Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-02-13 Summit IV-min February 13, 2019 Page 1 of 5 Financial Summit Meeting IV Board of Selectmen, School Committee, Appropriation Committee and Capital Expenditures Committee Wednesday, February 13, 2019 A Financial Summit meeting was held on Wednesday, February 13, 2019 at 7:05 p.m. at the Samuel Hadley Public Services Building Cafeteria, 201 Bedford Street. Present for the Board of Selectmen (BOS): Ms. Barry (Chair); Mr. Pato; Mr. Lucente; Ms. Hai; Mr. Malloy, Town Manager; Ms. Axtell, Assistant Town Manager; Ms. Kosnoff, Assistant Town Manager for Finance; Mr. Hudson, Management Intern; and Ms. Siebert, Recording Secretary. Present for the School Committee (SC): Ms. Jay (Chair); Mr. Alessandrini; Ms. Colburn; Ms. Lenihan; Ms. Sawhney; Dr. Hackett, Superintendent of Schools; and Mr. Rowe, Assistant Superintendent of Schools for Finance and Operations. Present for the Appropriation Committee (AC): Mr. Parker (Chair); Mr. Bartenstein; Mr. Michelson; Mr. Levine; Mr. Padaki; Mr. Neumeier; Ms. Basch; Mr. Nichols. Present for the Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC): Mr. Lamb (Chair); Mr. Kanter; Ms. Manz; and Mr. Smith. Also present: David Pinsonnault, DPW Director; Melissa Battite, Director of Recreation and Community Programs; Rick DeAngelis, Recreation Committee (Chair); and Lisah Rhodes, Recreation Committee. Note: Mr. Lamb (CEC) corrected a statement made at a recent Lexington League of Women Voters First Friday event: CEC has taken no position as yet on the Minuteman High School Athletic Recreation Complex. Minuteman High School Athletic Recreation Complex Update Town Manager Jim Malloy summarized the status of a possible Intermunicipal Agreement (IMA) with Minuteman High School: Lexington’s funding share of the Minuteman High School Athletic Recreation Complex project began at $8.5M; however, the Town has declined to participate in funding a number of project elements that are not applicable to Lexington usage. As a result, the Town’s contribution was reduced from $8.5M to $4.9M but Minuteman has now released a Request For Interest (RFI) seeking additional partners for a full-build scenario. It is unclear whether an additional partner(s) would take Lexington’s place in the IMA or increase the number of partners overall. Additional partners are not limited to municipalities but could be sports leagues or other private groups. The RFI period closes Friday, February 15, 2019. Additionally, Mr. Malloy expressed the Town’s concerns about the proposed duration of the IMA. Originally, Lexington envisioned a 50-year agreement but Minuteman has expressed uncertainty about the ability of the IMA to enter into such a contract for that length of time. The two entities are now working to find a mutually acceptable way to characterize an initial 25-year period and a second 25-year period, as well as what Lexington’s access to the fields would be under a partial-build scenario and/or with additional partners. Discussions are scheduled between the entities, with the goal of achieving clarity prior to Annual Town Meeting. Ms. Battite, Director of Recreation and Community Programs, reported that the full-build February 13, 2019 Page 2 of 5 scenario ($25.5M full cost/$8.5M Lexington cost) includes a full-sized, multi-use synthetic field surrounded by a 6-lane track with a straightaway; a full-sized softball field with a synthetic overlay for multi-use; space for a potential cricket pitch; a full-sized synthetic baseball diamond with a full-sized field synthetic overlay; 6 lighted tennis courts, 3 with pickleball linings; stadium seating; restrooms, storage; a press box; a drop-off area; a parking area; and an access road. The reduced scope project (Lexington cost $4.9M) includes the full-sized field and 6-lane track and the lighted softball and baseball diamonds with synthetic overlays. The partial-build option would provide room for a future full build-out. Ms. Battite said Lexington, via a series of community stakeholder meetings, identified three elements of the project as most important: lighted multi-use fields; restrooms; and storage. Mr. Pinsonnault and Ms. Battite are now determining how a reduced scope and/or additional partners would affect Lexington’s schedule of field access. Mr. Kanter (CEC) asked for a cost breakdown for the reduced scope scenario. Ms. Battite reported that the