How Can We Help?

Categories

TSBC Meeting Minutes – 5/5/2021

< All Categories

May 5, 2021
Tisbury School Building Committee
Meeting Minutes

2021-05-05_TSBC_MeetingMinutes

Tisbury School Building Committee
2019-2020
5:00PM, Wednesday, May 5, 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, Jim Rogers, Michael Watts*,
Others:

 

 Marie Laursen,
Recorder – Marni Lipke,
Daedalus Projects – Christina Opper, Amanda Sawyer,
Tappé Architects – Chris Blessen,
Town:

 

 Town Administrator – Jay Grande,
Select Board – Jim Rogers,
MVPS:

 

 Prin. John Custer, Asst. Prin. – Melissa Ogden, MVPS Business Administrator – Mark Friedman, Shannon Gregory Carbon, Sean DeBettencourt, Rita Jeffers, Meredith Goldthwait, Natalie Krauthamer, Jane Taylor
  * TSBC members late arrivals or early departures.

1. Call To Order & Virtual Meeting Reminders

• The Tisbury School Building Committee 2019-2021 (TSBC) was called to order at 5:01PM. TSBC Chair Harold Chapdelaine reviewed the protocol for remote meetings occasioned by the pandemic. All participants were welcome. The meeting was being recorded for posting, along with all background documents, on the Project website http://www.tisbury-school-project.com.
– (Recorder’s note: Discussions are summarized and grouped for clarity and brevity.)

2 . Tisbury School Building Committee (TSBC) Attendance – was called.

3 . Minutes from April 6, 2021 – Tabled

An amendment was read and there was a discussion on the requested list of inequities and inefficiencies referred to in Ms. Rachel Orr’s letter (see 4/6/21 Minutes p. 3 #6).
Issues included:
– discomfort with charged terms and request for specifics on inequities referring to: types of students—minorities, Special Education, grades, etc.
– damage of vagueness where some residents have decided the project is too expensive;
– other opposition, some of it citing untruthful assertions;
– teachers’ perspective on such things as steady northern light;
– Ms. Orr’s understanding that the design was voted and that she was not planning to speak at Town Meeting;
– Ms. Orr’s willingness to submit a list of bullet points/plans in time for the next meeting (see below: Actions & Meetings/Events);
– belief in clarifying and addressing issues.

4. Communications Working Group Update

  1. Review of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) (See documents on file.)
    The FAQ for voter information was targeted for a press insert, with the goal of sending people to the Project website—where simple, technical and in-depth information was available, including the evolution of the design process and background material such as the Education Plan and the Existing Conditions report. The following edits and issues were suggested (see below: Actions).
    • Why do we need a Tisbury School Project section, insert and addition to ‘revitalize the original 1929 building…’
    • Specify June 17th as the only early voting day.
    • The Tax impact was difficult to report, especially given the current volatile market. The Committee discussed changing median house prices and other factors such as retiring Emergency Services Building debt, changing bond rates, etc. It was agreed it would be noted as * to be updated.
    • Solar ready included not only designed for electric energy and roof wiring/structures, but also conduits and specifications.
    • Committee members asked to be prepared to respond to questions about the jump in enrollment projections—as well as the move to universal daycare. It was noted that the design provided flexibility in accommodating increased population.
    • Under the Timeline section ‘begin’ should be lower case. The Committee considered the timeline which rested on a number of variables, such as the early start to the Construction Manager at Risk (CMR) process (under the purview of the Tisbury Select Board (TSB)—see 2/18/21 Minutes p.2-3 #5) to support building the temporary school, as well as collaboration during the final design phase.
    • Rumors/opinion on rejoining the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) process were addressed in terms of probable higher cost to taxpayers:
    – renovation versus new school as a local control decision but is not considered a changed project by the MSBA and therefore subject to a lengthy waitlist due to previous rejections/failure of MSBA funding;
    – required repetition of a feasibility study—that would not be reimbursable;
    – minimum 8 year delay to start of construction—with attendant 5% per year inflation
    – necessary expensive interim work on the existing building—lead abatement, water intrusion, heating/ ventilation/air conditioning (HVAC) replacement, American Disability Act (ADA) accessibility issues, etc.;
    – un-reimbursable and/or hidden costs such as a temporary school.
    • The TSB, the FinCom and the Historic Commission all endorsed the project and other committees such as the Energy Committee gave favorable support—with the exception of the Planning Board which offered no opinion.
    • The TSBC was jointly appointed by the TSB and the Tisbury School Committee.
  2. Coffee-Talk Update from the Chairperson
    Mr. Chapdelaine continued to host chats which were being offered through press advertisement or website reservations. So far the talks went well.
    • Recently a community member asked interesting questions about MSBA standards on space per student. Mr. Chapdelaine did extensive research and calculations (see documents on file) which validated the current design (as well as the 2018 design) as within the guidelines and satisfying the Education Plan.
    – Such standards set for new buildings could be waived for renovation/additions on a case-by-case basis in recognition of inherent differences. MSBA often encouraged renovations.
    – The design fit most of the standards with the exception of a 2,800 sq. ft. overage that would require sacrificing some part of the Educational Program.
    • TSBC members were strongly reminded that they were tasked with voter education on facts and not with persuasion or influencing voter opinion (see below: Actions).

8. Public Comments – None.

9 . Other Topics Not Reasonably Anticipated by the Chair Within 48 Hours of the Meeting – None

10 . Adjournment

• ON A MOTION DULY MADE BY MR. MICHAEL WATTS AND SECONDED BY PRIN. JOHN CUSTER THE TISBURY SCHOOL BUILDING COMMITTEE MEETING UNANIMOUSLY ADJOURNED AT 6:27PM: 9 AYES, 0 NAYS, 0 ABSTENTIONS: PRIN. CUSTER—AYE, MR. DEBETTENCOURT—AYE, MR. GEARHART—AYE, MS. JEFFERS, MS. MILNE, MS. ORR—AYE, MR. ROGERS— AYE, MR. WATTS—AYE, MR. CHAPDELAINE—AYE.

Appendix A: Meetings/Events:
• TSC – 4 : 0 0PM, Tu esday, May 11, 2021 – Zoom
• TS BC – 5 : 3 0PM, Mond ay, May 24, 2021 – Zoom
• STM/ATM – TBD 12:00N, June 12, 13, 2021 4:00PM June 14, 2021

Appendix B: Actions:
Mr. Chapdelaine/Ms. Opper – send out coffee-talk dates.
Mr. Chapdelaine – check re: Energy Committee endorsement.
All – volunteer for coffee talks and restrict discussion to voter education facts only.
Mr. Watts – ask Supt. D’Andrea about spiked NESDEC projections.
Ms. Orr – send bullet point list under 2 headers: inequities and inefficiencies

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 5/5/21
• Sawyer/Chapdelaine cover email re: FAQ for Committee Approval, Flier Text for Your Edit (2 p.) 5/5/21
– Tisbury Building Project FAQ (6 p.)
– Flier/Postcards (2 p.)
• In a recent coffee-talk a member of the community…(4 p.)

Minutes respectfully submitted by Office On Call/Marni Lipke.

Approved by the TSBC 5/24/21

 

Table of Contents