High School Building Committee (HSBC) Meeting #56 Minutes

Thursday, September 4, 2008

Wayland Town Building

School Committee Conference Room

 

Attendees

HSBC members:  Josh Bekenstein, Dianne Bladon, Steve Breit, Brian Chase, Jim Howard, David Lash, Joe Lewin, Erric Sheffels, Jennifer Steel

Absent:  Lea Anderson, Fred Knight, Mary Lentz, Cindy Lombardo, Karen Talentino, Steve Tise

HMFH Team:  Arthur Duffy, Stephen Friedlander, Chin Lin, George Metzger, Steven Millington

Ex Officio members: Gary Burton, Brad Crozier, Pat Tutwiler

 

Call to order Ð HSBC Acting Chairman, Dianne Bladon, called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m.

 

Enrollment Projection Ð discussion.   Jeff Dieffenbach, member of the Wayland School Committee, joined the meeting through a speakerphone and gave an enrollment presentation he and David Lash developed.  The presentation reviewed historical enrollment and trends, as well as enrollment drivers.  Jeff discussed the difficulty of making projections based on history and reviewed several projections.  He noted that once children are in the school system, it is not difficult to predict the cohort survival from year to year; however it is very difficult to predict kindergarten enrollment and we have not historically been very accurate at doing so.  The enrollment figures we received from MSBA were based on only five years of history and only go out to 2017, i.e. only the first five years of use for an updated school.  JeffÕs conclusion:  a reasonable hypothesis has WaylandÕs enrollment continuing a gradual, fluctuating increase, probably between 800 and 1100, with a reasonable target midpoint at 950.  Jeff had to leave the meeting after the presentation concluded.

 

A discussion followed with several points being made:

-          How does Wayland compare to state and regional demographic trends?  We should review these and consider this information.  It is difficult to know whether these would apply to Wayland, however.  For example, historically WaylandÕs enrollment usually behaves like WestonÕs, but has been very different from other towns in the same region and state. 

-          We should project enrollment beyond just five years, and look at a 30-year cycle.

-          MSBA does not appear to have considered demographic trends or build-out in their analysis.  WeÕve been as high as 1200 with the fewer bedrooms than currently exist in Wayland, so it could happen again.

-          We should consider a long-term enrollment figure for sizing common spaces, and a shorter-term projection for classrooms.  However this may not be acceptable to MSBA.

-          MSBA has said in several meetings that it wonÕt support building for maximum enrollment.

-          Several other communities have reached agreement with MSBA on an enrollment figure, through a process of discussions and meetings.  MSBA has been most receptive when communities brought new information or analysis to their attention.

-          MSBA verbally mentioned a figure of 930 for Wayland in an earlier meeting attended by Lea and Gary. 

-          Several committee members voiced a concern that this figure seemed low, and expressed their support for a figure closer to 1,000.

 

The next step will be for Wayland to respond to MSBA, by asking for a meeting to discuss the projections and present additional information that the HSBC believes is relevant.  It was concluded that a smaller group should work offline to refine JeffÕs presentation and develop a more specific enrollment recommendation for MSBA to consider.  It was suggested that the smaller group should consult with Fred Knight, and also should seek information from Belmont and Hanover, who have reached an enrollment agreement with MSBA already.  When Lea returns, she will contact MSBA to ask for a meeting. 

 

Motion:  A motion was made by Joe Lewin and seconded by Eric Sheffels that the HSBC would support the continued analysis of the smaller group and their conclusion, with a target figure between 930 and 1050.

Vote:  The motion was approved unanimously, 9 in favor, 0 opposed.

 

Proposed HMFH Team.  George Metzger introduced the proposed team from HMFH and distributed their resumes.  Each team member gave a brief review of their experience and their qualifications.  An HSBC member asked how HMFH would bring fresh eyes and a new perspective to this project, given their involvement so far.  George noted that many HMFH team members were new to the project and emphasized HMFHÕs commitment to being open-minded.  He also pointed out that the industry has seen many changes in the years since the last project was done, for example in the technology of mechanical systems in schools.  He said that HMFH is constantly looking at ways school buildings can be different and improved.

 

MSBA Update.  Gary gave the committee an update on a presentation Katherine Craven of MSBA made to 100 school superintendents at M.A.S.S. in August.  She emphasized MSBAÕs wish to control every aspect of the school construction process and noted that the process would be new.  The old SBA no longer exists, but many aspects of the process are still being developed.  Building needs and enrollments will be key priorities for project approval.  Communities will not be allowed to overbuild.

 

Dianne reported on a meeting Lea, Joy Buhler and the Turner team attended August 11th with the OPM Review Committee, when Turner presented their proposals for Wayland and Belmont.  MSBA is struggling with accountability for the OPMÕs and asked if Turner would be willing to Òwork for two bosses.Ó  Although Turner has assured us they will work with MSBA, there are outstanding contract issues around indemnification.

 

Next Steps.   MSBA has requested HMFH to present before their Designer Review Panel on Tuesday, September 9, and sent an email in which they were very specific about the content and format of the 10-minute presentation.  Dianne and Gary will also attend.  MSBA approval of HMFH should follow, at which time the contract negotiation subcommittee (Dave, Joe, Mary, Lea and Joy) will begin work.

 

Before she left on vacation, Lea spoke with Mary Pichetti at MSBA, who asked to meet with us and with Turner to discuss the outstanding issues.  Dianne spoke with Trip Elmore at Turner last week, and he was confident the issues could be resolved in this meeting.  When Lea returns from vacation on Sept. 15, she will arrange the meeting.  Lea and others from the contract negotiation subcommittee as needed will work with Turner to prepare for this meeting.  With MSBA approval of Turner, the contract negotiation subcommittee will begin work on this contract as well.

 

Members of the committee will continue to work on enrollment analysis, and will refine the presentation Jeff gave.  When Lea returns, she will contact Mary Pichetti to ask for a meeting with MSBA to discuss enrollment. 

 

At the next School Committee meeting on Sept. 15th, the HSBC will present the HMFH team and the enrollment analysis for approval.

 

It is hoped that these three MSBA approvals (designer selection, OPM selection, and target enrollment for design) can be obtained before the end of September.  If so, work will begin to update the Feasibility Study and the HSBC will resume an every other Thursday meeting schedule.

 

At this point in the meeting Dianne thanked the HMFH team for their participation and they departed.

 

Vote on HMFH Proposed Team.  The members discussed the team proposed by HMFH, the use of subcontractors, and the scope of decision-making by the contract negotiation team.  Following this discussion, the committee took a vote.

 

 

Motion:  A motion was made by Josh Bekenstein and seconded by Steve Breit that we approve the proposed HMFH team.

Vote:  The motion was approved unanimously -  9 in favor, 0 opposed.

 

Motion Ð A motion was made by Josh Bekenstein and seconded by Dave Lash to approve the minutes of the HSBC meeting #55 on July 23, 2008.

Vote Ð The motion was approved unanimously Ð 6 in favor, 0 opposed.

 

Adjournment Ð The HSBC adjourned at 10:00 p.m.

 

Observers:  Janet Correia, Lisa Valone