Town has received an itemization for the full build but not for the reduced build. Mr. Kanter asked that the cost per element list of the full build be forwarded to CEC. Ms. Manz (CEC) asked if there are opportunities to build turf fields on in-town properties Lexington already owns. Ms. Battite said there are some possibilities; the Recreation Committee intends to put such projects into the 5-year Capital Plan. The Committee will request funding in FY2021 for a feasibility study to look at possible expansion/improvement of existing recreation properties and to examine the development of fields on Town-owned parcels. Ms. Battite noted, however, that it would take longer to develop in-town properties than to join in the Minuteman project. Mr. Michelson (AC) asked about the lifespan of the Minuteman Field elements and what the need/demand levels are for athletic fields. Ms. Battite reported that field lighting has a 25-year warrantee; synthetic turf typically has an 8-10 year lifespan (depending on use); and the grandstand would last approximately 20 years. Lexington’s exposure for replacement costs, particularly for synthetic turf, is still under discussion. Ms. Battite said usage/demand data is now being collated into a document but the biggest need is multi-use fields for sports like lacrosse and soccer. Some newer sports, like cricket and ultimate frisbee, have difficulty finding available fields. Additionally, the high school would like to be able to offer intramural sports for students who are not on sports teams. Other factors such as weather, program expansion, and later school start times also impact scheduling. Mr. Alessandrini (SC) said that with increasing enrollment, an increasing number of students are looking for athletic alternatives to sports teams that have limited capacities. While additional fields would be critical to the Schools’ ability to offer intramural sports, Mr. Alessandrini expressed concern about adequate field access given to the Town at Minuteman High School. Ms. Battite reported that Lexington would have access immediately after school if Minuteman teams are playing away games and the fields would be available on weekends as well. With the full-build scenario, Lexington would have been able to use the fields Monday-Friday 6:00-10:00 p.m. and Saturday and Sunday 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. It is unclear whether/how access would change with partial build or with more partners. February 13, 2019 Page 3 of 5 Mr. Alessandrini asked how Minuteman would finance their portion of athletic field costs. Ms. Battite reported that Minuteman already has $12.5M in hand, a funding component of the high school building project. Mr. Alessandrini asked how maintenance of the facility would be handled. Ms. Battite said her understanding is that the Minuteman would be responsible for all maintenance and Lexington would be responsible for field permits. Cost- and revenue-sharing are still being considered. Mr. Malloy said the cost of field maintenance would come from user fees, a portion of which would be set aside for synthetic turf replacement. Mr. Padaki, (AC) said it is important to have a clear understanding of Lexington’s need level and what the return on investment would be, programmatically. He asked if a swimming pool is part of the discussion with Minuteman. Ms. Battite said a pool is not included in the plan. Ms. Jay (SC) said the biggest limitation is not having field access right after school. However, having access in the hours indicated would be useful for pre-season practices and the ability to create/expand an intramural program would be beneficial. Ms. Jay asked how the $4.9M figure was calculated. Ms. Battite said eliminating elements of the project does not wipe out full costs for those items because groundwork/field drainage must still be done; the Town has asked Minuteman for a new partial-build cost breakdown. Mr. Pinsonnault estimated that each synthetic field costs upwards of $1M, depending on subsurface conditions. Mr. Kanter (CEC) recommended that Lexington develop a back-up plan focusing on Town- owned land in case the IMA falls through. Mr. Pinsonnault agrees, saying this is the reason Recreation will ask for funds in FY2021 to hire a consultant to analyze in-town field potential. Mr. Kanter said he was not aware that the Minuteman High School educational facility assessment included $12.5M