TSBC-TEC Joint Meeting Minutes – 2/18/2021

---

February 18, 2021
Tisbury School Building Committee and Tisbury Energy Committee
Joint Meeting Minutes

2021-02-18_TSBC-TEC_MeetingMinutes

---

Tisbury School Building Committee
2019-2020
3:00PM, Thursday, February 18, 2021
by Zoom Cloud Conference due to Covid-19 Restrictions

TSBC Members Present:	Chair Harold Chapdelaine, John Custer, Sean DeBettencourt, Peter Gearhart, Rita Jeffers, Reade Milne*, Rachel Orr*,
Energy Members Present:	Chair Bill Straw, Dawn Bellante, Nancy Gilfoy, Bruce Stuart,
Others:	Recorder – Marni Lipke, Daedalus Projects – Christina Opper, Amanda Sawyer, Tappé Architects – Chris Blessen,
Town:	Select Board – Jeff Kristal,
MVPS:	Prin. John Custer, Asst. Prin. – Melissa Ogden, Sean DeBettencourt, Rita Jeffers,
Press:	MV Times – Rich Saltzberg,
	* TSBC members late arrivals or early departures.

1. Call To Order & Virtual Meeting Reminders

• The Tisbury School Building Committee 2019-2021 (TSBC) meeting was called to order at 3:03PM.
• The Tisbury Energy Committee (TEC) was called to order at 3:03PM.
– (Recorder’s note: Discussions are summarized and grouped for clarity and brevity.)
• TSBC Chair Harold Chapdelaine reviewed the protocol for remote meetings occasioned by the pandemic. All participants were welcome. In order to facilitate the technology he asked that:
– microphones be muted to reduce background noise,
– participants raise hands either by Zoom option or on video;
– non-TSBC members turn off their video to preserve bandwidth.
The meeting was being recorded for posting, along with all background documents, on the Project website http://www.tisbury-school-project.com.

2 . Tisbury School Building Committee (TSBC) Attendance – was called.
Mr. Chis Blessen of Tappé Architects, and Ms. Christina Opper and Ms. Amanda Sawyer of Owner’s Project Manager (OPM) firm Daedalus Projects were introduced.

3 . Presentation of the Tisbury School Project’s Plans for the Incorporation of Renewable Energy Sources
• The focus of the project and project design was near or net zero energy consumption. Mr. Blessen gave a quick overview of the proposal focusing on lot and building location/size, massing and envelope, followed by sun and shadow rendering from sunup to sundown for July 21st of any year which showed the building was well placed to capitalize on solar harvesting. Renovation projects were somewhat limited in energy remediation. Interior insulation would be added to the walls and roof of the original building, thickness depending on moisture content and brick calibre, and fenestration upgrades would be installed for better “U” factors and to seal the building tightly. All systems would be electric (with no fossil fuel).
– A separate placeholder article at $1,6-700,000 was submitted for solar installation, however alternate funding was being aggressively sought.
– The project would include conduits for future renewable energy planning, e.g. parking lot carport panels or battery backups if/when technology or funding was feasible.
• The Energy Committee was 100% supportive and saw a number of possibilities:
– Chair Bill Straw recommended Town funded and owned installation as the most lucrative solution since third party involvement reduced direct payments. For example, the Emergency Services Building 114 panel solar array cost $122,000 and resulted in $8,000 energy bill reduction and $10,000 in cash from the Massachusetts SMART Program (see Mass.Gov website) for a 20 year benefit of $360,000. (The Town contracted out for maintenance—local companies being South Mountain and Fuller Energy).
– Cape and Vineyard Electric Collaborative (CVEC) was in its 6th application round (presenting some timing complications). They were experienced and interested (with 4 Tisbury projects completed).
– Vineyard Power/Vineyard Wind would sign a community agreement in April with funds available August to October, but had to decide whether to accept this project.
– CVEC and Vineyard Power/Wind took profit to support their administration but were small companies with minimal staff. However, third party use of municipal property (e.g. for solar installation/profit) was a borrowing issue (see 1/13/21 Minutes p.2).
– The Energy Committee could also research other grants.
• The Committee was dedicated to long-range planning (currently highlighted by the Texas winter storm/power grid failure) so that although Police Station heat pumps were installed under the green communities grant, the original fossil-fueled boiler was retained as a backup system in case of power failure. The School project had not yet determined action on this issue.
– A generator would provide enough power to preserve critical building infrastructure. A (semi-tractor-trailer) mobile device could be rented to provide heat and light to any sheltering in the facility during emergencies (although the School was not an officially designated shelter). Generator maintenance was currently the responsibility of the Tisbury Emergency Manager.
– Solar battery backup technology was outsized and not yet effective or reliable.
• Solar panel lifespan was 25-30 years, usually dropping to ~ 80% efficiency. Current technology allowed identification of any rogue panels for replacement or repair.
• Aside from roof specifications on solar and snow loads, the project might include installation of the racks, which would greatly enhance and reduce cost for panel installation. However these should have universal fittings and be coordinated with the solar contractor to avoid refit problems and insure warranties.
• The Energy Committee had informal conversations with CVEC and suggested a letter of intent be submitted shortly, for a January 2022 project demolition start date of the 2-year construction project.
– Each of the six Island Towns would submit 3 projects to Vineyard Power/Vineyard Wind and the School would be Tisbury’s first priority.
– The solar (and maybe other project aspects) might come under the current Municipal Vulnerability Preparedness (MVP) funding round.
• Chair Harold Chapdelaine thanked the Committee for their help and support.

4. Public Comments – None

5. Other Topics Not Reasonably Anticipated by the Chair Within 48 Hours of the Meeting

6. Adjournment
a. The TSBC will Reconvene at 4:30PM in a Separate Meeting to Continue Regular Business.
• ON A MOTION DULY MADE BY MR. DEBETTENCOURT AND SECONDED BY MR. GEARHART THE TISBURY SCHOOL BUILDING COMMITTEE MEETING UNANIMOUSLY ADJOURNED AT 4:18PM: 7 AYES, 0 NAYS, 0 ABSTENTIONS: PRIN. CUSTER—AYE, MR. DEBETTENCOURT—AYE, MR. GEARHART—AYE, MS. JEFFERS, MS. ORR—AYE, MR. ROGERS—AYE, MR. WATTS—AYE, MR. CHAPDELAINE—AYE.

Appendix A: Meetings/Events:
• T SB C – 4 :30PM, Wednesday, February 18, 2021 – Zoom
• T SBC /VH Bus. Assoc. – TBD 10 : 0 0PM, Wednesday, March 3, 2021 – Zoom
• T SB C/PTO – 6 :30PM, Wednesday, March 18, 2021 – Zoom

Appendix B: Actions – see 3/18/20 TSBC Minutes

Appendix C: Documents on File: Available at :
http://www.tisbury.mvyps.org / click on Tisbury School Project
(Official archive hard copies on file at Tisbury Town Hall & Tisbury School):
• Agenda 2/18/21

Minutes respectfully submitted by Office On Call/Marni Lipke.

Approved as amended by the TSBC 4/5/21

---