June 2019. Some previously-developed projects and studies will help inform the Committee’s work but the group should not be confined to looking at former proposed solutions. Ms. Ciccolo (BOS) agreed it is essential to get started with the planning process but believes the consultant need not start immediately. She asked if a new procurement process would be required to hire a consultant and if that would impact the SMPAC’s timeline. Ms. Colburn (SC) said she has not been advised that a new RFQ is required, largely because the work is similar to what DiNisco Designs has already done and the next process would be a continuation of that effort. She added that DiNisco Designs is already producing materials that will form the baseline of work to be done over the summer, including ten-year projections that feed into the Master Plan. Ms. Hai (BOS) said the no-build options should be examined as robustly as possible. Such examination would not require the immediate assistance of DeNisco Designs and could therefore commence independently of the funding. The biggest concern Ms. Hai has is that anything the Schools recommend be integrated into and balanced with the larger Capital plan. Mr. Alessandrini (SC) said the School Committee agrees that all plans should be transparent and integrated. He encouraged all committees/boards to develop their own master plans so that all master plans can then come together to form one comprehensive plan based on town-wide needs. Ms. Lenihan (SC) said that the SMPAC would be sure to look at both build and no-build options but more enrolled students will require more space, if the educational caliber is to be maintained. Ms. Colburn (SC) said that DiNisco Designs, as the consultant, looks at how much space School programs require; this is an expertise that is needed on the SMPAC. Mr. Bartenstein (AC) said the balance of the Appropriations Committee Reserve Fund is now approximately $900,000; the unused funds will fall to Free Cash if not expended before the end of the fiscal year. His preference would be to use the FY18 AC Reserve Fund as the source, since the end of the fiscal cycle is near, rather than to dip into the FY19 AC Reserve Fund at the beginning of a new fiscal cycle. Mr. Valente said it would be up to the Appropriations Committee to determine how to handle this but, if FY19 funds are tapped, none of the $106,00 could be expended until after July 1, 2018. Mr. Bartenstein asked if the Schools plan to turn back any unexpended funds from the FY18 budget. Mr. Daily confirmed that the Schools’ will turn back an estimated $700,000-$800,000, depending on end-of-the-year close outs and grant balances. Summit – June 14, 2018 Page 6 of 7 Mr. Bartenstein said he is comfortable tapping the FY18 AC Reserve Fund but some of his colleagues may disagree with that strategy. He said it would simplify matters if the School Committee taps into its own budget balance since adequate FY18 funds remain. Mr. Valente said there is no legal barrier to using the School Operating budget for this purpose. Choosing this route requires agreement of the Board of Selectmen, Appropriations Committee, and Capital Expenditure Committee to depart from past practices. Ms. Colburn confirmed that DiNisco Designs has already started working within the Master Plan parameters so FY18 funding, from either source, would be appropriate. Mr. Michelson (AC) asked how much of the $106,000 has already been encumbered by the work DiNisco has done. Mr. Cronin and Ms. Colburn were not certain of the amount but said the work already done is not generally part of the $106,000 as there is overlap between work done for the former project and the master planning effort. Ms. Lenihan said work done has already been paid for but DiNisco’s future work has not. Mr. Cronin clarified that “work already done” includes evaluation of the elementary schools’ capacities. This is a component of the master plan evaluation but the remaining funds from the $4.6M appropriation are not eligible for use in the larger master planning effort. He noted further that the MSBA will only accept 10-year plans that anticipate future issues and Lexington currently only has a 5-year forecast. Mr. Lucente (BOS) asked if $106,000 is enough to fund the necessary work. Ms. Colburn said DiNisco Designs has assured the School Committee that $106,000 will cover its participation through the conclusion of the master plan process. Ms. Barry (BOS) asked what the scope is of the master plan in terms of grades. Ms. Colburn said it would be predominantly K-8 but noted that the administration will also be working simultaneously on a LHS Statement of Interest (SOI) to be submitted to the MSBA. If, for th example, the SMPAC were to recommend moving 8 grade to LHS, that would become a consideration for the SOI. Mr. Michelson asked how the new Superintendent would be integrated into the master planning process upon her arrival. Ms. Colburn said a workshop will be set up for Dr. Hackett in July. Ms. Beebe (CEC) said that when the CEC had a quorum at its June 6, 2018 meeting, it confirmed support of the master plan process and for finding an expeditious approach/source for funding the $106,000. Mr. Bartenstein said if the consensus of the Summit is to tap the AC Reserve Fund, the earliest possibility to proceed would be after the next Appropriation Committee meeting, scheduled for June 27, 2018. He cautioned that approval of the AC Reserve Fund option is not a foregone conclusion. Tapping the FY18 School budget is more certain and expeditious and, if the process is transparent, there should be no prohibition against this course of action. Ms. Barry asked the committees/boards to caucus for the next 5 minutes to discuss the matter, after which these preferences were voiced: Summit – June 14, 2018 Page 7 of 7  School Committee: Members were unanimously in favor of a Reserve Fund transfer for the amount because master planning should be a shared expense;  Capital Expenditures Committee: There was no comment due to the lack of quorum;  Appropriation Committee: The consensus was not entirely clear but Mr. Bartenstein believes a Reserve Fund transfer request is likely to pass; he cautioned, however, that if certainty and speed are important considerations, the School Committee should opt to use School budget funds;  Board of Selectmen: Members were unanimously in favor of using remaining FY18 School Operating funds. The expense was deemed somewhat unforeseen but tapping School funds is more certain and expeditious. Mr. Bartenstein (AC) asked that the School Committee make clear its intentions so that the matter can be included on the June 27 agenda, if necessary. Ms. Beebe (CEC) asked if there is any difference in using one source or another for shared expenses. Mr. Valente said the School Committee’s concern is setting a precedent in which a Capital expense, always deemed a shared expense in practice, would be taken solely from the School budget. The AC Reserve Fund can be applied to either Operating or Capital. Mr. Alessandrini (SC) emphasized that the expense is unforeseen/unexpected because the School Committee thought the remaining $106,000 of the $4.6M could be used for the master planning purposes. When it was discovered that this would not be allowed, the School Committee was compelled to look for an alternative source. He believes the School Committee will opt to go before the Appropriation Committee to request the Reserve Fund transfer, instead of using FY18 School Operating funds. Ms. Barry closed the meeting by saying that this meeting marks the final Summit for Town Manager Carl Valente, prior to his impending retirement. She invited Summit participants to attend a reception in honor of Mr. Valente, scheduled on August 2, 2018, from 4-7 p.m. at Battin Hall in the Cary Memorial Building. Upon motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 at 8:53 p.m. to adjourn. The School Committee and the Appropriation Committee followed suit. A true record; Attest: Kim Siebert Recording Secretary