that Minuteman will use for the athletic complex. Mr. Malloy said the amount was included in the full project cost that district towns share in. Ms. Colburn (SC) asked about Article 14i in the Annual Town Meeting (ATM) warrant for $435,000 for athletic fields at Diamond Middle School, noting it appears to be subject to reduction if the Minuteman project is funded. Ms. Battite said this is a proviso, intended so that the remainder of Recreation projects can be funded with the Community Preservation allotment for recreation projects. The Minuteman project is listed as ATM warrant Article 14f, cost to be determined. Review List of 2019 Annual Town Meeting Articles The Board and Committees reviewed the articles. Topics briefly discussed were: Westview Cemetery and the possible impact of a crematorium; if the possible reduction of Diamond School Athletic Field funding would compromise the project; a possible reduction of the 3% Community Preservation surcharge; the Sustainability Director and the sustainability project resolutions; and Automatic Meter Reading. Continue Discussion FY2020 Preliminary Budget and Financing Plan February 13, 2019 Page 4 of 5 Carolyn Kosnoff, Assistant Town Manager for Finance, said budget numbers have been adjusted as a result of the February 6, 2019 Bond and Note sale. She summarized revised revenue and expense adjustments. Ms. Kosnoff stated that it would not be necessary to use the Capital Stabilization Fund to hold in-levy debt service at 5% due to savings/reductions. Mr. Kanter (CEC) asked how the reduced health care expense numbers affect Town and School budgets. Mr. Malloy said minor amounts would be re-allocated to each budget. Dr. Hackett, Superintendent of Schools, asked what effect an increase in State Aid would have on the budget. Mr. Kosnoff said additional funding, if it occurs, could be allocated at fall Special Town Meeting or be left in the Fund Balance at the end of the fiscal year. Such funds are typically set aside in a Reserve Fund. Ms. Jay (SC) asked if the $30,000 listed in the adjustments as an Expense for Youth and Family Services is attached to any particular use. Mr. Malloy said it would be tied to recommendations coming from the Mental Health Task Force. Mr. Padaki (AC) asked what would be drawn from the Capital Stabilization. Ms. Kosnoff projected there would be one drawn down for excluded debt of $5.2M. Mr. Malloy will forward these changes to the Appropriation Committee and to the Capital Expenditures Committee. Dr. Hackett will also forward analyses of per pupil costs for several comparable school districts and a comparison of towns’ shared expenses. Capital Expenditures Committee— Preliminary Report: FY2020 Proposed Capital Projects Mr. Lamb (CEC Chair) highlighted various issues CEC has identified in association with some of the FY2020 Capital projects:  Center Streetscape Improvements: awaiting more detailed cost and design information (CEC has taken no position as yet);  Minuteman High School Athletic Fields Complex: awaiting itemization and IMA details to be worked out (no position taken);  Automatic Meter Reading System: discussion pending;  Westview Cemetery: five out of six members in favor of moving forward;  Police Indoor Firing Range: CEC does not agree with deferring this project to FY2021;  Battle Green Master Plan: CEC awaits clarification for what is being funded in FY2020.  Recreation Community Needs Assessment: CEC unanimously opposes linking the needs assessment with Community Center expansion; Other/general issues: February 13, 2019 Page 5 of 5  CEC considers all post-FY2020 requests to be placeholders until they are included in the debt modeling.  CEC asks that all projects in the future be assigned to a department for oversight.  CEC applauds Mr. Malloy’s initiative to create a realistic five-year plan model. Ms. Barry reported that, in the spring, the Board of Selectmen would look more deeply into three policies: Personal Property taxes; taxing to the maximum capacity; and the OPEB policy. Following the Board’s discussions, a Summit will take place about these subjects. The Board and Committee members thanked Mr. Alessandrini for his years of service to the community as a member and past-Chair of the School Committee. Adjourn Upon motion duly made and seconded, the Board of Selection voted 4-0 to adjourn at 8:37 p.m. A true record; Attest: Kim Siebert Recording Secretary